man (1 Tim. 5: 22), but commanded him to commit the gospel "to faithful men" who should be "able to teach others also" (2 Tim. 2: 2). He left Titus in Crete, "to appoint elders in every city" (Titus 1: 5). And Clement Romanus, who was contemporary with the apostles, says: "They [the apostles] appointed those [to be presbyters] already mentioned, and afterwards gave instructions that when these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry." Thus the ministry has been continued to the present time; but how were "other approved men" to be designated for the ministry when qualified by the Christ? How was the needed testing of the qualifications to be made? § 121. The recognition of the ministry is made in ordination, which is a formal inquiry and setting apart to the work. The inquiry respects the qualifications, and consequent fitness or unfitness, of the candidate, as called of God for the ministry; and the setting apart is an ecclesiastical act or ceremony formally recognizing him as called of God to be a minister. (1) We should expect to find some setting apart of men to so important and responsible a ministry. It would not only be natural, but expected, since the priests under the ceremonial dispensation were consecrated to their holy office by solemn and elaborate ceremonies. They were anointed and consecrated during seven days, and the ordination separated the priests from the people. None others than the unblemished (Lev. 21: 16-24) and the consecrated could serve at the altar (Ex. 28: 41; 29). In addition, "there was. regular ordination to the office of rabbi, elder, and judge” among the Jews, with "the imposition of hands." 28 (2) The ordination of the New Testament was by the laying on of hands and prayer. The words translated to ordain, in the Authorized Version, are reduced from the prelatical sense into simply, "to become," or "to appoint," by 27 Ep. Cor. i, ch. xliv. 28 Edersheim's Life and Times of Jesus, ii, 382.. the revision. The seven almoners were set apart by the laying on of hands and prayer (Acts 6: 6). Paul and Barnabas were consecrated in a similar manner as foreign missionaries (Acts 13: 3). Timothy was thus ordained by the presbytery of a local church, assisted by Paul (1 Tim. 4: 14; 2 Tim. 1: 6). But imposition of hands was had in cases of converts (Acts 8: 17; 9: 12, 17); and in cases of ordination, "the rite was not universal: it is impossible that, if it was not universal, it can have been regarded as essential." 29 In later times, "the form of ordination or consecration varied. In the Alexandrian and Abyssinian churches it was, and still is, by breathing; in the Eastern Church generally by lifting the hands in the ancient Oriental attitude of benediction; in the Armenian Church, as also at times in the Alexandrian Church, by the dead hand of the predecessor; in the early Celtic Church, by the transmission of relics or pastoral staff; in the Latin Church by the form of touching the head, which has been adopted from it by all Protestant Churches. No one form was universal; no written formula of ordination exists." 30 up (3) The significance of ordination depends upon the theory of the ministry held. If the Christian ministry were a priesthood, as it is not (§ 112), then ordination would be. essential to the work of the ministry, and especially to the administration of the sacraments. But since the function of preaching was opened to laymen, ordination put no gulf between the ministry and the laity, but was only an ecclesiastical recognition of the divine call to the ministry. Christ calls men to be his ambassadors, but they stand to his. churches in relations of vital moment, which require that his call be recognized, not ratified, but ascertained and recognized. "The conception of ordination, so far as we can gather either from the words which are used to designate it, 29 Hatch's Org. Early Christ. Chhs. 131. or from the elements which entered into it, was that simply of appointment and admission to office." "It can hardly be maintained upon this evidence that the ceremony of imposition of hands establishes a presumption, which is clearly not established by the other elements of ordination, that ordination was conceived in early, as it undoubtedly was conceived in later, times as conferring special and exclusive spiritual powers. " 31 (4) Ordination is the ecclesiastical recognition of the ministerial function of the church-kingdom as that function appears in individuals called by Jesus Christ to preach the Word. It is not therefore primarily and fundamentally an inauguration into the pastoral office, as the New England fathers made it, but into the ministry of the Word.33 The function is wider than the pastoral office; it includes as well all evangelistic and missionary labors; and so ordination is to the ministry, which is as wide in its scope as the wants of the church and the work of Christ. 