Ai V^. .0^. \'l IMAGF EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1.25 M |2£ 1.8 U IIIIII.6 ^ <^ /} c^^. «1^ ^^;> ^;. ^iw 0^' '^1^ ^^*' O-^^J >^ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques 1980 Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibliographically unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the I ual method of filming, are checked below. L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6t6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la mdthode normale de filmage sont indiquds ci-dessous. r~T| Coloured covers/ IV I Couverture de couleur □ Coloured pages/ Pages de couleur □ Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e □ Pages damaged/ Pages endommagSes □ Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaurde et/ou pelliculde □ Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes □ Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages bdcolor^es, tachet^es ou piqudes D Coloured maps/ Cartes gdographiques en couleur □Pages detached/ Pages d6tach6es D Coloured ink (i.e. other than bluo or black}/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Showthrough/ Transparence □ Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ Relid avec d'autres documents D Quality of print varies/ Quality in6gale de I'impression □ Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel supplementaire D D Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La reliure serr^e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajoutdes lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela dtait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film^es. n Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the best possible image/ Les pages totalement ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes d nouveau de fagon d obtenir la meilleure image possible. D Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppl^mentaires: a This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqud ci-dessous. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X 30X 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University L'exemplaire filmd fut reproduit grdce d la g6n6rosit6 de: Harold Campbell Vaughan Memorial Library Acadia University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. Les images suivantes ont 6td reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la nettetd de l'exemplaire filmd, et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de filmage. Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimde sont filmds en commenqant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont film6s en commenpant par la premidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol — »- (meaning "CON- TINUED "), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparaitra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbole -^»- signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbole V signifie "FIN". Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre filmds d des taux de reduction diffdrents. Lorsque le document est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul cliche, il est film^ d partir de Tangle sup6rieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images n^cessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la m^thode. 1 2 3 1 2 3 4 5 6 ^?v. cit^c:i:5^. L The Church and the Episcopate. / d^ • — --^ — I I \ \ I i \ ^3 I . ?J ~3!r~>." 1'5S ■s^smi -T\:^:z^ r " -t.fe_ ^""i:i->- tv' i.-'s^s^-r ^cv'-.-i^-:^--.' -c^f - -^- se I ^ A LETTER TO THK & ^ Right Rev. Henry J.Wiiitehouse, D.D., JSinhnp (if the I'l-ol' slant Kiiiscn/nil CliurcU in the Dincisc nfjlliiioii!, ^> In review of his Sermon preached at the Consecration of Christ :f Church Cathedral, Montreal. I BY b JOHN S . DAVENPORT. PRINTED BY JOTIN LOVELL, ST. NICHOLAS STREET. 1872. ^ 4 v_J .^ illJ'*^-?:;;::::?' I A 2-04 ■ V ■■ w«<»-^^ V"i^* ,1 I The Church and the Episcopate. A LETTER TO THE Right Rev. Henry J.Whitehouse, D.D., Ditluip of the I'roteglnnt Himoopnl ChurcJi in (Ac Diocrif of lIKihiis, In review of his Sermon preached at the Consecration of Christ Church Cathedral, Montreal. BY JOHN S. DAVENPORT >♦-♦-♦< PRINTED BY JOHN LOYhuL, ST. NICHOLIS STRBBT. 1873, THE CHURCH AND THE EPISCOPATE. To the Right Rev. Henry J. Whitehouse, Bishop of the Protes. tant Episcopal Church in the Diocese of Illinois. Right Reverend and Dear Sir, I have read with much attention the very able ser- mon preached by you at the consecration of the Cathedral in Montreal, June 18th, 1867 entitled '* The complement of the Head- ship" with a copy of which you favored me. With regard to the main object of the discourse, the exhibition of the " Cathedral System," I have no call to say anything. But the discourse assumes some principles both in regard to the rela- tion of the Episcopate in the Church, to the Church at large, and also in regard to the relation between the Apostolate and the Episcopate at large, as set forth in the New Testament, which, as one set equally with yourself for the defence of the truth of the Gospel, I find myself constrained to call in question and thus openly discuss. It is not often that one meets with statements so full and clear and admirably expressed, as those passsages of your sermon which refer to the relation of Christ the Head to His Body the Church ; and it is the recognition of these principles held by us in common which furnishes the basis of the arguments I propose to adduce in controverting some of your propositions in regard to the ministry. The following passage : " The blessed perfect Saviour stands incomplete without His One Holy Church, instinct with His vitality, infused with^ His spiritual powers, permeated with His wisdom and energy, and in turn developing as the grand organic agency, which consciously glows with the supernatural life, illus- trates its influence in movement and growth and fulfils the whole distributive functions of His living progress and work. * He fiUeth 3 U ^^ all iu air yet something!; is wanting. There is a body for the Head. There are ' very members incorporate in the mystic.il Body of Christ ;' and when Head and body arc thus united in His Church, then in the conciliencc and harmony of the vital and functional unity, it is prcdicable in the completeness cftccted, that they are the fulness (the filling up) of ' Him that fiUeth all in all.' " This passage with the page thatfollows illustrating it, is worthy to be selected and transcribed, as giving clear and forci- ble expression to some of the deepest thoughts of Si. Paul. The very title of the sermon expresses the truth in a striking form "the complement of the Headship," tie Church the fulness of Christ. I might cite two or three passages more in the same strain in which the relation of Christ to the church is further illustrated, and with equal force and beauty. But when you come to speak of the office of the Ministry in the Church I cannot follow your line of thought without objec- tion, and the objections, as I believe, involve some of the most vital principles. On page 11 you say "But there is an office which more than any other on earth was directly conferred by Christ and has been perpetuatod by him in unbroken line as formal representative of His own Headship. The Saviour organizing His Church for all coming time, invested the Apostles with their profound commission in the words, ' As my Father has sent me so send I you.' As Christ received from the Father the power to order aud govern the Church, to draw all to the faith and minister to them in the varied relations of the mystical fcllow.ship, 30 did He impart the same to the Apostles, make it eiFective by the abiding * power from on high ' infused at Pentecost, and vest them with authority through the same Holy Ghost of transfer- ring to their successors everything requisite for the full adminis- tration and efficient life of the Church. All power in the Church thus descends, coming from above, vested by Christ, and transmitted downward through his successive agencios. In the Apostles therefore the whole Church was in one sense contained. All else might be taken away; yet with that commission and Headship the membership in all grades must be effectively supplied. It w.is a living IlGadnhip of inexhaust iblc vitality and perpetuation. All beside was its complement." The statement I venture to controvert now, is that the Apostle" ship ordained by Christ, or the ministry which succeeded that — the Episcopate, is set in the Church as the " representative of his own Headship." The ({uestion thus raised is of the utmost importance, as it involves the entin relation of the ministry and especially the Episcopate, to the Church. It is another question to be afterwards considered whether the Episcopate is the inheritor of all the authority of the Apostleship, but as you claim that it is, your statement involves nothing less than the same broad distinction between the Episcopate and the rest of the Church, as that which exists between Christ, as the Head, and the Church, which is His body. As the Church at large is the complement of Christ, so Tin your vi >w) is the Church, constituted as you would have it in the Cathedral system, the complement of the Episcopate. The Episcopate stands in the same relation to all the rest of the Church as the Lord stands to the whole body, including the Episcopate. This is indeed claiming for the Episcopate a high distinction. It is nothing less than putting it in the place of Christ. Is it warranted by Holy Scripture ? In speaking of Apostles, Prophets, Teachers, &c., St. Paul in 1st Cor. chap, xii says " Yc are the body of Christ and members in particular." " God hath set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him." " God hath set (the same word tOfTo) some in the Church, first Apostles, secondarily Prophets, thirdly teachers, &c., 1st Cor. xii, 18, 27, 28. Here the whole ministry from Apostles down are declared to be members in the body. The dignity of a " representative Head- ship " js nowhere ascribed to them. They are ministers of Christ, not his vicars. The highest dignity St. Paul claims for himself is that of an Ambassador. By them the Lord ministers, by them he rules, but the prerogative of Headship is, that it cannot be conferred.* I shall have occasion hereafter to refer to the representative character of the several ministries in the Church. Our Lord stands in the two-fold relation of Head and Minister. The G latter relation wc see that ho has delegated, hut wc cannot sec how he can delegate the former. The relation of Headship implies much more than that of ruler, even the supply, an from a fountain, of the new resurrection life which comes from Ilim by the Holy Ghost. " Aa the Father hath life in Himself so has he given to the Son to have life in himself." No one, I suppose, will deliberately assert that any man, or any body of men, can be 80 made the container of spiritual life as to impart it to his fellowman. I fear indeed, it is a prevalent impression connected with the belief of the Apostolic succession, that the bishops are the containers of the life, cisterns as it were, and not merely channels through whom grace flows from the Head. I do not suppose any one would deliberately defend any such view, but it is a logical result from the assumption that the ministry, or any order in it, is a representative of Christ's Headship in the Church, and may be fairly drawn from your statements. Bat the ministry is one in all its orders, and if this grace is in any order, then, according to its degree and function, it is in all orders ; and wc are to consider that if this idea is held, each order of the ministry is a repository, in its measure, of the grace of the Head, which is imparted by it, and not merely a channel through which it flows. This theory of a representative Headship in the Ministry has the mischievous effect of separating the clergy from the people more than is done by the mere circumstance of order, and the Episcopal from the other orders. St. Paul' s symbolism regards the ministry of all orders as members in the body, by means of which it fulfils its functions, so that the acts of the ministry are the acts of Christ in the Body ; the hands, the feet, the eye, the ear, even down to the most obscure and insignificant. They are no more separated from the body than are the hands, feet, eyes, and ears of the natural body ; and there is no difference in this respect between Bishops and other Ministers. This broad line of distinction between the clergy and people, making the clergy in fact the Church, has been often referred to as one of the most effective causes of the corruption of the Christian system which Protestants condemn in the Church of Rome. In fact, I cannot see how any one holding the theory of a representative Headship can logically stop aliort of the Papacy. A ropresontativo liead- ship of one cannot beozcrcidcd by an iudofinitc number of Biahop-s with no ouo to hoad them up. Representative headship finds itaelf consistent only in the rocoj^nition of a vicar of Christ. The distinction between representative headship and represen- tative ministry is broad. The Lord said " I am among you as one that serveth." Ministry is diflFusivo. Headship isconcontrative. Headship is tlic container of life and fullness. Ministry is the means by which life is distributed every where. There is one Head and many members. If the Episcopate is a representative headship, then every bishop has a .sliurc in it and is the head to his own church or diocese, in the same sense that Christ is the head of the body. There can logically be no power over him, or authority to res- train him. The canonical regulations, by which, in all ages, Coun- cils and Synods have sought to define and limit the action of Bishops are a usurpation. The minute and exact details by which the Bishops in your own church are restricted in their action, are a clear violation of the prerogatives of the order. Every bishop is, in fact, a pope, above law, answerable to no one. It is to be observed, too, that the claim of a representative Head- ship must involve that of a right to temporal as well as spiritual authority, such as is put forth by the Papacy ; for Christ was given to the Church to be Head over all things, and they who claim to represent His headship cannot stop short of claiming universal temporal authority. I now pass to consider your statements in respect to the relation between the Apostolate as given by the Lord and the Episcopate. The following passage contains the substance of your teaching on this point : ''As Apostles simply these chosen men had indeed certain trusts and endowments which were not to be transmitted. They belonged to them as Apostles in individual specialty, and not to them in virtue of t^e great delegate headship of the Episcopate. They were separately sent abroad to all the world, and further. Apostles were endowed with doctrinal infallibility, fullness of wisdom, gifts of tongues and miracles, for that creative mission of 8 the Body of Christ. These were purely personal, the meet but variant qualities and instruments for the diffused Apostolate, planting the church in the world. They were accidents of their real oflBice, the Episcopate ; and hence, necessarily, passed away with their honored recipients. The extraordinary gifts were magnifi- cent as the glowing sparks in the welding of that supernatural chain ; but the more excellent gifts were its substance, beauteous in form, enduring in strength for the strain of all ages. " All power or ofiSce except these extraordinary gifts was Episco- pal, the overseeing, vitalising and cooperative headship, and was plenary in its transmission for the perpetuation of the church in its order, government and diffusion. The Episcopate contains within itself the full causality of the Priesthood, the church, and the Ecclesiastical regimen. It involves potentially thus the adminis- tration of the whole body, and the visible church is the comple- ment in the secondary and ministerial sense of the Divine Head- ship vested collectively in that order." p.p. 12.13. In another sermon preached by you at the consecration of Bishop Pierce, I find the same opinion thus expressed. " In the Apostolate, as a temporary estate, there were powers and gifts which were incidental to the formative period of the church. A world-wide breadth of labor, with a pledged success ; inspiration to make the moral and religious teaching infallibly true ; superna- tural gifts to supplement the personal influence and give attesta- tion to the unfolding economy. To such ' charismata' whether as the investiture of Apostles or descending as they did on the heads of the lower ministry and laymen, dying out as dawn streaks the confirmed morning, no after age has laid claim, and the name ' apostle' was separated, in honor, to indicate the peculiarity in the administration of the unchanging gift." p 11. These statements of yours agree with the commonly received views, in asserting that the peculiar endowments of Apostles