the comprehension of their duties, for discharging which, they were miraculously endowed. There is not a syllable in any or all of these alleged commissions, even on the archbishop's interpretation, about dioceses, or government of presbyters, or imposition of hands, or the transmission of the sacred gift to an endless succession. Let us, then, pass on to the second order, and what is represented to be their especial function, by which they are distinguished from the first? Why it is their duty, we are told, to preach and to administer the sacraments; that is, to do just what the apostles, by their three commissions, were empowered to do, while the great modern function of presbyters, that is, an implicit obedience and submission to the prelatic order, is never once even hinted at. But our amazement increases, when we pass on to the third order of deacons. "These,' says Potter, 'are inferior ministers," while, as Mr. Palmer teaches, they are not a spiritual order at all. But what are the distinct powers of this inferior order, subordinating them to the two higher? "They are,' says Potter, 'attendants and ministers, to preach the gospel and to baptize,' which offices they have executed 'since our Lord's ascension.”3 Now these are the identical functions, represented by this same author, as the peculiar and exclusive powers of the apostles, and of the presbyters. He assures us, that 'the principal business' of the apostles was 'to preach." They were also to baptize. What are we then to think, when we now learn that 'baptizing is an inferior ministry,' 'deputed' by the first order to those whose proper business it was to baptize.” We put it to any reasonable mind, whether it is possible to believe that Christ, by divine inspiration, instituted in his church three orders of ministers, essentially distinct in their nature, offices, and gifts, and essential to the very being and perpetuity of the church, and that, after all, he has declared, that those are the ordinary and principal duties of the first order, which he has made the duties of the second, and also of the third; and that he has, at the same time, left altogether unmentioned, those prerogatives by which the first are now said to be characterized by divine right? And more than this, can any man believe, that when Christ thus commissioned these three orders, the same duties, when enjoined upon the second and third orders, are inferior, which, when performed by the first order, constitute 'their principal business?' And further still, that the min 1) Ibid, p. 67. 2) On the Ch. vol. ii. 3) Potter on Ch. Gov't. p. 58. 4) Ibid, p. 68. istry of baptism, which is deputed to an inferior order, and that not a spirtual one, should, nevertheless, be the most vital and efficacious ordinance the church has to dispense, since all its recipients are assured that thereby they are born again, regenerated by the Holy Ghost, justified, and made christians? Can any sane mind believe all these contradictory declarations, to be verily and in truth the simple and pure doctrine and institution of God? It is impossible. And when, in addition to all this, we remember, that in the Romish church there are now eight, nine, or ten orders, all claiming the sanction of this divine commission;1 that in the single order of presbyters, there are ten subdivided orders; and under that of bishops seven orders more; how can we avoid regarding the whole theory as the offspring of human vanity, begot upon pride and ambition? This commission determines of itself the whole controversy. Ministers do not receive their office or power from the ordainer, but immediately and solely from Christ. The ordainers can do nothing more than designate the person as qualified to fill the office; and ministerially, as the servants of Christ, deliver to him the possession of office and authority by a solemn rite or sign. The office, however, and the power, are fixed, certain, immutable, and of divine institution. And it is not in the power of any church, or of the whole church, to alter that institution, or to say that to one order of men this power shall be given in its plenitude, and to other orders it shall be given only in part; nor can any pretended rules or canons affect that right and title, which descends, by divine gift, to every duly commissioned minister of Jesus Christ. That such was the understanding of our Lord's commission, by those to whom it was originally given, is made evident to us, by the organization of the church in Jerusalem, as constituted by these same apostles, and, as we must believe, under the immediate guidance of Christ himself. For we are informed, that the whole number of the apostles continued, for some twelve years, even after churches had been established elsewhere, (see Acts 8: 1, 25,) to govern this church with equal power, having other presbyters associated with them, who sat and acted with them, (see Acts 15:) as coequal members of the ecclesiastical senate. They thus gave us, under their own hand, and by 1) Elliott on Roman, p. 451. 2) Ibid, p. 459. 3) Ibid, p. 460. 