mian Churches possessed. In the course of this correspondence, while yet in exile for his fidelity, Calvin addressed the Bohemian Pastors in the following pointed terms:-"I heartily congratulate your Churches, upon which, besides sound doctrine, God hath, bestowed so many excellent gifts. Of these gifts it is none of the least, to have such Pastors to govern and order them; to have a people themselves so well affected and disposed; to be constituted under so noble a form of government; to be adorned with the most excellent, discipline, which we justly call most excellent, and, indeed, the only bond by which obedience can be preserved. I am sure we find with us, by woful experience, what the worth of it is, by the want of it; nor yet can we by any means attain to it. On this account it is, that I am often faint in my mind, and feeble in the discharge of the duties of my office. Indeed I should quite despair, did not this comfort me, that the edification of the Church is always the work of the Lord, which He himself will carry on by his own power, though all help beside should fail. Yet still it is a great and rare blessing to be aided by so necessary a help. Therefore I shall not consider our Churches as properly strengthened, until they can be bound together by that bond." And the pious Historian, after giving this extract from the venerable Reformer, adds: "It so happened, in the course of Divine Providence, that, not long aftewards, this eminent man was recalled to minister in the Church of Geneva, where he established THE VERY SAME KIND OF DISCIPLINE, which is now famed throughout the world."*

Testimony more direct and conclusive could scarcely

JOH. A. COMENII Historia Bohem. Frat. Sect. 80.

be desired. Comenius, himself a Bishop of the Bohe nian Brethren, surely knew what kind of Eldership it was which was established among the Churches of his own denomination. He says it was the very same with that which Calvin afterwards established in Geneva. We know, too, that this venerable man, before he was expelled from Geneva, in 1538, and while he was struggling and suffering so much for want of an efficient discipline, made no attempt to introduce the institution in question. But during his painful exile, his attention is forcibly turned to the Bohemian plan. He is greatly pleased with it; speaks in the strongest terms of its excellence; declares that he has no hope of any Church prospering until it is introduced; and the very next year, on his return, makes it one of the conditions of his resuming his pastoral charge, that this plan of conducting the discipline of the Church, by a bench of Elders, shall be received with him, and thus causes it to be adopted in Geneva.

And yet the historian of the Waldenses, John Paul Perrin, has been reproached, and insinuations made unfavorable to his honesty, because he has represented the Bohemian Brethren as having ecclesiastical Elders distinct from their Ministers of the gospel. How utterly unjust such reproaches are, every one must now see. If there were ever Ruling Elders in Geneva, they were found in the Churches of Bohemia. Nor is it any solid objection to the fact, as we have stated it, that they had some other features in their system of Church order, which were not strictly Presbyterian. All that the historian has to do is with facts. Having stated these, he is answerable for nothing more. That those Churches gave the title of Seniors, but more frequently of Antistites to certain elderly clergymen, who were peculiarly

venerable in their character, and who chiefly took the lead in all ordinations, is, no doubt, true; that, in their plan of Church government, they distinguished their Diaconi from their Eleemosynarii; and that they include in the list of their ecclesiastical offices, some which are strictly secular, is also manifest. But surely none of these invalidate the fact, that they had Ruling Elders; a fact stated in a manner which it is impossible either to doubt or mistake.

Thus we have good evidence, that ALL the most distinguished and faithful witnesses for the truth, during the dark ages, with whose faith and order we have any minute acquaintance, carefully maintained the office for which we are contending; that some of them, at least, considered it as of Divine appointment, and accordingly quote in its support Scriptural authority; and that they appear, with good reason, to have regarded it as one of the most efficient means, under the Divine blessing, of promoting the spiritual order and edification of the Church.

CHAPTER VI.

TESTIMONY OF THE REFORMERS, & OTHER LEARNED AND DISINTERESTED WITNESSES, NEARLY CONTEMPORARY WITH THEM.

We have seen how utterly groundless is the assertion, that Ruling Elders were invented and first introduced by Calvin at Geneva. If there be any truth in history, they were in use long before Calvin was born, and in the purest Churches on earth, to say nothing of their apostolical origin. Nor is this all. It may further be maintained, that a great majority of the Reformers, in organizing those Churches which separated from the Church of Rome, either actually introduced this class of officers, or, in their published writings, freely and fully declared in its favor. And this was the case, as we shall presently see, not merely on the part of those who followed Calvin, both as to time and opinion; but also on the part of those who either preceded, or had no ecclesiastical connexion whatever, with that illustrious man; and who were far from agreeing with him in many other particulars. Now this is surely a marvellous fact, if, as some respectable writers would persuade us to believe, the office in question is a mere figment of Genevan contrivance, toward the middle of the sixteenth century.

The first Reformer whose testimony I shall adduce in favor of this office, is Ulrick Zuingle, the celebrated leader in the work of Reformation in Switzerland

And I mention him first, because, as he never was connected with Calvin; nay, as he was removed by death, in 1531, five years before Calvin ever saw Geneva, or appeared in the ranks of the Reformers, and ten years before the introduction of Ruling Elders into that city, he cannot be suspected of speaking as the humble imitator of that justly honored individual.

On the subject of Ruling Elders, Zuingle speaks thus:-"The title of Presbyter, or Elder, as used in Scripture, is not rightly understood by those who consider it as applicable only to those who preside in preaching: For it is evident that the term is also sometiemes used to designate Elders, of another kind, that is, Senators, Leaders, or Counsellors. So we read Acts xv., where it is said, the Apostles and Elders come together to consider of this matter. Here we see that the Elders spoken of are to be considered as Senators or Counsellors. It is evident that the TgesBurago mentioned in this place were not Ministers of the word; but that they were aged, prudent and venerable men, who, in directing and managing the affairs of the Church, were the same thing as the Senators in our cities. And the title Elder is used in

Again; Oecolampadius, who also died before Calvin appeared as an active Reformer, and of course before

*This quotation from Zuingle, is taken from the Politice Ecclesiastica of Voetius, in which it is cited for the same purpose as here; a copy of the works of the Swiss Reformer not being at present within the reach of the writer of the Essay.

L