treme sickness, or under any urgent necessity when they might be suspected of having acted not voluntarily, but by constraint. 14. They who had been baptized by heretics. An exception, however, was made in favor of the Novatians and Donatists. 15. Persons who had been guilty of simoniacal conduct, i. e. of using bribery or any unfair means of obtaining ordination. This species of iniquity-the buying and selling of appointments to spiritual offices, and the obtaining of them by any unfair and dishonorable means-was severely censured by the church. The penalty was deposition from office, both on the part of him who was invested with holy orders, and of those who had assisted in his ordination. The laws of Justinian also required the candidate elect to make oath that he had neither given nor promised, nor would hereafter give, any reward directly or indirectly as a remuneration for aiding in his appointment. The exceptions above mentioned are comprised in the following lines: Aleo; venator; miles; caupo; aulicus; erro Curator; sponsor; conductor; conciliator; pronexeta In causa judex civili; vel capitali, Clericus esse nequit, nisi Canones transgrediantur. Besides the foregoing negative rules, there were others of a positive character prescribing the requisite qualifications for ordination. The 1. The candidate was required to be of a certain age. rules by which this canonical age was determined were undoubtedly derived from the Jewish rituals. The deacons were required to be of equal age with the Levites-twenty-five years. The canonical age of presbyters and bishops was the same as that of the priests of the Jews-thirty years. The Apostolical Constitutions prescribe fifty years as the canonical age of a bishop. This was afterwards reduced to thirty. In some instances, persons may have been introduced into the ministry at an age still earlier. Both Siricius and Zosimus required thirty years for a deacon, thirty-five for a presbyter, and forty-five for a bishop. The age at which our Lord entered upon his ministry is frequently alleged as a reason for requiring the same age in a presbyter and bishop. That was usually the lowest canonical age. Children were sometimes appointed readers. The age of subdeacons, acolyths, and other inferior officers, was estab lished at different times, at fifteen, eighteen, twenty and twenty-five years. 2. They were subject to a strict examination previous to ordination. This examination related to their faith, their morals, and their worldly condition. They were especially subjected to the severest scrutiny in regard to the first particular. It was the duty of the bishop and subordinate officers of the clergy to conduct, for the most part, the examination; but it was held in public, and the people also took a part in it. No one would be duly ordained without the concurrence of the people in this examination, and the united approbation both of them and the bishop. Cyprian also insists upon the concurrence of the people in the selection of a pastor, and offers as a reason, the consideration that they were more familiarly acquainted with the life and conversation of the candidate. The names of the candidates were published, in order that they might be subjected to a severer canvass by the people. By a law of Justinian, the candidate was required to give a written statement of his religious faith, in his own handwriting, and to take a solemn oath against simony. The extracts in the margin show how carefully the church observed the apostolic injunction to lay hands suddenly on no man. 3. No person could regularly be appointed to the higher offices of the church without having passed through the subordinate grades. To this rule there were frequent exceptions, but the principle was strenuously maintained, in order that no one should assume the ministerial office until he had, in this way, become practically familiar with the whole system of ecclesiastical discipline and polity. 4. Every one was to be ordained to some special charge. This was supposed to be the apostolical rule, Acts 14: 33, Tit. 1: 5, 1 Pet. 5: 2. Exceptions sometimes occurred, though very rarely, and always against the decided sentiments of the church. Non-resident clergy, who are in this way removed from the watch and discipline of the church, receive no favor from the ancient canons and ecclesiastical writers. 5. Every minister was required to remain in the diocese over which he was ordained; and no one could, at the same time, be invested with more than one office. Plurality of livings were unknown to the ancient church. 6. A clerical tonsure was made requisite about the fifth or sixth century. No mention is made of it before the fourth, and it is first spoken of with decided disapprobation. In perfect consistency with these strict precautions against the introduction of unworthy persons into the sacred office, was the character of the discipline to which the clergy were subjected. This, in some respects, was more severe than that of private members of the church. The latter, if penitent, might regain their former standing, but the excommunicated or degraded minister could never be restored to the clerical order. The offences which exposed a clergyman to censure were numerous from the first; and they regularly increased as the purity of ancient Christianity diminished. Many of them originated in the peculiar trials to which primitive Christians were subject, and in the heresies and defections consequent upon them. We subjoin the following account of the punishments inflicted upon offending ministers during the first seven or eight centuries. 