in

both parties, and each considers it as his glory to contradict the other as much, and to recede from his sentiments as far, as possible. One is afraid of every thing that looks like concession: it is like losing ground in a battle, For when once unhappily the controversial spirit has gotten possession of a man, his object is no longer truth but victory. Against this evil Ï would warn you, my young friends, as much as possible. Revere truth above all things wherever you find it. Attend coolly and candidly to the voice of reason, from what quarter soever it comes. Let not the avenues to your understanding be choked up with prejudices and prepossessions, but be always open to conviction.

Now, though what has been advanced in regard to the apostolate should not be deemed sufficiently established, yet that one, on account either of seniority, or of superiour merit, habitually presided in the presbytery, will still remain probable, for the other reasons assigned, the obvious conveniency of the thing, the commonness of it in all sorts of councils and conventions; particularly in the sanhedrim and synagogue, the only rational account that, in a consistency with other parts of sacred writ, or with any christian relicks of equal antiquity, can be gi ven of the address, in the singular number, to the pastors of the seven churches severally in the Apocalypse; and I may add, the most plausible account which it affords of the origin of the more considerable distinction that afterwards obtained between bishop and presbyter. The whole of life shows us, that from the most trivial causes the greatest effects sometimes proceed. History in particular evinces this truth, and no sort of history more remarkably than the ecclesiastical.

It may further be observed, in support of the same doctrine, that some of the most common appellations, whereby the bishop was first distinguished, bear evident traces of this origin. He was not only called poess, but poedpos, president, chairman; and by periphrasis the presbyters were called us to devlepy Spovo, they who possessed the second seat or throne, as the bishop was πpaToxopos, he who possessed the first. Thus he was in the presbytery, as the speaker in the house of commons, who is not of a superiour order to the other members of the house, but is a commoner among commoners, and is only, in consequence of that station, accounted the first among those of his own rank. The same thing might be illustrated by the prolocutor of either house of convocation in England, or the moderator of an ecclesiastical judicatory in Scotland. Now as the president is, as it were, the mouth of the council, by which they deliver their judgment, and by which they address themselves to others, it is natural to suppose, that through the same channel; to wit, their

president, they should be addressed by others. A letter there. fore to the congregation might very naturally be directed to him who possessed the first place, and presided among them.

But it may be said, Is not this at most but a plausible conjecture, and not a proof? I acknowledge, indeed, that the point does not admit so positive a proof as might be wished. But in a case of this kind, the most plausible conjecture, as it is all that can be had, will be accounted sufficient by a reasonable man for determining the question. This solution appears to me the best, because it puts no undue stretch upon the words, and is perfectly compatible with that equality in power and or, der, which the uniform style of the Acts and the Epistles, in the promiscuous application of the same appellatives, and in the use of the plural number on such occasions, proves to have subsisted among the pastors first settled by the apostles and evangelists. This equality is, in my opinion, strongly supported. It is only the solution now given of the difficulty, arising from the noted passage in the Apocalypse, that I admit to be conjectural. And all I plead in its favour is, that of all the conjectures I have seen on that article, it is the most likely.

It was doubtless the distinction of one pastor in every church, marked by this apostle, though not made by any who had written before him, which has led Tertullian, whose pub. lications first appeared but about a century after the apostles, to consider him as the institutor of episcopacy. These are his words, (lib. iv. adv. Marcionem) "Ordo tamen episcopo"rum ad originem recensus, in Joannem stabit auctorem :" which Bingham (Christian Antiquities, b, ii. chap. 1, sect. 3,) translates thus: The order of bishops, when it is traced "up to its original, will be found to have Saint John for one "of its authors." A palpable misinterpretation of our antiquary. Tertullian says expressly, "Our inquiries into the "origin of the episcopal order terminate in John the author." Had that father said, "Mundus ad originem recensus, in "Deum stabit creatorem ;" would Bingham have rendered it, "The world, when it is traced up to its original, will be found "to have God for one of its creators?" I cannot allow myself to think it. Yet the interpolation in rendering creatorem one of its creators, is not more flagrant, than in rendering auctorem one of its authors. By this version he avoids showing what is extremely plain from the words, that Tertullian did not think there was any subordination in the pastors of the churches instituted by the other apostles, Else how should he refer us to John, of whom, though an eminent propagator of the faith, we have not such particular accounts as of some of his col