were, as is said " extraordinary" and transitory, while they differ from the commonly received opinion (in the Episcopal church) in not claiming that Bishops are Apostles, but in fact confound- ing the Apostolical and Episcopal functions, and making the latter the more important and essential office. As my object is to set 9 forth the relation of the Episcopate to the church, I purpose to enquire whether these views accord with Holy Scripture. The New Testament says a good deal about Apostles and Apostleship, but very little about Bishops and Episcopacy. It declares Apostles to be direct gifts of God to the church, but assigns no such importance to Bishops. It surely cannot be without significance that our Lord, "named" the twelve "apos- tles." Luke vi. 13 ; but the name of Bishops is no where found, save in a single instance when it is applied to the Lord, except as an equivalent for Presbyters, in cases where it does not desig- nate any pre-eminency in office. The preeminency is univer- sally assigned to Apostles, and the Episcopate of the churches was manifestly subordinate to them. It is by no means clear that no claim was ever made to the possession of the charismata in later ages. There are unquestionable traces of their exercise in the second, third, and fourth centuries, and it would seem that the church of the first century certainly did not suppose that the office of apostle was limited to the original twelve, as we learn from Kev. chap, ii, 2. that there were those who " said they were Apostles," and the Angel of the church in Ephesus, was com-, mended for having " tried" them and having found them liars, which he surely could have had no call to do if it were the fact, that there could not be apostles. It is a simple fact that there has, since the close of the first cen- tury, ceased to be a Ministry in the Church answering to that of Apostleship as well described by you, and the inference has been that it was not intended that it should be continued, and that it does not enter into the essential and complete constitution of the Church, and consequently, cannot be of any practical importance. But may it not be restored ? This was a question which was forced upon my attention some years ago in a practical way. While engaged to the ut- most of my power in fulfilling my duties as a Priest in the Pro- testant Episcopal Church, I was in a remarkable way made ac- quainted with a spiritual movement in the British Isles, be- ginning with the revived gifts of prophecy, which had resulted in the constitution of a body in which all the various " gifts of the 10 Holy Ghost" had found their place, especially the four-fold min- istry of Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists and Pastors and teach- ers, in accordance with the teachings of St. Paul in Ephes. chap, iv. Here then were men who "said they were Apostles" (Rev. ii. 2.) and although I had not on me the responsibility of an ■ " Angel of the Church," I held a standing among the priesthood, and a care of souls, and I considered myself bound to " try them," to see whether they were true men or "liars ;" having in mind also the words of John <' Beloved, believe not every Spirit, but try the Spirits whether they be of God." (1st John iv, 1.) The leading features of the work, as well as the claims it put forth, forbade my passing it by as an ordinary case of schism, or comeouter-ism. I had in mind too, the doctrine of the xix Article, which forbade my regarding the Anglican or American Episcopal Church as infallible, and found myself led to the consideration of the question wh'^ther our received theories regarding Episco- pacy, as the highest form of ministry, and the independent nation- ality of the Churches, were not liable to revision. The result of my studies and reflections in this direction was a conviction that the Episcopal theory of the Church, as held by Anglicanism, was materially defective both on scriptural and on historical grounds ; was wholly inconsistent with the ideas of Unity and Catholicity ; that the Church never has rested in it, but always has manifested a tendency and an effort to a more concentrated form of organ- ization ; that the history of the English Church, in the three hundred years of its separate existence, is a long exhibit of its weakness, and that the present state of the Anglican Communion is a standing proof of the insufficiency of the Episcopate alone to lead on the Body of Christ to " the measure of the perfect man in Christ Jesus." These are results which others have arrived at before me who have sought their remedy in the Roman Church and the Papacy. Finding myself not at all attracted to that Body but distinctly repelled from it, I could not but see in the restoration of a supematurally called Apostleship, a provision to meet the deficiencies of the Episcopal system. My more intimate acquaintance with the movement in its details, satisfied me of its genuineness as a work of God, and entitled to the recognition of 11 the Church. The view taken then of this question has an important bearing upon the relation of the Episcopate. There are manifestly two questions here, one of doctrine and another of fact. The question of doctrine may, for present pur- poses, be best considered under the form of the distinction between the Apostolate and the Episcopate, but to arrive at this we must first consider the nature of all Minisry in the Church. The entire Ministry of the Church is representative of our Lord's Ministry. The significance of the name given to the church as the *' Body of Christ" is, that by ihe Holy Ghost all the offices and functions of Christ Himself are to be brought out in it. As such it is spoken of by theologians as Christ mys- tical. When, then, we come to the specific names given to the ministry in the Epistles, we find that they represent to us the several offices and functions which are inherent in the Lord Himself. There is no passage in the New Testament of greater importance or more palmary significance in reference to this ques- tion than that in St. Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians, chap iv 8. 13 :* If the complete doctrine of the ministry of the Church is not declared here, then it is nowhere in the New Testament. Here it is stated with an exactness and fulness and with a direct reference to a purpose that we look for in vain elsewhere. It is one of the great propositions of the Apostle, and, in reference to the point in question, is to be regarded as holding the same relation to it that the 3rd and 6th chapters of John's ( ■ '^l do to the two principal sacraments. In jour exegesis of this passage you have overlooked the specific designation of the four forms of Ministry which St Paul names as * Ephesians iv. 8. 13. Wherefore He saith, when He ascended up on hi^h, He led captivity captire and gave gifts unto men. Now that He ascended what is it, but that he also descended first into the lower parts of the earth. He that descended is the same also that ascended far above all heavens ; that He might fill all things and He gave some Apostles, and some Prophets and some E vangelist8,and some pastors and teachers,for the peifecting of the saints, for the work of ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ till we all come in (or into) the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fulness of Christ." 