first bishop of Jerusalem. The same remark applies to Epaphroditus, to Timothy, to Titus, and to the seven angels, all in virtue of their succession called to be Apostles, and yet by all antiquity designated, as bishops of their respective cities, owing to their supreme oversight of the Churches therein established.

Another, and as I conceive, an invincible argument in support of the divine institution of episcopacy, is derived from what is universally admitted by its opponents. For when they tell us, that the government of the Churches was left by the Apostles to presbyters alone, they are forced to acknowledge its extremely limited duration. According to some, it was extinct before the death of St. John. Others think, that about this time it began to disappear. Others, that by little and little, it gradually vanished during the second and third centuries; while no writer amongst them ventures to assert, that it continued in any part of the world, beyond the term of three hundred years.

Here then Brethren, permit me seriously to inquire: Is it credible that such a government as this could have been instituted by the Apostles; a government so fading and fleeting in its character; a government, so soon to be obliterated from the face of the earth, by the unanimous adoption of episcopacy? Verily, verily, I say unto you, it is far too marvellous for my belief, and I cannot but think for yours. Almighty God, in his infinite mercy, establishes one Church to-day; his adorable Son, after having purchased it with his precious blood, promises to be with it always, even unto the end of the world; and lo, to-morrow it is not! To-morrow, like Noah's dove, not a resting place can it find for the sole of its foot amongst all the nations, that had originally sought a refuge beneath the droppings of its 'sanctuary! If this is not impliedly disparaging the divine wisdom and foresight, I know not what is. If this is not calling in question the faith and obedience of the primitive Christians and martyrs, so often and so justly extolled, I know not what constitutes faith, nor what obedience. Before one, two, or at most, three centuries have elapsed, épiscopacy a human invention completely triumphs over a ministry established under the guidance of heaven, and recommended by men endued with the inspiration of the Highest. If this be true, let us hear no more of the unchangeable character of God, or of the perpetuity of those institutions which he does not expressly abolish. Let us hear no more of the extra

ordinary piety and holiness of our fathers in Christ. I can only wonder, that they had not discarded baptism and the supper of the Lord, as well as the ministry, by which they were to be celebrated.

No, no, Brethren, it will not, cannot do. Such a change and perversion of the true Church, such a successful usurpation over it, will never be seriously credited by persons, who can be persuaded to dismiss all bias and prejudice from their minds; who shall enter upon this investigation with a single eye to the discovery of truth; who shall determine to follow where it leads, and upon this principle alone make up their judgment for time and for eternity. Party spirit may make us any thing and every thing; may for a season blind the eyes, and warp the understandings of men; but almighty truth with irresistible force will eventually storm the ramparts of schism, and in the person of its divine Author, bring back the wandering to his fold again.

Particularly, when I have also to remark to you, that this alleged usurpation on the part of bishops was permitted to take place, without one noble effort to arrest its progress; one burst of indignation from the injured, lifting up their cry to heaven, and invoking the continuance of that liberty wherewith Christ had made them free. Let us bring the subject home to ourselves; let us imagine, that the existing protestant bishops were to endeavour, either by force, or combining their efforts, by collusion, to proselyte all the various denominations, and unite them in the one holy catholick or universal Church. Would not one voice be raised against it, not one outcry against persecution, or if persecution were renounced, against the subtlety and intrigue of mere propagandists? You know very well, that upon such an attempt, the protestant world would rise up in arms against them; they would vigorously repel every assault upon the respective citadels of their religion, and only yield up these beloved sanctuaries of their hearts, with their fortunes and their lives. If the sword were requisite, it would leap from innumerable scabbards; if the pen alone, myriads of writers would exhaust all their theological learning in the contest, they would compose a multitude of books, and these, with the arguments they contained, would descend to the latest posterity.

But be astonished, ye moderns, and wonder at the forbearance and even the pusillanimity of the ancients. If bishops were not

the successors of the Apostles in office; if their powers were not

4

derived from them; then did they usurp their station, and lord it over God's heritage, as the expression is, without one exclamation of surprise, or one manly vindication of the Church and the ministry it had received by the appointment of the Lord Jesus. All opposition was hushed as the foot of night. Our most recondite opposers can discover no trace of it in ecclesiastical history. They are obliged to levy a tax upon conjecture, whenever they would settle the era of this wonderful revolution, and even then, they are unable to agree. Some will have it at one period, and some at another. Rolling centuries intervene and divide their judgment, when it might reasonably be thought, that such an event could no more be obliterated from the memory of man than the era of the crusades, or the epoch of the reformation.

