the New Jerusalem so far as it bears the image and likeness (though defaced) of God's universal order.

Thus there are the

All heaven and all earth, being more or less in the human form, is most distinctly jointed. The earth is the Lord's footstool; heaven and the church are his body. The external church may, in one aspect, be regarded as the legs by which he stands on the earth. And to imagine that a church, coming down to earth from him out of heaven, would be arranged in only one grade of its ministry, would be to suppose that his legs would be as one stiff member without any joints, instead of a flexible one with three. And if, in another aspect, we suppose the external church to be only the Lord's foot,* then the trinal order is still more manifest in its articulations. For there is a twofold trine in the arrangement of the pedal bones. tarsal bones, the metatarsal bones, and the bones of the toes-forming the first trine; and there is besides a trine of bones in the toes themselves. And thus it is a curious fact, that the trinal articulation becomes most distinctly marked in the most ultimate degree of the very foot. For in the thigh-extending from the hip to the knee joint-there is but one bone; in the leg-extending from the knee to the ankle joint (not including the knee pan, which is common to the thigh and shin bones)-there are two bones; while in the foot there are twenty-six ! The same observation holds true of the arm. What will the advocates of but one grade in the natural plane, say to this? Let this law of order in the human body, be borne in mind; for we may have to refer to it hereafter. Here we will only ask, does it not most strikingly show the necessity of a trine on earth? Nay, so universal and pervading is the law of correspondence between natural and spiritual things, that every thing which exists on earth does in fact figure forth the trinity which is in God. And so imperatively does the law of a trine in the ministry call for obedience, that no ministry ever does or can exist without something like it. It may be in some cases less developed, less distinctly formed, or less acknowledged, but in all there is at least a shadow of it. Hence even in the calvinistic constitution, as it is now seen to exist around us, we see the distinct arrangement of licensed preachers, ordained ministers, and doctors of divinity; and, in one form of the calvinistic church in this country, there are ministers who are now openly called "bishops."+ Let it be observed, too,

The church on earth is that to the angelic heaven, which a foundation is to a house that rests upon it, or as the feet upon which a man stands, and by which he walks." (Ap. Rev. 645.) If, therefore, the angelic heaven is the Lord's body, the church on earth is the Lord's foot.

In a Baltimore newspaper just come to hand, we find the following marriage notice: On the 17th instant, by [the] Rev. Dr. Musgrave, Bishop of the Third Presbyterian Church, R. EWING ANTHONY to Miss ELLEN GAULT, all of this city." This shows that a D. D. of the presbyterian church has the title of bishop: but it is evident that the term is used in a very limited sense, as designating merely a pastor or overseer of a particular society or church, and does not imply any thing like an adoption of the episcopal grade as it exists in the romish or english churches. It does, however, indicate something like gradation in the ministry. And who, that knows any thing about it, will undertake to say, that the D. D.s of the presbyterian church, as to all those powers of mental influence and control which master spirits exert over their fellow-men,

that there is here also the preparatory stage of the theological student. It is true that licensed preachers are not supposed to be in the ministry before they are ordained as pastors over particular churches; and there may not be any acknowledged discrete gradation between the ordained minister and the doctor of divinity, who is constituted such only by an academic decree: but there is here seen to be a sort of struggle of the internal world to produce a trine in external order, where a hard, unyielding material presents peculiar obstructions. And it will be well for us to consider whether the Calvinist, in his anxiety to get rid of what he regards as the flummery, or mere cookery, of the "mother of harlots," has not striven to throw away some of the esculent substance of that "divine order" which "fills all and every thing in the universe," without being able wholly to do without it.

