of the Master Builders. Let us now take a summary view of the foundations of episcopacy, as they appear in the Word of God.

Had the Scriptures been silent, analogy would have afforded ground for presuming that the Church of Christ was never to consist of disgregated members, having no common bond of sympathy, no common principle of action, and utterly dead to those social propensities, which were either originally implanted by God in the breast of man, or so powerfully impressed upon him by his necessities, that they seem part of his nature, and, in every age and country, have influenced both his religious and civil relations. But both Jesus himself and his Apostles have expressly, and under a variety of figures, represented His Church as a community', with that appropriation of powers and subordination of offices, which are necessary to the order and welfare of any society. They have likened it to a kingdom; to an household with servants and rulers of servants2; to a body3 with mem

might require a change in the outward circumstances of its members, whether rulers or subjects, without affecting the principles of the society itself. Would a Christian nobleman, for example, think he was acting contrary to the principles of religion, because he did not, as the early Christians, lay his possessions at the Bishops' feet?

1 The very designation of the Church indicates that those who compose it have, as it were, been chosen and called out from the world, to form themselves into a religious community.

2 Luke xii.

3

1 Cor. xii.

bers, each having their proper functions; to an house "built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone1." He, who recognized this social principle in His Church, did not leave it without a model of government, to direct those to whom he should commit it at his death, or those their successors, with whom he expressly declared, he would be" to the end of the world." And he not only appointed rulers in his Church, but himself became their pattern, and showed them, by example, that the authority is not to be assumed at pleasure, but only by lawful calling. We are not left to infer this from his acts, which we might have done; we have the express testimony of St. Paul in the Epistle to the Hebrews, that "even Christ glorified not himself to be made an high priest, but He that said unto him, Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee.”

Having been thus consecrated, he calls others to be with him, for the purpose of assisting him in his ministry during his life, to qualify themselves for being witnesses of his truth, and for governing the Church after his departure into glory. With a solemnity suited to the occasion, having passed the whole of the previous night in prayer, he calls the twelve; he gives them a special title-Apostles,

and directs that they are to be with him'. Their number, not their office, twelve, appears to have been ordained with a view to the twelve heads of the tribes; for to Israel was the Gospel preached during the life of Christ, and for some time after. And to this connexion with the twelve tribes, an allusion appears to be made, when Jesus tells the Apostles they shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel'. Afterwards, he sent forth also seventy disciples (probably in both cases fixing the numbers with reference to a number familiar to his countrymen), after the pattern of the seventy* elders in the book of Numbers, who were

1 Mark iii. 14.

2 Luke xxii. 28-30. The strife of the sons of Zebedee for to sit one on the right hand and the other on the left of our Lord, shows the sense they had of the authority of their office. Their authority is not questioned, only their ambition for precedency rebuked.

3 I say number, for there appears no similarity in their office, nor were they called "elders."

4

Vid. Hammond. Dissertationes, &c. Dissert. tertia, cap. iv. §. 18. Heylin. from the xi. Numb. referred to by Hammond, thinks they were 72, six to each of the 12, as the term septuagint and 70 was commonly understood as speaking in round numbers, and, applied to Sanhedrim, to mean 72. The case of Numbers xi. is certainly one very much to the point, where the Lord says, "Gather me 70 men of the elders of Israel ;" and Moses is said to have " gathered the 70 men of the elders," &c. at the tabernacle. But there were still two in the camp upon whom also the Spirit fell, as well as on the rest. With respect to the difference between the office of elders under the Jewish and

inferior to the twelve heads of tribes. No solemnity of prayer precedes their selection: they go forth to preach; they give an account of their mission; and no more is heard of them during our Lord's ministry. They have no place assigned them about his person, no name is appropriated to them, nor is any commission afterwards given to them by Christ or the Spirit, to rule the Church or take his authority. They appear only as a subordinate and secondary class of preachers.

But how different is the case with the Apostles. During Christ's abode upon earth, the authority and regulation of the visible Church, for obvious reasons, centered entirely in Him; the Apostles as yet are merely chosen to minister under Him, to be with Him continually, and to qualify themselves for the important part they were afterwards to act. Only a prospective and subordinate authority had yet been given them'. No independent authority could be needed, or exercised, till his death. But then it is given, and given only to the Apostles,

Christian dispensations, there are some good observations in Townsend's Arrangement of the New Testament, vol. ii. 166, in one of those valuable and condensed notes which enrich that work.

1 Hammond, from the juxta-position of Mar. iii. 14, Luc. xx. 11. 19, Jo. xx. 23, Matt. xxviii. 19, ingeniously argues that the advance of the Apostles by Jesus through the several degrees to the highest order of the ministry may be traced. Vide Dissertationes Quatuor, &c. Dissert. tertia, cap. iv. §. 15—19.

cers.

and with every solemnity which could indicate the extent and the perpetuity of their office. Every thing in this transaction denotes a regular, formal transfer of the power to regulate the Church, and to ordain a succession of governors and other offiSt. Matthew' expressly declares that the government of the Church was delegated to the eleven, and to the eleven only, by Christ himself; that they were convened specially by Him to a particular spot to receive it. He prefaces it by a declaration, that He is supreme in the Church; all power in heaven and in earth had been given to Him; and that in proper time and place they shall receive power. They were to make disciples, as He had done. His commission is universal-all nations are to be taught, by them, all things He had commanded. This could not be accomplished, unless they had power to ordain others to assist them. It was perpetual, for He is to be with those to whom He delegates this office, " to the end of the world" and therefore implies that the Apostles must have the power of ordaining, not only assistants, but also successors, with such powers as the future maintenance and regulation of the Church would require. Not a word appears of any such delegation of his power to the seventy, or to any other bodies or individuals.

If we turn to the Acts of the Apostles, and fol

1 Matt. xxviii. 16.