Part 1

Transcribed from the 1845 J. Hatchard and Son edition by David Price, email [email protected]

SERMONS ON THE SCRIPTURAL PRINCIPLES OF OUR PROTESTANT CHURCH.

BY THE REV. EDWARD HOARE, M.A. CURATE OF RICHMOND, SURREY.

* * * * *

LONDON: J. HATCHARD AND SON, PICCADILLY; RICHMOND, DARNILL AND SON; KINGSTON, SEELEY. 1845.

* * * * *

BY THE SAME AUTHOR.

TRACTS ON TRANSUBSTANTIATION AND INVOCATION OF SAINTS. Price 3s. 6d. a hundred.

A SERMON ON THE THEATRE. Price 4d., or 3s. per dozen.

FRIENDLY SOCIETIES COMPARED WITH THE OLD BENEFIT CLUBS. A Dialogue. Price 1d. each, or 10d. per dozen.

PREFACE.

THE following Sermons are committed to the press at the request of many beloved parishioners. They were originally preached, as they are now published, under a deep sense of their imperfection, only equalled by the perfect conviction of their truth. The consciousness of defect has strongly prompted me to keep them back from public criticism; the assurance of truth has emboldened me to hope that those who took an interest in their delivery, may derive some profit from their study. May God, the Holy Ghost, be pleased to make them useful! May he accompany each copy with his blessing! and, forgiving all defects, may He honour this little volume as an instrument in his own hand for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying of the body of Christ!

In stating the doctrines of the Church of Rome, the appeal has been made either to the decrees or the catechism of the Council of Trent. These are both authoritative documents, and form the standards of Roman Catholic theology. Yet, strange to say, some Protestants are heard to argue, that by appealing to Trent, we misrepresent the Church of Rome. The decrees, it is maintained, are antiquated documents, and no longer express the real opinions of the church. The true Romanist would not thank his advocate for such an argument. A change in their fixed principles would destroy their claim to infallibility. Eternal truth changes not; and whoever changes must be wrong either before the change or after it.

But such a change has never taken place. The decrees stand unrepealed. Romish priests are required to swear to them at their ordination; Romish disputants appeal to them in controversy; the Pope himself quotes them in his letters; and they are to this day in full force as the standard documents of Romanist theology.

Others, again, are often heard to argue that, although these may be the principles of the Church, they are not the opinions of individuals in union with Rome. It is much to be hoped that this charitable supposition is true of multitudes; that there are very many, who from circumstances are connected with her communion, but who, from conviction, disclaim many of her errors. But how fearful is the position of such an enlightened Roman Catholic! A layman may be a member of the Church of England, but yet differ from many of our principles, for the only declaration of faith required as an essential to church membership is an assent to the Apostles’ Creed. This, and nothing more, is expected of every man before he can be received into the congregation of Christ’s flock. Those who are admitted to the ministry, must add their subscription to the Articles. But no subscription is required of the layman; he may therefore be a faithful churchman, but yet differ from some of the Church’s doctrines. What is impossible for the honest clergyman, is quite possible for him. But such modification of sentiment is altogether impossible with Rome. A layman must be either an entire Romanist, or reject Rome altogether. There is no middle course. A man cannot say “I am attached to the Church of Rome, but I do not go all lengths with her opinions. I believe it to be the true church, but I disapprove of her worship of the Virgin.” For Rome has fenced in her opinions with her curses. Rome is a cursing church, and the curses attached to her decrees render modification impossible in her laity. Take, e.g., the decrees respecting saint and image worship, in the beginning of the 25th session. In those decrees, it is declared that images ought to be retained in churches, and that honour and veneration should be paid to them: and then is added the curse, “If any man either teach or think contrary to these decrees, let him be accursed.” Now it is very plain, that at first sight the word of God appears in opposition to these decrees, for, if not, the second commandment would never have been expunged from Romish catechisms. But if any conscientious Roman Catholic happen to read the 20th chapter of the book of Exodus; if the thought flash across his mind that the word of God may possibly mean what it certainly appears to say; if he venture to think that God meant to forbid image worship when he said, “Thou shalt not make unto thee any graven image, or any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth: thou shalt not bow down thyself to them, nor serve them.” For that one passing thought his own church curses him. She does not wait till the thought has found utterance in language; he may never breathe his difficulties to his dearest friend; it is enough if he ever dare to feel a difficulty; for that one secret doubt the church lays upon him the burden of her anathema. Modified popery is therefore an impossibility. If men believe the Church of Rome to be the true church, they must receive her whole system; they cannot pick and choose for themselves; they cannot retain communion, and yet differ from any of her doctrines. They must reject her altogether, or deliver themselves over, bound hand and foot, mind and conscience, judgment and will, to her decisions. Such are the terms of union which Rome imposes on her people. They leave no middle course between abject submission and fearless rejection; between unconditional surrender to her decrees, and unflinching defiance of her anathemas.

