14366-14369]

ment" is still maintained as Christ's ordinance for the perpetuation and government of His Church, and is received as such by eleventwelfths of the whole Christian world.-Ibid.

III. THE AUTHORITY FOR ORDINATION
AND ESSENTIAL NECESSITY, FROM A
HIGH CHURCH STANDPOINT, OF ITS
EPISCOPAL ADMINISTRATION.

Viewed as the teaching of the Bible. [14367] Those ten days when the apostles had not their Master visibly amongst them, and when neither had they received the promise of the Father, were selected as most appropriate for a transaction in which the rising Church had the deepest possible interest. And may we not suppose that this was ordered with a view to the instruction of more remote times? If Christ had Himself appointed the successor to Judas, it might have been said that the apostles were not competent to communicate their authority; and that we were not therefore bound to recognize in those whom they set over the Church, rulers possessed of a commission from God. If, on the other hand, the apostles had not proceeded to the election, until they had obtained the miraculous gift of the Spirit, it might have been urged, that they acted solely in virtue of their supernatural endowments; and that, therefore, when such endowments were withdrawn from the Church, there was no longer any power of appointing successors. But the very singular fact, that the election of Matthias was made to fall just when it seemed least likely to fall-when the apostles were more alone than at any other time-more in our own case, with Christ in heaven, and the Spirit present only in His ordinary influences-this fact sets itself decisively against both insinuations, and seems to establish almost beyond controversy, that the practice of the apostles is binding on the Church; and that in what they did in the appointment of overseers of the flock, they did only that in which they might be followed by those overseers themselves; so that there might be a regular transmission of authority from their day even to our own.-H. Melvill, B.D.

[14368] Holy Scripture evidently teaches us. that before the coming of Christ it was the will of God that sacred offices should be performed by a regular ministry, consisting of priests and other ministers, and acting under Divine authority and inspiration. It is also certain that He was accustomed to punish with fearful severity all who attempted to assume these offices without such Divine appointment. But what was the will of Christ with reference to the Christian ministry? Did He intend that it should be held less sacred than the Jewish priesthood? Let us consider how He gave His commission to the apostles. In the evening of the day on which He rose from the dead He said to them, "As My Father hath sent Me, even so send I you. And when He had said this He breathed on them, and saith unto

[HOLY ORDERS.

them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost” (John xx 21, 22). Yet they did not at once enter upon their work. Later on He gave them the commission, "Go ye and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." But even then they did not begin to exercise their m'aistry, because He had further said to them, "Tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem until ye be endued with power from on high" (Luke xxiv. 49). Hence He intended them to understand that He had committed to them certain extraordinary spiritual powers, and that they must not venture to use those powers until He had given them full and visible commission, and abundant inspiration by the outpouring of His Spirit.-Rev. D. J. White, M.A.

[14369] St. Matthias became one of the apostles, possessed of the same authority and spiritual powers with the others. This was so because he had been duly authorized by them, although he was not chosen by Christ while visibly present upon earth. This was the first ordination in the Christian Church after the ascension of Christ. It differed from subsequent ordinations in some respects, because the Holy Ghost had not yet descended. For example, there is no mention of "laying on of hands," probably because they could not by that means confer any spiritual gifts until they were themselves “filled with the Holy Ghost." But we have a very clear description of an ordination in the 13th chapter of the Acts. It is there related that "there were in the Church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers." Among the names mentioned are those of Barnabas and Saul. "As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate Me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them." Hence we see that although these disciples had hitherto filled the ancient offices of teachers" and "prophets," they needed regular ordination before they could enter upon their future work as apostles. To use the words of Bishop Wordsworth in his commentary on this pas. sage:-"Although St. Paul had received visions and revelations of the Lord, yet ordination and mission by the public authority of the Church to qualify him for the apostolic office was not dispensed with in his case, but was especially enjoined by the Holy Spirit, who did not say, 'I have separated them,' but 'do ye separate them for Me.'" Surely this is a remarkable proof of the necessity for ordination. St. Paul had been miraculously converted several years before he had given and received many proofs of his fitness for the ministry, and yet it was required that he should be regularly ordained. Moreover, we should be careful to notice the manner in which this ordination was effected, because it appears to have been given as a specimen of the mode of all other appointments to the ministry. First the apostles "fasted," then they "prayed," and then "they laid their hands on them." After this regular ordination,

14369-14374]

and not before, it could be said of them that they were "sent forth by the Holy Ghost" to their sacred work.-Ibid.

