3. Presbyters were understood in the early ages of Christianity to possess the right to ordain, and generally to perform the functions of the Episcopal office.

The right of presbyters to ordain, and the validity of ordination administered by them, is a direct inference from what has already been said of their identity with bishops. Clement knows nothing of any distinction between bishops and presbyters. Polycarp knows nothing of bishops. Each specifies but two orders or grades of officers in the church, of whom deacons are one. Presbyters or bishops, of necessity form the other grade, and are one and the same. Justin Martyr again speaks of only two grades, of whom deacons are one. Irenaeus, still later, uses the titles, bishop and presbyter, as perfectly convertible terms; and Clement of Alexandria and Tertullian recognize no clear distinction between bishops and presbyters as different orders. If therefore there were, in the ages immediately succeeding the apostles, but two orders in the church, if bishops and presbyters are still but different names for the same office, as they were in the churches founded by the apostles, then assuredly presbyters had the right to ordain. The ordaining power was vested in them, as the highest order of ecclesiastical officers.

We have, however, direct authority in proof that presbyters, in the primitive church, did themselves ordain. This is found in the epistle of Firmilian from Asia Minor, to Cyprian in Carthage, A. D. 256. In explanation of the ecclesiastical polity of these churches, he says, "All power and grace is vested in the church, where the presbyters, majores natu, preside, who have authority to baptize, to impose hands [in the reconciling of penitents], and to ordain." 79 Firmilian wrote in the Greek language, from

79 Omnis potestas et gratia in ecclesia constituta sit; ubi praesident majores natu, qui et baptizandi, et inanum imponendi, et ordinandi, possident, potestatem.-Cyprian, Epist. 75, p. 145.

Asia; but we have a Latin translation of his epistle in the writings of Cyprian. No one who has any acquaintance with these languages, can doubt that the majores natu of the Latin is a translation of лoɛσßvτégo, in the original. Both the terms, лоɛσßντégо and majores natu, mean the same thing; and each may, with equal propriety, be rendered aged men, elders, presbyters.80 The Episcopal hierarchy was not fully established in these Eastern churches so early as in the Western. Accordingly, we find the presbyters here in the full enjoyment still of their original right to ordain. The general tenor of the letter, in connection with this passage, exhibits the popular government of the apostolical churches as yet in exercise in the churches of Asia. The highest authority is vested in the church, who still administer their own government. No restrictions have yet been laid upon the presbyters in the administration of the ordinances. Whatever clerical grace is essential for the right administration of baptism, of consecration, and of ordination, is still retained by the presbyters.

This authority is in perfect harmony with that of Irenaeus given above, that the succession and the Episcopate had come down to his day, the latter end of the second century, through a series of presbyters, who, with the Episcopate, enjoyed the rights, and exercised the prerogatives, of bishops, ordination being of course included. "This pas

80 Reeves, the translator of Justin, a churchman, who loses no opportunity of opposing sectarians, allows in his notes on the passage, лówεστós, &c., that this лoweσtós of Justin, the probati seniores of Tertullian, the majores natu of Firmilian, and the лgoεotwres пgeoßurέooi, or presiding presbyters of St. Paul, 1 Tim. 4: 17, were all one and the same. Now Tertullian, Cyprian, or Firmilian, the celebrated bishop of Caesarea in Cappadocia, and St. Paul, all mean presbyters. Their language cannot be otherwise interpreted without violence. Presbyter, says Bishop Jewell, is expounded in Latin by major natu.-Smyth's Presbyt. and Prelacy, p. 367.

sage," says Goode, "appears to me decisive as to Irenæus's view of the matter." 81

To the foregoing testimonies succeeds that of the author of the Commentaries on St. Paul's Epistles, attributed to Ambrose, but with greater probability assigned to Hilary the Deacon, A. D. 384. "The apostle calls Timothy, created by him a presbyter,82 a bishop (for the first presbyters were called bishops), that when he departed, the one that came next might succeed him. Moreover, in Egypt the presbyters confirm, if a bishop is not present.83 But because the presbyters that followed began to be found unworthy to hold the primacy, the custom was altered; the Council foreseeing that not order, but merit, ought to make a bishop; and that he should be appointed by the judgment of many priests, lest an unworthy person should rashly usurp the office, and be a scandal to many.84

81 Goode's Divine Rule, Vol. II, p. 66.

82 Timothy is here said, we may observe, to have been ordained a presbyter. And I cannot but think that the passage, 1 Tim. 4: 14, is favorable to this view. For without adopting the translation which some have given of this passage, viz., "with the laying on of hands for the office of a presbyter," if we retain our own version, which appears to me more natural, who or what is "the presbytery?" Certainly not consisting altogether of the apostles, though it appears, from 2 Tim. 1: 6, that ordination was received by Timothy partly from St. Paul. But if presbyters joined in that ordination, it could not be to a higher sacerdotal grade or order than that of the presbyterhood. Nor is this inconsistent with his being called elsewhere an apostle, which name might be given him as one appointed to be a superintendent of a church.-Divine Rule, Vol. II, p. 64.

