bulk of mankind,* it is needful that well qualified persons should be provided, în every generation, to bring their brethren, as far as possible, within reach of that divine instruction, and enable them to understand it. And this office surely cannot be more fitly entrusted to any than to those appointed to lead the public devotions of the Church, and administer its Sacraments. It seems most decorous, convenient, and every way fitting that to these the clergy-should be committed the office of publicly instructing the people in religion.

Now, well-instructed Christians perform, as we have said, this good office for their brethren, partly by translating the words of Holy Scripturet into the mother-tongue of each country;— partly by informing the unlearned of such matters of history, geography, &c., as contribute to making clear its sense; and partly by pointing out the connexion of thought and argument, and by bringing together the various portions of the Sacred Writings, so as to reflect mutual light upon each other. Without such aids, it is manifest, the bulk of mankind could not be brought effectually under the teaching of their inspired instructors; and, even with such aids, it is idle to pretend that the unlearned can be placed in altogether as advantageous a position as those who combine greater knowledge with equal zeal and piety though our efforts should be constantly directed towards removing, as far as possible, all differences of this kind between Christians, and bringing all equally and immediately within hearing of every word which "the Spirit saith unto the churches."

It is, then, necessary, as the immediate means towards the grand end of teaching the way of Salvation, that there should be a body of learned christians in the Church. But the foregoing observations do not at once prove the necessity of a peculiar

* "Greek!" exclaimed a fanatical preacher in the hearing of our informant, "I wonder what St. Paul knew of Greek!" The reader will perhaps wonder what this man knew of St. Paul. Yet something of the same confusion of ideas is not unfrequent, even with persons less sublimely indifferent to knowledge, and to modest inquiry after knowledge, than the hero of our story.

+ It is possible that some of you may have been startled at our remark (in the last Number, and also in No. XIV. p. 282-3) that the translator of any book is virtually a kind of commentator, since he puts before us what is, in his opinion, the sense of each passage. We have, therefore, thought it worth while to append as a note at the end of this Number, a reference to some passages of Scripture, in which a good deal turns on the sense in which certain words and sentences of the original are understood, and in which different translators, each exercising his own judgment on the question, have differed from each other.

Order of teachers—a clergy, as distinct from the laity. Doubtless much may be, and has been done by laymen in the way of christian instruction. The famous Mr. Locke, for instance, has given the Church a Commentary, in many respects highly valuable, upon the Epistles of Paul: and others also, who, like him, never entered the clerical profession, have, like him, contributed much to improve and enlarge men's knowledge of the Scriptures. Indeed, the first translation of the Gospels into the mothertongue of our Saxon forefathers was made by a layman-King Alfred,-who was certainly much better qualified to instruct the people in religion, than hundreds of the clergy at that time in England.

But the need of an Order of appointed teachers results mainly from the importance of having some readily recognisable mark to distinguish well qualified teachers from bad. It is of the greatest importance that the ignorant should know to whom they may safely resort, and not be left to pick up instructors by chance, or select them according to their own whim; and, therefore, it is needful that public authority should set apart some person in each neighbourhood to the office of a public instructor. But the solemn setting a man apart to the ministry of the word is not that which makes him able to discharge that office. It only recognises his previous ability,-declares his qualification for that great work,—and gives him permission to engage in it; just as the Queen's image and superscription do not make the metal they are stamped upon pure gold or silver, but only assure us of the weight and purity of the piece, and so render it a convenient medium of exchange. It is conceivable, indeed, that an assaymaster may be hasty, or even designedly unfaithful; and so the royal stamp might, in some cases, mislead those who trusted to it; but then it is obvious that, under anything like a reasonably good government, the chances of error are lessened, and not increased, by having such an officer.

Vain, therefore, is the cavil which, it may be foreseen, some will raise against what we have been just saying of the necessity of providing in the Church an Order of regularly appointed teachers." Is it not notorious that, in point of fact, not only in Alfred's time, but in our own, some men have been called to the ministry, of slender abilities or learning, and far worse qualified

for the post of instructors, than others, upon whom they look down as mere laymen ?"

True it is that such instances are to be found; and that they probably will continue to occur, more or less, as long as man remains an imperfect Being. Nor is it less true, that the command of a ship or of an army is sometimes intrusted to an incompetent person. But would it, therefore, be wise to abolish all such appointments, and let any man who chose to step into a ship and take the command, or make himself general of an army? Accidents happen on railways from careless or ignorant drivers; but would it mend the matter to have no regular driver, but to let any passenger at his pleasure assume that office?

So also in the Church, and every other kind of institution, it is right that, for any important service, persons should be specially appointed. And the most vigilant care should be used to select fit persons for each office. But if we were to wait till we had attained complete security that no error in the appointment could possibly take place, we should wait for ever.