1. Suspension. This related either to the salary of the clergyman, or to his office. Both methods of punishment were practised by the ancient church. An instance is related in the writings of Cyprian of some whose monthly wages were suspended, while they were allowed to continue in the discharge of their office. Decrees to this effect were ordained by the councils of Nice, Ephesus and Agde. Suspension from office was varied according to circumstan ces. At one time the offender was suspended from the performance of the active duties of his office, whilst he still retained his clerical rank with his brethren in the ministry. At another, he was forbidden to perform some of the duties of his office, while he continued in the discharge of others; and again, he was debarred the performance of all ministerial duties for a definite period of time. 2. Degradation. This punishment consisted, as its name implies, in removing the offender from a higher to a lower grade of office. This sentence of degradation appears to have been final and irrevocable. Bishops were in this manner transferred from a larger to a smaller or less important diocese. Presbyters were degraded to the order of deacons; and deacons, to that of subdeacons. This species of punishment was also inflicted upon bishops in Africa, by superseding them in their expected succession to the office of archbishop or metropolitan. 3. Exclusion from the communion. Of this there were two kinds, which were denominated communio peregrina, and communio laica. The former has sometimes been confounded with the latter, or it has been supposed to denote a communion in one kind, or communion only at the point of death, which, in the Romish church, was regarded as a kind of passport to the future world. The most probable explanation of this point, confessedly obscure, is, that the term communion implied not only a participation in the eucharist, but in all the rights and privileges of a member of the church. Travellers and strangers, unless they had testimonials certifying to their regular standing in the church, were presumed to be under censure, and were not allowed the privileges of full communion, though permitted to receive, if need be, a maintenance from the funds of the church. An instance is related of Chrysostom, who on a certain occasion hospitably entertained the bishop of Alexandria, who had fled from persecution to him at Constantinople; but the bishop was not allowed to partake of the eucharist, until it had been fully ascertained that no just accusation could be brought against him. Clergymen under censure were sometimes treated in this way in their own communion. They were placed in the same relations as strangers, which was denoted by the phrase communio peregrina. Under these circumstances they could neither officiate nor be present at the celebration of the Lord's Supper, until they had given the prescribed satisfaction. The act of communion was indeed the highest privilege of a layman; but it was a severe rebuke to one who had been elevated to the rank of the clergy to be again degraded to the condition of a layman, and to be required to communicate as a layman at the table of the Lord. This was a kind of mitigated excommunication. He was excluded from the body of the clergy and reduced to the condition of a humble individual. In this situation he was required to perform certain services for that same body from which he had been expelled. This was styled communio laica, and the subject of this penalty was said to be delivered over to the secular arm,-curio tradi, in the phraseology of the ancient canonists. 4. Imprisonment. The custom of confining delinquent clergymen in monasteries appears to have taken its rise in the fourth and fifth centuries. At a later period it became a frequent mode of punishment. 5. Corporal punishment. This kind of punishment, together with the last mentioned, was inflicted only on clergy of the inferior orders. This mode of punishment was by no means uncommon in the time of Augustine. A presbyter, who had given false witness, could first be deposed from his office; and then, as a layman, might be subjected to corporal punishment. Connected with the churches in large cities, such as Constantinople, there were houses of correction, decanica, for adminis tering the correction of imprisonment and of corporal punish ment. 6. Excommunication. This was the last and highest form of ecclesiastical censure. It cut off all hope on the part of the offender from ever being again reinstated in the ministry, even if he were restored to the fellowship of the churches. None who had at any time been exposed to public censure, were restored again to their office. The above penalties appear to have been inflicted by authority of ecclesiastical councils alone, or at least to have been prescribed by them. ARTICLE XI. CRITICAL NOTICES. 1.-The Nestorians; or the Lost Tribes; containing Evidence of their Identity, an Account of their Manners, Customs and Ceremonies, together with Sketches of Travel in ancient Assyria, Armenia, Media and Mesopotamia, and Illustrations of Scripture Prophecy: by Asahel Grant, M. D. New-York, Harper & Brothers, 1841. pp. 385. We begin our notice of this book by expressing our high estimation of its value. It is intensely interesting and instructive. Dr. Grant, as our readers generally know, is one of the missionaries to Persia, sent out by the American Board of Foreign Missions. His work is a valuable accession to the vast amount of information, and even of critical and learned research, for which not only the Christian public, but the literary world is indebted to the published correspondence and other productions of the missionaries of that Board. The first part of the volume,-130 pages,-contains an account of the author's travels and missionary labors, dangers and privations, from the spring of 1835 to 1840, during which he accomplished a more extensive exploration of the country of the Nestorians, than has been effected by any modern traveller. He went out as a physician, and by means of his profes |