regard to its essential principles it lies within the sphere of ordinary human knowledge. How absurd would it be to establish councils and controlling organizations to protect schools of philosophy, and to bind their disciples, by oaths and pledges, to particular formulas of philosophic faith! Freedom of discussion, and the inherent excellence and superiority of truth, are sufficient guarantees for the protection and preservation of the sciences. Knowledge cannot be preserved and perpetuated by authority, it cannot be lost under a system of freedom. Why do we not establish organizations to preserve the Newtonian philosophy? to preserve the science of chemistry, of natural philosophy, of astronomy; and establish our superintendences to keep men everlastingly to the truth of these sciences? The method of freedom is better. It is as much better in the science of religion as it is in the secular sciences. A knowledge of spiritual things needs pledges and engagements, to keep men in its possession, as little as a knowledge of temporal things.

Uzzah was not allowed to put forth his hand to steady the ark of God when it seemed to jostle. How much less may human authority override the essential prerogatives and liberties of the human race, to save the great truths of religion from being ignored or rejected! Truth wants no such aid. God requires no such coöperation. He allows no such interference.

The weakness of God is stronger than men, and the foolishness of God wiser than men..

The church departed from its primitive organization to make its purity more secure, and its power more transcendent; and the result has been, universal and incurable corruption. Had it continued in its apostolic polity, it would, in all probability, have retained its purity and power, through all the dark ages of the past, to the present time. Truth would have had free course, and would have prevailed and have been glorified. The prosperity and liberty of the church would have reäcted on the state; and the great civil despotisms of mediaval and modern Christendom would never have existed.

CHAPTER V.

CHURCH REVOLUTIONISM.

ALL the improvements in the state of Christianity that have been effected in modern times have been effected by a more or less general return to the principles of church polity established by Christ.

The great movements of Luther in Germany, and of Zuingle in Switzerland, were based on the assumed right of the independent. organization of Christian churches. The detachment of the church of England from that of Rome was based on the same assumption, and was only justified on principles that justify independent church organizations universally, as far as such organizations are deemed expedient.

All these movements were made not only without the authority of the church of Rome, but against its express prohibitions, and in defiance of its power.

Under ordinary circumstances, men ought not to preach without being duly authorized to do so by the church authorities, and churches should be organized with the advice and counsel of ministers. But, in cases where this regular institution cannot be conveniently attained, and where, in the opinion of Christians, the interests of religion imperatively demand such institution by other means, it is the right of individual Christians to unite on the basis of a common faith in Christ, as a Christian church; and, having done so, to institute a church ministry, agreeably to the New Testament examples and directions on this subject.

Such a procedure is justified by the example of Christ and the apostles, in organizing the church at first on revolutionary principles. This is the highest and most authoritative precedent

that can be, and ought not to be thought lightly of, by any professed Christian. It demands the respect of all Christian churches. A church which was founded on revolutionary principles, and which in its origin was the great Protestant and revolutionary movement of the times and country in which it arose, cannot object to revolutionary reorganizations in emergencies which are judged to demand them. Such is the church of Christ. It was a revolutionary reörganization of religion, to free it from the errors of a corrupt Judaism. It was a Protestant organization, all its members uniting in a solemn protest against Jewish corruption generally, and Jewish spiritual despotism in particular.

The right of revolution in the church rests on the same principles as the similar right in the state, and is equally necessary. The right of revolution in the state is the safeguard of civil liberty and prosperity; and that of revolution in the church, of religious liberty and prosperity. Both are equally valid, and indispensably necessary for the promotion of the interests of mankind.

The great objection to the right of revolutionism in the church, and of the multiplication of independent church organizations indefinitely, is, that it divides the church, and allows one church to be arrayed against others. It divides Episcopalians from Methodists, Episcopalians and Methodists from Presbyterians, and all these from Congregationalists, and so on.

Of course it does. And what is the effect of these divisions? The general increase of knowledge, wisdom and piety, and a gradual process towards reünion on higher and nobler principles than those of authority, principles of agreement in holding to truth and expediency.

The idea of supporting truth by authority is preposterous and absurd. It implies a misconception of its nature, and of the correlative laws of the human mind. Authority can give truth no valuable support. Its effect is only to embarrass and hinder its progress. It would not be less preposterous to teach mathe

matics, chemistry and philosophy, by authority, than religion. Mathematics, chemistry and philosophy, if taught at all, must be taught by their essential evidences; so must religion, both natural and revealed.

The catechetical schools arose in the second century, to meet the exigences of the church in respect to education. The most celebrated of them were the schools of Alexandria, Edessa, at Nisibis, and at Seleucia.

It is supposed by some that schools of this kind were founded by John at Ephesus, and by Polycarp at Smyrna. This is very probable; but we have no explicit information on the subject from any reliable source. The catechetic schools were Christian schools, both of sacred and general learning. That of Alexandria was one of the most distinguished seats of learning known to ancient times.

But the ministry was not supplied principally from the schools of the church. It was supplied principally from the ranks of the laity, and from the other professions and employments of life, particularly the literary professions.

As long as each congregation had a plurality of ministers, these presided at their religious and business meetings in turn, or according to such other arrangements as they deemed suitable to their circumstances, and officiated in public worship without any considerable study in the way of special preparation for their public instructions. Under this arrangement, the pastors required but little support from their churches. But, in process of time, one minister came to officiate principally in all the congregations, and to require from them a full support. Even Paul was to some extent a self-supporting missionary; and many others were self-supporting pastors.

But, as the churches became enlarged and enlightened, the labors of their ministers became increased, and it became necessary for them to devote themselves exclusively to their ministerial work.

CHAPTER VI.

THE PRIME MINISTER OF THE CHURCH.

THE prime minister and head of the Christian church is the Lord Jesus Christ. While he was present in the flesh, with his disciples, he exercised the powers of king or absolute sovereign over them, with various exalted titles, but with little kingly state. The following are the principal of his titles:

1. Kugiòs, Lord. 17:5, 6, &c.

Luke 1: 43; 7: 13; 10: 1; 11: 39;

2. Baotlevs, King. Luke 19: 38; John 1: 50; 12: 13. 3. 0εos, God. - John 1:1; 20: 28; Rom. 9: 5; 1 Tim. 3: 16.

4. Yios tov Oεov, Son of God. — Matt. 16: 16; Mark 14 : 61; Luke 4: 41; John 6: 69.

5. Xgoros, Christ, the anointed; corresponding to the Hebrew, Messiah.

6. 4oyos, Word, or Reason.—John 1: 1, 14; Rev. 19: 13. 7. Kuonnins, Master.-Matt. 23: 8, 10.

8. 'Paßßi, Doctor. - Matt. 26: 25, 49; Mark 9: 5; 11: 21; 14: 45.

9. Pußßovvi, Great Doctor. — Mark 10: 51; John 20: 16. 10. Eлiσxoлos, Bishop.—1 Pet. 2: 25. The same is applied to God. Sept.; Job 20: 29.

11. Пouny, Shepherd, or Pastor.-John 10: 14; Heb. 13: 20; 1 Pet. 2: 25.

12. Aroσrolos, Apostle. Heb. 3: 1.

13. Aσziegeos, High Priest.-Heb. 3: 1; 7: 26; 9: 11; 10: 20.

Notwithstanding the assumption of these exalted titles, our Lord associated with his disciples as a friend and com