and the word Bishop signify exactly the same office, and are the very same term in the original language of the New Testament.

The term Presbyter, and the term Overseer or Bishop, are applied indiscriminately in the writings of the Apostles to all the pastors of the Christian church. That they mean the very same office, and are intended to designate nothing more than the station and functions of every minister of a Christian congregation, may be abundantly demonstrated from numerous texts in the Acts and Epistles, relating to the formation of the primitive churches. Thus in Acts xx. we are informed that the Apostle Paul "sent from Miletus to Ephesus and called the Presbyters of the church." And when they were come unto him he admonished them "to take heed unto themselves and to all the church of God, over which the Holy Spirit had made them Overseers or Bishops, to tend as Pastors the church of God." Here we find a fact recorded worthy of our most particular notice, viz. that so far from having one Overseer or Bishop ruling over many congregations, according to the system of diocesan episcopacy, there were in the one city of Ephesus several overseers, pastors of Christian flocks, all denominated indiscriminately Presbyters and Bishops.

In the Epistle to the Philippians i. 1. the Apostle Paul, with his fellow-labourer Timotheus, addresses all the members of the Christian congregations in the town of Philippi, and particularly the officers of their respective churches. "Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the Overseers or Bishops, and Deacons." Here again we find, as in the case of Ephesus, the remarkable fact recorded, that, instead of one Bishop or Overseer ruling, as in the diocesan system, over many towns and congregations, there were several Bishops or Overseers superintending the spiritual concerns of the different congregations residing within the bounds of a single city. It is, also, worthy of remark, in this passage, that the Apostle is evidently enumerating all the officers in the churches at Philippi; and he omits the term Presbyter, because it would be superfluous, being identified with the term Overseer, as indicating the very same officer, viz. the pastor of a single church.

In the Epistle to Titus, chap. i, the Apostle reminds Titus that he had left him in Crete to set in order things that were wanting ; and to ordain Presbyters in every city, if any were blameless or unexceptionable; "for," he adds, "a Bishop or Overseer must be blameless." This is a demonstration that Bishop and Presbyter are synonimous terms, designating the same order of ecclesiastical officers; for, otherwise, the words of the Apostle would be destitute of meaning.

In the First Epistle to Timothy, chap. iii. the Apostle gives

B

particular instructions to all church officers with respect to the manner in which they ought to conduct themselves and govern their families, so as to shew forth the efficacy of true religion. In these important instructions he mentions Overseers and Deacons, as including all the officers of the primitive Christian church; nor does he even allude to Presbyters as a distinct order.

In short, throughout all the writings of the Apostle Paul, he uniformly speaks of Presbyters and Overseers indiscriminately as the same persons, without the slightest intimation of a difference in their office. And there is no where the least hint of the existence of any superior ecclesiastic to whom any other pastors of Christian flocks were subordinate, in any manner or degree whatsoever.

с

The identity of Presbyters and Bishops is farther demonstrated by a most clear and decisive passage in an Epistle addressed by the Apostle Peter to the whole Christian church. I allude to the Gfth chapter of his first General Epistle. Πρεσβυτέρους τους εν υμιν παρακαλῶ ὁ συμπρεσβυτέρος. Ποιμάνατε το εν υμιν ποιμνιον του Θεου, επισκοποῦντες, μη αναγκαστως, αλλ έκουσίως, μηδε αισχροκερδώς, αλλά προθύμως. "The Presbyters who are among you, I, who am their Co-presbyter, exhort;-Be ye pastors of the flock of God which is among you, fulfilling your duty as Overseers thereof, not by constraint but willingly, not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind." And he adds, as if he had foreseen the evils which would ensue from the unauthorised introduction of a system more adapted to the views of earthly ambition. Neither as being lords over the heritage, but being ensamples to the flock; and, when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away."

It thus appears, with the most unquestionable evidence, that Presbyter, and Bishop or Overseer, are synonimous and interchangeable names for the same persons, character, and office. It appears, moreover, that in the first age of the Gospel, which was certainly the purest, instead of one Overseer over many churches in an extensive district, and of a superior order to other Pastors, there were several Overseers or Bishops in the confined limits of one town, and a perfect equality subsisting among them of ecclesiastical rank and function.

Such having been the case in the apostolical age, it follows undeniably, that all ministers of the Gospel, regularly called to that sacred office by a Christian people, are Overseers or Bishops within the limits of the respective folds wherein they exercise a pastoral charge. All those who are thus appointed to the oversight of any congregation in the general church, are, according to the genuine spirit and express letter of the Christian institution, ap

pointed Presbyters or Pastors, Overseers or Bishops, in the genuine, primitive, evangelical meaning and designation of these

terms.

During the apostolical age, while there was yet to be found upon earth a person endowed with the supernatural gifts of the Holy Ghost, and capable of proving, by miraculous powers, his extraordinary commission from the Son of God, it were reasonable to suppose, that the authority of a person so commissioned would be appealed to as paramount for the decision of every point of ecclesiastical government; and it might be expected, if it could be presumed in any case, that such a person would have been looked up to by all the Christian world as possessed of personal dominion to direct, decide, and controul, in every question of doctrine or of discipline.

But we find no instance of a claim to such pre-eminence in the pure model of ecclesiastical government presented to us in the New Testament. No Overseer affected to be superior in dignity or authority to the other Pastors of the Christian Church.

