until he repent, and publicly revoke his wicked errors." Can. 6. The seventy-fourth canon directs that archbishops and bishops shall wear the accustomed apparel of their degrees, and that the subordinate orders shall "wear gowns with standing sleeves, straight at the hands; or wide sleeves, with hoods or tippets, of silk or sarcanet, and square caps." They are not to wear "wrought night-caps, but only plain night-caps of black silk, satin, or velvet." At home they may wear "any comely or scholar-like apparel, provided it be not cut or pinkt; and that in public they go not in their doublet and hose, without coats or cassocks; and that they wear not any light-colored stockings." All this is gravely entered in the canons of the church, and "ratified by letters-patent from the king, under the great seal of England, after having been diligently read with great contentment and comfort."

2. As a conservative principle, to preserve the unity of the church, Episcopacy is entirely inadequate.

If the unity of the church consist in a name merely, and in forms, in the use of a prayer-book and surplice, then may Episcopacy be said to preserve this unity; but in what else have they of this communion ever been united? how else have they kept the unity of the faith? In the ancient church what was the success of the Episcopal expedient to preserve the unity of the church? Let Milton reply. "Heresy begat heresy with a certain monstrous haste of pregnancy in her birth, at once born and bringing forth. Contentions, before brotherly, were now hostile. Men went to choose their bishop, as they went to a pitched field, and the day of his election was like the sacking of a city, sometimes ending in the blood of thousands;.. so that, instead of finding prelacy an impeacher of schism and faction, the more I search, the more I grow into all persuasion to think rather, that faction and she, as with a spousal ring, are wedded together, never to be divorced." 11

11 Prose Works, Vol. 1. pp. 121, 122.

What idea does the profession of Episcopacy at present give of one's religious faith? Is he Calvinistic, Arminian, or Unitarian; high-church or low-church; Puseyitish, semipopish, or what? "The religion of the Church of England," says Macaulay, "is so far from exhibiting that unity of doctrine which Mr. Gladstone represents as her distinguishing glory, that it is, in fact, a bundle of religious systems without number. It comprises the religious system of Bishop Tomline, and the religious system of John Newton, and all the religious systems that lie between them. It comprises the religious system of Mr. Newman, and the religious system .of the Archbishop of Dublin, and all the religious systems that lie between. All these different opinions are held, avowed, preached, printed, within the pale of the church, by men of unquestioned integrity and understanding."12

As an expedient, therefore, to preserve the unity of the church, Episcopacy must be pronounced an entire failure. And yet they of this denomination present the extraodinary spectacle, of the most discordant sect in all Christendom boasting the conservative powers of their religion as its distinguishing glory, and urging a return to this, their " one body in Christ," as the only means of preserving the unity of the church!"

12 Review of Gladstone's Church and State. Miscel. Vol. 3. p. 306,

CHAPTER XIV.

THE BENEDICTION.

I. Origin and import of the rite.

It seems to have been from remote antiquity, a common belief, that either a blessing or a curse, when pronounced with solemnity, is peculiarly efficacious upon those who are the objects of it.1 So common was this belief, that it gave rise to the proverb, "The blessing and the curse fail not of their fulfilment." The consequences were momentous, according to the character of the person from whom the prophetic sentiment proceeded. The blessing of the aged patriarch, of the prophet, the priest, and the king, was sought with peculiar interest, and their execration deprecated with corresponding anxiety. Of the king's curse we have an instance, in 1 Sam. 14: 24. Saul adjured the people and said, Cursed be the man that eateth any food until the evening, that I may be avenged on mine enemies. Comp. Josh. 6: 26, with 1 Kings 16: 34. The blessing and the curse of Noah upon his sons, Gen. 9: 25-28, and of Moses upon the children of Israel, Deut. xxviii, xxxiii, are familiar illustrations of the same sentiment, as is also the history of Balaam, whose curse upon Israel Balak sought with so much solicitude, Num. xxii, xxiii, xxiv. The blessing of the patriarchs Isaac and Jacob, respectively, was sought with peculiar anxiety, as conveying to their posterity the favor of God and the smiles of his provi