Ancient authors indeed, and their works are abundant; authors of unblemished reputation and undoubted veracity. But if you search the writings of presbyters, who never attained the episcopal rank, even they are silent on the subject, and mute as the very graves into which they retired. They say nothing of prelatick ambition, nothing about the invasion of presbyterian rights. If you look over the folios of bishops, there are no arguments to justify their revival and personal assumption of the Apostolick office, none to silence the clamour of one intrepid champion of the ministry once delivered to the saints. On the contrary you will see, that all those writers of whatever rank and whatever country; all those writers unite in ascribing to episcopacy, the sanctity and the authority of a divine institution. They tell you, that the Apos tles nominated bishops to be their successors in the several Churches planted by them. They confine to them the sole right of ordination, and most cheerfully did presbyters acquiesce in the speedy degradation of the few, who obtained an imaginary promotion, by the imposition of the hands of their inferiour order. And what is the fair inference to be gathered from this statement, this undeviating harmony in the records of those early times? To me, it speaks volumes in behalf of our construction of the scriptures. To me, it elevates episcopacy upon a lofty eminence, on which is inscribed in letters of living light, This is my will, and this is my ministry saith the Lord of Hosts. "He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith to the Churches."

Waiving however, for the present, the testimony of the fathers; let us imagine it possible to resort to some other tribunal, with the view of determining our conflicting opinions. Let us imagine, that, preserved by some inscrutable providence of God, a Christian Church could be found in some sequestered corner of the globe, which from remotest time had enjoyed no intercourse whatever with their brethren professing the same faith. We know that the twelve were despatched on their errands of mercy into far distant lands, and of most of them, that no authentick memorials have been transmitted to us. Imagine then, that a Church of their planting could be found. Would not the character of the ministry it possessed be considered a safe guide, in enabling us to decide upon that, which was instituted by the Apostles, whose labours are known, although we contrive to interpret them differently? If, for example, presbyters alone were to be discovered in such a Church, would it not furnish our friends of that exclusive order with abundant cause of congratulation and triumph? If bishops, with presbyters and deacons in reverent subjection to them, would it not be equally the source of joy and exultation with us? Upon such a statement, it would be next to impossible to avoid either conclusion, or to object to the providential character of the discovery itself, provided it could be effected.

Be it remembered then, that it has. India was the place, and the celebrated navigator, Vasco de Gama, the discoverer, in the year fifteen hundred and three. "When the Portuguese arrived they were agreeably surprised to find upwards of a hundred Christian Churches on the coast of Malabar. But when they became acquainted with the purity and simplicity of their worship, they were offended. These Churches, said the Portuguese, belong to the Pope. Who is the Pope, said the natives, we never heard of him? The European priests were yet more alarmed, when they found that these Hindoo Christians maintained the order and discipline of a regular Church under episcopal jurisdiction: and that for thirteen hundred years past, they had enjoyed a succession of bishops appointed by the patriarch of Antioch. We, said they, are of the true faith, whatever you from the west may be; for we come from the place where the followers of Christ were first called Christians."

Their Churches were therefore Syrian, but were soon subjected to the inquisitorial power of Rome. "At a compulsory Synod, one

hundred and fifty of the Syrian clergy appeared;" and, by the Romish Archbishop Menezes, "were accused of the following practices and opinions: That they had married wives; that they owned but two sacraments, baptism and the Lord's supper; that they neither invoked saints, nor worshipped images, nor believed in purgatory: and that they had no other orders or names of dignity in the Church, than BISHOP, PRIEST, and DEACON." At length, "the Churches upon the sea coast were compelled to acknowledge

the supremacy of the Pope." But those, "in the interiour would not yield to Rome. After a show of submission for a little while, they proclaimed eternal war against the inquisition; they hid their books, fled occasionally to the mountains, and sought the protection of the native princes, who had always been proud of their alliance."

con

These details I have extracted from the "Christian Researches in Asia" of the celebrated English missionary, Buchanan; who proceeds to inform us, that when "two centuries had elapsed without any particular information concerning the Syrian Christians in the interiour," (those who would not submit to Rome,) and when "it was doubted by many whether they existed at all," he " ceived the design of visiting them." He did so, and found them in all their original simplicity and purity. He conversed with them freely; and do you wish to know by whom their Church was founded? According to their records, by the Apostle Thomas. After diligent inquiry, the good missionary says, "I am satisfied that we have as good authority for believing that the Apostle Thomas died in India, as that the Apostle Peter died at Rome." Do you wish to know what was at this time the character of its ministry? It was composed as it always had been, of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, the offices being as distinctly marked, as those of any episcopal communion whatever. Buchanan saw numbers of the two lower orders. On one occasion, he "was received at the door of the Church by three Kasheeshas, that is, presbyters or priests, who were habited in like manner, in white vestments." "There were also present two Shumshanas, or deacons." On another, he visited "Mar Dionysius, the metropolitan of the Syrian Church," and after a long interview, in which the conversation turned upon protestant episcopacy, he observes, "The bishop was desirous to know something of the other Churches which had separated from