4) See this admitted by Potter, on Ch. Govt. c. 3, p. 107, Eng. ed.; Goode's Div. Rule of Faith, vol. ii. p. 61, Eng. ed. direct inspiration, a model or platform for the government of all other churches. Of this body, Peter probably acted as moderator or president, until after their dispersion, when James appears to have acted in this capacity. Now it is a fundamental maxim in prelacy, that there can be but one prelate in any one church or city at one time. The apostles, therefore, while in their extraordinary endowments they were superior to all presbyters, were, in their ordinary ministerial character, presbyters, and acted as such in the constitution of the first and mother church of all that should ever arise. They have thus put this matter beyond controversy, with all reasonable minds, and proved that this commission of Christ authorizes only one order, as permanent ministers in Christ's church; that this is the order of presbyters; and that the whole power and authority flowing from this charter, both as it regards teaching, governing, and ordaining, is vested in this divinely constituted order. And thus have we given a demonstration, as far as the subject is capable of it, that the government of the church, as instituted by Christ, and as understood by his apostles, was not monarchical like prelacy, nor democratical, like pure congregationalism, but republican, like presbytery; and that presbyters are the true and only valid successors to the apostles in the ordinary ministry of the gospel. And if prelatists will plead for any subsequent alteration of this divine model, we hope they will make the matter of fact and the warrant for such alteration, as plain and clear as this first institution itself. We contend for that form and order which was undoubtedly the original institution of our Saviour; while prelatists contend for that which was, they say, the result of a subsequent change, for which they can, at best, give no more than probable reasons. And who is most likely to be on the Lord's side in this controversy, may therefore easily appear to any one who seeks the truth. 1) See authorities given in Peirce's Vind. of Presb. Ord. part 2, p. 33. &c. 2) See Peirce, ibid, p. 42. CHAPTER IV. THE CLAIMS OF PRESBYTERY TO THE MINISTERIAL SUCCESSION SUSTAINED BY AN APPEAL TO THE APOS TOLIC AGE OF THE CHURCH. § 1. The powers and titles attributed to the ministry by the apostles. 'It is evident to all men,' says the prelatic church, diligently reading the holy scriptures and ancient authors, 'that there have been, from the apostles' time, three orders of ministers in Christ's church, bishops, priests, and deacons.' Now for these three orders we have diligently but fruitlessly inquired in the order of the church during our Lord's ministry, and as he left it when he ascended up far above all heavens, having given to it that broad charter and commission by which it is to be guided to the end of time. There was but one order of ministers, with perfectly similar functions, appointed by our Lord during the period of his own ministration; and when he had solemnly instituted the christian church and inaugurated the christian ministry, he commissioned but one order, in perpetuity. It remains, therefore, to inquire whether there is any sufficient evidence to be found for these three orders in the subsequent organization and extension of the christian church. We have in the New Testament, an inspired record of the apostolic procedure in the propagation of christianity, with twenty-one epistles addressed to particular churches; to the churches generally; to ministers; and to christians. We may well, therefore, and reasonably expect, that, with diligent search, it will be made plain to us, that these three orders, of bishops, priests, and deacons, were instituted by the apostles in all the early churches; that where they were not already found, they were speedily consecrated; and that full directions are given by which their separate spheres of duty and proprieties of office may be clearly designated, and the present unhappy divisions of the visible church, on this account, be effectually healed. But is there any such revelation made to us in the book of the Lord-in these apostolic canons? That numerous churches were organized in various countries, and under divine guidance, we are there informed. That the apostles, and other extraordinary officers, who were supernaturally endowed, and therefore of a temporary order, were employed in laying the foundations deep and wide, of that building which will only be completed when the last ransomed sinner shall be added as a top-stone, with shoutings of grace, grace unto it; of this, also, we have there distinct information. That an order of ministers, according to Christ's commission, was set up in every place, when the Lord opened up the way by the conversion of sinners, and that to them were committed the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to be handed down in perpetuity to all their successors; this, also, is not left ambiguous to any diligent inquirer. But that these several keys, in the full plenitude of episcopal authority, were, solemnly and by divine inspiration, given to one of three distinct orders, to whom was delegated the exclusive authority to use them, and to grant them in partibus to other two orders subordinate to their own, or that this order was to transmit in an unbroken, lineal succession, this sacred and mysterious gift; all this, with whatever diligence we examine, we find not written in the Book of the Lord. That the ministers of the church are, in the New Testament, called bishops, eπiσкoπol, in reference to their duty of taking oversight, is undoubted, and this term is certainly to be retained and had in reverence, as an official designation of those who are over the churches in the Lord, and who are to be very highly esteemed, honored, and loved for their work's sake. And thus are our ministers denominated bishops, throughout our standards. But these same ministers are also called by the name of presbyters, in the New Testament, in reference to their authority, seniority, and preeminence in the church; and by various other terms, descriptive of their several functions, as stewards, ministers, shepherds, ambassadors, and so on. |