1 Dira detestatio nulla expiatur victima.-Hor. Epod. 5, 90. Hence also the expression, Thyesteae preces, in the same ode. Comp. Iliad. 9, 455.

dence. Gen. xxvii, and xlviii, xlix. Comp. Deut. xxxiii. The son of Sirach expresses a similar sentiment, 3:9. "The blessing of the father establisheth the houses of children; but the curse of the mother rooteth out foundations."

With the question relative to the prophetic character of these patriarchal benedictions we are not now concerned. It is sufficient for our present purpose that the benediction of patriarchs, of parents, and of all those who were venerable for their age, or for their religious or official character, was regarded as peculiarly efficacious in propitiating the favor of God towards those upon whom the blessing was pronounced. In addition to all this, the Aaronitic priesthood were divinely constituted the mediators between God and his people Israel. They were the intercessors for his people before his altar; and stood in their official character, as daysmen between the children of Israel and Jehovah their God. In this official capacity, Aaron and his sons were directed to bless the children of Israel, saying, "The Lord bless thee and keep thee. The Lord make his face shine upon thee and be gracious unto thee. The Lord lift up his countenance upon thee and give thee peace." Thus were they to put the name of God upon the children of Israel, and the promise of God was that he would bless them: Num. 6: 24-27. In conformity with this commission to the house of Aaron, it was a universal custom in the worship of the Jews, both in the temple and in their synagogues, for the people to receive the blessing only at the mouth of the priests, the sons of Aaron. If none of these priests were present, another was accustomed to invoke the blessing of God, supplicating in the prayer the triple blessings of the benediction, that the assembly might not retire. unblessed; but this was carefully distinguished from the sacerdotal benediction.2

This view of the subject may perhaps aid us in forming a just idea of the nature and import of the sacerdotal benedic2 Vitringa, De Synagoga, Lib. 3, part 2. c. 20.

tion. The term benediction is used to express both the act of blessing, and that of consecrating,-two distinct religious rites. The sacerdotal benediction, according to the views above expressed, seems to be a brief prayer, offered with peculiar solemnity unto God, for his blessing upon the people, by one who has been duly set apart to the service of the ministry, as an intercessor with God in their behalf.3

Both this and the other forms of benediction, in the acts of consecration and dedication, are exclusively the acts of the clergy. Only the higher grades of the clergy were permitted in the ancient church, to enjoy this prerogative. The council of Ancyra and others restricted it to bishops and presbyters.4 And in all Christian churches it is still a general rule that none but a clergyman is entitled to pronounce the benediction. In the Lutheran church none but an ordained clergyman is duly authorized to perform this rite. The licentiate accordingly includes himself in the petition, saying, not as the ordained minister, The Lord bless you, etc., but The Lord bless us. And if a layman is officiating, he includes the form of benediction in his prayer, varying yet again the emphasis, and saying, The Lord bless us, etc. Their doctrine is, that the minister stands in the place of Christ, to bless the people in his name; and that in the benediction there is an actual conferring of the blessing of God upon the people-of which, however, none are partakers but those who receive it in faith. Such, also, is the Roman Catholic doctrine of the priesthood, derived from the prelacy of the ancient church. Immediately upon the rise of Episcopacy, the clergy began to claim kindred with the Jewish priesthood. The bishop became the representative of the Lord Jesus Christ; and the priesthood, like that of the Jews, the mediators be

3 According to Ambrose, the benediction is-sanctificationibus et gratiarum votiva collatio—votiva; quia benedicens vovet et optat.—J. Gretseri, Vol. V. 178, in Lib. 1. De Benedictionibus.

4 Conc. Nic. c. 18. Ancyr. c. 2. Arelat. 1. c. 15. Constit. Apost. Lib. 8. c. 28.