So in Hermann's Consultation it is said of some of the Anabaptists, that they "dispise the outwarde ministerie and doctrine of the Church, they denie that God worketh by the same. They teache that we muste loke for private illuminations and visions. Wherefore thei avoyed the common sermons of the Church, and holye assembles of the people of Christe, they wythdrawe from the sacraments," etc.1

Such a view as that here condemned can only lead to confusion and disorder, for according to it anyone who claims for himself the Spirit may set himself up as a minister of the word and sacraments, with no commission whatever from any external authority. In opposition to this the statement of the Article is clear and decisive. It falls into two parts, each of which requires some little consideration—

1. The need of an external call and mission.

2. The description of those through whom the call

comes.

I. The Need of an external Call and Mission.

It is not lawful for any man to take upon him the office of public preaching or ministering the sacraments in the congregation (in ecclesia), before he be lawfully called and sent to execute the same. "Called and sent." The two words (which are repeated in the second part of the Article) should be carefully noticed. They refer to distinct things: the call, to the original

1 English translation of 1548, fol. cxlii.

2 Evidently, though this is not stated, by the law of God.

3 It is not clear why throughout this Article, in the heading as well as the body of the Article, ecclesia is rendered by congregation and not by 'hurch.

summons to enter the ministry: the mission, to the commission to execute it in a particular sphere. Unless the need of each of these is recognised there can only arise confusion, as if only the call were necessary different ministers properly ordained might assert rival claims to execute their office in the same place, and the whole principle of Church order would be destroyed. To obviate this they must be "sent to execute the same," as well as called " to the office. Thus the requirement of "mission" follows from the general principle that "God is not a God of confusion, but of peace"; and from the necessity that "all things should be done decently and in order." 1 With regard to the "call" to the ministry, all Christians are agreed that a call from God is necessary before a man can presume to teach and minister in His name. "No man taketh the honour unto himself, but when he is called of God, even as was Aaron," and "how shall they preach except they be sent "? So much is admitted by all. The question really is whether the "inward call" requires to be supplemented by an external one. And here all the evidence from Scripture and antiquity is in favour of insisting upon one from properly constituted authorities. While it cannot be doubted that under the Old Covenant in addition to the regularly constituted priesthood and Levitical ministry, God did from time to time raise up the prophets as His messengers, and send them forth with no commission from men, as he did afterward at the beginning of the gospel in the case of S. Paul, who always claimed to hold his apostolate "not from (ảπó) men, neither through (Stá) men, but through Jesus Christ and God the Father," yet in these cases the call was authenticated by signs which could be recognised and 11 Cor. xiv. 33, 40. Heb. v. 4; Rom. x. 15.

Gal. i. 1.

Feed

can

an

of

h

11.

res,

all

of

es.

it

d

P

h

e

The gift of prophecy and the power of es no longer remaining with the Church, seen that unless the necessity of an

So in Hermann's Cas Anabaptists, that the e and doctrine of the were insisted on, the Church would be at by the same. Theny religious fanatic who might be pleased private illumination taught by the Spirit of God. And so we avoyed the commonatter of fact, from the very first men were holye assembles of he properly constituted authorities of the drawe from the sacred not take upon themselves the ministerial Such a view as t such a call. Thus the seven were " apconfusion and disis KaтаσтńσwμEV) to the ministry by the claims for himself they had been "chosen " (¿§eλéžavto) by a minister of the wititude. Paul and Barnabas "appointed " sion whatever every church (χειροτονήσαντες δὲ αὐτοῖς πρεσβυτέρους κατ ̓ ἐκκλησίαν). Timothy received the gift through (Sia) the laying on of" S. Paul's hands, or, as it is elsewhere said, "through (diá) prophecy, with (μeтá) the laying on of the hands of the presbytery.” 5 Titus is commissioned to "appoint elders in every city," " and Timothy receives full instructions as to the character and qualifications of those who are to be admitted into the ministry. These facts seem quite decisive, and it is a simple fact of history that from the Apostles' day to the present time the Church has always required an

1 See Deut. xviii. 20-22.

"6

2 It will be remembered that the Church of England is equally emphatic in insisting on the need of an "inward call, the first question addressed to candidates for the ministry being this-"Do you trust that you are inwardly moved by the Holy Ghost to take upon you this office and ministration to serve God for the promoting of His glory and the edifying of His people?" Not till this has been satisfactorily answered is the further question put concerning the external call-"Do you think that you are truly called, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the due order of this realm, to the ministry of the Church?"

