The special forms of ecclesiastical polit}' adopted by the various churches will be found stated under the name of each Church in its alphabetical place in this CyclopcTedia. We onl}' note, in conclusion, one or two points in which all forms are concerned.
1. Synodical government (}\y councils, synods, as- semblies, conferences, etc.) prevails in all the great churches of the world except the Independent (includ- ing Congregationalists and Baptists). Synods have " been the most universal!}' received type of Church government in all ages ; even the fact that they have undergone so many modifications only serving to bring out more prominently the unanimity with which they have been upheld on all sides, in the midst of so much discordancy respecting almost every other question con- nected with ecclesiastical polity. The Greek Church, glorying in its agreement with antiquity, will decide nothing of consequence without them still ; in the Latin Church it has never ceased to be customary to appeal to them from the pope ; the Church of England, which upholds, and the Church of Geneva, which has abjured episcopacy, have made them part and parcel of their respective ideals ; in Russia it is the Holy Gov- erning Synod by which its national Church affects to be ruled. ]More than this, they were ecclesiastical synods that introduced the principle of representative government to mediaeval Europe" (Ffoulkes, Christen- dom''s Divisions, i, 11).
2. The riglit of the laity, as an integral part of the Church, to share in its government, is admitted l)y all churches except the great hierarchical bodies. In the Church of England, Parliament (a lay body) is the central power in the government of the Church. In the Protestant Episcopal Church lay delegates are ad- mitted to the Diocesan and General Conventions. In the Presbyterian Church they find their place in Pres- Ijytcry, Synod, and Assembly. In the Independent churches the equality of laymen and ministers as to ecclesiastical rights and powers is fundamental. In the Methodist Episcopal Church the supreme judica- tory (the General Conference) is as yet (1869) an ex- clusively clerical body. But that body has itself ad- mitted the rights of the laity to the fullest extent by submitting to a popular vote (held in June, 1869) the fundamental question whether lay delegatic^i shall be practically incorporated into the ecclesiastical system or not. The vote is by a very large majority in favor of lay delegation, and now (July, 1869) only the con- currence in the proposed changes of the Kestrictive Rules of three fourths of all the members of the Annual Conferences, present and voting thereon, is required for the admission of lay delegates to the next General Con- ference in 1872. In the Methodist Episcopal Church South, this change in its polity was, by the General Conference held in 1866, likewise submitted to the An- nual Conferences, and, having received the requisite approval, lay delegation has been incorporated into its economy. This subject of controversy in the Methodist Episcopal churches of the United States seems, there- fore, now on the eve of settlement. For other points re- lated to ecclesiastical polity, see Church; Church Axi> State; Discipi.ixe ; Episcopacy; Laity.
Literature. — Hooker, Laus of Ecclrsinstical Polity {Wiirks. vol. i); Potter, Discourse of Church Goverii- menf {Works, vol. ii) ; Stillingfleet, Irenicum (Philad. 1.'42, 8vo) ; Watson, Institutes, pt. iv ; Litton, Church of Christ {Land. 1851, 8vo) ; Ban ett, Ministry and Polity of the Christian Church (Loud. 1854, 12mo); King./'rm- itire Church (N. Y. 12mo) ; Stevens, Church Polily (N. Y. 1852, 12mo) ; Coleman, Primitive Church, p. 38-50 ; Wilson, On Church Government; Davidson (Congrega- tional), Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament (Lend, 1854, 12mo); Morris (Bishop), C« ChurchPoWy (18mo); Fillmore Ecclesiastical Polily, its Forms and Philosophy; Ripley (Congregational), Church Po'ily (Boston, 1867, 18mo); Garratt, Inquiry into the Scripjtural View of the Constitution of a Christian CYiU/rA (Lond. 1848) ; Neio Enr/lander, August, 1^60, art. vi (Congregational); Leicester A, Sa\v}-er, Organic Christianity, or the Church of Cod, with its Officers and Government, and its Divisions and Variations, both in ancient, medieeval, and modern Times (Boston, 1854, 12mo ; Congregational).