Let us Protestants turn those curses into prayers! Let us plead with God to have compassion on our poor Roman Catholic brethren; to burst the bands which are now rivetted on their conscience and their judgment; and to lead them by his Spirit to the full enjoyment of the truth as it is in Jesus!

_Richmond_, _May_ 1845.

CONTENTS.

SERMON I. 2 Tim. iii. 15. The Scriptures _Page_ 1 SERMON II. Acts xiii. 39. Justification 18 SERMON III. Luke xxiii. 43. Purgatory 34 SERMON IV. Hebrews x. 12. Transubstantiation 45 SERMON V. 2 Tim. iii. 1. The church in the latter days 71

SERMON I. THE SCRIPTURES.

2 TIM. iii. 15.

And that from a child thou hast known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.

“TO everything there is a season.” There is “a time to keep silence, and a time to speak;” a time to be still, and a time to act; and it is the duty of the careful watchman of the Lord, to be ever on the alert in watching the rapid progress of God’s providence; to be silent when it is the time for stillness; to speak, and speak plainly, when he deems it to be the time for utterance. It is a conviction of this, which has led to the commencement of the present course of sermons. There has never been a period since the days of the Reformation, in which greater efforts have been made for the advancement of the influence, and power, of the Church of Rome; agents have been multiplied in every direction; the order of Jesuits has been revived; and a zeal has been shown in all branches of their efforts, which would reflect honour on a better cause. But there are two facts in our present position, which deserve our especial notice,—the one, that our own happy island is the great object of their exertions. Yes, England, our own dear England, is the prize at which Rome is aiming. The other, that at the very point of this remarkable crisis in the history of our nation, it is proposed in the parliament of this protestant country, to give a large and permanent endowment to the Roman Catholic college at Maynooth; that is, to strengthen and increase the priests of a system, which is declared by our constitution to be unscriptural and untrue.

Surely, then, the time is come to speak. Surely the watchman is bound to sound the note of warning. Surely the whole company of God’s believing people should know well the reason of the hope that is in them, that they may be able to take their place with boldness in the armies of the Lord; and, in the last great fearful struggle against Antichrist, be found standing stedfast, amongst the fearless, faithful, followers of the Lamb.

It is my intention, therefore, to preach a short course of sermons on some of the leading principles of our protestant church. It will be my endeavour rather to set forth the truth than to occupy your time in exposing error. God’s people come here to be fed with the bread of life, and they must not be robbed of their daily food by the introduction of cold and cheerless controversy. Our constant desire and prayer to God for you all is, not that you should be subtle controversialists, but well instructed and practical believers in your Lord. This great end I now hope to keep steadily in view.

Pray for me, dear brethren, that my intention may be carried into effect. Pray that the spirit of the living God may himself direct me in this effort for his glory! Pray for us, as we pray for you, “that speaking the truth in love, we may grow up unto him in all things.”

Now the controversy between the church of England, and that of Rome, hinges mainly upon one great turning point, namely this, they deny the Bible to be the only rule of faith, and appeal to other writings as a sufficient authority in their statements of sacred truth. To the Bible, then, as the rule of faith, we must direct our first attention, and will endeavour to point out,

