XII. Wherein the first thing which moveth them thus to cast up their poison, are certain solemnities usual at the first erection of churches. Now although the same should be blame-worthy, yet this age thanks be to God hath reasonably well forborne to incur the danger of any such blame. It cannot be laid to many men’s charge at this day living, either that they have been so curious as to trouble bishops with placing the first stone in the Churches they built, or so scrupulous, as after the erection of them to make any great ado for their dedication. In which kind notwithstanding as we do neither allow unmeet, nor purpose the stiff defence of any unnecessary custom heretofore received1: so we know no reason wherefore churches should be the worse, if at the first erecting of them, at the making of them public, at the time when they are delivered as it were in God’s own possession, and when the use whereunto they shall ever serve is established, ceremonies fit to betoken such intents and to accompany such actions be usual, as in the purest times they have been2. When Constantine3 had finished an house for the service of God at Jerusalem, the dedication he judged a matter not unworthy, about the solemn performance whereof the greatest part of the bishops in Christendom should meet together. Which thing they did at the emperor’s motion, each most willingly setting forth that action to their power; some with orations, some with sermons, some with the sacrifice of prayers unto God for the peace of the world, for the Church’s safety, for the emperor’s and his children’s good4. By Athanasius5 the like is recorded concerning a bishop of Alexandria, in a work of the like devout magnificence. So that whether emperors or bishops in those days were church founders, the solemn dedication of churches they thought not to be a work in itself either vain or superstitious. Can we judge it a thing seemly for any man to go about the building of an house to the God of heaven with no other apparance6, than if his end were to rear up a kitchen or a parlour for his own use? Or when a work of such nature is finished, remaineth there nothing but presently to use it, and so an end?
It behoveth that the place where God shall be served by the whole Church, be a public place, for the avoiding of privy conventicles, which covered with pretence of religion may serve unto dangerous practices. Yea, although such assemblies be had indeed for religion’s sake, hurtful nevertheless they may easily prove, as well in regard of their fitness to serve the turn of heretics, and such as privily will soonest adventure to instil their poison into men’s minds; as also for the occasion which thereby is given to malicious persons, both of suspecting and of traducing with more colourable show those actions, which in themselves being holy, should be so ordered that no man might probably otherwise think of them. Which considerations have by so much the greater weight, for that of these inconveniences the Church heretofore had so plain experience, when Christian men were driven to use secret meetings, because the liberty of public places was not granted them7. There are which hold, that the presence of a Christian multitude, and the duties of religion performed amongst them, do make the place of their assembly public8; even as the presence of the king and his retinue maketh any man’s house a court. But this I take to be an error, inasmuch as the only thing which maketh any place public is the public assignment thereof unto such duties. As for the multitude there assembled, or the duties which they perform, it doth not appear how either should be of force to infuse any such prerogative.
[3.] Nor doth the solemn dedication of churches serve only to make them public, but farther also to surrender up that right which otherwise their founders might have in them, and to make God himself their owner. For which cause at the erection and consecration as well of the tabernacle as of the temple, it pleased the Almighty to give a manifest sign that he took possession of both9. Finally, it notifieth in solemn manner the holy and religious use whereunto it is intended such houses shall be put10.
These things the wisdom of Salomon did not account superfluous11. He knew how easily that which was meant should be holy and sacred, might be drawn from the use whereunto it was first provided; he knew how bold men are to take even from God himself; how hardly that house would be kept from impious profanation he knew; and right wisely therefore endeavoured by such solemnities to leave in the minds of men that impression which might somewhat restrain their boldness, and nourish a reverend affection towards the house of God12. For which cause when the first house was destroyed, and a new in the stead thereof erected by the children of Israel after their return from captivity, they kept the dedication even of this house also with joy13.
The argument which our Saviour useth against profaners of the temple14, he taketh from the use whereunto it was with solemnity consecrated. And as the prophet Jeremy forbiddeth the carrying of burdens on the Sabboth15, because that was a sanctified day16; so because the temple was a place sanctified, our Lord would not suffer no not the carriage of a vessel through the temple17. These two commandments therefore are in the Law conjoined, “Ye shall keep my Sabboths, and reverence my sanctuary18.”
Out of those the Apostle’s words, “Have ye not houses to eat and drink19?”—albeit temples such as now were not then erected for the exercise of the Christian religion, it hath been nevertheless not absurdly conceived20 that he teacheth what difference should be made between house and house21; that what is fit for the dwelling-place of God, and what for man’s habitation he sheweth; he requireth that Christian men at their own home take common food, and in the house of the Lord none but that food which is heavenly; he instructeth them, that as in the one place they use to refresh their bodies, so they may in the other learn to seek the nourishment of their souls; and as there they sustain temporal life, so here they would learn to make provision for eternal. Christ could not suffer that the temple should serve for a place of mart, nor the Apostle of Christ that the church should be made an inn.
