Holy Scripture, that the Christian ministry shall consist of precisely three orders, no more and no less.

A second objection is, that the practice of the Apostles, even though in favor of a three-fold ministry, has only the force of the ordinary practice of all good men.

Each of these objections we shall now notice; and we commend them to the candid attention of our readers-and shall then proceed to present the Scriptural argument itself.

The first objection is, the absence of any express command on the subject. We fully admit that there is no express command in the New Testament, that the Christian ministry shall consist of precisely three orders, and no more or less, and that these shall be called Bishops, Priests, and Dea

cons.

But we meet this objection by answering, that, in the circumstances under which the New Testament was written, an express command, on this point, is not to be expected; that, if the objection proves anything, it proves too much; and, that we have other Scriptural evidence on the subject, which is entitled to the consideration of an express command, and which, as we think, is binding on the consciences of all Christians to the end of time.

1st. An express command on this subject was not to have been anticipated.

Jesus Christ, having conquered death and hell, and by his resurrection from the grave, purchased mediatorial power to establish his Church, committed the planting and organizing of that Church to his inspired Apostles, who were to follow the commandments which He had given them. Acts i. 2. He did not, in his own person, after his resurrection, go forth to preach, or baptize, or plant a single Church. He left this entirely to his Apostles. Neither did he commit to writing a single syllable of the doctrines of his Gospel. Not a word did He himself leave on record, while "there were many other things which Jesus did, which were never recorded by the Evangelists or Apostles." John xxi. 25.

Now, what is particularly important, as bearing upon this point, is, that the writings of the New Testament were wholly written several years, probably at least twenty years, "after the ascension of our Lord, and consequently after the Church had become already well established," (Burton's His. Chris. Ch., chap. iv., p. 124), while there is reason to believe that some portions of the New Testament were not received until after the close of the first century. "The Epistle to the Hebrews, that of Jude, the second Epistle of Peter, and the second and third of John, were among the number." Burton's His. Chris. Ch., chap. vii., p. 173.

This very important, and too often forgotten his

torical fact throws great light upon the subject before us. The writings of the New Testament were addressed to Churches already established and organized. While, therefore, there could have been no occasion for an express command of that which already existed, we might have anticipated that these Scriptures would recognize a ministry as already existing, and so it is.

Is it said in reply, that on such an important subject more might have been expected to be revealed, and that one explicit direction would have put to flight the disputes and controversies of centuries? Let us not attempt to be wiser than God. He has chosen his own way to reveal his will. Doubtless there are great uses in what are termed "moral uncertainties." Had everything been defined in Scripture with rigid mathematical precision, there could have been less occasion for the graces of patient investigation, and of a childlike, docile disposition; and while infidelity would have put on less show of reason, yet truth could not have rewarded its votaries with so bright a crown.

But again. The objection, if it prove anything, proves too much. It is surprising that they who press this objection so strongly against the ministry, do not perceive to what extremities the objection will drive them, if they will act consistently with themselves. Are we to receive no doctrine of the Gospel, no ordinance of the Church, which is not taught explicitly by a well defined proposition, and

enforced by the authority of an express command, "Thus saith the Lord?" And yet, the objection amounts to all this. On what explicit command then, do we believe the doctrine on the Holy and Adorable Trinity? or of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son? On what express command of God do we receive and observe the Christian Sabbath, as a Divine institution? Where is there an explicit direction in the Holy Scriptures to administer the Sacrament of Baptism to Infants? And yet each of these doctrines of the Holy Trinity, of the procession of the Spirit from the Father and the Son, of the Christian Sabbath, and of Infant-Baptism, is incorporated into the standards of these objectors, as vital doctrines in the Christian system.

We are reasoning with them who reject a threefold ministry, on the ground of the want of an explicit command; and we say to them most confidently, that they must withdraw that objection, on the ground of its invalidity, or else they must abandon the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, and the doctrine of the Christian Sabbath, and the doctrine of Infant-Baptism. The objection, therefore, if it prove anything, proves too

much.

Again. We notice, next, the other objection, that the practice of Inspired Apostles, even if ascer tained, does not give to the institutions by them

established, the binding force of authority on the Church in time to come.

There is an important principle involved here, of which we must not lose sight. The question is simply this: What claim have institutions, established by the Inspired Apostles, upon the Church, in all time to come? Were they establishing institutions peculiar to their own age, and of course temporary and local in their character; or were they establishing institutions for the universal Church of God, for the Church, in all ages, and under all circumstances? The answer to this important question is, that the Apostles were called, appointed, qualified, and sent forth, to lay the foundations of the Church of God-foundations which can never be overturned-foundations firm as the everlasting hills, established on the everlasting rocks, and against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail. This question is a broad question, and does not apply simply to the ministry of Christ, but it has also its bearing equally upon the doctrines which they preached, upon the Scriptures which they wrote, or had the care of writing, upon the other ordinances, institutions, which distinguish Christianity. In regard to all these points we receive the testimony of the Word of God-that "the Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone." Eph. ii. 20.

These were the men, to whom the Great Head