I. Its supreme authority.

II. Its complete sufficiency.

III. Its clear intelligibility.

I. First, then, for its supreme authority. There is no occasion now to enter into proofs of its inspiration. That all scripture is given by inspiration of God, we may regard as an admitted truth: we are not dealing with the infidel, but with those who profess to believe the Scriptures: we are to receive it “not as the word which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth:” to listen to it, “as it is in truth, the word of God.” All that we are concerned with now is the supreme authority, which, being inspired, it possesses over man. Our object is to point out, that as the word of God, it has absolute authority in all its statements of divine truth, and that just as the written law is the one rule for the nation’s government, so the written word is the one rule of the Church’s faith. Who can reveal the truth of God but God himself? “The things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.” And when God speaks, who shall dare to give an opposing judgment? “Be silent, O all flesh, before the Lord!” Let us strive then to realize this fact, that the Bible comes direct from “God, who cannot lie;” that it is his own statement of his own divine purposes; that He has, as it were, put his seal and signature to it, to mark it as his own; that he has brought it forth amongst us with the solemn preface, “Thus saith the Lord;” and there can then be no doubt left as to its certain, its invariable, its unfailing, its authoritative truth. There it stands, unshaken in its supremacy: like the Sun in heaven, beyond the reach of man’s attack: like the great mountains, immoveable by man’s effort. “Thy word is truth,” saith the Saviour, certain, unfailing, unerring truth; and though multitudes may deny, though thousands may resist, though the whole body of unconverted men may hate its message, it is still truth; the pure, unmixed, unadulterated truth of God. Nor can any amount of human evidence rival its authority. Multiplication does not make inspiration. Ten thousand butterflies do not make an eagle; nor can the human intellect, however multiplied, be measured for a moment with the mind of God. Thus, if it were to fall out, (which thanks be to his grace it never can), that all living men, of all ages and all ranks, were to agree in the denial of any one doctrine of the gospel; if all the great, all the learned, all philosophers, and all divines; all that now live, or ever have lived, were to concur in one united opinion, and that opinion were in opposition to the Bible; then all must be wrong, and the Bible must be right; for they are men, and the Holy Ghost is God; and “Let God be true, and every man a liar.”

Now, we fully admit that the Church of Rome does not openly deny the supreme authority of Scripture, but it virtually sets it aside by two principles: the one, that it is not complete; the other, that it cannot be understood without the interpretation of the Church. We must examine, therefore,

II. Its complete sufficiency.

The idea taught by the Church of Rome is, that there are two channels of divine truth, two streams conveying the same water, the written, and the unwritten word, the written found in the Bible, the unwritten, in the traditions and decrees of the Church. {5} Thus by attempting to blend the two, they throw the Bible virtually into the shade; and like the Jews of old, “make void the commandment of God by their traditions.” The opposing principle of the Church of England, is, that the written word is itself sufficient; that it contains an ample and complete statement of the whole truth of God.

“Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to Salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an Article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation. In the name of the Holy Scripture we do understand those canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.” {6}

1. And is not this evident from the _direct statements_ of the word of God itself?

Look only at the passage from which our text is taken, v. 15. The Holy Scriptures “are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus.” They are sufficient, then, for the heavenly wisdom of the people of God; nothing more is needed; they contain God’s truth, and make men wise in his wisdom. But this is not all: follow on the passage: “All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness.” And what is the result? “That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works.” Who shall presume to say, then, that the written word is not sufficient? There is enough in it to form a perfect character, to leave nothing wanting in the furniture of the religious mind. When it says, “They are able to make thee wise unto salvation,” it teaches that they reveal all that can be needful to make Christ’s coming kingdom ours: when it adds, “That the man of God may be perfect, throughly furnished unto all good works;” it proves that they also supply us with the sum total of all that can be needed in our pilgrimage through life.

2. But, even, if we had no such direct statement, we have ample proof of the completeness of the Bible in the simple fact, that there is _nothing else inspired_. If there be a void left, it must remain unfilled for ever. If there be a chasm, the whole world can never close it. For if there were deficiencies in the Bible, to whom should we go to supply the defect? To the Fathers? They were holy, devoted, fervent men, and multitudes amongst their number counted not their life dear unto them, if only they might fulfil the ministry, which they received of the Lord. But they were men after all, fallible, and often failing men; they never pretended to inspiration; they knew far too much both of themselves and God to presume to say of their own writings, “Thus saith the Lord.” They never claimed either inspiration or infallibility. To whom then shall we go? To councils? But they were human too, they were assemblies of fallible men, so fallible, that in one instance the whole church was actually induced to decide against the divinity of our blessed Lord. This was the case, when the whole body of the Church, bishops, priests, deacons, and laymen, were all arrayed against Athanasius, and Athanasius alone stood forth as the champion for truth. Athanasius was against the world and the world against Athanasius. To whom then shall we go? To the Pope? But he too is a man, and as too many sad facts in the history of popedom prove, a fallible and often failing man. To whom then shall we go? Shall we seek for some united testimony of fathers, councils, and popes? It would be a hopeless task, it would be to attempt an impossibility, for they are perpetually differing, and when we had gained it, we should after all have only the testimony of man. To whom then shall we go? Peter must give the answer, “Thou hast the words of eternal life.” We will not now stop to discuss the question whether it be possible for men to fill up the deficiencies of the word of God. He that cannot add a single inch to his own stature, he surely can add nothing to the volume of inspired truth. He that cannot add one single leaf to the flower, nor give one additional wing to the insect, he surely can contribute nothing to the most perfect of all the works of God, the revelation of his own hidden will. It was prophesied originally of the Roman Empire, that it should be part of iron, part of clay; a fit image of that false system, which would blend together in one whole, the word of God, and the word of man. As well might you expect to strengthen iron by the mixture of a little fragile clay: as well might you hold up the candle in the vain endeavour to add to the brightness of the noon-day sun: as well might you strive to perfect the beauty of the clear fountain of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding from the throne of God and of the Lamb, by adding to it waters that have been stained and thickened in their passage along an earthly world, as hope to add anything to the word of God, by mixing up with it the word of man.

