imperative upon us, as if it had been performed by our blessed Saviour in person. A contrary doctrine would destroy the inspiration, and consequently the authority of the four gospels, and of all the epistles, inasmuch as they were composed subsequently to his ascension. We should have nothing certain, nothing true; no baptism, no supper of the Lord, no ministry, no Church, no cross of Christ, in a word, no religion. But the Holy Ghost was given to them, that they might be guarded from all errour; their divine Lord promised to be with them always, that their acts might be his, and command the reverence and submission of mankind on his, and not on their authority.

Hence when Peter, in company with John, had healed the lame man, and the multitude around greatly wondered, he addressed them in these words, "Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk? The God of Abraham, and of Isaac, and of Jacob, the God of our fathers, hath glorified his Son Jesus;" ;” “And his name, through faith in his name, hath made this man strong, whom ye see and know." Paul also in writing to the Corinthians, concerning the ministry received by himself and his brethren, expressly asserts, "that God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed unto us the word of reconciliation." "Now then" he continues "we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God." And again, speaking of the holy eucharist, and the proper spirit and manner, in which it should be celebrated," I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you." By such strong and convincing language, we therefore easily perceive the interpretation given by the Apostles to the command of Christ, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations." They attempted nothing but through his power. They did nothing, but what he had expressly directed them to do,

Let us examine then the ministry they established, and see if it does not in all particulars correspond with our own, with the three orders of bishops, priests, and deacons, and not with the one order of presbyters or elders. I shall begin with the lowest, because its investigation will not require as much time, as the highest or episcopal rank. In the ordination service of deacons, the ordaining bishop

addresses the candidate in these words, "It appertaineth to the Of fice of a Deacon, in the Church where he shall be appointed to serve, to assist the Priest in Divine service, and specially when he minis tereth the Holy Communion, and to help him in the distribution thereof; and to read holy Scriptures and Homilies," meaning ser mons"in the Church; and to instruct the Youth in the Catechism; in the absence of the Priest to baptize Infants; and to preach, if he be admitted thereto by the Bishop. And furthermore, it is his Office, where provision is so made, to search for the sick, poor, and impotent people of the Parish, to intimate their estates, names, and places where they dwell, unto the Curate, that by his exhortation they may be relieved with the alms of the Parishioners, or others: Will you do this gladly and willingly?" To which the candidate answers, "I will so do by the help of God."

But where is the authority for all this; for ordaining a deacon, and specifying these duties, as appertaining to his office? I find it in various parts of the new testament, and particularly in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, to whose minute recital, I must necessarily claim your indulgent attention. "And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, Brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas, a proselyte of Antioch; whom they set before the Apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them."

And now in justification of our Church; if it should be asked, Why do you ordain deacons? It appears, that the Apostles appointed men to this office and ministry, "and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them." If it should be asked, Why do you call them, deacons? They were diakonein, that is, to "serve" tables, and deacon, from the Greek word, diakonos, signifies a ser

vant, while Paul, in his epistle to Timothy, gives him certain direc tions about "the office of a deacon." If it should be asked, Why should they attend to the sick, poor, and impotent people of the parish, where provision is made for their relief, as it is with us, by alms contributed at the holy communion, where deacons assist the priest, in distributing the bread and wine, thus serving at the highest of all tables, the table of the Lord? It is in conformity to the original cause of their appointment, the "murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration." If it should be asked, Why are they permitted to read sermons in the Church, and to instruct youth in the catechism, and to preach the gospel, if admitted thereto by the bishop, as is always done? It is because the first seven deacons were to be men, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, and because it is said, immediately after their ordination, that Stephen, one of their number, "full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people," so that "certain of the synagogue," "disputing with" him, "were not able to resist the wisdom and spirit by which he spake;" and afterwards, for the very reason, that he persisted in preaching, the people, whom they stirred up, stoned him to death,"calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit." If it should be asked, Why are they allowed to baptize, as well as to preach? It will be found in the eighth chapter of the Acts, that Philip, another of the seven deacons, "went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them;" and "when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women." If it should be asked, Was not the office temporary in its nature, and not designed to be perpetuated in the Church of Christ? I answer, that it was first established, because “the number of the disciples was multiplied," and that this reason for its existence is far more obvious at present, than it was at the period of its original institution. I also find that long after this, Paul addressed one of his epistles "to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." I find in another directed to Timothy, that he writes, "Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience.? And to show, that they were to be admitted by him to this ministry

Paul adds, "let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless."