[14370] With reference to ordination, the apostles taught that by laying on of hands they conferred upon others the gifts of the Spirit which they themselves possessed. This is plainly shown us by the words of St. Paul, addressed to Timothy (Bishop of Ephesus): "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery" (1 Tim. iv. 14). Again, in his second epistle to the same bishop, he writes: "I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands." We see, then, that St. Paul reminds Timothy of the spiritual gifts which he received at his ordination, and distinctly asserts that these gifts were bestowed by means of the laying on of hands.-Ibid.

[14371] The teaching of the apostles is that persons ordained as bishops by them should, in their turn, confer holy orders upon others. Hence in writing to Titus (Bishop of Crete), St. Paul says, "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldst ordain elders in every city,

as I had appointed thee" (Titus i. 5), and they also taught that none were to be permitted to assume ministerial offices without due ordination, as in Heb. v. 4. In this passage it is clearly laid down as a principle of the Christian ministry that men must be outwardly called thereto, just as Aaron was outwardly called to the Jewish priesthood. In a similar manner St. Jude, in condemning the false teachers of his time, pronounces a "woe" against them for following the example of Korah, and compares their sin to "the gainsaying of Core."—Ibid.

Viewed as the teaching of the Church. [14372] 1. The Church does not overlook the importance of the “inward call" to the ministry. Therefore she puts to candidates for the priesthood the question, "Do you think in your heart that you be truly called, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, to the order and ministry of the priesthood?" And the candidate answers, "I think it." 2. Nevertheless, the Church insists that regular ordination (with imposition of hands and use of the Ordinal) is necessary in order to give authority and power for the work of the ministry. In the Preface to the Ordinal she recognizes the existence of a three-fold ministry from the time of the apostles, and declares that Holy Scripture and the ancient authors" plainly prove this fact. Moreover, in the same Preface it is laid down as a principle that "no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful bishop, priest, or deacon in the Church of England, or suffered to execute any of the said functions, except he be called, tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, according to the form hereafter following, or hath had formerly episcopal consecration or ordination." Hence the Church of England distinctly

[HOLY ORDERS.

asserts that regular ordinations before the Reformation were valid, and that none should here. after be accounted so without the use of a similar

form. 3. Further, the Church teaches that the necessary gifts of the Spirit are bestowed by means of the imposition of hands, and not by virtue of the inward call. Therefore when the bishop lays his hand on the candidate for the priesthood he says-" Receive the Holy Ghost, for the office and work of a priest in the Church of God, now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands." 4. Lastly, the Church teaches that the powers of the priesthood do not. depend upon the holiness of life of the persons who are ordained. The 26th Article explains this briefly and clearly in the following words concerning unworthy ministers :-"The effect of Christ's ordinance is not taken away by their wickedness, nor the grace of God's gifts diminished from such as by faith and rightly do receive the sacraments ministered unto them; which be effectual because of Christ's institution and promise, although they be ministered by evil men." It is, of course, true that the wilful sins of a priest are more grievous than those of a layman, because of the holy office which he fills. But, at the same time, we may be sure that while he will suffer for his own faults, the

gifts of God which are administered by him are still effectual for the good of souls.—Ibid.

[14373] We may sum up the teaching of the Church on this subject thus: That while some Christians have ignored the necessity for regular ordination, the Church of England has never done so; that she distinctly teaches that the Holy Ghost is given by imposition of hands; and that the gifts of the Spirit for the work of the ministry depend upon the power of God, and not upon the imperfect goodness or faith of man.-Ibid.

3

Viewed as the teaching of common sense. [14374] (1) Common sense certainly teaches us that if a man would exercise official duties he must have authority for his acts. Suppose, for example, the case of a person wishing to act towards you as a legal officer, either to enforce some penalty of the law, or to confer upon you some property or power. As a wise man you would question him as to his authority before you consented to submit to the penalty or receive the gift. If he failed to produce such authority, you would be right and wise in refusing to have any dealings with him.

(2) Common sense teaches us that authority must be given by some one who has himself been authorized. Suppose that in a case such as that which we have imagined the person wishing to act in the name of the law were to produce a warrant signed by a person whom you knew to be himself unauthorized. would be justified in saying, "This is so much waste paper; the person who signed it had no authority." It would be quite useless for him to reply, "Yes; but he is a very good man, and in fact a much better and wiser man

You

14374-14379]

than many who have such authority." Of course you would answer that his goodness and wisdom had nothing to do with the matter, since these qualities could not give him authority or power.

