his heterodoxy; no great body, even of heretics, could find cause to dissent from the church in this point; but all Arians, Macedonians, Novatians, Donatists, &c. maintained the distinction of ecclesiastical orders among themselves, and acknowledged the duty of the inferior clergy to their bishops; and no wonder, seeing it standeth upon so very firm and clear grounds; upon the reason of the case, upon the testimony of holy scripture, upon general tradition, and unquestionable monuments of antiquity, upon the common judgment and practice of the greatest saints, persons most renowned for wisdom and piety in the church. The holy scripture doth plainly enough countenance this distinction; for therein we have represented one angel, (or bishop,) presiding over principal churches, which contained several presbyters ;* therein we find Episcopal ordination and jurisdiction exercised; we have one bishop constituting presbyters in divers cities of his diocese,t ordering all things therein concerning ecclesiastical discipline; judging presbyters, rebuking, with all authority, or imperiousness, as it were; and reconciling offenders, secluding heretics and scandalous persons.‡ The primitive general use of christians most effectually doth back the scripture, and interpret it in favour of this distinction; scarce less than demonstrating it constituted by the apostles; for how otherwise is it imaginable, that all the churches founded by the apostles, in several most distant and disjoined places, (at Jerusalem, at Antioch, at Alexandria, at Ephesus, at Corinth, at Rome,) should presently conspire in ac * Rev. ii. & iii. Tit. i. 5. ii. 15. + 1 Tim. v knowledgment and use of it? How could it without apparent confederacy be formed, how could it creep in without notable clatter, how could it be admitted without considerable opposition, if it were not in the foundation of those churches laid by the apostles? How is it likely, that in those times of grievous persecution, falling chiefly upon the bishops, (when to be eminent among christians yielded slender reward, and exposed to extreme hazard; when to seek pre-eminence was in effect to court danger and trouble, torture and ruin,) an ambition of irregularly advancing themselves above their brethren should so generally prevail among the ablest and best christians? How could those famous martyrs for the christian truth be some of them so unconscionable as to affect, others so irresolute as to yield to such injurious encroachments? and how could all the holy Fathers (persons of so renowned, so approved wisdom and integrity) be so blind as not to discern such a corruption, or so bad as to abet it? How indeed could all God's church be so weak as to consent in judgment, so base as to comply in practice with it? In fine, how can we conceive that all the best monuments of antiquity down from the beginning (the acts, the epistles, the histories, the commentaries, the writings of all sorts coming from the blessed martyrs and most holy confessors of our faith) should conspire to abuse us; the which do speak nothing but bishops; long catalogues and rows of bishops succeeding in this and that city; bishops contesting for the faith against pagan idolaters, and heretical corrupters of christian doctrine; bishops here teaching and planting our religion by their labours, there suffering and watering it with their blood?" CHAPTER V. POWERS AND DUTIES OF CHRISTIAN MINISTERS. In considering the distinction of orders in the christian ministry, we have been necessarily led to consider the different powers and duties, with which the various officers of the church are invested. It has been already shown that none but bishops have authority to ordain ministers; indeed, "the plenitude of power, which is communicated to inferior ministers by parts, according to their respective orders, is wholly and altogether lodged in the bishop; so that whatever duty is incumbent on any inferior minister, does in a more eminent manner belong to him."* "While our Lord lived on earth, he reserved the power of ordaining ministers to himself. He gave the apostles and the seventy disciples a commission to preach, but never allowed them to communicate that commission to any other. This was his own prerogative, which he would not impart to others, whilst he visibly governed the church in person. Afterwards when the apostles were the chief visible governors of the church, they ordained ministers." All the apostles together ordained the seven deacons in the church of Jerusalem ;† Paul and Barnabas ordained presbyters in every church they visited; Timothy and Titus, Bishops of Ephesus and Crete, ordained ministers in those churches; but * Potter on Ch. Gov. 206 & 256. † Acts vi. 3, 6. there is no instance, in the first centuries, of any mere presbyter ever exercising this power. "It hath not been heard of," says Hooker, "that inferior presbyters were ever authorized to ordain." Another power peculiar to bishops, and which inferior ministers were never known to exercise in the early ages of the church, is that of the laying on of hands upon those who are baptized, in the holy ordinance of confirmation. This rite is reckoned by St. Paul among the "first principles," or rudiments, of the christian religion, such as "repentance, faith, and baptism." It appears from scripture to have been the practice of the apostles to lay their hands on the disciples after baptism; which is what Bishops, their successors in the government of the church, still do, in confirmation. We read in the Acts, that when Philip the deacon went down to Samaria and converted and baptized many of the Samaritans, the apostles, who were still at Jerusalem, sent two of their own body, Peter and John, "who, when they were come down, prayed for them, and laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost." In like manner, when St. Paul came to Ephesus, he laid his hands on twelve disciples, who had already been baptized; "and when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them." These authorities from scripture, joined to the "The more the subject is canvassed, the more the fact will be evident, of there never having been a period in the christian church without an order of the clergy clothed with certain authorities, including this of ordination, not committed to the other orders." Bishop White, Sermon before the Gen. Con. 1808, p. 8. † Hebrews vi. 1. POWERS AND DUTIES OF CHRISTIAN MINISTERS. 143 universal practice of the church in the first centuries, prove that the power of administering confirmation is strictly appropriated to the highest order of the christian ministry. This subject will be more fully considered, when we come to treat of the rite of confirmation. Priests, or presbyters, have authority given them by the ordaining bishop to preach, to baptize, to consecrate the Lord's Supper, and to offer up the public prayers of the church. All these duties, excepting that of consecrating the eucharist, belong also to deacons, and he is authorized to assist in administering the communion, yet neither presbyters nor deacons can exercise any of these duties, without the bishop's permission; because, as we have before remarked, "all offices annexed to the cure of souls, have constantly been understood to belong primarily to the bishop, and to be executed by the inferior orders of presbyters and deacons only in subordination to him." We have, in scripture, the examples of the seventy disciples, who were of the lowest order of ministers, going forth to preach the gospel; and Philip the deacon both preached and baptized ;*-hence we infer that bishops may lawfully depute deacons to preach and baptize. The distinction of powers, then, is briefly this; to bishops belong the exclusive right of ordaining and administering confirmation; to presbyters, besides authority to preach and baptize, and offer up the prayers of the church, the power is given of consecrating the holy eucharist; deacons are empowered to preach, to baptize, to offer public prayers, and to assist the priest in administering the Lord's Supper. *Acts viii. 5-13, 26-40. |