THE GENESIS

OF THE

NEW ENGLAND CHURCHES.

CHAPTER I.

WHAT WAS IN THE BEGINNING.

In the beginning, Christianity was simply Gospel. Ecclesiastical organization was not the cause, but the effect of life. Churches were constituted by the spontaneous association of believers. Individuals and families, drawn toward each other by their common trust in Jesus the Christ, and their common interest in the good news concerning the kingdom of God, became a community united, not by external bonds, but by the vital force of distinctive ideas and principles. New affections became the bond of a new brotherhood, and the new brotherhood, with its mutual duties and united responsibilities, became an organized society. The ecclesiastical polity of the apostles was simple-a living growth, not an artificial construction,

How was it at Jerusalem? A few persons-about one hundred and twenty in all-after the ascension of their Lord, were in the practice of assembling in an upper room, which seems to have been the head-quarters of the eleven who had been nearest to him, and whom the others recognized as leaders. These persons were Jews, whose distinction from their countrymen was that, having been followers of Jesus

B

before his ignominious death, they had not lost their confidence in him; but, in the face of an immense and triumphant majority, believed that though he had been rejected by the priests and rulers of the nation, and crucified by the Roman power, he was the Messiah risen from the dead, and invested with all authority on earth and in heaven. Waiting for some new manifestation of his glory, they "continued with one accord in prayer and supplication "—not those of the sterner sex only, as if they were planning a revolutionary movement in the state, or were setting up a new school in philosophy, but the men "with the women, and Mary, the mother of Jesus, and with his brethren." Thus they were unconsciously forming that new commonwealth of men and women, and of households, united by personal attachment to Jesus, and living in the atmosphere of worship-that commonwealth of faith and love which was to realize in its future all the promise of a new earth encircled by new heavens.

At first the few disciples seem not to have thought much about how their society should be organized and its affairs administered, their minds being otherwise occupied. The earliest appearance of any thing like organization among them is when it seemed necessary that one of them should be designated and recognized as an apostle in the place that had been made vacant by the defection and death of Judas. On that occasion the whole proceeding, though essentially theocratic in its spirit, was democratic in its form. It seems to have been doubtful which of the two brethren toward whom the minds of the assembly had been turned was best qualified for the work of an apostle. An expedient was resorted to, which, had the assembly been unanimous concerning the superior fitness of either candidate, would have been preposterous. The question whether Barsabas or Matthias should be "numbered with the eleven apostles " was decided by lot, religiously, and with prayer that thus God's will might be manifested. The religious use of the lot for the decision of doubtful questions was customary among the

Jews from the earliest period of their history, but no other instance of it appears in the New Testament.

On the fiftieth day after that Passover at which Christ was crucified, the new dispensation which had been prepared in his life and death, and completed in his resurrection and ascension, was publicly introduced by the manifestation of a special divine presence, the promised Holy Spirit illuminating and guiding the apostles. Suddenly the one hundred and twenty became three thousand. Of this growing multitude it is said that "they continued in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers." In other words, the "three thousand souls" were bound together by their constant attendance on the apostles' teaching, and their sympathy of thought and feeling with the movement which those witnesses for Christ were leading; they had a certain distinctive practice of breaking bread together, as if they were all one family, and they continually prayed together. Their new ideas and new sympathies and hopes were a bond of union; and though not yet separated from the Jewish people, nor anticipating such a separation, they were beginning to be a distinct community with a life of their own-a community almost unorganized, so far as the record shows, and yet distinct in the midst of the Jewish nation, like that nation in the midst of the Roman Empire. A new and unique commonwealth had begun to live, and must needs grow into some organized form according to its nature.

How, then, shall the new community be organized? What officers and functionaries shall it have? How shall it be governed? The silence of the record seems to show that the apostles, busy with their work of teaching, daily repeating to the thousands of new disciples the remembered words of their Master, telling as eye-witnesses the story of Jesus from his baptism to his ascension, and preaching the good news of the kingdom, gave themselves little concern beforehand about the organization of the community which was coming into existence as the result of their testimony con

cerning the resurrection and glory of the crucified Christ. Yet something of organization was inevitable, and could not be long deferred. To sustain so large a community-so suddenly constituted, and including multitudes who had come to Jerusalem only as pilgrims, many of them from distant regions-large contributions were necessary, and were made by those who had any thing to give. In the emergency, all that they had was thrown, as it were, into a common stock; for such as had convertible property of any kind sold it, and made generous distribution of the proceeds to all that were in want. When this liberality is first mentioned [Acts ii., 44, 45], it is as if the distribution were made by the donors themselves, or by their personal friends, without any formal arrangement. Afterward [iv., 34, 35], when the work had become more arduous, and when those of the disciples who had "lands or houses," in Jerusalem or near it, sold them for the benefit of the common cause, the distribution seems to have been in a more systematic way under the direction of the apostles. But after a while the number included in the new community had been so multiplied, and the amounts to be received and distributed had become so great, that these methods were found unsatisfactory. Then it was-and apparently not till then-that special officers or commissioners were appointed to that service.

The procedure in making the appointment was full of a religious spirit, and at the same time democratic. It may be compared with a parallel passage in the history of the Wesleyan polity. After Wesleyanism, with its exquisitely adjusted organization, had become powerful in England, and while John Wesley was still holding the reins of power, he undertook to tell, at one of the conferences of his helpers, what his power was, and how he came by it. He told how a few persons came to him, first in London, and then in other places, desiring that he would advise them and pray with them. "The desire," said he, was on their part, not on mine"-" but I did not see how I could refuse them my help

and be guiltless before God. Here commenced my powernamely, a power to appoint when, where, and how they should meet, and to remove those whose life showed that they had no desire to flee from the wrath to come. And this power remained the same whether the people meeting together were twelve, twelve hundred, or twelve thousand." After a time, the people who had thus come under his care and direction proposed a subscription of quarterly payments for certain common interests-such as rent and repair of the building in which they held their meetings—and he permitted them to subscribe. "Then I asked," so he continued the story, "Who will take the trouble of receiving this money and paying it where it is needful?" One said, 'I will do it, and keep the account for you;' so here was the first steward. Afterward I desired one or two more to help me as stewards, and in process of time a greater number. Let it be remembered it was I myself, and not the people, who chose the stewards, and appointed to each the distinct work wherein he was to help me as long as I chose." He gave a similar account of his power over the preachers, whether as individuals or as assembled in conference. Without raising any question as to the wisdom or the rightfulness of the autocracy which Wesley asserted over the voluntary association by which he was hoping to revive religion in the Church of England, we can not but observe the contrast between his account of what he did in the appointment of receiving and disbursing officers in the community which he was founding, and Luke's account of what the apostles did in the appointment of similar officers for the community under their teaching at Jerusalem.

The apostles seem to have been proceeding on Wesley's plan, which was natural and reasonable in the circumstances. Offerings for the support of the community had been brought to them, and the distribution seems to have been made by them personally, or by others acting for them. A complaint had arisen that the distribution was not perfectly equitable.