Page 6, line 25.

Hooker's summary of his third book is as follows: "The mat ters wherein Church polity is conversant are the public religious duties of the Church, as the administration of the word and sacraments, prayers, spiritual censures, and the like. To these the Church standeth always bound. Laws of polity are laws which appoint in what manner these duties shall be performed.

"In performance whereof, because all that are of the Church cannot jointly and equally work, the first thing in polity required is a difference of persons in the Church, without which difference those functions cannot in orderly sort be executed. Hereupon we hold that God's clergy are a state, which hath been and will be as long as there is a Church upon earth, necessary by the plain word of God himself; a state whereunto the rest of God's people must be subject as touching things that appertain to their souls' health. For where polity is it cannot but appoint some to be leaders of others, and some to be led by others. lead the blind, they both perish. It is with the persons be respected, even as it is with other men: their quality many times far beneath that which the dignity of their place requireth. Howbeit according to the order of polity, they being the lights of the world, others (the better and wiser) must that way be subject unto them.

If the blind

clergy, if the

“Again, forasmuch as where the clergy are any great multitude, order doth necessarily require that by degrees they be distinguished; we hold there ever have been, and ever ought to be, in such cases at least wise two sorts of ecclesiastical persons, the one subordinate to the other; as to the Apostles in the beginning, and to the Bishops always since, we find plainly, both in Scripture and in all ecclesiastical records, other ministers of the word and sacraments have been.

"However it cannot enter into any man's conceit to think it lawful, that every man which listeth should take upon him charge in the Church; and therefore a solemn admittance is of such necessity, that without it there can be no Church polity.

"A number of particularities there are which make for the more convenient being of these principal and perpetual parts in ecclesiastical polity, but yet are not of such constant use and necessity in God's Church. Of this kind are times and places appointed for the exercise of religion; specialties belonging to the public solemnity of the word, the sacraments and prayer; the enlargement or abridgment of functions ministerial depending upon those two principals before mentioned; to conclude, even whatsoever doth by way formality and circumstance concern any public action of the Church. Now although that which the Scripture hath of things in the former kind be for ever permanent, yet in the latter both much of that which the Scripture teacheth is not always needful, and much the Church of God shall always need which the Scripture teacheth not.

"As for those marvellous discourses whereby they adventure to argue that God must needs have done the thing which they imagine was to be done, I must confess I have often wondered at their exceeding boldness therein. When the question is whether God have delivered in Scripture (as they affirm he hath) a complete, particular, immutable form of Church polity, why take they that other both presumptuous and superfluous labour to prove he should have done it; there being no way in this case to prove the deed of God, saving only by producing that evidence, wherein he hath done it? But if there be no such thing apparent upon record, they do as if one should demand a legacy by force or virtue of some written testament, wherein there being no such thing specified, he pleadeth that there it must needs be, and bringeth arguments from the love or good will which the testator always bore him; imagining that these or the like process will convict a testament, to have that in it which other men can no where by reading find. In matters which concern the actions of God, the most dutiful way on our part is to search what God hath done, and with meekness to advance that, rather than to dispute what he in congruity of reason ought to do. The ways which he hath whereby to do all things for the greatest good of the Church are more in number than we can search, other in nature than that

F

When

we should presume to determine which of many should be the fittest for him to choose, till such time as we see he hath chosen of many some one; which one we then may boldly conclude to be the fittest, because he hath taken it before the rest. we do otherwise, surely we exceed our bounds; who and where we are we forget; and therefore needful it is that our pride in such cases be controlled, and our disputes beaten back, with those demands of the blessed Apostle, How unspeakable are his judgments, and his ways past finding out! who hath known the mind of the Lord, or who was his counsellor ?"" Hooker's works, vol. i. pages 523, 525.

Page 9, line ult.

