greater, inasmuch as the glory of the Church is the superior's glory." "What reason have we to be afraid of the wrath of God, when some presbyters, neither mindful of their own station, nor regardful of the Bishop, their superior, are bold to assume all to themselves, to the reproach and contempt of their superior, a thing never hereto fore attempted under any of my predecessors." [Bowden's Letters, 1. 167.]

154. Jerome is another writer whom Dr. Miller represents on similar grounds as a decisive witness in his favour, although we have the most positive evidence to the contrary. Thus, he says, "We know that what Aaron and his sons were, that the Bishop and Presbyters are." Again addressing the Church, he says, "The Apostles were thy fathers, because that they begat thee. But now that they have left the world, thou hast in their stead their sons, the Bishops." He asserts, "Without the Bishop's license, neither presbyter nor deacon has a right to baptize." He says, "It is the custom of the Church, for Bishops to go and invoke the Holy Spirit, by imposition of hands, on such as were baptized by Presbyters and Deacons, in villages and places remote from the mother Church." "Do you ask," says he, "where this is written? In the Acts of the Apostles." Speaking of the difference between the Church and the Montanist heretics, he says, "With us, the Bishops hold the place of the Apostles; with them the Bishop holds the third place." [Bowden's Letters, vol. 1, p. 6, 7, 8.] He also "calls Presbyters Priests of the inferior degree, and Deacons the third degree." [Religious world Displayed, by Robert Adam, B. A. Oxford, vol. 2, p. 280.]

155. This is more than enough to show, that a man may occasionally call a Bishop a Priest or a Presbyter, without conceiving that they are of the same degree; and that Irenæus's clear and express declarations, that the government of the Church at Rome was committed to one Bishop at a time, and successively to twelve whom he names, each in his day governing that Church, are not to be rendered void of meaning by the simple circumstance of his sometimes applying to a Bishop the term Presbyter.

156. We have now, therefore, seen that Lardner speaks in very high terms of Irenæus; of "his learning, integrity and good sense;" (Vol. 2, p. 157;) and that Mosheim mentions his five books against heresics as 66 one of the most precious monuments of ancient literature." (128.)

157. We have seen that this Father, who was acquainted with many of those who were taught by the Apostles, and with some who were by them appointed Bishops of the Churches, and is said to have suffered martyrdom, in other words, to have borne witness to the truth (96) at the expence of his life, in the year 202; we have seen, that he expressly says, that the Apostles appointed the Bishops as their successors in the government of the Church; that he says that this was the case in all the churches that were in all respects faithful; that he could enumerate the successions of Bishops in all the churches, but, as this would take up too much room in one volume or book, he enumerates those only who successively governed the Church at Rome, as a specimen of the order and government of all the others; that, in mentioning those who governed the Church at Rome, in order, by name, he says the Apostles delivered the Church to Linus to govern it, and after him to Anacletus, and so on to twelve, the last of whom governed that Church at the time the book was written; and that, by this ordination and succession the doctrine of the Church was handed down from the Apostles, and had come even to the Christians of his day. (130)

158. We have moreover seen that Irenæus speaks in the most exalted terms of Polycarp, and of his Epistle to the Philippians; (pp. 72, 73;) and that Polycarp uses similar strong language in speaking of the Epistles of Ignatius, whereby the statements of Ignatius are as completely supported by the evidence of Polycarp, as if he had himself written those Epistles. (126, 127.)

159. We have seen that the testimony of Ignatius is as strong as that of Irenæus as to the fact that the government of the Church was in the Bishop, all ministerial authority proceeding from him; (See 118 123, with the references to the Epistles of Ignatius in the appendix;) but that the former is more particular with regard to the different orders; speaking expressly, in many places, of three orders, Bishops, Presby iers, and Deacons; and in plain terms calling the latter, ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ and ambassadors of God. (Epistle to the Trallians, sect. 2; Magnesians, sect. 6; Philadelphians, sect. 10, 11.) That he also unequivocally, in many instances, speaks of the Bishop as the object of the reverence of the other two orders, and of their being subject to him. (See Epistle to the Magnesians, sect. 2, 3, and the passages in Italics generally, in the Epistles of Ignatius in the appendix.) That he speaks of the presbyters being particularly bound to refresh the

L

Bishop; (Epistle to the Trallians, sect. 12;) and as having no authority but what they derive from him, even to administer the sacraments of Baptism and the Lord's Supper: (Epistle to the Smyrneans, sect. 8:) And lastly, that these orders are all essential, and that he expressly says, without them there is no Church.— (Epistle to the Trallians, sect 3.)

160. Of this state of things in the Church, evidence more and more abounds as we progress through the third century, because more and more learning was enlisted in the cause of the Christian Religion, and because more of the writings of the Fathers of the succeeding centuries have been preserved. It is, however, needless to carry the investigation further for two reasons.

161. First, it is admitted by all, that the government of the Church, from the Reformation up to a very early period, was Episcopal; and the controversy relates to the nature of the government only during the time, between the commencement of the preaching of the Gospel and that period in which it is admitted that the Church was Episcopal.