Even the apostles themselves, the companions and chosen friends of the blessed Jesus-specially selected by himself-instructed by his own sacred lips-the witnesses of his miracles, death, resurrection, and ascension into heaven-in whom the promise of the Holy Spirit was fulfilled-and who were enabled to controul or suspend the laws of nature, by the miraculous powers conferred upon them-even they, though possessed of all these high gifts and pretensions, never for one moment claimed superior jurisdiction, or aimed at pre-eminent dominion. They devoted themselves to the perilous and toilsome office of Missionaries, or to the less prominent, though not less useful and laborious, duties of Presbyters or Overseers in the churches they had collected together. They addressed all Pastors and Ministers of the word as their brethren, over whom they asserted no superiority of personal rank or station. No mortal man was then dignified with the title of infallible or supreme head of the church. Such a title would have been deemed blasphemy in the apostolical age. The Christians in the primitive churches called no man Father in a spiritual sense; for ONE was their Father, even their Father who is in heaven: they called no man Master in a spiritual sense; for ONE was their Master, even Christ the Lord; and all they were brethren.

Thus the doors of the primitive church admitted no rivalship of priestly ambition, and were effectually barred against all encroachments of ecclesiastical domination.

With respect to the union that subsisted amongst Christian congregations in the apostolical age, it appears plainly from Scripture, that a number of Pastors and Deacons occasionally met to

gether, for the purpose of mutual edification, consultation, examination into the state of their respective societies, settling any matters of dispute that might have arisen, and arranging affairs relating to their common interest. Of such Synods, or assemblies of Presbyters, there are several intimations in the Acts and Epistles. For instance, in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, there is minutely recorded the narrative of an appeal made by the church at Antioch, to the Synod of Presbyters held at Jerusalem. In this Synod several of the apostles sat and took an active part in its transactions; and thus gave the sanction of apostolical_example and precedent to all similar assemblies of Christian Pastors convened for the purpose of reforming abuses, and extending the uncorrupted religion of the Son of God. But in order to have such assemblies truly modelled after the apostolical precedent, it is manifestly requisite that the members thereof should not only be on a par with respect to ecclesiastical function and authority, but (what is of yet greater moment) that they should meet together with the same mind and intention of the apostles themselves, viz. with singleness of heart and Christian zeal, to promote such objects as the apostles would approve, such as are worthy of the disciples of the Lord Jesus to undertake—such as tend manifestly to promote the glory of God, with peace on earth and good will towards men.-This is the prime business; the name or mode of the assembly is of infinitely less importance.

One of the offices which the Scriptures represent Presbyters as empowered to discharge, is, to ordain or set apart Pastors for the ministry of the word, either for missions amongst the heathens, or for the stated religious instruction of particular congregations.

Thus, in the thirteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, the Presbyters or Teachers of the Church of Antioch were directed to set apart Paul and Barnabas for a particular ministerial office, which they did by prayer and laying on of their hands. So likewise, in the fourth chapter first Epistle to Timothy, the apostle Paul expressly reminds him of the solemn duties to which he had been set apart by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery: and in the second Epistle, first chapter, he recalls to the recollection of Timothy, in the most affectionate manner, that he himself had been present on that interesting occasion, and had joined in the solemnity by laying on his hands. In like manner, we are informed that Paul and Barnabas ordained Presbyters in every city and in every church throughout the limits of their mission.

By ordination nothing more is meant than the solemn appointment of an individual to some office in the Christian Church, which appointment is publickly witnessed by Ministers of the Gospel. By the laying on of hands nothing more is meant than a significant gesture to point out the individual who is thus set

apart, and for whom a special petition is offered to Almighty God.

That this simple and impressive rite has been in various ways perverted to purposes of the grossest imposture and superstition, is but too well known; and it is not surprising, that the disgust excited thereby has produced amongst some pious Christians objections to the service altogether but we never ought to argue against the use of any institution from its abuse; for, if so, we might be led to object to the adoption of every religious service, rite and institution. The chief source of the abuses of ordination has sprung from the notion, that, by the laying on of hands, is conveyed some spiritual gift, property or endowment a notion totally unwarranted by any scriptural authority. Even in the apostolical age, when the extraordinary influence of the Holy Spirit was imparted to chosen converts, though this divine gift was sometimes bestowed at the time of the laying on of the hands of inspired men, yet it no where appears to have been the consequence of that action: on the contrary, the gift of the Holy Spirit appears to have been generally bestowed antecedently to ordination; and the laying on of hands was merely the customary form of witnessing the appointment to a special office in the church, and of blessing the person so appointed.

If the imposition of hands meant nothing more than this, in the first age of the church, at a time when the apostles were in existence, who were themselves filled with the Holy Spirit and thereby empowered to exercise a miraculous agency for the diffusion of Christianity,-there can be no grounds for supposing that this rite could confer any peculiar spiritual gift in the future ages of Christianity after that miraculous agency had totally ceased. It is, in fact, not only an unscriptural, but a very dangerous and highly superstitious notion, to suppose that ordination conveys any extraordinary influence of the Holy Ghost: it is a notion that can never be entertained by any Christians who take the Bible alone as the rule of their discipline, and the primitive church as the model of their ecclesiastical government.

Connected with the ordination of Pastors, there is another practice of the primitive church which seems to be set up for the guidance of all future Christian societies, viz. the free choice of the people in the election of Pastors, and their concurrence in the appointment of all their ecclesiastical officers. So anxious were the first apostles to maintain this most important privilege of Christian freedom, and so scrupulous and jealous were they of any interference with these indubitable rights, that they would not proceed to fill up, by their own authority, the vacancy