The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1890-10-05
CHRISTIAN UNITY.
VIEWS OF THE REV. HARTLEY CAR
MICHAEL.

=
Church - The Question of Apostolic
order and Observation-Disclosures Prac-
tice.
In his sermon at St. Paul's church
Sunday night, the rector, the Rev.
Hartley Carmichael, preaching upon
the first ten verses Of the second chap
ter to the Galatians, said: 1T is fire.
quently urged by those who are ex-
IRENE advocates of the especially divine
right of the Episcopal form OF church
government that it Is in direct sue
cession to the Apostolic order. This
position is based upon arguments which
assume not only uniform mode
of appointment in the early Church, but
also the notion that divine favor Of a
form of government made that govern
ment divine. In proof of this position
it is argued that there we're ever three
orders in the ministry: that in Apos-
tolic times these orders were apostles,
presbyteis. or bishops, and deacons.
As the p )stles died, it il alleged, their
places were taken by the bishops, thus
once more forming The three orders,
bishops, presbyters. and deacoDs.
Now. let us consider this position.
FIRST. as to the absolute nsces-
sity for the evidence OF three orders;
and three orders only. Ii is said that
there were three orders under the
Jewish dispensation. and that it is tit
there should be the like number in the
primitive Christian Church. This is
not to the point. Christianity is not
responsible for the forms Of Judaism,
nor have we any reason to believe that
it should to any extent be bound to fol-
low that creed's ceremonial system.
As to the question of fact whether or
not these were the three orders and ~
only in apostolic times there is album
dant proof to suppose the negative con-
clusion. Ia the churches gener-
ally we read of apostles. elders.
bishops, deacons officers called
angels. In the Corinthian Church
there evidently existed num-
Der of orders. St. Paul speaks Of
diversiiies of mnistratioDs therein
and follows the statement up by emu
merating apostles. prophets, teachers,
miracle workers, healers. helpers. and
wise councillors. Amongst the Ephe-
slams we find an equally large though
somewhat differently arranged organ
ization. We read in the epistle written
TO that Church of apostles. prophets.
evangelists pastors, and teachers. Any
one who honestly studies his New Tes
lament will find it hard to ac-
knowledge that in the early Apos-
tolc days there were only three
orders, nay, will rather incline to the
view that order at that time varied
according to necessity aud circumstan-
ces.
The further statement of the extreme
school aforementioned. that the orders
of an apostle with episcopal powers
were conferred by St. Paul on Timothy
and Titus, is one in support of which
there is not particle of evidence
These men had no apostolic qualiflca
tions, their Office was unlike that of an
apostle. They were appolnted-not to
go forth and preach. but to preserve
order in newly constituted churches:
to ordain elders. Even this latter COM
mission does not prove that they were
numbered with St. Paul and the twelve,
for formal ordination. in the earli-
est stages Of The Church S history, was
not limited to the apostolic order.
Barnabas and Saul were ordained to
the apostleship itself. not by the twelve.
but by certain prophets and teachers OF
the Church at Antioch.
There is yet another link in this
argument whose weakness we feel
bound to point out. 1t is said that
whle in apostolic times the terms bishop
and presbyter were interchangeable
yet that soon after the deceaseof the
first apostles the term bishop came
to be applied to the Apostolic order
Of the ministry. Here again we are
struck with the absence of evidence.
The opinion is first found in Theoderet
who wrote some four hundred years
after Christ, and whose witness as Il
primitive use must consequently be OF
but little value. la contemporaneou:
apostolic history there is no evidence OF
such a change. There we find the office
of the apostle and of the bishop per-
ltCtll ulStiuCl- OHt uulNtlSdl, but
other particular. Ignatius. who wrote
a few years after the death of st. John
and whose witness is therefore valu
able, in his episties distinguishes be
tween a bishop and apostle. Il do not
command you, he says, las Peter and
Paul: they were apostles. Moreover
IN such writings as the epistles OF
Clement. and the writings of Hierone.
mus works whose evidence on the point
would he of value, we find no trace OF
the Identification OF the apostolic and
episcopal orders.
The truth is that no one established
form of church government can be
found in the New Testament. Every
little church managed its own affairs.
subject 10 the supervision of an apostle.
Whenever they were in difficulty they
applied TO an apostle for advice and d.
rection. AS scriptural church govern.
meDt was government by apostles, it is
quite plain no such form of govern
ment is possible to day. As soon as
the apostles began to die off the ques.
ton of church government became a
serious one. and undoubtedly the form
Vi SONtIHultDt lutu tStdUilsneu was
emphatically Episcopal.
Episcopacy dates from the latter
years Of st. John, and it is no
mere boast, but fact, which is
recorded in the preface to the ordinal
that from the apostles days there have
been the three orders. Every good
Episcopalian believes that Episcopacy
was established with the sanction OF
the apostles. and that after their death
it was the sole, ancient, and primitive
plan of church government. But be-
yond that the argument does not go.
All limitations of the benefit of the
sacraments TO Episcopal churches, doc
trines of bishop being sole SUCCESSORS
of the apostles as guardians of the Holy
Ghost, are traditions of men founded or
nothing but human pride and human
intolerance.
Another topic suggested to US by this
chapter is that of Christian unity, a
term now much misunderstood, if not
wilfully abused. Churches and sects
have pleaded its claims as a reason for
separating from the body of Christen-