162. The most learned Presbyterian writers admit that the Church was Episcopal in the year 140. The Provincial Assembly of London, in the appendix to the Jus Divinum Ministerii Anglicani ask this question-"How long was it that the Church of Christ was governed by the common council of Presbyters without a Bishop set over them?" To which they thus answered, "Dr. Blondel, a man of great learning and reading, undertakes in a large discourse, to make out that before the year 140, there was not a Bishop set over Presbyters; to whose elaborate writings we refer the reader for further satisfaction in this particular." Blondel in his preface "labours to prove that the change of government was made at Jerusalem, about the year 135 or 136; at Alexandria about the year 143, and at Rome about the year 140." (Bowden's Letters, vol. 3, pp. 82, 83.)

It has however been shown that the Church was Episcopal throughout the first two centuries, and consequently throughout the period in controversy; and therefore it is not necessary to prosecute the inquiry further.

163. The second reason is, that if the fact be established that the Church was Episcopal in its government for the first two centuries; even if it should be made evident that it was Presbyterian in the next five, it would only be evidence that the Church had depart

ed from the Apostolical plan. that the Church was for two to inquire further into the matter. We are under the most positive obligations to conform to the Apostolical form of government of the Church; and if it should be made to appear that we have departed from it, we are bound to return to it. This is an obligation so far from being questioned, that it is a first principle not barely admitted, but laid down as a fundamental position, by Dr. Miller himself. His words are, "If all the interests of the Church are precious in the view of every enlightened Christian, it is evident that the mode of its organization cannot be a trivial concern; and if the Saviour, or those who were immediately taught by his Spirit, have laid down any rules, or given us any information on this subject, it behooves us carefully to study what they have delivered, and to make it our constant guide." And again, he says, "We unite with such of them as hold the opinion, that Christians, IN ALL AGES, are bound to make the Apostolic order of the Church, with respect to the ministry, as well as other points, the model, as far as possible of all their ccclesiastical arrangements." (Miller's Letters pp. 6, 8.)

Having therefore established the fact, centuries Episcopal, it is unnecessary

164. But although it is not necessary, strictly speaking, to proceed with this investigation regularly through the third and fourth centuries, it may not be amiss to make some remarks upon the semblance of argument on this subject, derived from other writers than those heretofore mentioned.

165. Clemens Romanus is quoted by Dr. Miller in support of the doctrine, that there is but one order of ministers. He was the third Bishop of Rome, in which city there were numerous Presbyters. It will subsequently appear that there were forty six of this order of ministers under one of his successors.

Clement and the Church at Rome, in order to compose a disturbance in which the Corinthians had deposed their priests, (all of them it appears,) wrote a very long letter to them, fully as long as the whole seven Epistles of Ignatius together, in which he uses every possible argument to induce them to return to a quiet and orderly state. Very little mention is made of the Priests, against whom they were violently excited. He mentions once Bishops and Deacons and once Presbyters, and in a third place the chief Priest, the Priests, and the Levites. (Sections 40, 42, 44.)

The third, Dr. Miller objects to admitting as applicable to the

Christian Church. But they to whom the letter was addressed, were not Jews, and he mentions these orders of priests in connexion with the services God required of them, who were Gentiles; and half a century before that, it had been determined by the Jewish Christians, that the Gentiles were not bound to regard the Jewish ceremonies. Let this be as it may; it is certain, first that the mention of two orders is destructive, as far as this testimony goes, of that doctrine which insists only on one; and as far as it goes, supports that which insists on three: for, two are mentioned, and one of the terms, Presbyter or Priest, is a general one, sometimes used to include Bishop, (56, p. 47, and 147) and is even applied to the Apostles.

But further, Polycarp is likewise quoted by Dr. Miller as being an aid in support of the doctrine, that there is but one order of ministers; and he commences with saying, "This venerable martyr, like Clemens, speaks of only two orders of Church officers, viz. Presbyters and Deacons. He exhorts the Philippians to obey these officers in the Lord." "The word Bishop is no where mentioned in his whole Epistle; nor does he give the most distant hint as if there was any individual or body of men vested with power superior to Presbyters." (p. 138.)

This is a most extraordinary declaration. An ancient Father is quoted to prove the truth of the doctrine that there is but one order of ministers, when it is roundly admitted in the very outset that he speaks of two, and when we know that he himself belonged to a third. But independently of this circumstance, does the omission of the name of an officer, in an Epistle not written on the subject, prove that there is no such officer? Polycarp says in this very letter, "The Epistles of Ignatius which he wrote unto us, together with what others of his have come to our hands, we have sent to you according to your order; which are subjoined to this epistle; by which you may be greatly profited; for they treat of faith and patience, and of all things that pertain to edification in the Lord Jesus." (Sect. 13.) One of these epistles was written to him and another to the Church at Smyrna, over which he presided. His is addressed to "Polycarp Bishop of the Church which is at Smyrna,” &c. Polycarp's own letter is directed "Polycarp and the Presbyters that are with him to the Church of God which is at Philippi,” &c. In the letter to Polycarp, Ignatius tells him, "Let nothing be done without thy knowledge and consent." (Sect. 4.) In that to