leagues? If he had discovered any traces of such a disparity in the settling of the churches, recorded in the Acts of the Apostles, or mentioned in the Epistles of Paul, it is impossible he should have referred us solely to John, of whom we have so little information, as the author. But this opinion he has evidently founded on the Apocalypse, a book mentioned by him in the same sentence. Now if he thought that that apostle gave a model to the churches established by him, which the other apostles had not given to theirs, (though in aftertimes it came to be universally adopted) we must conclude, at least, that he did not consider any particular external form as essential to the christian church, but as a thing entirely discretionary in the several founders. And that this was his opinion, appears at least probable from this, that he had mentioned John's paternal care of certain churches in the preceding sentence, which he therefore considered as peculiarly his. "Ha"bemus et Joannis allumnas ecclesias.' To me, however, it is more likely, that John, in the direction of the epistles to the seven churches, availed himself of a distinction, which had subsisted from the beginning, but as it implied no difference in order and power, was too inconsiderable to be noticed in the history. This I think at least more credible, than that either the church was new modelled by this apostle, or that the different apostles adopted different plans.

In my next lecture, I shall make a few more observations on the constitution of the apostolick church, and on the nature and character of episcopacy, which obtained in the second and third centuries; and shall, in that and some subsequent discourses, proceed in tracing the progress of the hierarchy from the latent and inconsiderable seeds or principles whence it sprang, to the amazing height at which it at length arrived.

M

LECTURE VI.

THE purpose of this lecture is to make a few more obser

vations on the constitution of the apostolick church, and on the nature of the episcopacy which obtained in the second and third centuries.

When the gospel was preached by the apostles throughout the different cities and countries into which they travelled, wherever they made as many converts as would be sufficient to form a congregation, they caused them to unite together for this purpose; and with the first convenient opportunity, settled (as Clemens Romanus expresses it) bishops and deacons among them, for instructing them more fully, both publickly and privately, for guiding them by their counsel in every doubtful or difficult exigence, and for conducting more regularly in their assemblies the publick worship and ordinances. When the disciples in any place were not numerous enough to form a congregation by themselves, they united them to that which was nearest. To the congregation they gave the name Exxana which is commonly rendered church.

The deacons, who seem at first to have been chosen merely in consequence of a particular exigence, as we learn from Acts vi. 1, &c. to wit, for the inspection of the poor, and the distribution of the charitable collections, were admitted very early, probably in the time of the apostles, to an inferiour part in the sacred ministry, such as attending the pastors in the discharge of the religious offices, and acting under their direction. The deaconship served in fact as a noviciate to the ministry.

The bishops or presbyters (for these terms, as we have seen, were then used synonymously) appear to have been all-perfectly co-ordinate in ministerial powers. That a certain priority or presidentship, for order's sake, and in deference either to seniority, or to distinguishable talents, was allowed to one of their number, is probable for the reasons assigned in my last discourse. That the pastors were from the beginning vested with a superintendency over the congregation purely

in what concerned spiritual matters, cannot be questioned. Some of the titles that are given them in scripture, yamera, @porsano, guides, governours, undoubtedly imply thus much, as do also the terms in which the duty of the people to their pastors is recommended; UEIXEle, obey, submit, which manifestly require a respectful observance on their part. For this reason I imagine, that the generality of those modern sects, which have adopted the congregational, or independent plan, as it is called, have gone to an extreme, though not the most common extreme, in bringing the pastoral authority too

low.

It is however certain, that when authority of any kind is unattended with what are commonly called coercive measures, or the power of the sword, and unsupported by temporal splendour, or worldly sanctions, it is impossible to preserve it otherwise amongst an enlightened people, than by purity of character in those vested with it, and by diligence in the discharge of the duties of their station. In such cases, this is the only foundation on which the respect, obedience, and submis sion of others can be raised. It was therefore a pertinent advice that Paul gave to Timothy, however oddly it may appear at first:"Let no man despise thee." For we may justly say, that in ninety-nine cases out of a hundred, if a pastor is despised, he has himself to blame. All however that I purpose, by quoting the aforesaid titles and commands, is to show, that in what related to the peculiar duties of their office, a reverential attention was acknowledged to be due to them, as the guides and guardians of the flock.

There were some things, however, which, from the beginning, were conducted in common by the pastors, the deacons, and the whole congregation. This appears particularly and most properly to have been the case in all matters of scandal and offence. In regard to these, it is the community, that, in strictness of speech, is offended. The very word scandal or stumbling-block implies this. It is the community, therefore, that ought to be satisfied. It is to them our Lord appears (Matth. xviii. 15, &c.) to have committed the charge of admonishing delinquents, and even of excommunicating obsti nate offenders. But I shall have occasion to examine the import of that passage in the gospel afterwards. Only it may be further observed, in confirmation of what has been now ads vanced, that the earliest practice of the church was conformas ble to the interpretation now given. Clement, in the epistle above quoted, (chap. liv.) calls church censures a poolασσoμEve o T8 Tous, the things commanded by the multitude, that is, the congregation.