CHAPTER VI.

CONCLUSION.

We shall here conclude all that we have at present to offer on the ministry of the church; thinking that we have already made it sufficiently "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." Those, indeed, who deny the divine institution of Episcopacy, assign its origin as early as the second century; and while they contend for ministerial parity, they are ready to admit that "long before the council of Nice, (A. D. 325,) this their government began greatly to decay, and that since the said council, it was never heard of in christendom until the time of the reformation." "A very strange matter, if it were true," says Archbishop Bancroft,*" that Christ should erect a form of government for the ruling of his church, to continue from his departure out of the world, until his coming again, and that the same should never be once thought of, or put in practice for the space of 1500 years; or at least, that the government and kingdom of Christ should then be overthrown, when by all men's confessions, the divinity of his person, the virtue of his priesthood, the power of his

* Sermon at St. Paul's Cross, A. D. 1588, p. 10.

office as he is a prophet, and the honour of his kingly authority, was so godly, so learnedly, and so mightily established against the Arians in the council of Nice, as that the confession of the christian faith, then set forth, hath ever since without contradiction been received in the church." Strange, indeed, must have been the revolution, which could effect such a total change in that church with which its Divine Founder had promised to continue "till the end of the world ;" and stranger yet, that no record should remain of the time when that change took place, or the means by which it was brought about.*

"A very strange thing, sure it were," as honest Hooker remarks, "that such a discipline as ye [the Puritans] speak of should be taught by Christ and his apostles in the word of God, and no church ever have found it out, nor received it until this present time. Contrariwise, the government against which ye bend yourselves, be observed every where, throughout all generations and ages of the christian world, no chucrh ever perceiving the word of God to be against it. We require you to find out but one church upon the face of the whole earth, that hath been ordered by your discipline, or hath not been ordered by ours, that is to say, by Episcopal regimen, since the time that the blessed apostles were here conversant. Ecclesiastical Polity, Preface, § 4."

"When I shall see," says the learned Chillingworth, "all the fables in the Metamorphosis acted, and proved true stories; when I shall see all the democracies and aristocracies in the world lie down and sleep, and awake into monarchies; then will I begin to believe, that presbyterial government, having continued in the church during the apostles' time, should presently after (against the apostles' doctrine, and the will of Christ) be whirled about like a scene in a mask, and transformed into Episcopacy. In the mean time, while these things remain thus incredible, and in human reason impossible, I hope I shall have leave to conclude thus:

Episcopal government is acknowledged to have been universally received in the church, presently after the apostles' times. Between the apostles' times and this presently after, there was not time enough for, nor possibility of, so great an alteration. And therefore, there was no such alteration as is pretended. And

N

We think it one of the strongest proofs to be desired in favour of Episcopacy, that no other form of church government can be proved to have existed from the apostles' times, until the sixteenth century. We would therefore adopt the language of one, than whom no man was ever better entitled to the epithet "judicious," and say, "A thousand, five hundred years, and upwards, the Church of Christ hath now continued under the sacred regiment of bishops. Neither, so long, hath christianity been ever planted in any kingdom throughout the world, but under this kind of government alone; which, to have been ordained of God, I am for my own part, even as resolutely persuaded, as that any other kind of government in the world whatsoever is of God."

The church thus established we conceive to be ONE, because it is always so represented in scripture. "The Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved ;" "God hath set some in the church: first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers;" "Feed the church;" "Tell it unto the church;" "If he neglect to hear the church;" "Give none offence to the church of God." Surely we may be permitted, after such examples, to speak of "THE church;" for we no where

therefore Episcopacy, being confessed to be so ancient and catholic, must be granted also to be apostolic: Quod erat demonstrandum.-Apostolic Institution of Episcopacy demonstrated, §7-11."

The above quotations, with most others in these notes, were made to my hand, in that excellent work of Bishop Doane's, "A Word for the Church;" which is indeed " a word fitly spoken," and 'ought to be in the hands of every churchman."

Ecclesiastical Polity iii. 85.

read of more than "ONE Catholic and Apostolic church ;” and this is always spoken of in terms importing the strictest and most inviolable unity. Christ is said to be the Head of the church, and the individual members of which it is composed, constitute "his body." "As the body is ONE, and hath many members, and all the members of that ONE BODY, being many, are ONE BODY, so also is Christ; for by one Spirit are ye all baptized into ONE BODY; now are they many members; yet but ONE BODY." With such representations of the intimate union subsisting between the divine Head, and all the members of his mystical body, christians ought surely to be scrupulously careful "that there be no schism in the body." To say that there can be more than ONE pure and apostolic church, is to admit that many bodies may be united to one head, which is monstrous and absurd ;- "Ye are THE BODY of Christ," says St. Paul," and members in particular."

In conclusion, we would recommend to the attention of every reader of these pages the very forcible remarks of Mr. Law, the well known author of "A Serious Call," on the subject of Episcopacy. "The christian ministry is a divine, positive institution, which, as it could only begin by the divine appointment, so it can only descend to after ages in such a method as God has been pleased to appoint. Now, as Episcopacy is the method which was at first instituted for continuing the ministry, therefore Episcopacy is unchangeable. The apostolic practice shows that Episcopacy is the order that is appointed for conveying the ministry; but it is the nature of the ministry which proves that Episcopacy is unalterable. The office of the ministry is of no significancy but as it is of divine ap

pointment, and rests on a divine commission, for the conveyance of which Episcopacy was the mode appointed. The continuance of the commission, therefore, and of course the authority of the ministry, depends upon the continuance of the mode appointed to convey it. So that the question is not fairly stated when it is asked whether Episcopacy, as being an apostolic practice, may not be laid aside? But, whether an instituted particular method of conveying the ministry be not necessary to be continued?-whether an appointed order of receiving a commission from God, be not necessary to be observed in order to receive a commission from him? If the case were thus stated, any one would soon perceive that we can no more lay aside Episcopacy, and yet continue the christian ministry, than we can alter the terms of salvation and yet be in covenant with God." Is not this sound logic? Does it not place the whole subject on its true and proper ground? Why, then, should we be thought intolerant, or uncharitable, for maintaining and defending these principles ?* We believe that the advo

*"Is the charge of bigotry against the High Churchman founded on the fact, that in his efforts for propagating christianity, and of extending the kingdom of Jesus Christ, he devotes himself to the extension of his own church exclusively? And if a correct spirit, manner, and means are cherished and employed by him, the imputation is unfair and unjust. He regards the church which the Redeemer and his apostles founded, as subsisting under certain distinctive and essential principles of doctrine, ministry, sacraments, and worship. He regards his own church (every duly constituted Protestant Episcopal Church) as possessing these essentials. In advancing then his own church, he propagates, in his view, the gospel, as Christ and his apostles proclaimed it-he extends the kingdom and Church of Christ as they established and extended it