No separation of individuals to a specifick office and ministry could indeed be more solemn and imposing. It was performed by our Lord in person, after his resurrection from the dead, and even under these circumstances was not fully completed. They were still to remain at Jerusalem, and wait for the promise of the Father. They were still to elect another to take part of this ministry and apostleship, from which Judas by transgression fell. They were still to be baptized with the Holy Ghost and with fire, before they could venture to act as ambassadors for Christ. And does this look as if their rights and privileges might be assumed by others, at pleasure. Does this look, as if any person, upon his own mere motion, or guided by some fancied call from God, could presume to exercise gifts and graces, thus solemnly and authoritatively conferred. To me, it speaks a very different language. To me, it reserves all original and inherent power to Christ. It confers it, after a delegated manner only, upon the eleven, and confides to them the responsible office, of being his ministers to the uttermost parts of the earth, of preaching his gospel, and founding his Church, wherever there were eyes to see, and ears to hear, and souls to save.

To what has been already advanced, I have therefore to remind you, that in every correct definition of a Church, you must invaríably associate with it, the idea of officers, deriving their authority from its great head, and by him empowered to discharge its ministry, and perpetuate its existence. In this particular, it corresponds with all societies of human invention. You never heard of one, without its appropriate officers. Its very existence depends upon them. The moment it is formed, they are chosen. Without some presiding power, every thing relating to it would be involved in inextricable anarchy and confusion. It would be thus, with all literary and humane societies. It would be thus, with all the governments upon the earth. Our own would cease to exist, if there were no longer any provision for the election and appointment of men to administer it, according to the constitution and the laws. You are even aware, that with us, they must be elected with certain qualifications, and after a prescribed form and manner, or the nation would regard them in the light of usurpers, and refuse obedience to their illegitimate authority. Nor was the Church of Christ deemed, by its divine founder, of less value and importance than the societies and governments of this world. He has rather given

to it, an authorized ministry. He has rather promised to be with it "always, even unto the end of the world.”

And now comes the question of greatest moment to those, who would enlist under the banners of the true Apostolick Church, and the ministry, it has received of the Lord Jesus. A vast multitude of sects are known to claim it, but as we have already seen, that it is one, and that "there should be no schism in the body," in other words, no sects, where is it to be found? I answer, wherever the officers in question are duly called and ordained. Wherever, according to the institution of the Apostles, endued with power from on high, there are these three orders in the ministry; deacons, authorized to preach the gospel and baptize; priests or presbyters, having the additional authority to commemorate the death and sufferings of Christ, in the holy eucharist; and bishops, who alone possess the greater power of celebrating the holy rites of confirmation and ordination. And to convince you, that this is the doctrine of our protestant Episcopal Church, I shall here recite the twenty third article of her creed. "It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of publick preaching, or ministering the sacraments in the congregation, before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same. And those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and called to this work by men who have publick authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's Vineyard."

In the preface to her ordination services, she is still more explicit and declares, "It is evident unto all men, diligently reading holy Scripture and Ancient Authors, that from the Apostles' time there have been these Orders of Ministers in Christ's Church,— Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. Which Offices were evermore had in such reverend estimation, that no man might presume to execute any of them, except he were first called, tried, examined, and known to have such qualities as are requisite for the same; and also by publick Prayer, with imposition of hands, were approved and admitted thereunto by lawful Authority. And therefore, to the intent that these Orders may be continued, and reverently used and esteemed in this Church, no man shall be accounted or taken to be a lawful Bishop, Priest, or Deacon, in this Church, or suffered to execute any of the said Functions, except he be called, tried, exam

C

ined, and admitted thereunto, according to the Form hereafter following, or hath had Episcopal Consecration or Ordination."

It is scarcely possible to conceive of language more plain and unequivocal than this. It conveys opinions entirely coincident with my own. An episcopalian upon principle, I do most sincerely and conscientiously believe them. Not however, because they have been drawn up by divines eminent for their piety, and renowned for their theological learning; but because they have their foundation in the scriptures of truth, and are susceptible of a defence, as solid and substantial as those scriptures themselves. You must bear with me, Brethren, while I pursue it; while I endeavour to convince you upon this subject, as I am myself convinced, by a species of evidence, that taken as a whole, amounts to the demonstration produced by figures, which cannot lie. If there be any failure, with minds open to rational conviction, it must result from the weakness of the advocate, and not from the absence of ample proof to be gained from the bible, and most triumphantly corroborated by the written testimony of the primitive Fathers of the Church.

