duties that devolved upon them: we have nothing respecting the appointment of the men; nothing respecting the appointment of their successors; nothing that would direct us in making such a choice: and therefore they passed away amongst the first instruments God employed, just as be employed angels in establishing the Gospel of Christ.

But to shew farther that these individuals were not intended to be permanent -before we proceed to consider the proper officers, to shew the proper functionaries, of the Church of Christ—we may remark, that the extraordinay gifts which they enjoyed were, in the first instance, communicated to the Apostles directly by the Spirit of God; and, secondly, communicated to those who exercised them amongst the different Churches by the laying on of the Apostles' hands. No one had the power of laying on of hands to convey the gifts of the Holy Spirit, except the Apostles. Hence, though Philip himself performed wonders, though he performed miracles that astonished Simon Magus himself in Samaria, he could not convey the gifts of the Holy Ghost to any one whatever, until Peter and John went down to Samaria, and there laid their hands upon the people, and communicated to them the gifts of the Holy Spirit. And Simon Magus wondered when he saw this yet higher exercise of power: if he was astonished at Philip in the miraculous working he displayed before, he was much more so when he found there were others far greater than Philip, who could communicate the gift that Philip enjoyed to others: then he desired the supreme exercise of agency in the bestowment of spiritual gifts; he desired this should be purchased by money for himself. There is only one instance to the contrary; and that is the case of Ananias, who laid his hands on the Apostle Paul. And here I would say, that, in the case of Paul, I find in his reasoning in the beginning of the Galatians, how anxious he was that he should not be considered an Apostle at second hand, or dependent on those that were Apostles before him. And hence, lest it should be said that he held an inferior part, and received the gifts of the Spirit from the laying on of the hands of the Apostles, we find God employing this individual instead of them. And hence you will find, that Ananias bestowing these gifts upon Paul, will furnish an exception to the ordinary rule, namely, that it should be conferred by the Apostles. Not that there was anything inconsistent with the economy of Christianity in extending them to any numbers, but the fact is that it was not so extended. And hence, when the Apostles died, and all those on whom they laid their hands, we can easily conceive, without entering on the discussion of the question about the cessation of miracles-we can easily conceive when miracles ceased to be performed-just when the last of those persons expired on whom the Apostles laid their hands. Thus, then, persons could not possess these extraordinary gifts after the death of the Apostles, except those that had received these gifts from them; consequently they could not; for there were no Apostles constantly to apply the miraculous power they had for the communication of gifts; and these functionaries could not, therefore, as I have stated, be permanent; nor could miracles, or gifts of tongues themselves.

But let me now draw your attention to the officers that are appointed to be ordained in the Church, and whose qualifications are given, since we cannot look to those whom we have already noticed as permanent officers In 1 Timothy,

iii. from the beginning, we have some directions that will guide our inquiries upon this subject: "This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre, but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection in all gravity; (for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil." In the next place, the deacons are described in the eighth to the thirteenth verse of this same chapter. "Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. And let those also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things. Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For they that have used the office of a deacon well purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus." We have, therefore, the office of a deacon distinctly defined, and the qualifications connected with the exercise of his functions laid down, as well as the qualifications connected with a bishop. If it should be said, we do not find bishops connected with modern Independency; I answer, that we do: we do not find the word, but we find the man: and I am not, at the present moment, attaching importance to terms, any farther than as they may throw light upon things. It is possible to have names without the realities signified; and it is possible, in the change of language, to have the reality signified without the names. Hence, under these circumstances, if we do not find the term "bishop" among the Independent Churches, we are not to suppose that on this account there are no bishops. Nor are we to suppose, that even the term might not be, legitimately and fairly, in its true and proper meaning, applied to the pastors amongst the Independent Churches. It will appear that "bishops" and "elders," or, as they are sometimes called, "presbyters," are sometimes employed, as terms occurring in the New Testament: hence it is said" They had bishops, they had presbyters, they had deacons ; you have, even granting your right to the term bishop-you have only bishops and deacons." I should say, in reply to this, that there were not three orders described by these three terms. There are some single realities described by a double designation indicating something respecting the reality itself. The term "bishop" signifies an overseer; the term "elder," signifies an officer made such usually, though not always, on account of his judgment and his experience. And hence it will be found, that the term, whether it may signify an officer or an overseer, carries with it precisely the same idea.