And now, Brethren, it is my turn to ask, if I have not here presented you with a body of scriptural evidence upon this subject, which is utterly at variance with the modern idea of there being, but one order of Christ's ministers? If I have not shown you, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the office of a deacon, as exercised in our Church, is conformable in every particular to the model furnished by the Apostles, and by them intended to guide and control the practice of Christians to remotest time? It has been thus with episcopalians in every age and nation, and you cannot but perceive, that they have ample authority from the source of all authority to justify their course.

What right then have men to build up Churches where this office is not recognised, or if recognised, only by name; a name, which you know is arbitrary in its nature, and that of itself signifies nothing? It is office, that confers right and power, the lawful, prescribed acts of those, who hold it, which serve to distinguish them from all other individuals. Tell me not then, that there are deacons in the Churches, to which I refer, as well as among episcopalians. Those Churches do not allow them to be ministers of the gospel, for this would add a second order to their ministry, and prove an obvious surrender of their favourite doctrine, that there should be but one. Tell me not of such nominal deacons. They are not the deacons of the scriptures; they do not baptize, as did Philip; they do not preach the gospel; as did Philip and Stephen; they are not separated to this office and ministry by the imposition of hands, as were all those ordained by the Apostles.

And what right, I repeat, what authority is there, for this extraordinary innovation upon the original constitution of the Church? I reply that there is none. None, except that, which is to be traced to the caprice and invention of men. None, which would not equally justify us in abolishing the two sacraments of the gospel, as some denominations of Christians have already done. None, which would not fairly warrant the remark, if we had no personal knowledge of them, that some Christians appear to consider themselves wiser than the Apostles, better acquainted than they were with the mind of Christ, and therefore disposed to mould the Church and its ministry, in accordance with their happier views and sound.. er judgment.

I regret to be obliged to speak thus plainly and decisively; but the cause of truth and of Christ imperiously requires it. I am for rendering honour to whom honour is due. I know and am persuaded, that there is a large amount of piety and devotion to religion, clearly discernible among those, who reject what we esteem to be the ministry, instituted under the direction of our Saviour Christ. But still, none of these things move me to abandon it; none of these prevail with me to give in my adhesion to any body of believers, however respectable, who have renounced the holy office of a deacon, as it was instituted and maintained in the Apostolick and primitive age. He, who departs in one respect from such institutions, sets a dangerous example to others, to depart in many. So long as it is practised, there can be no reasonable hope of holding the faith, in unity of spirit, in the bond of peace and in righteousness of life.”

66

But to proceed. The second order of ministers in our Church is that, to which we apply indiscriminately the names of priest, presbyter, and elder. They are taken from the lowest order upon the principle advanced by St. Paul," they that have used the office of a deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree," in other words, are worthy of promotion. Their ordination is frequently mentioned in the scriptures. Paul and Barnabas, "when they had ordained them elders, presbuterous, in every Church, and had pray. ed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed." And many other passages of the same import might be easily adduced. But it is not necessary. The institution of this office by the Apostles is not denied. There is here no difference of opinion between us and our Brethren of other Churches. All admit its original existence. They however contending, that it is the only order of Christ's ministers. We, that it is the second, that it is subordinate to that of bishops, and without any valid authority to perform the rite of ordination,

So far therefore, Brethren, I have established by clear and unanswerable proof; first, the Apostolick office of a deacon, and second, by admission as well as proof, the equally Apostolick office of a presbyter or priest. I come therefore to the more interesting question, Was there another? In one point of view, there are none that can, or that do deny it. For the twelve Apostles were all liv. ing, at the time, that they ordained elders in every Church, and