From this time the subject of the trine in the ministry seems to have slept in England for some years. Whether the action of the English Conference upon this report was such a settlement of the matter as was likely to secure entirely the future quiet of the church, we must leave for those who are more expert than we are in discerning the signs of the times since, to decide. Some may think, that the report, in the admission to which we have objected, went too much on the temporizing policy of deferring matters of principle to matters of expediency. And if "by influx is meant all that which precedes, and composes what is subsequent, and by things subsequent in order composes what is last," (C. L. 313;) and if what was first in the establishment of the English Conference, was, by things subsequent in order, to flow into and qualify the state of the church in it at any future time; may it not be conjectured that this general body of the church has not evinced its usual wisdom in postponing so long all action correspondent to the principles which it at this time acknowledged to be true? Has any experience shown, that errors,-incorporated into the constitution of a body, from the prudential consideration that at some future time its members would be in a better state to see, acknowledge and renounce them, were ever worked out without convulsions? In short, can it be truly expedient, on the ground of mutual concession, to concede any thing to error or injustice, in establishing any organic law? Supposing slavery to be inimical to the fundamental political law that all men are born free and equal, was it wise to incorporate that into the constitution of the United States upon do not exercise as great an authority over a presbyterian synod, or assembly, and pres byterian clergy, as an episcopal bishop ever does over his diocese. If so, then the presbyterian church has the essence of episcopacy without its form. Now, in the very constitution of human nature, in the very nature of things, in the very order of influx and arrangement in the divine economy, this controlling influence of superior minds, superior men, or superior functionaries, is right and indispensable. It is the order of heaven, as well as the order of hell. It is only wrong in the visible church, when it is the control of imperiousness of those who desire to rule from love of dominion-as in hell. It is right when it is the control of superior love, or superior wisdom, or superior intelligence, or even of the representative of these virtues in the Lord's divine humanity, and if it results from the voluntary subordinations of other members of the church and ministry to it, as in heaven. (See A. C. 7773.)

REPORT ON THE TRINE.

the assumption that the individual states would of themselves, in due time, renounce it as an evil? And has experience shown that the whole United States, as one man, are now, after the lapse of more than seventy years of their independent national existence, any nearer a peaceable, quiet, constitutional acknowledgment that human beings are not property, entitling the holders of them as slaves to a certain weight in the legislative councils that are to determine the law, which should be the justice, of the land? And is the English Conference, now, after a lapse of about fifteen years, any nearer the time when all its members can see eye to eye in carrying out into correspondent action the trine in the ministry, which, from 1815 to 1843, had been decreed true order, but which "it was deemed inexpedient to legislate upon, from the conviction that the time to do so, with permanent advantage to the church, had not yet arrived"? The Lord says, "Work, while ye have the day"-"while ye have the light, walk in the light." And under these injunctions, is it not imperative on the collective bodies of the Lord's church, whenever they see, and formally declare, any principle of order to be true, to bring themselves into external conformity to it instantly? And if they put off to a more convenient season entire conformity to what they have light enough now to see and know to be true order, is it impossible that they may find themselves at last in that "night" in which "no man can work"? At least, will they not subject themselves to the necessity of putting off their temporary expedients by convulsions, and greater difficulties than would have attended the constituting themselves on the principles of true order at first? The future history of the New Jerusalem on earth can alone, perhaps, answer these questions satisfactorily.

The Twenty-Sixth General Conference, having thus settled the questions which had grown out of the order of a trine in the ministry, by decreeing it to be the true order, and yet postponing indefinitely all action in carrying that order fully out, no notice was taken of this subject for about nine years: except that the Twenty-Seventh General Conference adopted and published a supplemental paper on this subject by the Rev. Mr. Noble. (See Ap. No. L.) The Thirty-Fifth General Conference had its attention called to it by the communication from what is styled the General Convention of Societies in the United States. That communication solicited information or opinions from the General Conference, from a committee of it, or from any individuals of which it was composed, upon the following topics-"First, as to the order of the ministry, as consisting of a trine in just order; secondly, as to the order of the church, as consisting of a trine in just order; thirdly, as to the relation of an orderly ministry and an orderly church to each other." This conference resolved, "with regard to the question specifically proposed for its opinion, that its consideration be submitted to the consideration of the ministers whose names follow: viz. David Howarth, William Mason, and John Henry Smithson; and that they report thereon to the next conference." But this committee made as good as no report to the next conference. Probably the members of it could not agree in the views which they should present. Subse