12 the gifts of the ascended Lord, and have substituted for them one which he does not name — the Episcopate. I should allow that these four Ministries do constitute a universal episcopate for the whole church ; but where is the propriety of passing by the names by which the inspired Apostle designates the ministries given by the Lord to the Church, as if they were merely accidental ? St. Paul is very emphatic in designating them as separate classes. He does not say as you translate — " the Apostles, the Prophets, the Evangelists, the Pastors" but by the use of protasis and (tpodosis he specifies them as co-ordinate and suplementary to each other. He gave some men (tows m*") ^o be Apostles, and sjome men (jov^ 5e) Prophets, and some men (rovs 5e again) Evan- gelists, and some men (jovs St) Pastors and teachers. What can be plainer than that this was a complete form of ministry, and taking the context into view, that it was by this four-fold ministry that the unity of the body was to be preserved. The Lord gave these ministries for this purpose — in order that the Saints, the whole body of the faithful, might be completely fitted together for the work of ministering to the building up of the body of Christ. Pardon me if I suggest that you take a farther liberty with the text in rendering the word /i* ordained priests, and by them is this His Priesthood represented in the Church. And (we add parenthetically) as the Lord appeared among His disciples as "one that serveth " so must there be also a ministry of service, a deaconship, to represent Him in thi;; act of humility when He washed His disciples' feet. But we have not yet touched upon the Episcopate, for the reaaon that it lies in quite another sphere of action from that of Apostleship or the ministry for the Universal Church. The Episcopate (as distinct from the ministry of the Universal Church) is a ministry for the local church, whether greater or smaller in extent, in distinction from the Universal Church. The only clear and distinct recognition of it as actually working and. established 16 of the esacntial and inherent functions of the Lord in His Body the church, it follows that their presence and exercise are essential to the complete constitution of the church, and that the assertion that they arc transitory is unfounded. Apostleship is as really necessary that the Church shall be complete in every member, and be ready to show forth the glory of him who hath created her, as is Episcopacy. The saints cannot be perfected without the four ministries for the universal church, more than they can be w'thout the three ministries for the particular ihurch. Th'. Church can never cease to be Apostolic, for her Head in the heavens is the Apostle sent forth from the Father, and the Church is complete in Him ; but when, from any cause, this complete ministry of Christ ceases to be brought into full operation and exercise, the Church fails to give a full manifestation of the life that is in her Head. The assumption, therefore, which is so constantly made, that Apostleship and its other associated ministries are not essential to the perfect constitution of the church, or are accidental and " extraordinary " in the sense of not having a place as regular and constituent members of the body, is at variance with a correct apprehension of the true nature of the church. If the character of extraordinary be applied to those ministries and to the gifts of the Holy Ghost in a simple historical sense, to imply that they have not been continued during the ages, then of course there can be no question of the fact. But if it be meant that in the divine purpose, and in the actual constitution of the Church they were intended to be merely transient, and have no constant relation to the perfecting of the body of Christ, then the assump- tion must be denied as involving a misconception of the true na- ture of the gifts of the Holy Ghost. The church is not a mechanical contrivance, even of Divine Wisdom. It is a product of the Holy Ghost, and its ministries and orders are the expression of the very life of the Head — the Risen Christ — from whom the church is taken as Eve out of the side of Adam, the woman from the man, the counterpart and comple- ment of the Head. 17 hvine and Lisen le of iplo- The continuity of the ministry therefore, is not, according to tin prrfca ideal, etfccted by a law of succession rcguhitcd by hu- man skill and subject to the chanties of time, but by a continual reproduction tnrough the acticm of the Holy Ghost, of all those ministries in which its constituted order stands. The Melchisedeck Priesthood is not " after the Li>'; of a car- nal commandment'*' such as the Episcopal succession regulated by canons, but "after the power of an endless life," thr«)ugh the operation of the in-dwelling Spirit. We do not deny that, in the abeyance of the Apostolatc, God has chosen to perpetuate the Priesthood in the church by the Episcopal succession, and, in the absence of Apostles, I know no other way in which it has been perpetuated, and we do not question the validity of its orders whether in the English, the Greek or the Roman line ; but it is not after the power of an end- less life, and is therefore imperfect. It will be observed that St. Paul, in his teachings on the subject of the gifts of the Holy Ghost, in 1st Cor. chap, xii, speaks of gifts and ministries interchangeably. In verses 7-11, he speaks of the " word of wisdom, the word of knowledge, faitli, gifts of healing, working of miracles, discerning of spirits, tongues, and the inter- pretation of tongues," all as manifestations of the Spirit given to every man to use for the perfecting of the Body, but all tlie work of' One and the self same Spirit," and tliey are also spoken of collectively as Charismata or endowments. But in the 29th verse he speaks of the Ministries in and by which those gifts were mani- fested and exercised. " God hath set some in the Church, fi>\st Apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers after that miracles &c." From the manner in which these gifts are commonly spoken of, it would seem to be supposed that there was upon the Ministries of that age, and upon the Church, a power separate and distinct from that by which believers are baptized into Christ and pre- served in their union to Him ; that it had nothing to do with the constant abiding, in-dwelling life of which we are partakers by the Holy Spirit ; as if a special and distinct energy was put forth wholly disconnected from the constant operation of the Spirit in r\ 18 the Body, And so it is assumed, that after a certain time, this peculiar operation ceased, and all the Ministries connected with it were withdrawn. Thus the gifts of the Apostolic days are assim- ilated to the miracles of the Old Test:iment, and no account is made in this respect of that permanent standing miracle which contains all miracles — the Incarnation of the Eternal Word. But the Holy Spirit sent down upon the Cliurcli by Christ is • the Spirit of the Father and of the Son, and brings down to His elect the essential virtue and grace which are in the risen Christ. And in His operations there is no division as of ordinary and of extraordinary. The Charismata of the Apostolic age were only the man i/cstitt Ions of the Life of (he Jiisen. Christ in tlie ij I members of His body. There is no essential difference between I j the grace by whicli the new born infant is regenerated in baptism i and that by which the Apostle ministers in his oflfice. The only difference is in the degree of fulness. From the Acts of the I Apostles we learn, that the manifestations of the gifts were j consequent upon the laying on of Apostles hands, Acts viii, \ 14-18, xix, 6. This was an endowment beyond the grace of baptism, beyond even the confirmation of that graC3. It would seem as though there was a personal gift of the Spirit conferred. It would seem too that the presence of Apostles in the church was necessary to its continued bestowment, and with the with- drawal of the one the other necessarily, after a time, ceased. But can any one say that the Church, without the gifts of the Spirit, was in a better or more complete condition than when it possessed them? That such manifestation of the presence of Christ by the Holy Ghost would not be an indication of a higher and more spiritual condition than that in which the church is now found, or an assurance of power over the world, which has now and for many ages departed from her? Is not the assumption of the "extraordinary" nature of the gifts and ministries of the Apostolic age, a theory to conceal the fact of the loss of faith and falling away from the perfect way of God ? If it be true that Apostles are essential to a complete mani- festation of Christ in His body, then it must follow that the Episcopate, without them, is incomplete. For its full and com- 19 ith- sed. the n it of her jh is has the and ct of ^,od? nani- the com- plete endowment, the Episcopate needs tlie grace that can come only through the highest ministry that the Lord huth appointed, and which He hath sent forth, as lie was sent forth by His Father. No question is raised as to the authority exercised by the Episcopate in its proper sphere. But authority and endow- ment are distinct. The Episcopate can stand related only to individual churches, or to groups of individual churches, bound together by Ecclesi- astical arrangement. It has no authority over the universal church, and it has in itself no principle of unity. The entire Episcopate scattered over the world is divided into parties and sects which are at deadly war; and manifestly in our conception of a recovered unity, there