Let us look at some passages, for the purpose of ascertaining this. Take Acts, xx. 17, and you will find an illustration of the statement I have made. "And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church;" the "presbyters" of the church, that is. Now, this refers to the second order of clergy; that is, it is referred to that order of clergy which we are said to have left out in our arrangement. If, however, we look to other parts of the

context before us, we shall find, that these same persons are designated "bishops," as well as "elders." Hence, if we take the twenty-eighth verse of the same chapter, we shall find another part of the address delivered upon the same occasion, and to the same persons, establishing the view we take, that "elders" and "bishops" are not different, but the same; and that therefore we have not bishops, presbyters, and deacons, or bishops, elders, and deacons, in the apostolical church, as three distinct functionaries; but we have one class of the functionaries in question designated bishops or elders, and the others deacons only. The twenty-eighth verse says, "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers," (the word is " bishops,") "to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." The men, therefore, designated "elders" in the seventeenth verse, you perceive are designated "bishops" in the twentyeighth verse; and if the expression has not occurred in our translation, it is not on that account the less applicable to the case. The term is "bishops ;"

66

over which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops." If, again, we take Titus, i. 5, we shall find another illustration of the idea I am now pressing. "For this cause," says the Apostle, "left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee." That is, ordain presbyters, or officers. And here, then, the Apostle proceeds, and gives the qualification of those elders or presbyters: "If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless." Now, here he is speaking of the ordination of elders, and he designates them, and the qualifications which rendered them bishops. In the fifth verse, therefore, you perceive they are 66 elders," in the seventh verse they are "bishops :" just as we find them in the other chapter I have noticed, in the seventeenth verse "elders," and in the twenty-eighth verse "bishops."

It is not necessary, therefore, to dwell farther on this subject. There were no officers in the church directed to be appointed, whose qualifications were given, to whom I have referred. I find these officers, therefore, in the Independent system; and therefore this part of its characteristics I find also originating in the word of God.

With regard to the way in which these officers should be chosen, something may now be introduced. It may be asked, How are we to have these officers chosen? This is a very important and interesting part of the arrangement of any constitution-to know how to preserve its health and vigour, and to choose those who are to superintend it. Here I would direct your attention to Acts, vi. at the beginning. In the opening of the chapter the Apostle says, "And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business." Now, here in this passage, you perceive, certain functionaries are wanting; it becomes necessary to fill up the obvious deficiency;

and how is this to be done? The Apostles give their directions most explicitly: they tell the people to choose out, and to look out from among themselves, seven men of honest report," whom the Apostles might appoint, that they might accept them at the hands of the people; that they might be, in fact, the election of the church, with their apostolical approbation, and their apostolical blessing; and that they might thus give the sanction of their office to the choice of the people in appointing the men they liked, out from among themselves. In this way, therefore, do we find these officers chosen.

But it might be asked, "Where do you find the pastors thus clearly chosen ?” I answer at once, Nowhere. And then I may be asked, "If you find this to be the case with regard to them, how do you know that these were the deacons of the church? Some have supposed that these were nothing more than a financial or administrative committee over the funds of the church; and hence they have refused to admit the evidence that they were the first deacons of the church." Their supposing that they were only an administrative committee of finance, is a mere assumption; we find it nowhere. That the administration of finance was a part of their business we are sure, because they are here said to serve tables," and to leave the Apostles thus more at liberty to minister in the great things of God.