quent events have rendered it likely that they, in 1842, were divided, two to one, on the principles as set forth in the reports rendered in 1830 and 1833. In short, there was a prolongation of the original differences of opinion, which had prevented the settlement of this question, and correspondent action upon it, from the first, in England. Be that as it may, this committee only reported to the next conference that they had not been able "to arrive at any solid and satisfactory conclusion on a subject so weighty and important as that which was committed to their charge"; and recommended "the appointment of another committee for that purpose, should the conference of the present year be of opinion that it is still desirable to carry out the object," which the previous conference had in view in appointing the former committee. The Thirty-Sixth General Conference did resolve, "that a committee be again appointed to consider the said subject," and "that John Henry Smithson, David Howarth and James Bradley, ministers, be such committee; that John Henry Smithson, minister, do act as secretary; and that such committee do apply to any person they may conceive likely to afford useful information on the subject." The conference, also, invited "all the members of the church to communicate their views on this subject to the committee above named." It will be observed that James Bradley is substituted in the second committee for William Mason in the first. This indicates whom subsequent events have shown to be most probably the one, who, from disagreement with the views of the reports of 1833, in all likelihood, prevented agreement in a report to the conference of 1843. It is not a little remarkable, too, in this connection, that, in this same conference of 1843, the old question was again brought up, "whether it be in agreement with the laws of divine order for other preachers than ordained ministers, to baptize and administer the Lord's supper"? In reply, the conference "Resolved, That this subject, having been frequently under the consideration of conference, and its opinion thereon fully expressed, the conference deems it inexpedient to enter upon it now; but recommends that the former minutes of conference be consulted thereon, together with the reports appended thereto." The reports here referred to are those of which we have taken such extended notice, and of which we now intend to give reprints in an appendix to this report. (See Ap. Nos. XLVIII. and XLIX.) Thus it appears that the English General Conference again, in 1843, sets its seal of confirmation upon the trine in the ministry, which it had declared to be true order in 1815 and in 1833.

The Thirty-Seventh General Conference met in London in August, 1844. To this conference, the second committee, mentioned above as having been appointed by the thirty-sixth conference, made an extended report, on the trine in the ministry, in answer to the American General Convention's solicitation of its views on this subject. In respect to this report, the minutes of the thirty-seventh conference say" Before proceeding to read the addresses arising out of the interchange of communications with the new-church conventions in America, the report of the committee appointed by ... the last conference, on the subject of the existence of a trine in the ministry, was

REPORT ON THE TRINE.

again read; and it was resolved, that such report be received. Resolved, That the conference, fully concurring in the view of the subject presented in this report, trusts that it will prove satisfactory to the members of the General Convention, by whom the subject was proposed for consideration; and conducive to the well-being of the new church generally in the United States. Resolved, That this report, so clearly defining the opinions of the church in this country, on the subject to which it relates, be printed in the Appendix to the Minutes of the present conference."

This report on the trine, more fully confirming the principles of previous reports on this subject, and reiterating the declaration of the English General Conference, almost from its very beginning, that a trine is the true order of the new-church ministry, was officially communicated to the Central, as well as to the General, Convention of the New Church in this country. We say this report was officially communicated to the Central Convention, because the person appointed, by the conference which received and approved it, to address our general body, expressly referred us to it in the address which he sent. These are his words, (see Address, from the English General Conference, to the Central Convention, by the Rev. Thomas Goyder, published in Appendix IV. to Journal No. VII. of Cent. Con. p. 47):"The members, generally, of the church here, as with you in America, seem to have a constitutional acknowledgment of the principle of a TRINE in the ministry; and the english church has for years generally acted, and still continues to act, in agreement with such acknowledgment. The views held upon this subject by our General Conference are expressed in the report of its committee appointed to consider the subject of a trine in the ministry, to which I beg to refer, as printed in the minutes of the Thirty-Seventh General Conference, When this express (page 55,) copies of which are herewith sent." reference of the Central Convention to the report as printed in the trust," appendix to the minutes, is viewed in connection with the " which the conference expresses, in the minutes themselves, as quoted in the second of the above cited resolutions, namely, "that it will prove conducive to the well-being of the new church generally in the United States" as well as "satisfactory to the members of the General Convention," it must be evident that the General Conference designed to communicate it officially to the Central Convention also. So viewing it, it was published in connection with our Journal, "for a permanent record in immediate connection with the paper which refers to it," and "for future reference in the proceedings of our convention." Hence we refer to it now as a document for history appended to this report. (See Journal No. VII. Ap. IV. p. 53.) It is also proper to say, that the ecclesiastical council of the Central Convention, in its hasty report to the sixth annual meeting, (see Journal No. VIII.-Ap. I. Reps. Nos. VIII. and IX. pp. 28-44,) drew its authorities mainly from this and other reports made to the English Conference; and that our present report is mainly founded upon the same authorities. This is done because the members of the Central Convention's ecclesiastical council have failed themselves to

3