must enter the idea of a ministry higher than the I]piscopatc, not created by itself, but of divine sanction and obligation, which shall by virtue of an acknowledged supernatural divine commisf-ion and inspiration, hold in its hand and under its control the interests which are now in conflict, and bring them all together " unto the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God." It was just for this that the Lord gave Apostles, Prophets, Evangelists, and Pastors," a ministry higher than the Episcopate, and for this we may be assured that in His own time He would " restore that which He took not away." After the death of St. John the church was deprived of the ministry of living Apostles. But does not her history make it manifest that she has suffered a loss ? At the first, the churches scattered over the world were held in unity by the bands of faith, hope and charity, and the want of Apostles does not become so apparent. During the ages of persecution they were still more closely bound by the pressure of suffering and patience. But when they found themselves called upon to contend against heresy, how quickly did the feeling of the need of some outward and visible bond of unity become manifest ! And where did tliey seek at first to find such a bond but in the authority of the Emperor, and afterward in the Papacy. Can any one doubt that the elevation of the Bishops of Rome to a supremacy, claimed over the whole church and actually ex- 20 erciscd over tlic wliolo cliurch of Wostorn Europe for conturiea, was tlie result of an instinct, or the workinj; of a deep conviction, in the mind of the cliuroh, of tlie need of some embodied luithority for the preservation of unity? Could such a power liavo been acquired and been exercised if it had not rested upon a principle, true in itself, however perverted in its exereise ? The Piipney in itself a witness for Apostleship. Its peculiar functions as distinct from those of the Bishop of Home are Apostolical in chiiracter, and it calls itself the Ajwstolic See, claiming to inherit all tlie power of the Apostles, as distinct from those of Bishops. And what can TOorc clearly exhibit the necessity of Apostles than the present condition of the churehcs, those under the Papac}' and those separated from it ? While the enerLfy and efficiency and strenofth of the Boman Catliolic church shows the advantage of the princi- ple of Apostleship, even under an assumed form, yet in consequence of this assumption the church under the Papacy has been for ages the subject of a spiritual despotism, which has culminated at last in the subjection of all spiritual authority to the will of the Pope, and th<^ claim for him of personal infallibility. The Eustern cliurch, on the other hand under the authority of Bishops alo -.c, has become the slave of the state and subject to tho tyranny of the Sultan in the E ist, or tlie Czar in the North. And the history of the churches of the Anglican communioa since the Reformation, gives a still further illustration of the in- sufficiency of the Episcopate alone to carry on the church to per- f iction. The church of England, placed under the control of the crown, shows the weakness of the Episcopate which could not assert its independence of the Stat.^, while in these days, it is ad- mitted that it is only the authority of the crown that protects it from flying into fragments. In this land, where the authority of the crown is replaced by the influence or control of popular re- presentation, the authority of the Episcopate is reduced to its minimum, and outward unity is only preserved by compromising the most essential principles of the truth.* The Episcopate, without the support of the Apo tolate, is inca- pable of producing unity. There is before God One Church and * See the Bishops declaration in respect to the Baptismal office. 21 only one — the wliolcbody of the baptized — and the principle of 'anity ia in the grace of bupti.sui, but the innni/cstat'itn of unity ia esHcntial to perfection. The manifested unity of tlie church mu.st proceed from a centre. It is not e phirlbua unnm but jiturea ex und. Its unity is not formed by the agreement of sev- eral parts to come together and be agreed, but by all the different members being gathered around one centre. The Bishops are iu a human sense the heads of the several churches, but they them- Bclves need a common centre of authority. The Lord, in the vision of the Apocalypse, is seen holding the stars in his right hand, and, in symbolieal language, His rightjiaud is the Apostlo- flhip, by which he liolds in unity the Angels or Bishops of the Churches. On pages 18, 19 of your .sermon you depict in strong colors and with fine touches, the present condition of the Church in conse({ue".oe of the failure to recognize the true principles of rule. This is just what the centuries of time have brought the Episcopate to for want of its necessary and legitimate support in the Apostleship. " No lesson stands clearer in the Ecclesia.stical '* record than that corruption of doctrine, disunion and weakness, " have been the result of Papal or popular inroads on the order of Bisiiops " These are your words. This is an admission of all that I have alledged as the consequence of the want of a present Apostolic ministry. One Bi-shop usurping all Apostolic authority and crushing out the true divinely con.stltuted Episcopate on the one hand ; on the other the Bishops divided among themselves, and the office derided and trampled under foot, because of its claim to an authority which does not belong to it. And what is there in the existing constitution of things that shall heal the infirmity and weakness which you recognise ? Can any thing but a divine interposition effect anything, and if there is to be a divine interposition what can it be but a restoring of Apostles ? The questioi will arise as I have often been called upon to answer it, How has it come to pass that if Apostleship be truly an essential constituent of the perfect Church, ihe Church has been for so many centuries deprived of it ? Why was it allowed to die out, and how has it happened that it has not been restored ? 22 How is it that we do not find in the early writings of the teachers of the Church, any hints of a consciousness of its loss and a desire for its recovery ? ' To answer this question is to justify the ways of God towards His Church, since the Apostleship comes not from man but from God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ. The question is proposed indeed for the mos*. part, not in the form of an enquiry but rather of an unanswerable argument. The first question is, How was it that the Apostolato was suf- fered to die out ? It is quite clear from St. Paul's writings as well as those of St. Peter, that at first they expected to remain unto the coming of the Lord and personally to present the Church, as a chaste virgin, to Christ, without passing through the gate of detith. But later, Peter writes that the Lord Jesus had showed him that he was to put off his clay tabernacle, and Paul, in writing to the Philippians, signifies that it had been shown to liim that he, too, should depart. As the long period of the dispensation, though unknown to the Apostles, was providentially inevitable, it is clear, that except by an exertion of the Resurection Life in their bot'ies, and a mirac- ulous longevity, the first Apostles could not continne until the end. Of all of them, except St. John, the tradition is that they died by martyrdom. The powers of the world would not bear the mes- sengers of God. They put them to death for their testimony, and if it had pleased God to call and send forth others at that time, as St. Paul was sent, what reason is there to suppose they would not have met the same fate ? And thus the continuance of divine intcri'crence would have been only the means of britiging increased condemnation upon the world. In mercy to man God withheld his servants and did not send them forth to the peril of the generation. The same reason, too, existed in the condition of the Church. We learn from the Epistles of St. Paul, that the Cliurches were not heartily receiving him. He writes " all that be in Asia have turned away from me." What was this ? Was it a rejeetion'of the Gospel and a return to Paganism or Judaism ? By no means. It was a resistance of his Apostolical authority, just as we see in the 3rd Epistle of John, 23 the resistance to him of Diotrephes, doubtless the Bisliop. The ministry of Apostles, like no other