[14375] Acting on the principle of common sense, the Churchman says, "I do not doubt the goodness or earnestness of many who act as Christian ministers without authority; I only know that they have never received God's commission to perform sacred offices, and therefore I cannot accept their ministrations." It would be quite useless for any one to answer that such persons have some kind of authority given them by members of the sect to which they belong. The Churchman would be ready with the reply that those who professed to give such commission had not the power or authority to do so. This is made more clear when we trace back the authority of ministers who are outside the Church to the source from whence it was derived. We always find that it originated with some man who had himself been guilty of schism; that is to say, with one who had cut himself off from communion with the Church of Christ. Now, many people can understand at once that such a person has no right or power to appoint another to act as a Christian minister. But, at the same time, they seem to imagine that if he does so, and the same sort of ordination is repeated several times, then the persons so ordained are rightly appointed. But here common sense comes in as our teacher, and reminds us that repetition of an invalid act cannot make it valid. It would be absurd to suppose that a wrong action will become right if it is only repeated a number of times. No one imagines that an act of sin becomes less sinful if it is frequently performed. Just so, it is evident that if the first of a series of ordinations is a false one, those which follow are the same. Therefore, if our clergy did not derive their authority by regular succession from the apostles, and through them from Christ Himself,

their claim to a Divine commission would be opposed to the teaching of common sense.— Ibid.

IV. POPULAR MEANING OF THE WORD PRIEST ITS ETYMOLOGICAL AND ANALOGICAL USE.

The word priest, as used in the Church of England, is not employed in any sacrificial sense.

[14376] I would not willingly offend their ears to whom the name of priesthood is odious, though without cause. . . . Concerning popular use of words, that which the wisdom of their inventors did intend thereby is not commonly thought of, but by the name the thing altogether conceived in gross, as may appear in that if you ask of the common sort what any certain word, for example, what a priest doth signify, their manner is not to answer, a priest is a clergyman which offereth sacrifice to God, but they

[HOLY ORDERS.

show some particular person whom they use :ɔ call by that name. And if we list to descend to grammar, we are told by masters in those schools that the word " priest" hath his right place "in him whose mere function or charge is the service of God." Howbeit, because the most eminent part both of heathenish and Jewish service did consist in sacrifice, when learned men declare what the word priest doth properly signify, according to the mind of the first imposer of that name, their ordinary scholies do well expound it to imply sacrifice. Seeing, then, that sacrifice is now no part of the Church ministry, how should the name of priesthood be thereunto rightly applied? Surely, even as St. Paul applieth the name of flesh (1 Cor. xv. 39) unto that very substance of fishes which hath a proportionable correspondence to flesh, although it be in nature another thing.—Hooker.

[14377] The fathers of the Church of Christ, with security of speech, call usually the ministry of the gospel priesthood in regard of that which the gospel hath made proportionable to ancient sacrifices, namely, the communion of the blessed body and blood of Christ. As for the people, when they hear the name, it draweth no more their minds to any cogitation of sacrifice than the name of a senator or of an alder.an causeth them to think upon old age, or to imagine that every one so termed must needs be ancient because years were respected in the first nomination of both. Wherefore, to pass by the name, let them use what dialect they will; whether we call it a priesthood, a presbytership, or a ministry, it skilleth not.-Ibid.

V. PROPER FORCE OF THE TERM PRESBYTER.

The word presbyter is to be preferred to that of priest, as more appropriate and significant.

fit, and in propriety of speech more agreeable, [14378] The word presbyter doth seem more than priest, with the drift of the whole gospel of Jesus Christ. For what are they that embrace the gospel but sons of God? What are churches but His families? Seeing, therefore, we receive the adoption and state of sons by their ministry whom God hath chosen out for that purpose; seeing also that when we are the sons of God our continuance is still under their care which were our progenitors, what better title could there be given them than the reverend name of presbyters, or fatherly guides?—Ibid.

[14379] The Holy Ghost throughout the body of the New Testament, making so much mention of presbyters, doth not anywhere call them priests. The Prophet Esay, I grant, doth (Isa. Îxvi. 21), but in such sort as the ancient fathers by way of analogy. A presbyter, according to the proper meaning of the New Testament, is, "he unto whom our Saviour Christ hath com municated the power of spiritual procreation." Out of the twelve patriarchs issued the whole

14387-14394]

VIII. THE

OFFICE OF ORDINATION IN THE ENGLISH LITURGY.