3 Acts vi. 1-6.

₺ Cf. 2 Tim. i. 6 with 1 Tim. iv. 14.

• Titus i. 5.

Acts xiv. 23.

71 Tim. iii.

those whom she has There is no necessity

external call in the case of all recognised as Christian ministers. to prove this at length; but a single passage may be quoted from the first of the Christian Fathers to indicate how the matter was regarded in the very early times, and the principle of succession laid down

"Our apostles knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that there would be strife over the name of the bishop's office. For this cause therefore, having received complete foreknowledge, they appointed the aforesaid persons, and afterwards they provided a continuance, that if these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed to their ministration. Those, therefore, who were appointed by them, or afterward by other men of repute with the consent of the whole Church, and have ministered unblameably to the flock of Christ . . . these men we consider to be unjustly thrust out from their ministration." "1

II. The Description of those through whom the Call comes. While the Article is perfectly clear in asserting the need of an external call, it cannot be maintained that it

1 Οἱ ἀπόστολοι ἡμῶν ἔγνωσαν διὰ τοῦ Κυρίου ἡμῶν Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ, ὅτι ἔρις ἔσται ἐπὶ τοῦ ὀνόματος τῆς ἐπισκοπῆς. Διὰ ταύτην οὖν τὴν αἰτίαν πρόγνωσιν εἰληφότες τελείαν κατέστησαν τοὺς προειρημένους, καὶ μεταξὺ ἐπιμονὴν δεδώκασιν ὅπως, ἐὰν κοιμηθῶσιν, διαδέξωνται ἕτεροι δεδοκιμασμένοι ἄνδρες τὴν λειτουργίαν αὐτῶν. τοὺς οὖν κατασταθέντας ὑπ ̓ ἐκείνων ἢ μεταξὺ ὑφ ̓ ἑτέρων ἐλλογίμων ἀνδρῶν, συνευδοκησάσης τῆς ἐκκλησίας πάσης, καὶ λειτουργήσαντας ἀμέμπτως τῷ ποιμνίῳ τοῦ Χριστοῦ . . . τούτους οὐ δικαίως νομίζομεν àπoßáλλeσbaι Tîs λecrovpylas.—Ad Cor. I. xliv. On the reading and difficult word érμový see Lightfoot's note, ad loc. The old Latin published by Dom Morin (Anecdota Maredsolana, vol. ii.) seems to have had évoμly, which it rendered by "legem." Whichever be right, and whether kounowow refers to the death of the presbyters or of the apostles themselves, the principle of succession to the ministry, and of the need of an external call to it, is here clearly traced to the appointment of the apostles themselves.

is equally clear in its description of those who are empowered to give this call. Those we ought to judge lawfully called and sent, which be chosen and called to this work by men who have public authority given unto them in the congregation to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard. Who are these men "who have public authority given them in the congregation (ecclesia)? The Article fails to tell us, and its silence on this point is to some extent explained (as we have seen) by the source to which it can be traced. But though an Article on the subject of the ministry, designed to be subscribed by Lutherans and Anglicans, must needs be vague and indefinite, the question may fairly be asked, Why, when the Article was to be signed by Anglicans alone, was not the indefiniteness removed, and a plain statement describing the proper authorities inserted? To this it may be answered that Article XXXV. of 1553 referred definitely to the "book of ordering ministers of the Church" as "godly and in no point repugnant to the wholesome doctrine of the gospel, but agreeable thereto," while the corresponding Article (XXXVI.) of the Elizabethan revision supported the claims of the Ordinal more definitely, asserting that it "doth contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering: neither hath it anything that of itself is superstitious or ungodly. And, therefore, whosoever are consecrated or ordered according to the rites of that book, since the second year of the aforenamed King Edward unto this time, or shall be consecrated or ordered according to the same rites, we decree all such to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered." These citations show that the omission in the Article before us is made up elsewhere, and that the words under consideration are intended to refer to