A good logician often commences a train of reasoning with the least satisfactory argument, gradually proceeding to the more powerful and convincing, and determined as I am to be very full, as well as free, in this discussion, I shall adopt the same method, and maintain, in the first instance, the scriptural origin of the min istry of the Church, upon the ground of analogy.

You are probably aware of the almost universal opinion prevailing among Christians, concerning types and antitypes. Types in theological language are emblems, by which something future is prefigured, and antitypes constitute whatever, when it actually transpires, is thus prefigured. The former are found in the old testament, the latter in the new. Abel, for example, was a type of Christ, and is so accounted by the Apostle, who tells us that "the blood of sprinkling speaketh better things than that of Abel." The intended sacrifice by Abraham, of his only son Isaac, is another, and evidently shadows forth the future sacrifice of the only begotten Son of God, upon the accursed tree, in order to secure the redemption of the world, and the forgiveness of sins. St. Paul indeed assures us, in general terms, that "the law was a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things." And

this too, at the very time, that he is speaking of the priesthood of Christ, and the offering up of his body upon the Cross once for all.

It is consequently, very generally admitted, that all the Mosaick institutions were typical of the Christian, that we have rites and ceremonies in the Christian, which exactly correspond, with those ordained of God, to be used in the Jewish Church. Baptism affords a familiar and well known illustration. It comes in the place of circumcision, and as such is frequently referred to by the sacred writers, and by Christ himself, when reproving the blindness of Nicodemus, for not comprehending baptism, as the instituted mode of admission into his spiritual kingdom, he asks," Art thou a master of Israel, and knowest not these things?" Is your memory so treacherous as to forget, that by circumcision you have been personally admitted a member of the Church of Israel?

The Lord's Supper is another. It answers to the feast of the passover among the Jews. It was even instituted by our Saviour, when he was commemorating that ancient rite, and is expressly recognised by St. Paul, as being established in its room. "Christ our passover is sacrificed for us: Therefore let us keep the feast, not with old leaven, neither with the leaven of malice and wickedness; but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth."

With these remarkable coincidences existing, between the Churches of the old and new dispensations, we might therefore, Brethren, very naturally look for another resemblance in the order of men, who were set apart to administer the respective sacraments of the law and gospel. And we have it. In the Jewish Church, there were three orders in the ministry, the high priest, priest, and Levite. The first, having greater dignity and power, than the second, and the second, than the third. In the Christian Church, the same distinction in relation to number and authority has always obtained. It was thus during the actual ministry of Christ. He himself occupied the first rank, the twelve Apostles, the second, and the seventy disciples, the third.

And certainly, this argument founded upon analogy, upon the types and antitypes of the scriptures, derives peculiar force from the consideration, that our blessed Saviour is perpetually described, in the epistle to the Hebrews, by the very name, which was applied to the chief minister among the Jews. "Wherefore, holy Brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High

Priest of our profession, Christ Jesus;" and again, "seeing then that we have a great High Priest, that is passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God, let us hold fast our profession. For we have not a High Priest, which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as we are, yet without sin." Here also we are to bear in mind, that as among the Jews, so in this case the very name of High Priest implied superiority in station, that there must be inferiour priests, and these, as you have seen, were not wanting to complete the analogy contended for. They existed in the persons of the Apostles and of the seventy disciples.

And now I ask; Was all this a matter of accident or of design? A matter of accident, that Paul called our Saviour, a High Priest, and that he himself selected two separate classes of inferiour ministers, the one, for his constant, the other, for his occasional attendants? To me, it most clearly shows the actual accomplishment of Paul's declaration, that the law was a shadow of good things to come; a shadow, amongst other particulars, of the Church, the sacraments, and the priesthood of the gospel. For accident, I abjure the word as applicable to any thing performed under the auspices of Christ. For design, I embrace it on ground, which cannot be shaken, the accommodation of the new to the old dispensation, in every instance where purely spiritual things were prefigured. The sacraments of the Christian Church are not more essential to its existence, than is its priesthood. If a comparison must be formed, they are evidently of minor importance. For "how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they preach, except they be sent." If the former then were typified, why not the latter? Why this supposed distinction, between the sacramental means of grace, and the individuals authorized to administer them? The truth is, there is none. It never did and it never can exist. Unless you blend together the High Priest of our profession, the Apostles, and seventy disciples, unless you deny that there was any official difference of rank between them, I have satisfactorily proved, that our Saviour Christ had an eye to the three orders in the Jewish hierarchy, when at this early period he contemplated the future establishment of his own more glorious Church and ministry,