was given to the Apostles, that it might "lead them into all truth.' At the period, therefore, of which we have been speaking, a flood of divine truth, pure as the region from which it came, was suddenly poured upon a desert world. And had mankind loved the truth, they might have retained and enjoyed it till the end of time. But how soon was their native aversion to it exhibited? How soon did the streams, which flowed so pure at first, begin to be corrupted? Even before the eyes of the apostles, and under the droppings of their heaven-inspired lips, and among those too who had professed to receive and love the truth, heresies sprang up and flourished, and errors of the most dangerous and destructive kind were broached and propagated. In instances such as these, who does not see evidence of the native depravity of our race; and that a love of error, and a strong aversion to religious truth, are deeply seated in the human breast?

We see also from what has been said, that errors on religious subjects have usually run in the same great channels. These channels were marked out in the apostolic age; and the same erroneous views which were entertained then have in general been advocated in all periods since. There were some then, who considered the Lord Jesus Christ as neither God nor man, but as possessing a middle nature, and occupying a middle ground. There were others who considered him a mere prophet like Moses—a mere human teacher, sent from God. There were some, who felt not that they needed the merits of a Divine Redeemer, but depended on their own performances as a foundation of hope;-while others chose to consider themselves so entirely dependent on him, as to render good works useless and unnecessary. There were some, who desired and attempted to incorporate the wisdom which was from above, with the boasted wisdom of this present world ;while others, under a pretence of living above the world, and keeping themselves at a distance from it, neglected the most necessary duties of life. A very little acquaintance with the history of the church will be sufficient to satisfy any observer, that these are some of the principal channels in which errors have flowed, from the age of the apostles to the present time.

In view of the errors of the apostolical age, we may learn what was the faith of the apostles-that precious "faith once delivered to the saints." It must have been the opposite of all these errors. From the opposition of the apostles to the various errors which prevailed relative to the person of Christ, we may see what they understood and believed in regard to this important subject. They believed in the proper deity, and in the proper humanity of their Saviour that he was "God manifest in the flesh." And by the same mode of judging, we may ascertain their belief, in the doctrine of Christ's atonement, of justification by faith, in the necessity of a holy life, and in what have been denominated generally

the doctrines of grace. This kind of evidence of their belief in these doctrines is the more convincing, because it is indirect. It comes to us in such a way, that it is scarcely possible we should be mistaken respecting it, or deceived by it.

I hope all who read this paper may be deeply sensible of the value of the scriptures-that fountain of pure and heavenly truth to which we have so free access-that " sure word of prophecy to which we do well to take heed, as to a shining light in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in our hearts.' Those who walk by this perfect rule, walk safely and surely; while those who depart from it (as we all are fearfully liable to do) are lost in error, confusion and darkness.

COMMUNION OF CHURCHES.

ON the subject of Communion between different Churches, there are extremes on either hand. There is the extreme of regarding the churches as in all respects separate and disconnected communities, acknowledging no mutual responsibilities, and having little or no intercourse one with another. I recollect no example of this nature in the ancient churches. The Brownists, in the latter part of the sixteenth century, approached nearer to it than any previous sect. The other extreme goes to merge the individual churches in one great, universal or national church. The most eminent example of this is the church of Rome. Between these extremes, there is a scriptural medium, which it will be my object in this paper to point out.

That the Scriptures authorise the existence of individual or congregational churches,* I have no doubt. Nothing is plainer than that such churches are frequently spoken of in the New Testament. We read of "the church at Jerusalem," "the church at Antioch," "the church at Babylon," and "the church of God, which is at Corinth." We read also of "the churches of Judea," "the churches of Galatia," "the churches of the Gentiles,' and "the seven churches which are in Asia." These churches are spoken of, not as one body, but as several religious bodies, in some degree separate and distinct one from another.

The members of these churches were accustomed to assemble in one place for religious worship. On the day of Pentecost, the church at Jerusalem were assembled "with one accord, in one place." The church at Antioch were "gathered together," in

* I here use the words, Congregational churches, not in their technical acceptation, but merely as denoting distinct societies or assemblies of Christians.

one assembly, when Paul and Barnabas "rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." Acts xiv. 27. The Apostle addresses the church at Corinth, as being accustomed to "come together in one place." 1 Cor. xiv. 23. "Upon the first day of the week," the church at Troas, "came together for to break bread." Acts xx. 7. These churches are spoken of in the New Testament, not only as distinct bodies, but as exercising separate and independent powers. The church at Jerusalem appointed one to the Apostleship in place of Judas. This church, also, in the presence, and at the instance of the Apostles, chose its own deacons. Acts i. 23, vi. 5. The church at Antioch ordained Paul and Barnabas, and sent them forth unto the heathen. Acts xiii. 3. The church at Corinth labored with, reclaimed and restored the incestuous brother. 1 Cor. v. 5, 2 Cor. ii. 7. The churches of Macedonia chose delegates to travel with Paul and others, and carry their contributions to the poor. 2 Cor. viii. 19. The seven churches in Asia were reproved and censured for existing errors and irregularities,—implying that they had the power, and that it was their duty, to remove them. Indeed, the existence of individual, congregational churches is so plainly attested in the New Testament, that I wonder it should ever have been disputed.

I proceed to show, that between these churches there exist important connexions, and that a degree of communion should be maintained.

