apostles were not as the bishops of the Church in subsequent times. They were men specially raised up, and enlightened in their capacity of bishops, after a manner extraordinary and supernatural. They could not err in writing. They could not err in believing. They could not err in making laws for the government of the Church. They possessed individually, that which Catholics claim for the whole Church and for its head. They were all and each of them infallible. Peter was the governor of them all; but each of them from the special light and grace that he received from above was irresponsible for the exercise of his ministry, as a founder and governor of the Church. And Peter knew this well. Why, therefore, need he interfere with their appointments of "bishops," or why should we expect to find him recasting their institutions or remodelling their laws? Each of the apostles was in principle subjected to Peter, but in fact, we may suppose him to have been independent in the exercise of his apostolic powers. Did the jurisdiction of bishops, then, come through the apostles, without any reference to the primatial power? Not necessarily, as far as the Scripture is concerned, because the primacy of Peter might have been the fountain of all jurisdiction communicating its effects tacitly, and not overtly, or by express agreement, conferring the plenitude of episcopal authority on all the appointments made by the apostles, without a reference to them individually.

We may suppose, therefore, and our supposition has firm foundation in the Sacred Scripture, that the primacy conferred on St. Peter was given with a view to succeeding ages principally. It was so extensive, and the sphere of its operation was so varied, and its functions were so defined that it was not given as a mere power to be dormant in its original possessor, and then to expire for ever; but as its activias from circumstances restricted in the apostolic age, it was born for times succeeding, to outlive the first century, and to be developed by time, and to grow, in fact, and practice gradually but surely into the mighty proportions assigned it by the lips of wisdom undeceiving and infallible.

DIVISION VI.

THE CLERGY AND THE RITES THEY ADMINISTERED.

Who were the επισκοποι, πρεσβυτεροι, and

διακονοι ?

Protestant version. (Oxf. 1839.)

"For a bishop must be blameless."-Tit. i. 7.

"Paul and Timotheus. ... .to all the saints... with the bishops and deacons."-Philip. i. 1.

"Likewise must the deacons be grave.”—1 Tim. iii. 8.

"Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife."-1 Tim. iii. 12.

Catholic version. (Dublin, 1840.)

"For a bishop must be without crime."-Tit. i. 7.

"Paul and Timothy . . . to all the saints . with the bishops and deacons."-Philip. i. 1.

"Deacons in like manner be chaste."-1 Tim. iii. 8.

"Let deacons be the husbands of one wife."-1 Tim. iii. 12.

دو

I give here, in parallel columns, the English Catholic and Protestant translations of the words, episcopus, presbyter, and diaconus, in all the passages in which they occur in the Sacred Scriptures of the New Testament. From an examination of these texts, it appears that the compilers of the authorized version do not approve of the translation "priest" for ρεσ¤νтεроç, whereas they have no objection to render the words επισκοπος and διάκονος " bishops and "deacons"; whilst the Catholic translators are SO far consistent that they depart from the literal meaning in the three cases equally. The word επισκοπος does not literally mean a bishop, but an overseer, and the translation the Protestants give it in Acts xx. is in consequence literally correct. The word Staкovos means literally a minister or distributor. The Scriptural meaning of a word is, however, often different from its literal meaning; and thus it is that, according to the Protestants, two of the words in question, and, according to the Catholics, all three appear in the Scriptures in an English dress in which they would be quite a mystery to those who used them formerly, as parts of their vernacular language. This controversy will have little to say to the question we are now about to discuss, namely, "Who were the clergy of the primitive Church, and what were their functions?" and in reference to it I deem it expedient to make but one or two remarks. 1st. The German word Priester, and the

دو

old French word préstre, and the English word priest, are all evidently modifications of the word πρεσβυτερος, and they are all used to designate one who offers sacrifice. It would appear, therefore, that the Catholic translators of the Sacred Scriptures into English had a very general usage in their favour when they gave the word "priest as a proper translation for the word TрeoßUTEρos, as it occurs in the New Testament. 2nd. The word πρεσBUTEpos occurs eighteen times in the Scriptures of the Old Testament. In all these places it is translated by the Catholic divines of Douay, "ancients," with the exception of the Book of Daniel, where it is invariably translated "elder." If it were similarly translated in the New Testament, it might appear that the TOEGẞUTEρo of the primitive Church were the same as the peoẞUTEρOL of the Jews. Now, the πρεσβυτεροι of the Jews are always distinguished from the ɛpeç, or sacrificing ministers; and they were simply the presidents of the synagogues in the towns of Judea, or the members of the great council of the Sanhedrim at Jerusalem. The πρεσβυτεροι οι the primitive Church were not such. Their ordination and functions invested them with quite a different cha

racter.

It was, then, to say the least of it, reasonable to give the word "peoẞureρos a different translation in the New Testament from that which it had in the Old; but whether it was properly rendered, "a priest or a "sacrificing minister," will appear in the sequel of what we are about to say.

Who, then, were the πρεσβυτεροι, επισκοποι, and diakovo, that are so often mentioned in the Acts of the Apostles, and the writings of St. Paul, and what were their functions ? The πρεσβύτεροι, επισκοποι, and διακονοι, in question, were ordained ministers of the primitive Church. In stating that they were ordained ministers, I mean that they received an external rite which conferred upon them an internal grace for the due performance of their functions; or, in other words, that they received the

sacrament of holy orders by which they were consecrated to the service of religion and the Church. This I believe to be the first characteristic of the πρεσβυτεροι, επισκοποι, and διακονοι; and I further believe that the solid grounds of this conviction must be clearly evinced from an accurate examination of various texts regarding them which are found in the New Testament. I take here a sacrament to mean an external rite which confers an internal grace. In reality, it means more, because an external rite conferring grace would not be a sacrament, according to the orthodox view, unless it were instituted by Christ, destined to be permanent, and producing grace by virtue of its due performances, as distinguished from the dispositions of the recipient.

I purposely limit the meaning of the word sacrament to the two characteristics first mentioned, because if they are shown to have belonged to the ordinations of the primitive church, the three latter will follow as an easy consequence. The rite of ordination by which the επισκοποι, πρεσβυτεροι, and διακονοι were constituted such, was an external rite. Here are numerous examples. St. Paul, after instructing Timothy as to the qualities of the , men to be ordained, adds—“ Impose not hands lightly upon any man, neither be partaker of other men's sins." 1 The men who are alluded to are designated &TIOKOTOι by St. Paul, in the second verse of the third chapter of the same epistle. The ordination of St. Paul and Barnabas who were επισκοποι and πρεσβυτεροι, is thus announced in the Acts of the Apostles. "Then they fasting and praying, and imposing hands upon them, sent them away." Then we have the ordination of the Stakovou in the sixth

chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. "These they set before the apostles; and they praying imposed hands upon them."3 Timothy, an επισκοπος, is reminded of his ordination by St. Paul. "Neglect not the grace that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with imposition of the hands of the priesthood."4 And again, the same to

1 1 Tim. v. 22. 2 Acts xiii. 8.

3 Acts vi. 6.

1 Tim. iv. 14.