there is a Church. Every one lives by his own faith, nor is there respect of persons with God; since not the hearers, but the doers, of the law are justified by God, according to the Apostle. If, therefore, you possess within yourself the right of the priesthood to be exercised in cases of necessity, you ought also to conform yourself to the rule of life prescribed to those who engage in the priesthood; the rights of which you may be called to exercise. Do you, after contracting a second marriage, venture to baptise or to celebrate the eucharist? How much more heinous is it in a Layman who has contracted a second marriage, to exercise the functions of the priesthood, when a second marriage is deemed a sufficient ground for degrading a priest from his order? But you will plead the necessity of the case as an apology for the act. The plea is invalid, because you were not placed under the necessity of marrying a second time. Do not marry again, and you will not run the hazard of being obliged to do that which a Digamist is not allowed to do. It is the will of God that we should at all times be in a fit state to administer his sacraments, if an occasion should arise." We are very far from meaning to defend the soundness of Tertullian's argument in this passage. We quote it because it is one of the passages which have been brought forward to prove that he did not recognise the distinction between the Clergy and Laity; whereas a directly opposite inference ought to be drawn. He limits the right of the Laity to exercise the ministerial functions to extraordinary cases; to cases of necessity. Were they to assume it in ordinary cases, they would be guilty of an act of criminal presumption, as he indirectly asserts in the Tract de Monogamiâ; where he pursues the very same train of reasoning, in refutation of the same objection. That he recognised the distinction between the Clergy and Laity, is further proved by the fact, that among other accusations which he urges against the Heretics, he states that they conferred orders without making strict enquiry into the 9 8 9 Sed quum extollimur et inflamur adversus Clerum, tunc unum omnes sumus: tunc omnes Sacerdotes, quia Sacerdotes nos Deo et Patri fecit; quum ad peræquationem disciplinæ provocamur, deponimus infulas, et impares sumus. De Monogamiâ, c. 12. We may, however, infer from this passage that in Tertullian's day the validity of the distinction was occasionally questioned. 9 Ordinationes eorum temerariæ, leves, inconstantes. Nunc neophytos conlocant, nunc seculo obstrictos, nunc Apostatas nostros. De Præscriptione Hæreticorum, c. 41., and in the same chapter, Nam et Laicis sacerdotalia munera injungunt. In the Tract de Idololatriâ, c. 7. Tertullian complains that the artificers of idols were admitted into Orders; Adleguntur in Ordinem Ecclesiasticum Artifices Idolorum. qualifications of the candidates; and that they not only allowed, but even enjoined the Laity to assume the sacerdotal office, and administer the ceremonies of religion. In shewing that the distinction was recognised by Tertullian, we have incidentally shewn that it was generally recognised in the Church; this indeed is implied in the very words Clerus and Ordo Ecclesiasticus, which frequently occur. But what, it may be asked, is Tertullian's meaning, when he says that the distinction between the Clergy and the Laity is established by the authority of the Church? Before we can answer this question, we must ascertain what was his notion of the Church; and for this purpose we will turn to the Tract de Præscriptione Hæreticorum, in which he takes a rapid survey of its origin and progress. 10"Christ," he says, "during his residence on earth, declared the purposes of his mission, and the rule of faith and practice, either publicly to the people or privately to the disciples, of whom he attached twelve more immediately to his person, intending that they should be the teachers of the Gentiles. One of them 10 c. 20. Compare cc. 32, 36. Si hæc ita se habent, ut veritas nobis adjudicetur quicunque in eâ regulâ incedimus quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis, Apostoli a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit. betrayed him; but the remaining eleven he commanded to go and instruct all nations, and to baptise them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. These eleven, having added to their number a twelfth, in the room of him who had been cut off, and having received the promised effusion of the Holy Spirit, by which they were endowed with supernatural powers, first preached the Gospel and founded Churches in Judea they then went forth to the Gentiles, preaching in like manner and founding Churches in every city. From these Churches others were propagated and continue to be propagated at the present day, which are all reckoned in the number of Apostolic Churches, inasmuch as they are the offspring of Apostolic Churches. Moreover all these Churches constitute "one Church; being joined together in the unity of faith and in the bond of peace." In conformity with this view of the origin of the Church, Tertullian never fails, when arguing upon any disputed point of doctrine or discipline, to appeal to 11 On the Unity of the Church, see c. 32. and de Virgin. vel. c. 2. This Church Tertullian calls the house of God. De Pudicitiâ, c. 7. In it were preserved the authentic rule of faith and discipline, and the genuine Scriptures. De Præscript. Hæreticorum, cc. 21, 37. et passim. With respect to particular Churches, Tertullian admits by implication that they may fall into error, c. 27. the belief or practice of those Churches which had been actually founded by the Apostles; on the ground that in them the faith taught and the institutions established by the Apostles were still preserved. When, therefore, he says that the authority of the Church made the distinction between the Clergy and Laity, the expression in his view of the subject is manifestly equivalent to saying that the distinction may be traced to the Apostles, the founders of the Church. Thus he contends that 12 all virgins should be compelled to wear veils; because such was the practice in those Churches which had been founded either by the Apostles or by Apostolic men, and consequently the probable inference was that it was of Apostolic institution. It is true that, after his separation from the Church, he held a different language; he then began to contend, have already seen, that wherever three, though Laymen, were gathered together, there was a Church and in 1 the Tract de Pudicitiâ, 12 De Virginibus vel. c. 2. 13 chap. I. p. 48. 13 as we 14 Nam et Ecclesia proprie et principaliter ipse est Spiritus, in quo est Trinitas unius Divinitatis, Pater et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus. Illam Ecclesiam congregat, quam Dominus in tribus posuit. Atque ita exinde etiam numerus omnis qui in hanc fidem conspiraverint, Ecclesia ab auctore et consecratore censetur, et ideo Ecclesia quidem delicta donabit: sed Ecclesia Spiritus per Spiritalem hominem ; Ecclesia numerus Episcoporum, c. 21. Compare de Poni tentiâ, |