for the admission and exclusion of members, from the body: but a single Church, however numerous and well organized, agreeably to the congregational plan, has no power to perpetuate itself by supplying the vacancies which may occur in the pastoral office. Such a Church does not pretend to possess the power of ordination, which is essential to the perpetual continuance of the presbyterial office. This defect has been sorely felt by the advocates of INDEPENDENCY; and they have, in theory, proposed to remedy it in two ways; neither of which have been reduced, commonly, to practice. The first is, to constitute a presbytery within each congregation; that is, to have presbyters enough, in every Church, to form a complete presbytery, which should possess the full power of conferring the pastoral office, and excluding from it. Now, in theory, this does very well; we have no objections to a whole presbytery, within a single Church, if it is rich enough to support such a body. But whenever this is the case, the Church must be so numerous, and the members so scattered, that it will soon be found convenient, and even necessary, to meet in separate assemblies, on most occasions; and whenever this becomes expedient, it will of course be requisite, that the presbyters or pastors be distributed among the several assemblies, which compose the Church; and thus, we have the true origin of presbyteries, as they now exist. And thus it would ever be, in a rapidly progressive state of the Church.

Suppose half a dozen missionaries to gather a flourishing Church in a foreign land. At first they would all stand in the same relation to it, and would be a presbytery within a single society; but if this Church increased exceedingly, by the accession of new members, it would become inconvenient for all to convene in one place; and yet, there would be a repugnance in those united in bonds so sacred and tender, to separate entirely from each other's society:-and there would be no necessity for it. Let the missionaries distribute themselves among the several assemblies, into which the Church is divided; and let the usual routine of worship and instruction be conducted by them, respectively, in separate places: but when any business occurred, requiring the common counsel or consent of the whole body, let them come together into one place, as did the thousands of Jewish converts at Jerusalem, when they understood that Paul had returned from his successful mission among the Gentiles. Or, if the number should be too great for the commodious transaction of business

in one body, let them delegate a certain number of the wisest and most experienced of the members, to be their representatives; or, if they have other officers, besides pastors, let these convene with the preaching presbyters; and whatever might be the state of things in the beginning of the planting of Churches, very soon this plan of delegating the business to representatives would be adopted, almost as a matter of

course.

To illustrate our meaning more fully, we shall suppose, that at first, the converts to Christianity, in the mother Church at Jerusalem, formed one assembly, and met in one place; say, in some large room about the temple. Three thousand were added on the day of Pentecost, and soon afterwards, five thousand more; or, as the words are ambiguous, let us grant that the whole number was now five thousand; yet as the work was rapidly going on, in a short time, we may conclude, there could not be fewer than ten thousand members in the Church at Jerusalem. Now most of these would need much particular instruction,-and the teachers were numerous; for all who received special Pentecostal gifts would be qualified to edify the body, in one way or another. Can it be supposed then, that all these would, or could be instructed by the voice of one man? or, that all the other teachers would remain idle, while some one with stentorian voice attempted to make himself heard by such a multitude? We have never known a man that could so speak, as to be heard distinctly, through a whole discourse, by ten thousand persons. It is said, that such was the clearness, and distinctness of Mr. Whitefield's voice, that he could be heard by a greater number, when circumstances were favourable to the easy transmission of sound. But if ten thousand disciples, or even half that number, must so hear as to understand, and be instructed, common sense would dictate to any people, that the best way would be to separate them into a number of assemblies, and appoint one or more teachers, to take charge of each. And as the Jews who constituted the first Christian Church, had been accustomed to worship and receive instruction in many synagogues, in Jerusalem, as we learn from the New Testament itself, nothing can be more probable, than that they would agree to meet for worship and instruction in different places; and that the whole body would come together, only when some matter of general concern was to be heard or proposed, and soon even affairs, which concerned the whole society, would be committed to

the male members, and after a while to the seniors, or wise and experienced brethren.

