us"-"They are the messengers of the churches"—"When they had ordained elders in every church"-"It pleased the elders, with the whole church"-"If the church be met together in one place." These separate bodies of christians were not called churches by a figure of speech, for they had all the attributes of, and functions of entire churches, as their own particular officers or servants, their own particular places of meeting, and their own particular temporalities. Each of the churches also bore a common relation to the universal and divine head in heaven, without the intervention of any earthly head. These churches were distinguished from their ministers. "But he that prophesieth, edifieth the church"-"No church communicated with me, but ye only"—And let not the church be charged"-"There were prophets in the church, in Antioch"-"They were received of the church and elders"-Paul sent and called the elders of the church"-"How shall he take care of the church of God"-"The seven stars are the angels of the seven churches, and the seven candlesticks are the seven churches."

In the New Testament the acts of ministers were not confounded with those of the church; nor those of the church with the acts of the ministry, any more than their names. It may surprise those who have been accustomed to hear of the primitive church, to find, that in Paul's writings no such phrase exists; but that he uniformly writes to, and speaks of churches.

With the opinions of Romanists or Reformed, we have nothing to do, when we are seeking principles. These, I repeat, must be expressed in the New Testament, or they must originate from it, by plain and obvious consequence or inference. If any change take place, even one month after the canon of scripture was closed, or without the authority of the apostles, it is of no more importance in deciding a question of scripture principle, than as though it had happened in the eighteenth century.

From the New Testament, we find, then, the following principles: first, that in the very beginning, churches were local assemblies. Secondly, that each and every church possessed an identity of existence. Thirdly, that each church was distinguished from its office bearers. These three principles of church existence, are three natural, simple, and obvious means of preserving the rights and liberties of churches. By giving to each church identity of existence, every individual one must be destroyed before

the genus can become extinct. The church of any name or country may be destroyed, and yet, if any single christian church remains, in any part of the world, the gates of hell have not prevailed against it. Nothing is more notorious, from the whole tenor of ecclesiastical history, than the process by which churches have been enslaved. Individual churches must be swallowed up, to make dioceses, provinces, &c. This is not only a well known, but a necessary process of a hierarchy. One ministerial head, or sovereignty over many churches, is out of the question. Hierarchists have always aimed to make the church one and indivisible. Be the name, or the form of the head what it may, every part of the body is made equally dependent upon it, and must die if it be cut off.

But the indivisibility of the church has neither scripture, example nor precept for its support. The union of the primitive churches was maintained among themselves upon federative principles. Believers are, indeed, considered as composing one church, as it respects God and Christ; as, "the church of the living God-head over all things to the church," &c.-but when we attend to the addresses of the apostolic epistles, a distinction of the churches among themselves most evidently appears. "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, called to be saints"-"Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, with all the saints which are in all Achaia"-"Unto the churches of Galatia"-"To the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus"-"To all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons"-"To the saints and faithful brethren which are at Colosse"-"Unto the church of the Thessalonians in God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ" "To the twelve tribes which are scattered abroad, greeting: "To the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia"-"To them which have obtained like precious faith with us"-"John, to the seven churches of Asia." It is evident that the epistles of Peter, and that of James, were written to Jewish converts, and that they have been improperly called general. Certainly those members of the twelve tribes who were scattered abroad, were not a whole, or a universal church; nor yet the strangers who were scattered through the provinces of Asia Minor. There is nothing impossible or contradictory in the idea of confederated churches being one body, as it relates to their heavy head. In this respect, "there is

one spirit, even as ye are called, in one hope of your calling." It is this that constitutes all the individuals who compose different congregations, or churches, one body in Christ, as fully as though there was but one pastor or universal bishop, under whom all the believers were reduced to one congregation. The unity of the church is no more affected by the identity of churches, than citizenship is by the identity of family relations.

The men who did not write to two churches in the name of one; who wrote no catholic epistles, cannot be supposed to have exercised a universal government. Their acknowledgment of distinct churches, with their proper officers, is proof positive that they established no hierarchy. How would it sound to hear of the churches of Rome, of the churches of England, or the Methodist Episcopal Churches, would not these be strange sounds in our ears? Such seamed garments, and jointed harness, are not adapted to supremacy. The body must be one, and the name one, that the head may find no resistance in council or command.