When therefore we sanctify or hallow churches, that which we do is only to testify that we make them places of public resort, that we invest God himself with them, that we sever them from common uses. In which action, other solemnities than such as are decent and fit for that purpose we approve none.
Indeed we condemn not all as unmeet, the like whereunto have been either devised or used haply amongst Idolaters. For why should conformity with them in matter of opinion be lawful when they think that which is true, if in action when they do that which is meet it be not lawful to be like unto them? Are we to forsake any true opinion because idolaters have maintained it? Nor to shun any requisite action only because we have in the practice thereof been prevented by idolaters. It is no impossible thing but that sometimes they may judge as rightly what is decent about such external affairs of God, as in greater things what is true. Not therefore whatsoever idolaters have either thought or done, but let whatsoever they have either thought or done idolatrously be so far forth abhorred. For of that which is good even in evil things God is author.
← Places for the public service of God. · Contents · Of the names whereby we distinguish our chur →
Footnotes
-
Durand. (Bishop of Mende, taught law in Italy, †1296.) Rational. lib. i. cap. 6. Decr. Grat. III. Tit. de Consecratione, Dist. i. c. 2. “Tabernaculum.” Gregor. Magn. Epist. x. 12. [al. xii. 11.] and vii. 72. [ix. 70.] and viii. 63. [x. 66. The passage from the Decretal grounds the principle of consecration on the authority of the Old Testament, and transfers it a fortiori to the Christian Dispensation. Durandus (who wrote in the thirteenth century) gives a minute detail of the ceremonies used in his time. Of the “unnecessary customs” referred to by Hooker, and of the manner in which they had come to be blended with the simple and noble form still retained in the practice of the English Church, the following may serve as a specimen. “Quarto, dicendum est qualiter Ecclesia consecratur. Et quidem omnibus de Ecclesia ejectis, solo Diacono ibi remanente incluso, Episcopus cum Clero ante fores Ecclesiæ aquam non sine sale benedicit; interim intrinsecus ardent xii luminaria ante xii cruces in parietibus Ecclesiæ depictas. Postmodum vero clero et populo insequente circumeundo Ecclesiam exterius cum falculo hyssopi, parietes cum aqua benedicta aspergit, et qualibet vice ad januam Ecclesiæ veniens percutit superliminare cum baculo pastorali, dicens, Attollite portas principes vestras, &c. Diaconus de intus respondet, Quis est iste Rex gloriæ? Cui Pontifex, Dominus fortis, &c. Tertia vero vice, reserato ostio, ingreditur Pontifex ecclesiam cum paucis ex ministris, clero et populo foris manente, dicens, Pax huic domui; et dicet litanias.” Let this be compared with the corresponding part of the service drawn up by Bishop Andrews, and now commonly used. The passages from St. Gregory are official letters, a few out of many, exhibiting the form in which, as Bishop of Rome, he was accustomed to issue his license to his suffragans for dedication of a Church or Chapel. There are two conditions on which he invariably insists: a certain fixed endowment, and sufficient security that the spot had never been used as a burying-place before: the latter, because (say the Benedictine editors) “periculum erat ne cultus sanctis Martyribus debitus corporibus pridem hoc in loco sepultis reddi putaretur.”] ↩
-
Ἐγκαίνια τιμα̑σθαι παλαιὸς νόμος, καὶ καλω̑ς ἔχων, μα̑λλον δὲ τὰ νέα τιμα̑σθαι δι’ ἐγκαινίων. Καὶ του̑το οὐχ ἅπαξ, ἀλλὰ καὶ πολλάκις, ἑκάστης του̑ ἐνιαυτου̑ περιτροπη̑ς τὴν αὐτὴν ἡμέραν ἐπαγούσης, ἵνα μὴ ἐξίτηλα τῳ̑ χρόνῳ γένηται τὰ καλά. Greg. Nazian. Orat. εἰς τὴν κυριακήν. [Orat. 43. init.] ↩
