explicit command and direction from God. The mode of initiation into the Christian Church, and the indispensable necessity of its initiation, are as clearly revealed in the New Testament, as the former are in the old; and as it regards the great principle upon which the Christian ministry is organized, the Apostle declares, that "no man has a right to take this honour upon himself, but he that is called of God as was Aaron." "C It becomes, therefore, an important inquiry, what is that mode of administration which was established by our Lord and his Apostles, and to which "pertain the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the giving of the law, and the service of God, and the promises."

The preface to the ordinal in our Book of Common Prayer, has the following declaration :-" It is evident unto all men, diligently reading Holy Scripture and ancient authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's church-Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Which offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation, that no man might presume to execute any of them, except he were first called, tried, and examined, and known to have such qualities as are requisite, for the same; and also by public prayer, with imposition of hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful authority." This being the sober and deliberate declaration of wise and good men, who sealed their doctrines with their blood, cannot be supposed to have been made on slight grounds. The considerations which support the doctrine here laid down by our reformers could not be given at length in a work like the present. But it may not be unacceptable to those who have had no opportunity of examining the subject, to be put in possession of a few of

c Heb. v. 4,

the reasons which might be adduced in favour of this peculiarity in our ecclesiastical system.

I. On analogies we depend only for illustration of argument and confirmation of proofs. We do not maintain, that, because there were three orders in the Jewish priesthood, there must, of necessity, be three in the Christian. It is certain, however, that there is an intimate connexion between the two dispensations, and a strong resemblance between the positive institutions of the former, which, in fact, were, for the most part, typical, and those of the latter. We find, for instance, the Church founded on the twelve Apostles, answering to the congregation of Israel-divided into the twelve tribes under the twelve patriarchs, the seventy disciples appointed by Christ, answering to the seventy elders who assisted Moses;—the prayers, praises, benedictions, and federal rites of the Christian church, answering to all those in the Jewish. In this view, we cannot but think, that the Episcopal plan exhibits a fine analogy and noble consistency with the divine dispensations, by the preservation of three orders in the ministry, which, as St. Jerome remarks, were established in the Christian in correspondence with the Jewish hierarchy of High Priest, Priest, and Levite.

II. But we are ready, in all things, to refer our judgment to that only infallible standard of truth given us in the Holy Scriptures. And here we find no difficulty in admitting, that no express precept of our Saviour is recorded. If this be an objection, it is one which equally affects the form of government established by every other denomination; nay more, it goes to destroy equally the baptism of infants, the observance of the Christian Sabbath, and the canon of scripture itself. Our Lord gave no recorded instruction upon any of these subjects, and yet they were, the latter especially, infinitely important. Much contro

versy has arisen upon the authenticity and genuineness of some of the Epistles, now held as canonical. According to the argument used against Episcopacy, they cannot be maintained. "If this were so important a matter as is alleged, our Lord, knowing its liability to doubt and objection, would have put upon it some certain mark, by which its divine character might be infallibly demonstrated." The design of our Lord while on earth, appears to have been, not so much to organize his church, as to purchase it by his blood; not so much even to instruct us in the way of salvation, as to procure it for us: to raise up men, who, by his Spirit, should teach us more fully the way of the Lord; by his illustrious example to show us the path of religion, and by his resurrection, to teach us, that immortality was the high prerogative of our nature. The nature of the Christian ministry, the great doctrines of man's depravity, of the atonement, of justification through faith in his blood; these he left to be fully unfolded by his inspired Apostles; "being seen of them forty days (after his resurrection) and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God." What they did, as well as what they taught by his authority, is as imperious in its obligation, as though it were delivered by his own divine voice; and the form of government which they instituted, as well as the form of doctrine which they taught, was, no doubt, according to the pattern received by them from their Divine Master.

A great commission given for the purpose of carrying into effect a great and wonderful system, may, with propriety, be supposed to involve the power of appointing inferior officers. Nay, the very power of ordaining was declared to be inherent in the very act by which they them

d Acts i. 3.

selves were commissioned. "As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost." If there be any force in an objection which has been raised here, that the power of ordaining was not explicitly mentioned, and therefore, could not be so important as that of preaching and baptizing, it would lie equally against the administration of the Lord's Supper, which is omitted also in the words of the commission. But Christians, generally, do not consider that sacrament less important than the other.

In conformity with this view, we find the Apostles, early after their commission, going forth and ordaining others to offices co-ordinate with their own, and giving form and order to the Church over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers. From their acts and epistles it is manifest that ordination was never performed but by the higher order; although the Presbyters, or second order, assisted, as is the case in ordination by our Bishops. In the separation of Paul and Barnabas, in which it might seem that inferiors undertook to ordain to the highest order, it will appear upon examination, that this was not an ordination, but merely a selection by command of the Holy Ghost, in which prayer and the ceremony of imposition of hands were used. Dr. Doddridge, remarking upon this place, says, "That these were now invested with the apostolic office, by these inferior ministers, is a thing neither credible in itself, nor consistent with what St. Paul himself says, Gal. ii." Another instance is related 1 Tim. iv. 14: "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery." St. Paul however says he had a share in this business. "Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the put

of our

ting on of my hands." Although it is the usage Church to have three Bishops at the ordination of a Bishop, yet one only is the ordainer. We look upon this as essential to the conveyance of due authority, and the addition of others is a circumstance founded upon discretion, and made venerable by usage.

Thus argued that respectable body of divines, assembled at Westminster in the 17th century. In reply to the Independents, who wished to prostrate all order, and scouted the idea of succession, the divines tell them, "that all that is written in the epistles concerning the ordainers and the qualifications of the ordained, is directed to Timothy and Titus:" "That the Apostles went about ordaining elders in every church, and that the Apostle Paul ordained Timothy and Titus. That these ordained others, and that as Timothy was intrusted with the word of Christ, so he was commanded to commit the same to faithful men, so that there might be a succession of teachers, and they alone who received this church power from the Apostles can transmit it to other ministers, &c." As the Church multiplied and some of the Apostles finished their course, the survivors appointed others with apostolical authority to assist. Timothy and Titus were consecrated by the Apostle, the former Bishop of Ephesus, and the latter Bishop of Crete, with power to ordain Elders or Presbyters. At Philippi was Epaphroditus, whom St. Paul styles the Apostle or messenger of the Philippians. St. John, when he was an old man, wrote to the angel of the church of Ephesus, of Smyrna, of Pergamos, of Thyatira, of Sardis, of Philadelphia, and of Laodicea. The word angel signifies a messenger, and is equivalent to that of Apostle. Now, to suppose that there was only one indi

e 2 Tim. i. 6.

f Jus Divinum, p. 162.