83 The author of the "Quæstiones in Vet. et Nov. Test.," which have been ascribed to Augustine, but are probably not his, says, "In Alexandria, and through the whole of Egypt, if there is no bishop, a presbyter consecrates." (In Alexandria et per totam Ægyptum si desit Episcopus consecrat presbyter.) Where, however, one MS. reads, confirms (consignat). See Aug. Op., tom. iii, App., col. 93. On this subject, the 13th canon of the Council of Ancyra (in the code of the Universal Church) is also worth notice.-Divine Rule, ibid.

84 Timotheum, presbyterum a se creatum, episcopum vocat, quia primi presbyteri episcopi appellabantur, ut recedente uno sequens ei succederet. Denique apud Ægyptum presbyteri consignant si præsens non sit episcopus. Sed quia cœperunt sequentes presbyteri indigni inveniri ad primatus

This passage, then, clearly contradicts the notion of our opponents as to the essential necessity by apostolical ordinance of the successional Episcopal consecration of all bishops.85

A presbyter, you will observe, becomes the successor of the apostle; and the apostolical succession comes down through him, as a bishop; plainly contradicting the notion that the grace of ordination is restricted to a succession of bishops exclusively, and establishing, in the opinion of this author, the validity of presbyterian ordination. To this effect is this same author. "After the bishop, the apostle has subjoined the ordination (order) of the deaconship. Why; but that the ordination (order) of a bishop and presbyter is one and the same? For each is a priest; but the bishop is chief; so that every bishop is a presbyter, but not every presbyter a bishop. For he is bishop who is chief among the presbyters. Moreover, he notices that Timothy was ordained a presbyter, but inasmuch as he had no other above him, he was a bishop." Hence he shows that Timothy, a presbyter, might ordain a bishop, because of his equality with him. "For it was neither lawful nor right for an inferior to ordain a superior, inasmuch as one cannot confer what he has not received." 86

tenendos, immutata est ratio, prospiciente Concilio, ut non ordo sed meritum crearet episcopum multorum sacerdotum judicio constitutum ne indignus temere usurparet et esset multis scandalum. Comment. in Eph. 4: 11,12. Inter Op. Ambros., ed. Ben., tom. ii, app. col. 241, 242. The "Council" may, I suppose, be what Tertullian calls "consessus ordinis."

85 There are, also, indirect confirmatory proofs. Such, I think, is afforded by the account we have in Eusebius (vi, 29,) of the appointment of Fabianus to the bishopric of Rome, for the assembly that met to elect a bishop having fixed upon him, placed him at once on the Episcopal throne. (Αμελλετως επι του θρόνον της επισκοπης λαβοντας αυτον εлεivα), which seems to me irreconcileable with the notion of the essential necessity of Episcopal consecration, to have entitled him to the Episcopal seat, for he was installed in it without any such consecration.

86 Post Episcopum tamen Diaconi ordinationem subiicit. Quare? nisi quia Episcopi et Presbyteri una ordinatio est? Uterque enim sacerdos

There is another passage which has a striking coincidence with the foregoing, and is probably from the same author, though found in an appendix to the works of Augustine. "That by presbyter is meant a bishop, the apostle Paul proves, when he instructs Timothy whom he had ordained a presbyter, respecting the character of one whom he would make a bishop. For what else is the bishop than the first presbyter, that is, the highest priest? For he [the bishop] calls them [the presbyters] by no other name than fellow-presbyters and fellow-priests. He therefore considers them of the same grade as himself." But he is careful by no means to do the same with regard to clerical persons of inferior rank. Not even with the deacons, for to place himself in the same category with them would be degrading his own rank. "Does the bishop call the deacons his fellow-deacons? Certainly not; because they are far inferior to him, and it were a disgrace to call the judge a mere manager of a clerk's office." If any are disposed to call in question this interpretation of the phrase, judicem dicere primicerium, I will only say that it was given to me by Prof. Rothe of Heidelberg, with whose name the reader has already become familiar, by the frequent references to his learned work on the Origin of the Christian Church. The following is also his exposition of the passage. "Where there is a real difference of office and rank, the higher officer cannot include himself in the official designation of the lower, without degrading himself. It would be a downright insult, to address the president of a court as the head of his clerks. Just so it does not enter

est, sed Episcopus primus est; ut omnis Episcopus Presbyter sit, non omnis Presbyter Episcopus; hic enim Episcopus est, qui inter Presbyteros primus est. Denique Timotheum Presbyterum ordinatum significat; sed quia ante șe alterum non habebat, Episcopus erat. Unde et quemadmodum Episcopum ordinet ostendit. Neque enim fas erat aut licebat, ut inferior ordinaret maiorem; nemo enim tribuit quod non accepit.-Comment in 1 Tim. 3: 8, inter Ambros. Op., Tom. II, app. 295.