Thus, we have sought in the New Testament for principles by which to regulate our judgment, of the existence and unity of churches; and, if our deductions be true, they are the same practical utility as though the sacred writers had expressed them in the form of propositions. Let us adopt the same method in searching for the principles of church government.

"And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ"-"God hath set some in the church, first, apostles; secondly, prophets; thirdly, teachers; after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments." In these two passages, and they are the most detailed account of the primitive office of any in the New Testament, bishops and elders are not mentioned by name. The pastors and teachers in the first, may be supposed to answer to the teachers and governments in the second. The apostles, prophets, evangelists, miracles, gifts of healing, &c. are confessedly extraordinary, for they are equally wanting in all other ages and countries. The idea that bishops are successors of the apostles, in the only sense it can possibly be admitted, is precluded by their coexistence. Nothing is more plain, than that pastors, go

vernments, bishops or elders, were contemporary with the apostles. "And Paul sent for the elders, and said take heed to the flock of God over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers"-"And we beseech you, brethren, to know them who labor among you, and are over you, in the Lord, and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake"-"Remember them who have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the word of God, whose faith follow." It may be remarked in passing, how little this style savours of the dictatorial. But these passages prove, most unequivocally, that in Ephesus, in Thessalonica, and among the Hebrews, St. Paul recognised overseers, rulers, pastors or governments, as well as teachers. A succession to oversight or government, in the churches, must, therefore, be to those, and not to the apos tles; for by the shewing of Paul himself, the apostles and evangelists had not the oversight or rule, in the churches enumerated above; and no one overlooked them all; their bishops were among them. Now does it not follow, by analogy, where no evidence is found to the contrary, that the case was similar to other churches? That is, that there were elders in every city and church, whom the Holy Ghost made overseers.

Apostles, evangelists, prophets, gifts, miracles, &c. &c. might have been necessary in the planting of churches, and the completion of written revelation; but this extraordinary work once accomplished, the extraordinary succession would destroy the identity of the original.

We will now examine the several passages where bishop, elder, deacon, or minister, occur. "He sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church; the Holy Ghost hath made you (said he) (episcopi) overseers"-"This is a faithful saying, if a man desires the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work"-"A bishop must be blameless"-"To all the saints at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons""The elders I exhort, who am also an elder; feed the flock, taking the oversight"-"And sent it to the elders by the hands of Barabas and Saul"-"They ordained them elders in every city"—"The apostles and elders came together""The apostles, elders, and brethren, greeting"-"They delivered the decrees ordained of the elders". "That thou shouldest ordain elders in every city"-"Let him call for the elders of the church"-"The deacons must be grave""Let them use the office of a deacon"—"Let the deacon

be the husband of one wife." Minister, in the New Testament, is deacon in the original. Paul says he was made a minister, (deacon,) and he thanks God for putting him into the ministry, (deaconship.) In the Acts the apostleship is also called a bishoprick, though the apostles never call themselves bishops; and it is well known to every body that bishops are never named in conjunction or disjunction with elders, though they are conjoined with deacons. In Timothy, the qualifications of bishops and deacons are enumerated; but nothing is said of the qualifications of elders. In Peter, the elders are to take the oversight. In the Acts, the Holy Ghost makes the bishops of the elders. It must needs create some surprise to those who are not aware of the fact, that an office which makes such a figure in church history, an office which has swallowed up all others, or thrown them into the back ground, should have been so seldom mentioned by the sacred writers. In the Epistle of the Romans, it is not found; nor in Corinthians; nor Ephesians; nor Galatians; nor Thessalonians; and but twice in the Acts of the Apostles.

We will now proceed to search for the principle of the primitive government, as found in the examples recorded in the New Testament.

In the Acts of the Apostles there is a circumstantial account of the manner in which the controversy between the judaizing teachers and Paul and Barnabas was decided. "When, therefore, Paul and Barnabas had no small dissention and disputation with them (the certain men who came from Jerusalem) they (the brethren) determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain others of them (their own body) should go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders, about this question. How were the certain others of them selected? Did Paul and Barnabas choose them, or did they offer their own services, or were they chosen by the brethren who were vexed? Nothing but the most positive evidence to the contrary ought to influence any man to imagine that the latter mode was not adopted in preference to the two former. But if it was, then, there were delegates, or representatives in this case: "And when they were come to Jerusalem they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders. And the apostles and elders came together to consider this matter. And when there was much disputing, Peter rose and said, men and brethren, then all the multitude kept silence, and gave au