as the apostleship itself. Bishops of equal rank, whose number under • Trajan probably amounted to hundreds, were by no means the fit instru'ment for making or maintaining the unity of the Church-Catholic; partly 'because at that time an episcopal council was all but impossible; yet chiefly because, after it became possible, the bishops themselves were, ' each of them, one with his own flock; and the question, how the flocks were to be kept in unity, really resolved itself into the question, how 'the bishops were to be kept in the same. The Apostles could maintain unity, because they formed a central power, and each belonged to the .' whole Church, and none were identified with any one flock. When they disappeared, the Church demanded some higher substitute for their uni'versal central authority, than an aggregate of those very local elements ' which needed to be kept together.

'But there was no such substitute to be had at the time. Therefore, by ' necessary consequence, those apostolic functions which were necessary for 'the existence of every flock, such as confirmation of the baptized and 'ordination of elders, devolved on the bishop of each Church. They could 'not be given up, and they could not proceed from any but the highest ' existing ordinance, i. e. the episcopal. Now this took place universally, ' and without contradiction, save in the single case of Egypt. To explain 'so remarkable a fact, we must have recourse to the supposition, that, ' already during the life of the Apostles, and not without their approba'tion, the chief shepherds had been accustomed in many churches to con'firm and ordain, under reservation of the subsequent apostolic sanction. 'We cannot imagine that John, in those years in which he alone repre'sented the apostleship, was personally at work in all provinces of Chris'tendom. The bishops could not suddenly have undertaken, say in the ' year 100, that which had been invariably done by Apostles before. An enlargement of the episcopal functions must have accompanied the gradually increasing rarity of the apostolic. . . . . .

'The remnants of antiquity have very little to say as to what provision 'the Apostles made for future generations in this matter. Paul indeed 'commanded Timothy (2 Tim. ii. 2;)" What thou hast heard of me, before 'many witnesses, commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach 'others also." These words no doubt establish a succession; and a por'tion of apostolic authority must have passed from Paul through Timothy 'to these faithful men, and to their successors throughout. He must be 'destitute of all esteem for history and authority, who is not impressed by the proof of an uninterrupted apostolic succession. But all this says 'nothing as to the extent of the power which so descended through Timothy. And it is impossible, from this text alone, to justify, as normal ' and right, all the ecclesiastical order which the second century presents

'to us......

'On the extinction of the apostolic office, without an adequate surrogate, 'Christendom was certainly neither so blind nor so indifferent, as not to 'feel its loss. And the New Testament itself affords to us the most accre'dited testimony as to the feelings of the faithful at that time. This is the 'addition made to the Gospel of John by his disciples after his death. ́(John xxi.)

'Christ had already said, before His transfiguration on the Mount, "There be some of them which stand here, who shall not taste of death, 'till they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom." (Matt. xvi. 28.) After His resurrection, when He appeared to the seven disciples on the sea of Tiberias, He spoke a word full of mystery to John, which came to 'the ears of the faithful, and especially occupied those among whom John spent his last days. "The saying went abroad among the disciples, that 'this disciple should not die." (John xxi. 23.) Many expected, therefore, 'to see fulfilled in him the above prophecy given by our Lord. And, on 'the decease of all the other apostles, the expectation became more lively, 'that John, who had been so wonderfully preserved, should witness the ' return of the Lord. But it happened otherwise. He also went to his 'rest after attaining the utmost limit of man's age. He did not die as a martyr-for, as the saying went, he did not need that purgation. He 'died in Ephesus. His tomb stood outside the city. We may imagine 'the deep impression made by his death upon the faithful. The fact was 'then unquestionable. Was, then, the word of Christ to go unfulfilled? 'The last chapter of John's Gospel meets this question. It is, in our opinion, chiefly written by John himself. The last verses only are added by the elders of Ephesus, who had the keeping of the sacred book. Christ had foretold to Peter his martyrdom. Then asked Peter, concerning John, “But what shall this man do?" Jesus answered, "If I will that he 'tarry till I come, what is that to thee? Follow thou me." Then comes 'the notice by the elders, " Jesus said not," This disciple "shall not die ; 'but, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee?" The elders, 'therefore, give no interpretation of this remarkable saying. They merely ' remind us of what Christ had not said. He had spoken only condi'tionally; If I will. Still His language was that of one who did entertain 'such a thought, and yet had reason to withhold a positive assertion. It was no meaningless abstract assertion of a possibility which no one would question. Nor was it solely a rebuke to Peter. It evidently expressed a special purpose in regard to John, although its literal understanding by the disciples was erroneous. As to this the elders are silent. Their 'addition to the Gospel was intended merely to obviate the troubles 'created by the death of the Apostle, not to give a full solution to the words ' of Christ, which the Church should lay up in her heart.

And it is no wonder that the above idea as to the destiny of John kept 'its ground in the Church. It reappears in the form of two traditions, 'that John had not really died, and that he had died and was risen again. The former is reported by Augustine in his 224th Homily of the Gospel on 'John, not as giving credence to it, but the reverse. Some, he says, assert, 'that John descended into the grave, which he had caused to be made for himself, seemed dead, and was shut in—but that he had only fallen asleep, to awake at the day of judgment, and that the earth of his grave is lifted by the action of his breathing. On the other hand, the Greek 'tradition is, that God, immediately after John's death, raised him again, ' and keeps him, that he may come in the last times to testify for the truth, and along with Elias and Enoch, to overcome Antichrist. (Ephraim ' of Theopolis ap. Photion in Myriobibl. cod. 229, p. 797 c., p. 800 b. c.