This will be evident from the character of those who, according to the Gospel, are to compose these churches. All the members of a church are required to be regenerated persons, real Christians, true members of Christ's invisible kingdom. It cannot be doubted that persons of this character are bound together by many ties, and that, in the primitive age especially, their union was marked and manifest. They were brethren and sisters of the same holy family, united in a common cause, and exposed to common dangers and enemies; and though they resided in different places, and belonged to different particular churches or congregations, still, the bonds of their affection were not broken or impaired. Now it is not possible to conceive that churches, religious communities, composed of persons such as these, should not have been in many ways united. True, these communities had each its particular organization, and no one of them had any authority over another; but being composed of persons so closely drawn together in affection and interest, a degree of union between them would be natural and inevitable. Accordingly we learn from the manner in which the primitive churches are spoken of, and from a variety of circumstances recorded respecting them, that such union and communion did actually exist.

These churches are spoken of, in some instances, as constituting

one general body. "God hath set some in the church, first Apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers," &c. "That thou mightest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God, which is the church of the living God.” "Gaius, mine host, and of the whole church, saluteth you."

These and similar expressions, in which the whole Christian community is represented as constituting one general church, are not to be understood as contradicting the passages previously quoted in proof of the separate existence of churches, but as importing the connexion which subsists, and ought to subsist, between them. So closely were the primitive churches united in faith, in affection, and in order, that they might properly be represented as forming but one church. They constituted but one great family of churches, as the members of a particular church constituted one of individual believers.

It is evidence of the union existing among the apostolical churches, that they were established in the same order, and formed according to the same general rule. "Joying," says the Apostle to the Colossians, "beholding your order, and the stedfastness of your faith in Christ.” "Let us walk by the same rule; let us mind the same thing." The Apostle speaks in another place of the customs of the churches. "We have no such custom, neither the churches of God." And in another place he says, "So ordain I in all the churches ;"-implying that to all the churches, the same general rules were prescribed.* prescribed. But why this uniformity of organization in the primitive churches, if communion and fellowship were not intended to be practised? On supposition that each was to be in all respects a distinct and unconnected community, the mode of organization might have been various, according to the caprice or the convenience of individuals.

The degree and manner of communion in these churches may be gathered from various circumstances recorded in the New Testament. They obviously were to each other objects of mutual concern, interest and prayer.-They had communion, also, in the worship and ordinances of the Gospel. As their teachers journeyed from place to place, it is not to be doubted that they had an interchange of pastoral labors. The members, too, when absent from their own churches, were freely admitted to communion in the assemblies of their brethren.

The primitive churches sent Christian salutations, and letters of instruction, warning and reproof one to another. To the Romans Paul says, "The churches of Christ salute you." To the Corinthians he also says, "The churches of Asia salute you. Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the church that is in their house. All the brethren greet you." The epistle to the Galatian churches was sent in the name, not only of Paul, but of all the brethren who were with him at Rome.

* See Colossians ii. 5. Phil. iii. 16. 1 Cor. xi, 16, and vii, 17.

The primitive churches administered relief one to another in distress. No reader of Paul's epistles can have forgotten how deeply he was engaged, at different times, in taking up collections among the Gentile churches, that he might send relief to the poor and persecuted saints at Jerusalem. Indeed, he seems to have given order in the churches generally, that something should be laid by, every Lord's day, to be devoted to charitable purposes. 1 Cor. xvi. 2.

The primitive churches sent messengers or delegates one to another, as they had occasion. Thus, the church at Antioch sent delegates to the church at Jerusalem, that they might confer with brethren there on the question of circumcising the Gentile converts. And when this question was decided, the church at Jerusalem sent back delegates to the churches of Antioch, Syria, and Cilicia, that they might carry and confirm the decision. Acts xv. 2, 25. Paul speaks also of "the messengers of the churches,' who were deputed to transmit their contributions to Jerusalem. 2 Cor. viii. 23.

Acts

It appears from the apostolical writings, that letters of recommendation were frequently sent from one church to another. When Apollos was minded to go from Ephesus into Achaia, "the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him." xviii, 27. Paul gave Phebe, a servant (ovv) of the church at Cenchrea, a recommendation to the church at Rome, exhorting the brethren to "receive her in the Lord as becometh saints." Rom. xvi. 1. Addressing the Corinthians, he says, "We do not need, as some others, epistles of commendation to you, or letters of commendation from you. Ye are our epistle, written in our hearts, known and read of all men." 2. Cor. iii. 1. It is evident from the form of expression here used, that letters of recommendation were common in those times. See also 1 Cor. xvi. 3. and Col. iv. 10.

It may be gathered from the writings of the Apostles, that the members of particular churches assisted in ordaining elders over other churches, and gave to them the right-hand of fellowship. Thus Paul and Barnabas, who were members of the church at Antioch, ordained elders in every church which they had planted among the Gentiles. Acts xiv. 23. Titus was left in Crete, that he might "ordain elders in every city." Tit. i. 5. We know not of what particular church Titus was a member. He certainly could have belonged to but one church; whereas he assisted in ordaining elders over many. To Paul and Barnabas also, members and messengers of the church at Antioch, "James, Cephas, and John," who belonged to the original church at Jerusalem, "gave the right hands of fellowship." Gal. ii. 9.

It further appears from the writings of the Apostles, that the first Christian churches were accustomed to seek and to take advice