classical literature, and of a certain moderate stock of theological knowledge. Lastly, with respect to appointment: the personal authority of the ordaining bishop is, for this purpose, generally deemed to be all-sufficient. Were it true that, by the laying-on of his hands, the bishop of modern times, like the apostle of the earliest church, was miraculously enabled to communicate to the candidate for sacred orders the gift of the Holy Ghost, the most spiritual Christian could advance no objection to episcopal ordination. But, since this is not true, and since it is perfectly known not to be true, the ceremony plainly resolves itself into an appointment to the office of the ministry by the bishop only; and, with the exception of those individuals who are really called to the work by the inward motion of the Holy Ghost, the ministers thus ordained must be considered as undertaking the office of a preacher upon the sole authority of that appointment.

Among the generality of protestant dissenters in this country, much less of form is observed, in conducting the administrations of the Gospel, than is customary in the Anglican church. The written sermon, as well as the printed liturgy, are, for the most part, discarded, and make way for the extempore discourse and prayer. While, however, it appears to be an opinion generally prevalent among English protestant dissenters, that the faculty of praying aloud and preaching is the gift of the Spirit, I believe there are a few of their ministers who hesitate either to prepare themselves for the work by previous study and reflection, or to preach and pray, at periods appointed by others, or fixed upon by themselves. With this mixed standard, respecting the nature of the ministry itself, the practices of these Christians, with regard to the preceding measures, will be found exactly to correspond. While the necessity of a divine

H

call, and the preparation of grace in the heart, are generally admitted, the first selection of the dissenting minister depends, in great measure, on the church to which he belongs. When any young person is considered as affording a sufficient evidence of suitability for the ministry, in point of conduct and talent, as well as of a general call into such a field of labour, he is mostly recommended by the church (with his own consent and that of his friends) to some preparatory academy. There, his attention is directed to the acquiremeut of literature, and to those branches of study, more especially, which bear immediately on his great object. Thus prepared, he is invited by some congregation to come and preach the Gospel among them; and finally, when both parties are satisfied, several dissenting ministers, who have been already established in their office, unite in ordaining him as an authorized preacher, and as the minister of that congregation. This may, I believe, be considered an accurate description of the course adopted with respect to the selection, preparation, and appointment, of ministers, by some of the leading bodies of dissenters in this country; and, among many others, to whom such a description will not precisely apply, the same principles are, nevertheless, recognized and enforced -namely, that a divine call and the work of grace are, in the first place, indispensable; but that to these are to be added the application of outward means, and the interposition of human authority.

Before we proceed to consider the principles and practices of Friends in reference to the present branch of our subject, it will be well for us to examine whether any sanction is given, in the Holy Scriptures, to that practice so general among modern Christians— the human ordination of the ministers of the Gospel.

That the apostles, and some others of the earliest

Christians were enabled, by the laying-on of their hands, to draw down upon individuals, in a miraculous manner, the gifts of the Holy Spirit, has been already remarked; Acts viii, 18; I Tim. iv, 14. But it will be allowed, by the impartial reader, that the human ordination of preachers, when connected with this extraordinary power, resolves itself, in point of fact, into a divine appointment, and affords no authority for such ordination, when the power ceases to exist. There are, however, two passages of the New Testament, in which we read of human ordination, independently of any miraculous communication of the Holy Spirit. We are informed, in the book of Acts, that, when Paul and Barnabas revisited the churches which they had planted at Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, they "ordained them elders (or presbyters) in every church," (Acts xiv, 23); and, on another occasion, Paul thus addresses himself to Titus, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders (or presbyters) in every city;" Tit. ch. i, 5.

Here, on the supposition that the example of Paul and Titus may be safely followed by uninspired persons, we find a direct authority for the human ordination or appointment of Christian presbyters: and, since the office of preaching is understood, among many modern Christians, to be inseparably connected with the station of a presbyter, the inference is easily deduced, that the human ordination of the preachers of the Gospel is authorized in the New Testament. But I apprehend that such an inference is founded upon an original errour, of no slight importance. In the times of primitive Christianity, there was no necessary connexion between the gift of preaching, or prophecy, and the offices of bishops, presbyters, and deacons. The fourteenth chapter of the first epistle

of Paul to the Corinthians affords abundant evidence, as we have already found occasion to notice, that, when the earliest Christians assembled together for the purpose of divine worship, it was not the bishop or overseer, nor the presbyter or elder, nor the deacon or subordinate manager, who preached and prayed, ex officio, in the congregation. Being, for the most part, persons, of a spiritual character, they might, indeed, be frequently included in the number of those who preached and prayed in the churches; but the work of the ministry was, at that time, restricted to no appointed individuals: it devolved promiscuously upon all persons-whether men or women-whether governours or governed-to whom the word of God was revealed, and who were visited by the fresh and heavenly influences of the Spirit of prophecy.

The office of the bishops or overseers, and that of the presbyters or elders, was, in the earliest Christian churches, identical. The overseers were denominated elders, and the elders overseers.3 Their situation in the body corresponded with that of the chief rulers of the ancient Jewish synagogues. "It was their duty," says the elaborate Schleusner, "to rule the church of Christ, but not to teach more especially, to preside over matters of worship; to administer the sacraments (or at least the Eucharist); to make decrees in ecclesiastical affairs; to provide assistance for the poor and the sick; to maintain, in the church, integrity of doctrine and sanctity of manners, and to settle the differences which arose among Christians." 997 This able

3 PHIL. i, 1. "Paul and Timotheus, &c. .... to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi with the bishops and deacons." Theodoret, in his note upon this passage, says " He calls the presbyters bishops; for, at that period, they were called by both those names;" so also Theophylact.

4 See Schleusner in voc. πρεσβύτερος.

But,

critick appears to have been somewhat hasty in excluding from the offices of the bishops and presbyters the duty of teaching. The gift of teaching-a gift which is sometimes distinguished from that of preaching or prophecy-does not, indeed, appear to have been universal among them; but the apostle, in his general directions respecting the character and qualifications of the bishop or overseer, nevertheless recommends that he should be "apt to teach," (I Tim. iii, 2); and, again, that he should "be able, by sound doctrine (or teaching), both to exhort and to convince (or rather to refute) the gainsayers;" Tit. i, 9. although the elders and overseers of early Christianity, as the spiritual governours and appointed guardians of the flock, who were to protect their followers from the encroachment of false doctrine, and of every root of bitterness, were often called upon, in the exercise of their Christian authority, to advise, instruct, exhort, and argue; they were not (like the bishops and presbyters of modern times) necessarily ministers of the Gospel. Between the publick preaching and praying, practised in assemblies for worship, and the offices of these persons, there does not appear to have been any indispensable, peculiar, or official, connexion,5

5 In the Jewish synagogues, which were, probably, in some respects, the patterns of the early Christian assemblies for worship, the duty of preaching does not appear to have devolved upon any appointed officer. The officers of the synagogue were, first, the rulers, who corresponded with the Christian elders and bishops: they governed the church, and regulated the order of divine service. Secondly, the Sheliach Zibbor, or angel of the congregation, who read the forms of prayer. Thirdly, the Chozenim, or inspectors, who appear to have answered to the Christian deacons: it was their duty to keep every thing belonging to their place of worship in its proper order; to correct those who misread the Holy Scriptures, &c. Fourthly, the Interpreter, who translated into vernacular Syriac the portion of Scripture which had been previously read in Hebrew. The lessons of Scripture were divided into seven