'Ed. 1653.) This idea, which stands in evident connexion with a literal understanding of two well known texts in the Apocalypse (Rev. x. 11; 'xi. 3), became very prevalent among the later Greeks. Nay, it is ex'pressed in their ritual. And some Latin doctors, both of the middle ages ' and of later times, have inclined to it.

Why do we cite these fancies of a period subsequent to that of which 'we treat? Because they were the last relics of an opinion as old as the apostolic age. And whence sprang this primitive tradition with all its 'offsets? From the persuasion of the Church, at the death of John, that 'the apostolic office should be preserved to the Church, in the last at least of those who possessed it; that the Church still needed it; that it 'could not be awanting at the end of the days; that it had yet the works to do, of conquering Antichrist, and of completing the yet imperfect pre'paration of the faithful for the coming again of Christ.

'A longing for the preservation of the peculiar blessing of apostleship 'is thus shown to have been felt by the primitive Church, and must have 'been increased by the conviction that the internal progress of the Church 'to perfection did not keep pace with its outward extension. Widely as the 'Church extended under Trajan, it betrayed a marked decay of its original light and power, to which all that still remains from that time, the writ'ings of all the so-called apostolic fathers, bears sorrowful witness. So 'great is the difference between their best productions and the apostolic 'writings, that a glance at the respective worth and contents of the two 'classes of documents is sufficient to remove all uncertainty as to the 'boundary between canonical and uncanonical Christian literature. The 'subsequent experience of the Church confirms the verdict of antiquity in this matter.

It is said that John, enfeebled by great age, being carried into the 'meeting of the Church, merely repeated the words, "My beloved chil'dren, love one another." (Hieron. Comm. ad Galat. c. vi. p. 100, d.) This 'exhortation the Church laid to heart and followed, as we may judge from 'the unity in which it lived during the succeeding generation, being kept 'together, no longer indeed by the Apostles, but by the love which they 'had shed abroad in it, and by the careful observance of what it had ' received from them. The heads of the flocks felt themselves like orphans on the death of Philip, Andrew, and John. But those orphans only kept the closer together. Faithfulness to their trust, reverence for tradition, 'was their motto. But, with all this, no more could be preserved than 'what the Church, as a whole, had really laid hold of and appropriated as ' a part of her life. She could never thus ripen into perfect maturity for 'the kingdom to come. That which she lacked, from that time forward, 'was the progress of that spiritual growth, which Peter, Paul, and John 'had both exhibited and commenced.

'Whether such a progress should again be seen, was a question on which 'the Church had as little light as on the duration of time which should elapse before she should reach the goal of her race. We could not expect 'to find any definite views among the teachers of that time as to a future 'revival of a proper apostolic action, unless it had been plain to them that ⚫ centuries should elapse before the second coming of the Lord, and that

the work then fresh wrought by Apostles should thus utterly decay. The 'work of progressive building did stand still, even as Hermas saw it in 'vision, that many might in the interval have space for repentance. But 'no one could guess the duration of the interval. It was not known, that 'whole nations should stream into the Church, and that a Christian family ' of peoples should take the lead of the human race. The depth of the fall ' of Christendom was very much hidden from the eyes of the first fathers, ' and therefore it is not wonderful, that the ultimate deliverance from 'declension and ruin, and a return to an apostolic condition, was the 'object rather of their desire and indefinite presentiment, than of their 'intelligent expectation and endeavours.'-Pp. 335–351.

We have in our extracts omitted Mr. Carlyle's notes, which are weak in themselves, and, in connexion with his author, quite out of place. Dr. Thiersch will scarcely thank his annotator, Mr. Carlyle, for reminding us of what was sufficiently plain, that the cardinal argument for the especial claims of his co-religionists is to be detected in the romantic tradition of the Wandering Jew, which he assures us embodies that peculiar clinging to S. John and to his solitary position as the last of the apostolic college, upon which historical' Irvingism' builds so largely.

Mr. William Fraser's 'Constitutional Nature of the Convocations of the Church of England,' (J. H. Parker,) is a pamphlet unusually replete with research and information. We have received it at the last moment, otherwise we should have willingly transferred the results of much of its learning and soundness to our own article on the subject.

A very good paper read by Mr. Arthur Baker at the Bucks Architectural Society's anniversary has reached us, It treats of Seats in Churches, and the writer has adopted, and well expresses, sound views of his subject.

Among single Sermons-we have already taken detailed notice of several-we may point out for especial commendation one preached by Mr. J. Powell Marriott at Leicester, at the Annual Meeting of the Religious Societies: its title is, The Common Prayer of the Church, a means of advancing Christ's Kingdom.' (J. H. Parker.)

INDEX TO VOL. XXIV.

(NEW SERIES.)

ARTICLES AND SUBJECTS.