To the same effect Bishop Taylor: "In the Apostles there was something extraordinary, something ordinary. Whatsoever was extraordinary, as immediate mission, unlimited jurisdiction, and miraculous operations; that was not necessary to the perpetual regiment of the Church, for then the Church should fail when these privileges extraordinary did cease. It was not, therefore, in extraordinary powers and privileges that Christ promised his perpetual assistance; not in speaking of tongues, not in doing miracles; in these, Christ did not promise perpetual assistance, for then it had been done, and still these signs should have followed them that believe, but we see they do not. It follows then, that in all the ordinary parts of power and office, Christ did promise to be with them to the end of the world; and therefore there must remain a power of giving faculty and capacity to persons successively, for the execution of which Christ promised perpetual assistance. For since this perpetual assistance could not be meant of abiding with their persons, who in a few years were to forsake the world, it must needs be understood of their function, which must be either succeeded to, or else it was temporary in their persons. But in the extraordinary privileges of the Apostles, they had no successors, therefore, of necessity must be constituted in the ordinary office of apostolate. Now what is this ordinary office? most certainly, since the extraordinary

was only a help for the founding and beginning, the other are such as are necessary for the perpetuating of a Church. Now in clear evidence of sense, these offices and powers are preaching, baptizing, consecrating, ordaining, and governing. For these were necessary for the perpetuating of a Church, unless men could be Christians that were never christened; nourished up to life without the eucharist; become Priests without calling of God and ordination; have their sins pardoned without absolution; be members and parts and sons of a Church whereof there is no coadunation, no authority, no governor. There the Apostles had, without all question, and whatsoever they had, they had from Christ, and these were eternally necessary; these then were the offices of the apostolate, which Christ promised to assist for ever; and this is that which we now call the order and office of episcopacy." Works, vol. vii. page 11.

I must add a quotation from Field: "There were some things proper and peculiar to the Apostles, and not communicable to any other of the ministers of Christ, appointed by him for the gathering together of his saints. The first was, immediate vocation; the second, infallibility of judgment; the third, generality of commission to do all things pertaining to the ministry of salvation, in all places and towards all persons; the fourth, the speaking in all the tongues and languages of the world, the knowledge of all secrets, and power to confirm their doctrine by signs and miracles, and by the imposition of their hands, to give the like miraculous gifts of the Spirit to others. And as these things were reserved as proper and peculiar unto the Apostles, and not communicated to any other in their time, so are they not passed over to their aftercomers by succession; but instead of immediate calling we have now succession; instead of infallibility of judgment, the direction of their writings, guiding us to the finding out of the truth; instead of general commission, particular assignation of several churches to rule, and parts of Christ's flock to feed; instead of miraculous gifts, and the Apostles' power so confer them, a settled course of schools and universities, fitting men for the work of the ministry; instead of their miracles, wherewith they confirmed their doctrine, the faith already received, and by so many genera

tions recommended unto us, as confirmed by miracles at the first." Of the Church, Book v. chap. 22.

King Charles, in his discussion with the Parliamentary Commissioners, states this point very clearly: "Although the Apostles had no successors in eundem gradum, as to those things that were extraordinary in them, as namely, the measure of their gifts, the extent of their charge, the infallibility of their doctrine, and the having seen Christ in the flesh; but in those things that were not extraordinary, (and such those things are to be judged which are necessary for the service of the Church in all times, as the office of teaching and the power of governing are,) they were to have and had successors; and therefore the learned and godly Fathers and Councils of old times did usually stile Bishops, successors of the Apostles, without ever scrupling thereat."

Page 10, line 9.

"If it be asked how we can know what practices must be observed and what may be laid aside? I answer, as we know articles of faith from lesser truths; as we know occasional doctrines from perpetual doctrines; that is, from the nature of the thing, from the tenor of Scripture, and the testimony of antiquity."-Law's Second Letter to Bishop Hoadly, page 98.

"Some kinds of ceremonious prescriptions fell from them which were meant to be only local and temporary. Those we have no reason to think ourselves obliged to; but those which they left for the administration of God's Church, it shall be high presumption in any to alter. Because the Apostles did but meet together divers times on the first day of the week, and St. Paul ordered that day for the laying aside their collections, and that is only called the Lord's Day by the Apostle; how strongly are the vehement opposites of episcopacy wont to maintain that day, in succession to the Jewish Sabbath; and that in all points unalterable by human authority! Surely had they but the tenth part of that plea from the Apostles for this their Judaical-Evangelical Sabbath, which we have for an episcopacy, they would make us feel the