The fact, then, that there is nothing else inspired, is in itself a proof that the Bible is complete. Either the Bible is sufficient, or we are left without a sufficient guide. We may, therefore, rest satisfied as to the complete sufficiency, as well as the supreme authority of the word of God. But there yet remains another subject of scarcely less importance, which we cannot leave unnoticed. Namely,

III. Its clear intelligibility.

It is not enough, that the Scriptures are sufficient and complete. For practical purposes they must be within the reach of common men.

Now the Church of Rome takes the Bible out of the hands of private Christians. They acknowledge the authority of Scripture, but add that the church alone has the power to interpret it: they say there are many difficulties, and that it requires the church’s interpretation to unravel the path of life. {9} This principle places the people in absolute dependence on those who call themselves the church. It draws their attention to the church rather than to God. It teaches them to rely on man’s comment, and to lose sight of God’s decree. When looking through a painted window, your eye is fixed on the glass, and loses sight of the sun behind, which lightens it; so when we look at truth through the medium of human interpretation, the sight is caught by the human colouring, and the light of God’s eternal truth is thrown into obscurity with the neglected word. Now true Protestants gain their light, not through the coloured glass, but from heaven itself, that is, they look to the word of God, and not to man’s interpretation as the decision of christian truth.

At the same time we must not deny that there are difficulties in the Scriptures. Its subject is infinity, its range eternity, its author God; and it would be folly to suppose that poor, frail, shortsighted, and shortlived man, should be able at a glance to measure the unfathomable depths of God’s unexplored wisdom.

Nor are we to underrate the high importance of the sacred ministry. It was the gift of our blessed Lord after his ascension. {10a} It is carried on under the appointment and arrangement of the Holy Ghost. {10b} When Israel was without “a teaching priest,” they were “without the true God,” and “without the law.” {10c} When men labour for Christ, “rightly dividing the word of truth,” they are the great instruments in the hand of God for the ingathering of his elect, and the preservation of his children for eternal glory. We admit then freely and fully, 1st, the existence of difficulties in Scripture, and 2ndly, the importance and extreme value of a living and expounding ministry. At the same time, we are no less prepared to assert with the utmost earnestness, that the people of God are bound by, or dependent on, no interpretation of any man whatever. God has spoken in his word, and God has spoken plainly. Let us examine two or three of the many proofs.

1. See the _use made of Scripture in the time of inspiration_. Look at the well known case of the Bereans, Acts xvii. 11: they brought Paul himself to the test of Scripture; a set of laymen went daily to their Bibles to see if the man of God himself were true, and for this, which would be mortal sin in the Church of Rome, they were actually commended by the Holy Ghost, for a “These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the Scriptures daily to see if these things were so.” The Berean laymen, therefore, were right, when they studied their Bible as the rule of faith. Take again the case of Timothy. Timothy, we know, was a remarkable man. St. Paul loved him as his own child, and always spoke of him as his son. He was to Paul what John was to Christ. The grace in his heart was of early growth; he was one of those chosen few, who were believers from their youth. But mark his early history. He lived at Lystra, a heathen city: his father was a heathen, yet Timothy knew his Bible well: he had learned it of his mother, as she too from hers. Here then we have a little band of Bible students in the midst of a heathen city: it consisted of two women and one little boy. And yet we are to be told that the bible does not speak plainly to common people, that it cannot be understood until the church interpret. Who interpreted to Timothy? Who to Eunice? Who to Lois?