Ministry, is of that lofty spiritual character, that it comes directly to the spirits of men. They cannot help feeling its power. It is " a savor of death unto death, or of life unto life." Men, under it, are conscious of the Lord's presence, and they shrink from it. It seizes their consciences and subdues the flesh, and so they avoid it, for they say in their hearts, as the people of Israel did under Mount Sinai, " let not God speak with us, lest we die." And with such a spirit in the Church, joined with a desire " to have the pre- eminence," John iii, 9, it is manifest that a fresh supply of Apostles after the departure of the first, would only have hai the the eflect to call forth new acts of disobedience to the !'jord's authority in them. A further cause for the suspension of the Apostolate, and with this of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, is seen in the Epistle to the church in Ephcsus; " I have somewhat against thee because thou hast left thy first love," Rev. ii, 4. This, I suppose, we may regard as representing the condition, not of that church only, but of the whole cl.urch just at the close of the Apostolic age. There had boon r. loss of charity, and without charity the gifts of the Holy Ghost could not be manifested. Apostles endowed with plenary wisdom and ministering in the power of the Holy Ghost, would, in the midst of a people who had lost their first love, of necessity lose all their power and be a curse rather thau a blessing. A lower ministry was all that the church in that condition was capable of receiving. There is in the writings of the second and third centuries no intimation of a consciousness of a desire for a restored Apostleship, and this of itself shows that the church had got into that state in which it could not have received and prospentd by the ministry of Apostleship. * * The absence of any notice in the remains of the second century that have <5ome down to us of a lack in the Church for want of Apostles, is some- times adduced as an argument to prove ihat they could not have been an essentially constituent membership. Under one aspect I admit the force of the difficulty, but on the other hand it is quite within the bounds of probability, we may say certainty, that the Episcopate Lad attained a dignity and importance which would disincline its members to allow &n.j 24 If we recur to any of the salient points in the later history of" the Church we shall see how impossible it would have been, with out a turning aside of the whole current of thought and feeling, without in fact an extra miraculous interference, that Apostles should have been restored to the Church. Certainly it could not have been done in the times of Constantino. ' The bishops who recognised him as hapostolos could not have felt the need of real Apostles, and in the pride of his prerogative as patron of the church, he would not have allowed their presence. The times of Leo the Great, when tht Papacy was assuming its distinct form and shape, certainly were no more favorable to it, and from the fifth century down to the 16th there was nothing in the minds of men, nor in the state of the Church, to lead them to see or to admit the authority of such a ministry. The Apostolic authority was practically embodied in the see of Rome, and no other apostolic authority was thought of as possible. At the Reformation, the churches were too much allied to the civil power to allow of any authority independent of it, and it was not likely to come into the thoughts of the Reformers. The suggestion of it would have called forth the severest penalties, and would have destroyed their work, and it was *in mercy, we may perhaps say, withheld. And the state of things that was settled at the Reformation has continued until this day. The Puritans and Presbyterians, and -other modern sects, were too much intent upon the exercise of their own authority, and too hostile to divine ordinances, for the conception of a restored apostleship to have place among them. It does seem quite clear that the idea of apostleship once lost, its recovery can only come from a special divine inspiration. When it was lost after the departure of the first Apostles, the time of its recovery must remain hid in the will of the Father, and it can only be restored in His good pleasure. The review of the history of the Church shews us, that until this present century, there has been no period in which it could superior and at that day, equally with our own, this disposition would restrain the bishops from the suggestion of any higher ministry than their own. This would not imply any conscious insincerity then, any more thaa the same tendency does at this day. 25 be restored without danger of its again being lost. The eccles- iastical, moral, and spiritual condition of the Church, as well aa its political status, has been such as to leave no place for it to enter without a visible overturning of all things, and a constant miraculous interference for its protection. Not until a place had been found for it, and a people prepared among whom it might find a resting place, could the Lord visit His people, to restore His ordinances among them. The emancipation of Great Britain from the spiritual domination of the Papacy, had left a people free to hear the Word of the Lord speaking from heaven. The trials and anxieties of the wars following upon the first French revolution had prepared many hearts to look and pray for a divine interposition for the revival of the Church, and the politi- cal changes in the British Empire had removed all restrictions from the free developemont of any divine work in the midst of faithful Christians. It was in such circumstances that God put it into the hearts of His people to pray for the revival of His Church, and answered the prayers He had inspired, still further teaching them to pray for Apostles to be restored. In a review such as this, there is it seems to me, an answer to the difficulty. It shows, that after the Church had once fallen from its perfect condition the recovery was only in the good pleasure of the Lord Himself, and that nothing short of the proba- tion of centuries would suffice for the ripening of the human race under the infiuences of Christianity, that the full purpose of God might be developed in it. The Apostolate was not essential to the continuation and expan- sion of the Church or .to the preservation of the Priesthood, sacraments and faith, and the Lord had not ceased to be present with His Church, so long as the Holy Ghost was not withdrawn, notwithstaoding the incompleteness of the Ministries. And there is not only no reason in the nature of things to doubt, but every reason for believing, that at the proper time the principal minis- tries and gifts which had been suspended should be again brought into exercise. If they are, as I have attempted to show, simply the true functions of the Lord Himself in his Body, then certainly we may look for their return. There is nothing to warrant the 26 assumption tliat, in the institution of the Episcopate by the hand of his Apostles He foreclosed all right or title of His own to interfere for the recovery of his perfect ordinance. From the way in which Apostolic succession is commonly treated, it might be supposed that the Lord had given a pledge that He Himself never would or could of his own will, again put forth his power for the restoring of his chief Ministry. But there is absolutely nothing to warrant such a conclusion. Bishops are not successors of Apos- tles in their office. This is admitted when you allow that the Ministry of Apostles, as such, was not continued in the Bishops, who, appointed to the care of the several Churches, succeeded to such of their higher functions as they could fill ; and if it had been, what is there in the word of Scripture, or the nature of the case, to hinder the Lord Himself fi'om instituting a new line of succession, to accomplish, by virtue of a direct and therefore more efficient divine energy, the things for which the existing Ministries have lost their power. The case of St. Paul fully contradicts the assumption, which would limit the legitimate Ministry of the Church to the transmitted line of ordination. He was not one of the original Twelve,but was ordained by the Lord from Heaven, after he had ascended to the Father. We may well conceive that the first Twelve had a difficulty in receiving him to their fellow- ship, or recognizing his Apostolic standing. But he himself rests his Apostolic authority, not