-
Vide Euseb. de vita Constant. lib. iv. c. 41, 43-45. ↩
-
[Euseb. iv. 45. Οἱ δὲ του̑ Θεου̑ λειτουργοὶ εὐχαι̑ς ἅμα καὶ διαλέξεσι τὴν ἑορτὴν κατεκόσμουν· οἱ μὲν του̑ θεοϕιλου̑ς βασιλέως τὴν εἰς τὸν τω̑ν ὅλων σωτη̑ρα δεξίωσιν ἀνυμνου̑ντες, τὰς δὲ περὶ τὸ μαρτύριον μεγαλουργίας διεξιόντες τῳ̑ λόγῳ· οἱ δὲ ται̑ς ἀπὸ τω̑ν θείων δογμάτων πανηγυρικαι̑ς θεολογίαις, πανδαισίαν λογικω̑ν τροϕω̑ν ται̑ς πάντων παραδιδόντες ἀκοαι̑ς· ἄλλοι δὲ ἑρμήνειας τω̑ν θείων ἀναγνωσμάτων ἐποιου̑ντο, τὰς ἀποῤῥήτους ἀποκαλύπτοντες θεωρίας· οἱ δὲ μὴ διὰ τούτων χωρει̑ν οἷοί τε, θυσίαις ἀναίμοις καὶ μυστικαι̑ς ἱερουργίαις τὸ θει̑ον ἱλάσκοντο, ὑπὲρ τη̑ς κοινη̑ς εἰρήνης, ὑπὲρ τη̑ς ἐκκλησίας του̑ Θεου̑, αὐτου̑ τε βασιλέως ὕπερ του̑ τοσούτων αἰτίου, παίδων τ’ αὐτου̑ θεοϕιλω̑ν, ἱκετηρίους εὐχὰς τῳ̑ Θέῳ προσαναϕέροντες.] ↩
-
Athanas. Apol. ad Constantium, [§ 15. ὁ μακαρίτης Ἀλέξανδρος, καὶ οἱ ἄλλοι πατέρες … συναγαγόντες καὶ τελειώσαντες τὸ ἔργον, ηὐχαρίστησαν τῳ̑ Κυρίῳ, ἐγκαίνια ἐπιτελέσαντες. I. 685. Ed. Colon. 1686.] ↩
-
[“apparance,” A and C; “appearance,” K.; which scarcely gives sense. “Apparance” seems a word formed from Lat. apparare, with the meaning of the derivatives, apparatè, apparatio, apparatus, v. Facciol. in v.] 1886. ↩
-
[See the Apologies of Tertullian and Justin Martyr.] ↩
-
[See “A Declaration of the Faith and Order owned and practised in the Congregational Churches in England; agreed upon and consented unto by their elders and messengers in their meeting at the Savoy, Octob. 12, 1658.” London, 1659. p. 23, 24. “The Lord Jesus calleth out of the world unto communion with himself those that are given unto him by his Father; … . Those thus called, he commandeth to walk together in particular societies or Churches … … . Churches thus gathered and assembling for the worship of God, are thereby visible and public, and their assemblies (in what place soever they are) according as they have liberty or opportunity, are therefore Church or public assemblies.”] ↩
-
Exod. xl. 34. 1 Reg. viii. 11. ↩
-
Exod. xl. 9. ↩
-
1 Reg. viii. ↩
-
Lev. xvi. 2. The place named Holy. ↩
-
Ezra vi. 16. ↩
-
Matt. xxi. 13. ↩
-
[“Saboth,” “Sabboths,” A. (1597.) “Sabbath,” C. (1616.)] 1886. ↩
-
Jer. xvii. 24. ↩
-
Mark xi. 16. ↩
-
Levit. xxvi. 2. ↩
-
1 Cor. xi. 22. ↩
-
Pet. Cluniac. (Petrus Venerabilis, 1092-†1156, Abbot of Clugny.) [cont. Petrobrusianos Epist. in Biblioth. Patr. Colon. t. xiii. 221, 2. “Recolite Epistolas Apostolorum, et ipsius Pauli diversis Ecclesiis missas. Si vero appellatione Ecclesiarum spiritualem magis fidelium congregationem quam corporalem structuram fieri dixeritis: videte quid Paulus Corinthios corripiens dicat; ‘Convenientibus,’ inquit, ‘vobis in Ecclesia, audio scissuras esse; et ex parte credo.’ Et post pauca, ‘Nunquid domos non habetis ad manducandum et bibendum, aut Ecclesiam Dei contemnitis?’ Docet summus post Christum Ecclesiæ Magister domorum et domorum distantiam; et quid domui divinæ, quid humanæ conveniat, more suo lucide manifestat. Non patitur crimina carnis in domo Spiritus celebrari, sed vult Christianos in domibus suis communes cibos edere, in domo autem Domini dominicam tantum cœnam manducare. Instruit eos, ut sicut in illis victum corporis sic in ista victum animæ quærere discant: et sicut in illis vitam mortalem, sic in ista vitam sibi provideant sempiternam. Imitatus est magistrum discipulus Christum, in quo loquebatur Christus. Et sicut ille templum Dei noluit esse domum negotiationis, sic iste Ecclesiam Dei non est passus fieri domum comestionis.”The date of this tract is 1147, according to Fleury, Hist. Eccles. tom. xv. l. 69. c. 24.] ↩
-
[See Mede’s Works, B. iii. Disc. of Churches, p. 319-340.] ↩