I As regards the imposition of hands.

[14387] The imposition of hands signifies the overshadowing of God's protection or of His Spirit, which it procures upon the promise of Christ's presence with His Church when it prays to Him; ... but . . . ordination is not a sacrament, and is limited to a particular effect of ministering to the Church the ordinances of God, according to the trust reposed in the office. The laying on of hands is given in lieu of the incommunicable breathing with which it was conferred by our Lord. Yet that breath," says Bishop Andrewes, "though not into them for themselves, yet goeth into and through every act of their office and ministry, and by them conveyeth His saving grace to us all."-Blunt.

[14388] The cause why we breathe not as Christ did on them unto whom He imparted power is for that neither Spirit nor spiritual authority may be thought to proceed from us, which are but delegates, or assigns to give men possession of His graces.-Hooker.

2

we

As regards the words, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost."

Authority for and aptness of the formula. [14389] A thing much stumbled at in the manner of giving orders is our using those memorable words of our Lord and Saviour Christ, "Receive the Holy Ghost." The Holy Ghost, they say, we cannot give, and therefore foolishly" bid men receive it. Notwithstanding, if it may please their wisdom as well to hear what fools can say as to control that which they do, thus we have heard some wise men teach, namely, that the "Holy Ghost" may be not the person alone, but the gifts of the Holy Ghost; and we know that spiritual gifts are not only abilities to do things miraculous, as to speak with tongues which were never taught us, to cure diseases without art, and such like, but also that the very authority and power which is given men in the Church to be ministers of holy things, this is contained within the number of those gifts whereof the Holy Ghost is author. And therefore He which giveth this power may say, without absurdity or folly, "Receive the Holy Ghost," to express the heavenly well-spring of that power which ecclesiastical ordinations do bestow.-Ibid.

[14390] If our Lord and Saviour Himself have used the selfsame form of words, and that in the selfsame kind of action, although there be but the least show of probability, yea, or any possibility, that His meaning might be the same which ours is, it should teach sober and grave men not to be too venturous in condemning that of folly which is not impossible to have in it more profoundness of wisdom than flesh and blood should presume to control.-Ibid.

[HOLY ORDERS.

each man's ministry. The Nile, indeed, may hide his source, for he runs through unfruitful. sands and dangerous wildernesses; but the river of the Christian ministry must be traceable through fructified regions and realms of peace, bright and distinct, to the source whence it is derived. And as a man, standing at the head of a stream, naturally speculates upon its course, is it slow or rapid, through glen or through plain, does it visit this place or that, so is the time of ordination a time for serious reflection indeed to all present.-R. W. Evans.

[14392] To the receiver, a designation so visible, so attested in an assembly so publicly standing in the presence of the Head of the Church, who will come to judgment on the last day, is well suited to warn him that he is become indeed a public character, with all eyes upon him, to the end of life ; that he must move in their sight daily, displaying the various attributes of his character, and diverse functions of his missions as daily, and perhaps hourly, occasions call them forth in regulated succession or harmonious co-operation.—Ibid.

I

IX. NON-EPISCOPAL CALLS TO THE MINIS

TRY.

Doctrine of the Reformed Churches of Protestant Dissent as to the right to ordain.

[14393] The Reformed Churches generally held the call of the people the only thing essential to the validity of the ministry; and taught that ordination is only a ceremony, which renders the call more august and authentic. Accordingly the Protestant Churches of Scotland, France, Holland, Switzerland, Germany, Poland, Hungary, Denmark, &c., have no episcopal ordination. For Luther, Calvin, Bucer, Melanchthon, &c., and all the first reformers and founders of these churches, who ordained ministers among them, were themselves presbyters, and no other. And though in some of these churches there are ministers called super. intendents or bishops, yet these are only prim inter pares, the first among equals, not pretending to any superiority of orders. Having themselves no other orders than what either presbyters gave them, or what was given them as presbyters, they can convey no other to those they ordain.-Encyclopædia (Edwards).

[14394] Protestant Dissenters plead that their ordination, though not episcopal, is the same with that of all the illustrious Protestant Churches abroad, and object that a popish bishop should be received into the Church of England as a valid minister, rightly ordained, whilst the orders of another, ordained by the most learned religious presbyter which any foreign country can boast, are pronounced not valid, and he is required to submit to be ordained afresh. In opposition to episcopal ordination, they urge that Timothy was ordained by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery (1 Tim. iv. 14), that Paul and Barnabas were ordained by certain