on their recognition, but on his call by the Lord. " They that were Apostles before him added nothing to him." (Gal. ii. 6.) Now what the Lord did once he may do again. He is still the Living Christ. He has promised to be with his Church " all days, even to the consummation of the age," and therefore we may look for his interposition to give her every- thing needful for her perfection. If the existing Ministry has become in whole or in part effote, or fails to accomplish all that is needful to carry the Church on to the unity of the faith, her living Head may, in the riches of His mercy, again call forth from the midst of His Body those memberships which are necessary to the complete manifestation of His life. I state these things confidently, for I do not know of any thing that can be said against them. It is only when we lose sight of 27 the true Manhood of our Lord, of His resurrection and ascension to the right hand of the Father, that there can be any room to doubt of the possibility of His interfering to do whatever is needful for the perfecting of His body. The doctrine of apostolic succession, as commonly held, no less than the Papacy, shuts Him out from all control over the Church, except in the line of Providence, limits His power, and practically denies His right to rule. It makes the Body an institution separate from the Head, and claims for it an autonomy that would deprive it of His continual presence. What I have written thus far respects the (jucstion of doctrine as to the normal and complete relation of the Churcli and the Episcopate. Another question remains, the question of fact, whether, as is aflBrmcd, the Apostleship has been re.'^torcd. I have stated above that it was the assertion of this as a fact, which was the occasion of my reconsideration of my previous con- victions as to the completeness of the Episcopal constitution of the Church. I have given above the result of that revision in respect to the principles taught in the New Testament. But the question of fact, whether those who " say they are Apostles " are such, or are impostors, and wicked and presumptuous men who lay claim to a high office which does not belong to them, is one to be carefully considered and determined in view of the suitable evidence. What reason is there for receiving these men who " say they are Apostles " as being true men and entitled to be received as Apostles of the Lord ? The answer to this question, which must be the decisive one, is drawn from what they have done. Our Lord said, with reference to those who came offering themselves as teachers and guides of the people, " by their fruits ye shall know them ; men do not gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles ; a corrupt tree cannot bring forth good fruit." Those who are recognized by a number of their brethren — amounting to several thousands — as Apostles, are to be judged by their fruits. I know very well that Episcopalians very generally hesitate to allow such a test, claiming that the historical succession alone detern/nes the matter, but even here it may be » 28 found useful, for the succession may be retained for gcnenitiona in the uiidst of heresy and immorality, as it was by the Cathari and Albigenses of the middles ages, and is said to be by the Moravians at tl\is time. The objection will be made to the application of this te>st. that it gives free license to private judgment, and thus overtur la authority. There is no doubt a danger in this direction, 'jut this does not destroy the value of the principle nor cancel our responsibility in regard to the matter. The objection, or the denial of the duty, I will not say right, of individual judgment in mutters of religious belief and action is fully carried out in the Jesnit institutions, which require a man to have no mind of his own, none but that of his directors. There must be a medium between this extreme of deference to authority and the free license vrhich encourages every one to pass judgment on every thing he sees and hears. The appeal which the Lord allows in judging of the claims of teachers to respect and attention, is not one to the intellect, so much as to the conscience. Faith, of necessity, rests upon authority, and the question for the individual is first as to the sufl&ciency of authority. This, however, every one must judge more or less for himself, and the test is " by their fruits ye shall know them." When I was first told that there are men now living who say themselves, that God has called them to be Apostles, and who ar^ received as such by considerable numbers of their brethren, as a high church Episcopalian the first question with me was, whether the restoration of any such ministry is possible, or is consistent with the divine constitution of the Church. This being answered to my conviction in the affirmative, I apply this test, "by their fruits ye shall know them," to judge whether those who say they are Apostles are true men or liars, for I fully admit that if they are not true men no term of denuncia- tion can be too severe. And what are the tests by which their work is to be judged. I will here only refer to those tests which had force with me a» a churchman. 29 If premising then that I had every reason, as I have •cause to have, to believe that the practical effect upon the people who were engaged in the work, was altogether of a most salutary kind, promotive of personal lioliness and devotion and uniform uprightness of life, with a most remarkable de"Tce of spiritual knowledge and discernment, even where there was a great want of all ordinary education, I will say that the thin<^ that first struck me, was tlie very great fullness of the doctrinal teaching which was current among them. It was the Catholic Faith, whole and undefiled. The truth of the Incarnation and its application to the sacraments and the ordinances of the Church, was, in various ways, as taught by tlie Apostles and others with them, brought out with a fulness and power which I observed in no modern works, and which was not surpassed in any of the ancient. This I made a primary, a cardinal test for I was quite sure tliat any self prompted or schismatical movement, would fail in some point of fundamental truth, and it was equally settled in my mind that if any one taught not the doctrine, which has all through the ages been taught in the Catholic Church, he was not to be received. This was the first test of the fruit and it was complete and satisfactory. I found that all the questions which have for the last thirty years been so warmly discussed by the divines of the English Church, such as B.iptismal regeneration, absolution tlie real presence in the Eucharist, the now rife subject of Eucharistic adoration, had been considered clearly and definitely years ago, with an authority and clearness that left nothing in question ; and surely all tliis could not be regarded as the work of men who were acting in mere selfwill. This was certainly good fruit, that marked the character of the tree on which it grew. 2nd. Next to this was what the Apostles had done in instituting -worship. I was overwhelmed with surprise when made acquaint- ed with the "Liturgy and other Divine offices of the Church " which had been prepared and introduced by them into the congregations that received them. Here I found, in the first place, set forth as the centre and starting point of all Christian 80 worship a service for the celebratinn of the Eucharist, which I was constraitied to allow, as miny others have done since, fur transcended the service for the Holy Coniinuiiion in the English Church, in fact was tlie most complete service tliut could be conceived. I will not dwell upon its particular features as it is accessible to those who may wish to study it. Suffice it to say that it has the best features of the Greek and Roman Liturgies, and gives a most full and distinct expression to the doctrine of the Real Presence without any tendency to transubstun- tiation, or countenancing the doctrine of Eucharistic adoration. With this is also a regular service of Morning and Evening prayer, which is derived from it and supplementary to it, into which I will not enter in detail. The most remarkable thing about this Liturgy is, that its construction and principles are derived from prophetic light, thrown upon the reading of the Mosaic law, in reference to the tabernacle and its services. In ita actual composition, use has been made of ancient liturgies, and it is a matter of no small satisfaction, to observe in how many points this service, constructed in the light of prophecy, coincides with that of the earliest and best days of the Church. This Liturgy was introduced in 1842 and has been in use ever since — years before any thing like the present ritualistic movements began. It did not appear to me to be the fruit of a self constituted or unau- thorized schism, to lead those wlo were engaged in it to such sublime services of worship — to set forth worship in its highest forms as the great work of the Christian Church. This is so contrary to all popular instincts and demands that I could not help seeing in it a token of supernatural guidance.