What leads, however, some incautious people to decry all use of the aid of a fellow-christian in religion is their dread (and it is a just one) of the error of substituting another's knowledge for one's own, and following his directions instead of using his instructions.

But, as we formerly remarked, to employ a lawyer to educate you in law, is widely different from employing him to transact some legal business for you: to apply to a physician to teach you the principles of anatomy and pharmacy, is quite different from calling him in to prescribe for you.

This latter course answers to the case of the Roman-catholic priest; the other to the Protestant pastor.

"Is Ordination then"-it may be asked from an opposite quarter, "nothing more than a mere formal recognition of man's ability to teach, and a mere public permission to exercise his previous ability, like the conferring a degree in a university, or the delivery of a commission in the army?" We are far from saying this. We are far from denying that, in a regular act of ordination, the prayers of the Bishop, the congregation, and the candidate himself, will procure for the person to be ordained the assistance of the Holy Spirit in the discharge of his ministerial

office;-and such assistance as he who thrusts himself, uncalled, into the place of a teacher cannot be justified in expecting. But it is manifest that an unqualified person seeking ordination (however regular in its outward form) is guilty of gross presumption also; and that we have no right to expect that God will miraculously supply, after ordination, those gifts of natural understanding, and those attainments of acquired skill and learning, which the candidate ought to have brought with him to the solemn rite.

To recur, then, to a distinction which we have often made in these papers, because we deem it one of great importance to be understood and remembered-" Authority" to teach publicly in the Church, in the sense of a legal right to exercise that function, is given to every ordained person by the act of ordination itself; but "authority," in the sense of weight or claim to deference, belongs to him only so far as he is qualified to teach, by intellectual and moral fitness; and of this, ordination should serve as a solemn recognition and outward token. The case is similar in civil offices. The delivery of the Great Seal makes a man Lord Chancellor, and thereby gives him "authority”—that is, a legal right to pronounce judgments in Court which shall be binding upon the parties; but it does not make him a good lawyer. His opinion" upon any legal question is neither the better nor the worse for his high dignity; and his "authority," in that sense, is manifestly just the same, the day after he has resigned the seals, as while he held them. But, because we trust that an ignorant lawyer would not be selected for such an office, therefore his promotion to the woolsack, makes even those not familiar with the names of barristers, feel sure that one placed in such a position must be qualified to discharge its duties.

Now, an inference of this kind may be pretty safely made in a free and enlightened country like ours, where the appointment of a notoriously incompetent person to such an office would immediately raise a clamour which no government could stand against. But unhappily it could not be made with equal safety in all countries. Nor could a similar inference be made with equal safety, in the case of ecclesiastical offices, in all Churches, or in the same Church, at all times. Yet you will meet persons, who (from a confusion of thought) entertain the profoundest deference to the decisions of certain ecclesiastical assemblies,

merely because they were composed of Bishops; although history shows that the majority of those Bishops were ignorant or unrighteous men, who decided the questions before them, not by a careful examination of the evidence, but in conformity to partyintrigues or other corrupt influences. And, even apart from corrupt influences or ignorance in the Members of a Council, still its decisions about Articles of Faith, however maturely weighed, can claim small authority (in this sense), if it decide by the application of a false Standard of Doctrine. In such a case the probability will, indeed, be that its decisions are conformable to its standard, but not that they are absolutely true.

The mere machinery, then (so to speak), of an Ecclesiastical Body, may be as perfect in an Unscriptural Church as in a Scriptural one, or even more so. Those rules which only regard order, or the preservation of the society itself, immediately, are (as Paley says) "essential to a good government, but common to it with many bad ones."

Still, they are essential to all governments, and, therefore, it cannot be consistent with christian duty to despise them. Since our Saviour willed that his disciples should not consider themselves so many scattered individuals, but act as members of a society, we are plainly bound to regard, in our conduct, not merely our own best interest, taken separately as single individuals, but the interest of the whole Body. And if it be necessary, for the general interest of the whole Body, that public teachers should be appointed by common authority, in some one particular way, and fixed in particular localities, and governed by some established rules, then it cannot be right for us (except in some case of urgent necessity) to behave as if these things had no existence, or no lawful force.

If we were not members of a church—a religious society— with regularly-appointed teachers, there would be at least no inconsistency in our withdrawing, for very slight reasons, from the ministrations of one person, and availing ourselves of another's. It would be enough to say, that we liked that other better than the first, or felt ourselves more edified by his lectures. But, as members of a church, we cannot act thus without doing what in us lies to encourage others to do the same; that is, to chuse for themselves the instructor whom they like best. And it must be obvious, on a moment's reflection, that if this