66

66 men

But it has sometimes been said, Here we have only an appointment; the deacon's office is another matter; it is connected with something more than finance, because their qualification is given in the passage already referred to in Timothy. I answer at once, there is not a single qualification in the epistle to Timothy, that goes beyond, in any one thing, the passage before us. The individuals here referred to are required to be men of honest report; honestly reported of," or, having a report for honesty. They are required farther to be, men "full of the Holy Ghost." They are required farther to be, men "full of wisdom." Do we find anything in the supposed spiritual qualifications for deacons in Timothy, going beyond this? Certainly not, if we are to go on the qualifications. Then you will say, qualifications effectual for every good word and work in which they could possibly be engaged; and we would say, they are identified with a similarity of qualifications, instead of being separated by their dissimilarity. But if I find this election in one place, may I not say, Well, have I anything on the subject of election-anything historically deduced on the subject of election in the New Testament Scriptures, and by the New Testament Church? Yes, I have; and I find it in this passage. Am I then to proceed in a mode of election directly at variance with the only method of election that I find in the history of the apostolic church? Is the only specimen of election given me by the Spirit of the living God to be rejected, nay, opposed and spurned? And am I to believe that I am right in the rejection of the position, because these officers-whether they were deacons or not-whether they were chosen by the people, and brought to the Apostles, and submitted to them for their approbation-am I to place the appointment of all others in other hands, and to refuse that they should have anything to do with them? It would appear to me, that the principal illustration in the history of this election is strikingly instructive on elections universally in the church of God. This is the only one we know. Let us adhere to the only one we know.

I should say, let us not create another and an opposite kind of our own. I dare not do this; the authority of Scripture would not allow me: and, therefore, in elections, the species of election I should adopt, would be, the species of election they adopted. I should not look out another, and say, "This is only one, and therefore when I have an election to conduct I shall have a very different one." I take it, therefore, that the choice of officers is settled by this precedent, illustrating the principle which the church professed and established, and consequently commended to me as the mode of choice adopted by Independency. And here again, therefore, I find Independency originating in the Word of God.

But, again, it may be said (and I know it sometimes has been said), that Timothy and Titus were appointed to ordain the elders over all the churches, to have them appointed in every city. Well, now, if this were for a moment to be asserted, I should say, that between ordination and election there is a great difference. The Apostles in this passage ordained, but they did not elect. Timothy and Titus, therefore, assisted in ordaining; but they did not elect. The Apostles were infallible men; and yet to give us a demonstration of the principles of Christian election, that none might question it for a single moment, in any age of the Church to come, without being guilty of the most obvious oversight with regard to this striking incident-the Apostles themselves refused, though they were advocating the testimony of the Son of God-by which the world should be lost, and by which the world should be condemned -they refused to exercise their high and solemn vows, and left the whole with the community before them, in order that we might have an undoubted illustration of the mode of procedure in the Church as a precedent for our own; and if these men practised the only species of choice of this description, surely those who pretend not to have authority, should never pretend to infringe a mode of choice in which they set so striking and instructive an example.

66

But I should state further, that it may be questioned whether Titus and Timothy allowed any to assist them in their ordination, or their setting apart the individuals that were chosen. Let me remark, that in 1 Timothy, iv. 14, we have some instruction upon this interesting and important part of the subject. Neglect not," says the Apostle, "the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Now, if we were again to suppose, that, when Timothy was directed to ordain elders, he did it alone, simply because he only is directed in the instance in question, we may be assisted in meeting this view of the passage by another passage, in 2 Timothy, fi. 6, "Wherefore," says the Apostle, "I put thee in remembrance, that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands." Now, you perceive that the Apostle plainly states in the one passage (1 Timothy, iv. 14) that Timothy had his gifts by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery; and again in this passage, he is described as performing these gifts by the laying on of the hands of the Apostle. Thus it appears that the Apostle speaks of the laying on of hands, when he only assisted on the occasion. And have we any reason to suppose, that Timothy or Titus did anything more than assist, in precisely the same way, with all the eldership united with them in it, and they only assisting in it, in the ordinations which took place in the different churches that they visited. The two cases appear