32 (5) Ordination is to be performed by the churches. The apostles, as we have seen (§ 115), had the power of the keys; they might therefore set men apart in ordination to the ministry. But the permanent power of the keys was committed to local churches (§§ 99, 109). They had power to prove the spirits, whether they were of God (1 John 4: 1); to try them who called themselves apostles, and they exercised their power in this respect (Rev. 2: 2); and to set apart by the laying on of hands and prayer (Acts 13: 3; 1 Tim. 4: 14). A Baptist writer goes so far as to say: "The ministry alone confer ordination: in these examples (Acts 6: 6; 13: 1-3; 1 Tim. 4: 14), apostles, presbyters, and evangelists appear as officiating, but in no instance unordained persons." 34 But, in this case, if ordination be necessary to an orderly ministry, then the ministry have the sole right and power of opening and shutting the door to a recognized ministry; and 31 Hatch's Org. Early Christ. Chhs. 130, 132. 33 Boston Plat. part iv, chap. i, § 1. 32 Cambridge Plat. chap. ix, § 2. 34 Harvey's The Church, 84. there results a clerical rule in the churches. We sympathize with our ecclesiastical fathers when they repudiated this clerical ordination. "In general, the ordination of ministers was by the imposition of the hands of their brethren in the ministry; but some churches, perhaps to preserve a more perfect independency, called for the aid of no ministers of any other churches, but ordained their ministers by the imposition of the hands of some of their own brethren." 35 This was sometimes regarded as irregular.36 But it rests on sound principles. There is no priestly or clerical rule in Christian churches. The body that could "prove the spirits,” and try false apostles, and elect its officers, and had the keys of discipline, could recognize those whom the Master sent it as under-shepherds by prayer and the laying on of hands. This is confirmed by the action of the Corinthian church in removing men from the ministry.37 The local churches are the only organs of the Spirit provided for this work of ordination. The church-kingdom chiefly manifests itself in and through them. They are the normal repositories of ecclesiastical power, and the only bodies on which such power was conferred for all time. They are chiefly affected by the ministry, and have consequently the highest reasons for keeping out of the ministry all whom the Lord has not qualified and called. Their conceded independence (§ 109) involves the right and power of ordination. (6) There is no peculiar right or authority conferred by ordination. Ordination does not set the ministry over the churches; it does not end logically or in fact in ministerial rule. No man ordained to the ministry can invade a church to govern it; nor can he unite with others so ordained to form a presbytery to rule it. This ordination is the recognition of those whom Christ has called to the ministry; but a man so ordained must be called to the pastorate (§ 131: 1) 35 Hutchinson's Hist. Mass. i, 374. 37 Clement Romanus, Ep. Cor. chap. xliv. Felt's Eccl. Hist. ii, 267. by the vote of a church before he can have any authority therein, except as a layman in the church of which he is a member. His position as pastor is distinct from the recognition of his divine call as a minister. He may be a minister and not a church officer. And his ordination to the ministry gives him no authority whatever over or in local churches. § 122. The ordination of ministers places them in a peculiar relation to the churches. Those ordained may or may not be officers in a local church, but whether officers therein or not, they by reason of their recognized ministerial call stand as ministers of the Word, and are treated as such in all communions. We call their peculiar relation to the churches ministerial standing. And we mean by it a minister's responsible relation to, and connection with, some association of churches which may vouch for him and call him to account for heresy or immorality. If true ministers at all, they are called to exercise their function in subordination to the church-kingdom, which chiefly appears in the world in and through churches. Their belief and conduct vitally affect these churches. The needed qualifications by which to test them have been given not merely for their guidance, but for the guidance of the churches in ordaining them and dealing with them. They, if church officers, are more than church officers. They owe in fellowship accountability to the churches that recognize them as ministers of the Word. If the Ephesian church could commend by letter Apollos to the disciples in Achaia (Acts 18: 27); and if the council of Jerusalem could notify the churches that the Judaizers who disturbed their peace were not officially sent forth (Acts 15: 24), we may well assume that the relation of recognized ministers to the churches forms a broad and sure basis for their accountability to the churches. As the churches can |