Church as the good order, the instruction, and the ex- igencies of the society at that time required, without any intention, at least without any declared design of regulating the appointment, authority, or the distinc- tion of Christian ministers under future circumstances." To the same eflf'ect, also. Bishop Tomline says, "It is not contended that tlie bishops, priests, and deacons of England are at present precisely the same that bishops, presbj'ters, and deacons were in Asia Minor seventeen hundred years ago. We onlj' maintain that there have always been bishops, priests, and deacons in the Christian Church since the days of the apostles, with difterent powers and functions, it is allowed, in different countries and at difi'erent periods ; but the general principles and duties which have respectively characterized these clerical orders have been essential- ly the same at all times and in all places, and the va- riations which they have undergone have only been such as have ever belonged to all persons in public situations, whether civil or ecclesiastical, and which are, indeed, indispensable from every thing in which mankind are concerned in this transitory and fleeting world. I have thought it riglit to take tliis general view of the ministerial office, and to make these obser- vations upon the clerical orders subsisting in this king- dom, for the purpose of pointing out the foundation and principles of Church authority, and of showing that our ecclesiastical establishment is as nearlj' con- formable as change of circumstances will permit to the practice of the primitive Church. But, though I flatter myself that I have proved episcopacy to be an apostolical institution, yet I readily acknowledge that there is no precept in the New Testament which commands that every church should be governed by bishops. No church can exist without some gov- ernment; but, though there must be rules and orders for the proper discharge of the offices of public wor- ship, though there must be fixed regulations concern- ing the appointment of ministers, and though a subor- dination among them is expedient in the highest de- gree, yet it does not follow that all these things must be precisely the same in every Christian country; they may vary with the other varying circumstances of human society, with the extent of a country, the manners of its inhabitants, the nature of its civil gov- ernment, and many other peculiarities which might be specified. As it has not pleased our Almighty Father to prescribe any particular form of civil government for the security of temporal comforts to his rational creatures, so neither has he prescribed any particular form of ecclesiastical polity as absolutely necessary to the attainment of eternal happiness. But he has, in the most explicit terms, enjoined obedience to all gov- ernors, whether civil or ecclesiastical, and whatever may be their denomination, as essential to the charac- ter" of a true Christian. Thus the Gospel only lays down general principles, and leaves the application of them to men as free agents." Bishop Tomline, how- ever, and the High-Eiiiacopalians of the Cliurch ol'Ensr- land, contend for an original distinction in the office and order of l)ishops and presbyters; which notion is contradicted bv tli<> founder of the Church of England, Archbishop Cranmer, who says, "The bishops and priests were at one time, and were not two things ; but both one office in the beginning of Christ's religion" {Watson). On the inconsistency of the position of that portion of the so-called evangelical Episcopalians whicli holds that bishops are really successors of the apostles, see an admirable article in the Princeton Re~ view, January, 1850 (art. i).
(2.) The episcopacy of the Church of England is d'ocesan, like that of the Church of Rome, and the bishops are named from the chief city of the diocese (London, York, etc.). In the Protestant Episcopal churches the dioceses are generally coterminous with the States of the Union, and the bishops are named ac- cordingly (Delaware, Connecticut, etc.). The larger
EPISCOPACl
266
EPISCOPACY
rtates are in some instances subdivided. "In tlic AnK'ric;iu Cliurch tlie bisliops arc all of equal authori- t}', each ruling his own diocese independently of the ciintrcl of an ecclesiastical su])erior. No bishop is p.menable to any central authority." There are no archbishops; but nssinfant and misdonary bishops are authorized. See Bisnoi's, and Pkotestant Episco- pal CiiiHc n.
IV. Mtlholht Episcopal Church. — (1.) The episco- pacy of the Methodist Episcopal Church is believed to be nearer to tiie apostolic model than that of the churches which maintain the apostolical succession. Its simple idea is, that certain elders are chosen from the body of tlie presbyters to superintend the Church, and are called bishops or superintendents., both terms be- ing used in the Methodist ritual. The bishops, in vir- tue of their functions, naturallj' stand above their brethren. With regard to the ordinary functions of the ministiy, they do not difter from other ministers ; but extraordinary functions, such as ordaining, pre- siding in assemblies, and the like, ai'e devolved upon them by their brethren, and exercised bj' them exclu- sively and of right^right not divine, but ecclesiastical and human, founded upon the will of the body of pas- tors. The primitive principle that liishops and pres- byters are of ecjual rank in the N. T. is iviWy recog- nised; nor are bishops regarded as the successors of the apostles. "As soon as a church has more than one pastor, it is natural and necessary that one should preside over the rest," and that "certain functions should be reserved to him" (Bungener, Council of Trent, bk. v, cli. il). It is not contrary to the essence of the ministry, 1 ut rather in harmony with its mis- sionary nnd jtastor.il aims, that the presidency thus arising should List for life, and that he who exercises it should govern the bod}' of pastors accoi'ding to laws adopted and approved hj them, should appoint the ministers to their work, and should exercise all the functions necessary to an effective and vigorous super- intendency ; and if the superintendont or bishop is ap- pointed for life, it is quite in accovdance with scrip- tural usage that he should be set apart for his work by '• the laying on of hands." Accordingly, the bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church are elected by the General Conference (q. v.) for life, and are ordained according to a special form, modified from the ordinal of the Church of England (Discipline, pt. ii, chap. iii). Tlie limits of their authority are clearly set forth in the Book of Discipline (pt. i, ch. iv). A bishop is amena- ble, not to the bench of bishops, but to the General Conference, which may even " expel him for improper conduct if they deem it necessary" (Discipline, pt. i, ch. ix). " In the American branch of the Methodist Church, episcopacy exists not only in the form in ■which it does in everj' English circuit — which is the oM parochial episcopacy — but by formally connnitting general oversight into the hands of bishops, who have no other charge. These claim no superiority in order over their brethren, but exercise well-defined powers, siniiily as an arrangement of the Church for its own welfare — an arrangement which has worked admira- bly; and it may be questioned whether any form of church government in the world has more of the ele- ments of power and permanence than this, which ex- presses Wesley's own idea of a full}' organized church" (^Lond. Huartcrly Revieir, July, 18.o(;, p. 530).