^ * The introduction of this service into public use was accompanied with a series of teachings, or " Readings " from the pen of the senior apostle, exposi- tory of it, and of the principles upon which it was based, drawn from light of living prophecy cast upon the constitution and order of the Tabernacle of Moses, which illustrates that ancient institution more completely than any work that I have read or heard of, and harmonizes wonderfully with the mystical teachings of the early Church writers. 1 have found much satis- faction in observing a great coincidence in many things with Archdeacon Freeman's valuable work on the " Principles of Divine Service," but th& work of the Apostles was done and the service introduced many year* 31 3rd. Another distinctive feature of the work done by the Apos- tles, is its Catholicity. This terra is sometimes used, in a technical sense, to signify the principles that are at the basis of the ecclesiastical organization of the Catholic Church; and in this sense, I have already intimated that this work is everything that can be desired. But there is a wider and more etymological sense of the word in which also it may be applied to this work. The work done by Apostles is free from sectarianism. They recognize all the Baptized, of whatever name, as constituting the Body of Christ, even though in a disorganized and incomplete condition. They aim to comprehend all the Baptized in their sympathies and to extend to them all, the blessing they are charged to convey. Although of necessity separated from the existing Churches, they are not separated in spirit, but regard themselves and teach the Churches to regard themselves as one with all the Baptized, as having " one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one hope of their calling," and while recognizing each important section of the Baptized as representing some portion of the truth which can only be held in its completeness in the unity of the one body, they still do not seek to restore an out- ward unity by a compromise of principles or an ignoring of doc- trines. And in another and still more accurate sense is the work Catholic, in that, as an organization, it embraces believers and churches in several of the lands of Christendom, far removed from one another. In Great Britain, Germany, Denmark, France, Switzerland, the United States and Canada are Churches acknow- ledging the Apostles, which constitute one church. The organiza- before the work of Mr. Freeman. The first part of Freeman's work was published in 1857 and the last volume in 1862, whereas the first part of the "Readings" was publisiied in 1849 and the whole was complete in 1851. Mr. Freeman's was the result of extensive and elaborate study, and many of his conclusions are uncertain and speculative, while the other work professes to derive its princii)les from Prophetic and Apostolic revelation, and assigns an exact and sufficient significance to most of the types of the law in their liturgical aspect, as well as their relation to the constitution of the Church. The coincidence in the mystical interpretations of Scripture given in the light of Prophecy, with those of the early Christian writers, as illustrated by Dr. Neale's commentary on the Paalms, is, I think, worthy of attention. . 32 tion is one not scvenil. There arc no such bodies in it as National Churches. Tlic Churches in each Ian J, althou;^h more particularlj under the care of one of the Apostles, are not organized into a sepa- rate Church having an interior autonomy, but all together consti- tute One Body, diffused throughout Christendom. There is thus given a model, and the possibility of the reconstruction of a Catholic Church is made manifest. 4th. Another striking fruit of tlie labor and ministry of Apostles is found in the complete subordination to Authority which prevails in the mid.st of them. Not only in the churches is the authority of the apostles acknowledged and obeyed, and every ministry respected according to its rank, but the principle of obedience to authority is successfully enforced. The submission of all to the powers that be as ordaiued of God ; of the wife to the husband as her head ; of the children and the family to the father ; and the corresponding duty of all in the places of headship to stund in their places and use the authority given them by God, in His fei? rnd love over all related totlicm, is universally iuculcated and generally followed. There is no Radicalism — no wanton aggression upon rights or assumption of duties, but order in all the relations of life, in the family, the church, and the state. Such principles are not com- mon to modern heresies. 5th. Another fruit of the labor of Apostles is seen in the recog- nition by all who hold with them of the principle of Tithe. This is a recognition that Jesus is the Lord and possessor of the whole earth ; that all that we have belongs to hiin ; and that the portion which, from the earliest date of sacred history we are taught he claimed as specially his own, viz. one tenth part, is to be set aside for his service. This is done constantly and habitu- ally, by all who have income to be tithed. It is a principle of Apostolic teaching and will be acknowledged to be good fruit. I know it may be said, and truly, that such liberality in the use of means may often be found in exercise for the support of the worst practices, but this does not imply that when the cause is good, the liberality is not good, and it is, at the least, a striking ■example of obedience to a sound principle. 33 Here arc five distinct marks by which the work that has been done within the past forty years by those who say tliey are Apostles, and arc recognized and received as such by some thousands of Christian people, may be judged, whether they aro the products of a good or an evil tree. It could not bo a good tree if it grew out of a wilful schism, or were tho work of tho devil. There is nothing that any one can impeach. No such fruit was ever found upon a tree that was schismatically broken off from the main stock of the church. Schism always tends to and results in a departure from the Catholic faith. It professes to be a supernatural work. It had its beginning in supernatural manifestations, prophetic gifts. Tho system has been shaped under what is believed to be a supernatural guidance. Its claim to respect and acceptance rests upon its supernatural character. As a work of man it would not be entitled to present itself to the faith of the church. Questions respecting it go back to its supernatural origin. In this claim it stands apart from every other modern religious system, excepting only that of Swedenborg, and no one who knows anything of church principles will need to have any comparison instituted between this work and that of the Swedish seer. That system, besides its heresies upon tho Trinity, the Incarnation, the Resurrection &c., avowedly cuts itself off from the Church of the past, and professes to be a " New Church." Quakerism, indeed, claims to be guiu ^ by inspiration, but it is an inspiration which rejects all ordinances, and denies the objec- tive existence of the church, besides its many doctrinal abberations. Methodism does not claim any supernatural origin, and has more- over come to deny all church principles. The marks I have given above are to be taken in connection with the claims to the super- natural origin of the work for the purpose of deciding whether these claims are likely to be true or false. I do not pretend that the result of any such trial is demonstrative. Testimony strikes different minds differently. But I think there is enough of evidence of a divine work in these " fruits" Ihave presented, at the leant, to make any devout and thoughtful person Avho is 34 competent U^ lorm a jii(l;^eiiiotit in tlie matter, liesitute iih to rejec- tion of it an an evil thin