ECCLESIASTICUS
42
ECCLESIASTICUS
Ecclesias'ticus, one of the most important of the aiuicrvph:!! books of the 0. T. (see Apocuvi'HA), liein.; of the class ranked in the second canon. See Deutkko-canonical.
I. Title. — The original Hebrew title of this book, ac- cording to the authorit}' of the Jcwisli writings and St. Jerome {Pnrf. in Libr. Sol. ix, 124l>), was Qibr"?' Proverbs, or, more fully, i<"l"'D "2 r'TIJ';' "^V^""?' '^^^ Proi'trbg of Jesus, son of Siva, which was abbreviated, according to a very common practice, into S<"i'^0~"a, Ben-Slra; plT^D, Sink, which we find in a few later writers, evidently originated from a desire to imitate the Greek -(p^Y- Hence all the quotations made from this book in the Talmud and Midrashim are under these titles. (Comp. Mishna, Yadaim, iii, 15 ; Chagiga, p. 15 ; Midrash Rubba, p. 6, h. ; Tanclmma, p. G9, a, etc.) The Greek JISS. and fathers, however, as well as the prologue to this book, and the printed editions of the Sept., designate it 'Eoipia 'l7](Jov viov ^ipux (v. r. Sfina^i ^"cl even ^)}pdx), The wisdom of Jesus, the son of Sirach, or, b}' way of abbreviation, '2o(t>ia Sipc'ix, The wisdom of Sirach, or simply Sirach; also ao(j)ia i) iravuptroQ, or siniplj' >/ TzavaptroQ, The book of all vir- tues, because of the excellencj^ and diversity of the Avisdom it propounds (Jerome, /. c. ; comp. Routh, liell. Sacr. i, 27iS). In the Syriac version the book is en- titled The book of Jesxis, tlie son of Simeon Asiro (i. e. the liound) ; and the same book is called the wisdom of the Son of A siro. In manj' authors it is simply styled Wisdom (Orig. in Matt, xiii, § 4 ; compare Clem. Al. Peed, i, 8, § 69, 72, etc.), and Jesus Sirach (August, etd Simplic. i, 20). Tlie name Ecclesiasticus, by which it has been called in the Latin Church ever since the second half of the fourth century (Rufinus, Vers. ; Orig. Horn, in Num. xvii, 3), and which has been retained in manj' versions of the Reformers (e. g. the Zurich Bi- ble, Coverdale, the Geneva version, t'le Bishops' Bible, and [together with the other titl •] the Auth. Version) is derived from the old Latin version, adopted bj^ Je- rome in the Vulgate, and is explained to mean church reading-book. Calmet, however, is of opinion (^Preface) that this name was given to it because of its resem- blance to Ecclesiastes. But as this explanation of the title is very vague, it is rightlj^ rejected by Luther, and almost all modern critics. The word, like many others of Greek origin, appears to have been adopted in the African dialect (e. g. Tertull. De pudic. c. 22, p. 435), and thus it may have been applied naturally in the Vetus Leitina to a church reading-book; and when that translation was adopted bj' Jerome (^Prcrf. in Libra Sal.jurta LXX. x. 404, ed. Migne), the local title be- came cun-ent throughout the West, where the book was most used. The right explanation of the word is given 1)}' Rutinus, who remarks that " it does not des- ignate the autlior of the book, but the character of the writing," as puldicly used in the services of the Church (Comm. in Sipnb. § 38). The special application by Rulinus of the general name of the class (eccledasiici as opjiosed to canonici ) to the single book may be ex- plained by its wide popularity. Athanasius, for in- stance, mentions the book {^Ep. Fest. s. f.) as one of those " framed liy the fathers to be read by those who wish to be instructed (KaTrwtiaOat) in the word of god- liness."