Here then, from the first Church, a presbytery, with its several congregations is seen naturally to spring up. For unless these affectionate Christians had received an express command to separate entirely from the mother Church, from what we know of human nature, we may be sure, that they would not have thought of a wider dissociation, than local circumstances made necessary; and that they would still, though worshipping in different places, consider themselves as members of the original Church. And thus we have one Church, consisting of many branches, each of which is furnished with one or more teachers, and other necessary officers, and, on certain occasions, all meeting together by a grand convocation of the individuals composing the body, or by their representatives, and respective presbyters. Is not this idea of the primitive Church much more probable, than that they would, in the same city, proceed to institute different independent societies? And even when another church was formed, in Samaria, another at Joppa, a fourth at Damascus, and a fifth at Antioch; all these would possess the feeling of affiliation, and would cling to the mother Church, as children to their parents. And, whenever any difficulty occurred, they would naturally be disposed to refer for counsel to the original society, at Jerusalem. Thus we find it was, in fact; for here the most of the Apostles remained for a long time; and those who travelled abroad, often returned to this sacred spot, and reported the things which were done by them, and the success which attended their labours. Thus, when Peter went into the house of Cornelius, and preached the Gospel and administered baptism first to the Gentiles, when he came up to Jerusalem, the propriety of his conduct was then questioned and discussed. And when Paul returned from a long tour of preaching, and reported to James what he had done, and what doctrine he had preached, and what course he had pursued in regard to Jewish rites, James informs him, that the brethren, as soon as they heard of his arrival, must needs come together, and "there be," said he, "many thousands who believe, who are all zealous for the law of Moses." And when a difficulty, respecting circumcision and other Jewish rites arose in the Church at Antioch, they sent up Paul and Barnabas to Jerusalem, to consult the apostles, elders, and brethren, who were there, respecting this matter. The Church, therefore, was

still considered as one body, the members of which were scattered abroad, and existed in a multitude of distinct, but not independent congregations.

It appears to us also, that upon the hypothesis here assumed, the origin of Episcopacy can most easily be explained. It cannot be denied, by the candid Presbyterian, that at a very early period, a distinction was made between bishops and elders, although no vestige of any such difference is apparent in the Scriptures, but the contrary. And although the names bishop and presbyter are used promiscuously throughout the New Testament; yet as early as the time of Ignatius, or soon afterwards, the former of these names seems to have been confined to the presiding presbyter in the bench of elders. Now this change in the usage is easily accounted for, upon the principles laid down above. For, in every regular body, which transacts business, civil or ecclesiastical, a presiding officer is necessary. No collection of people attempt to transact the most common affairs, without appointing a chairman or president, who, for the time being, is invested with authority to keep order, and often with power to convene the body after it is dissolved, if any emergency should require a meeting earlier than the time to which it stands adjourned. As, at Jerusalem, there were many teachers and preachers in the Church, when these met, they would, in conformity with common sense and common usage, appoint one of their number to preside. This would be the man most venerated, or whose talents were best adapted to the impartial and effective execution of the duties of the office. In those days of simplicity and ardent piety, no danger would be apprehended from continuing the same man in office from month to month, and from year to year. Thus, by common consent, or repeated suffrage, one by office on a par with the rest, is by them invested with a peculiar authority, primus inter paros. And as a distinctive appellation becomes convenient, and is naturally resorted to, in all such cases; so, instead of inventing any new term to designate his office, they appropriated one of the names which had before been common to all the members of the body. Thus, while all continued to be denominated presbyters, the name bishop was particularly applied to the president of the presbytery; and as he was a kind of representative of the whole Church, it did not, upon the known principles of human nature, require a long time to establish a pretty wide distinction between him and his compeers. Men are

prone to increase the honour and power conferred on the incumbent of a high office; especially, when the gifts and character of the individual occupying it, render him estimable in the view of the people. In our opinion, nothing more than the natural, simple process here detailed, is necessary to explain all the well-ascertained facts, respecting episcopacy, in perfect consistency with the original parity of all the pastors of the Church; especially when that is recollected, which cannot be denied, that, for a long time, the jurisdiction of a bishop extended no farther than to converts of a particular city, and its immediate vicinity.

While the whole Church was confined to a city or narrow district, one presbytery would be sufficient for the government of the body, and no higher or larger judicatories would be needed. But, when congregations were gathered in remote cities or countries, if any union or communion were maintained in the body, it became necessary to have councils or ecclesiastical synods, in which the several distant members of the Church might meet, to consult about the interests of the general society. And however far the Church may extend, such representative meetings may occasionally be held with advantage, for they tend to promote unity, harmony, and brotherly affection, as well as afford opportunity of entering into important enterprizes which require the combined energies of the whole body. But when wide oceans, or almost impassable deserts, separate different portions of the Church, the unity of the body is not violated, nor the communion of saints denied, because these sections of the Church, far apart from each other, do not live under one and the same ecclesiastical regimen, or meet by their representatives, in the same synod. If they cherish Christian affection mutually, and cordially receive each other's members and ministers, when testimonials are satisfactory, they do still keep the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace.

The same may be observed, respecting Christian denominations, whose minor opinions and ceremonial usages are different. Although they inhabit the same city or country, yet an attempt to bring them together under the same rules of discipline and worship, would only tend to confusion; whereas, in their separate organizations, they can go along peaceably and comfortably, and may cultivate Christian communion with each other. Such distinct denominations, many of which are found in this land, cannot be considered as guilty of schism, VOL. IV. No. I.-E