Some Christian churches have supposed, that teachers were men, who, holding the pastoral office, were particularly to be employed in teaching Candidates for the ministry whatever was necessary to qualify them for this office. Others have believed, that they were destined to the employment of teaching, and defending, evangelical truth generally; without taking upon themselves the care of particular Churches. As all these, so far as I know, consider both kinds of officers as of the same rank, and as invested with exactly the same powers; it will be unnecessary, at the present time, to examine this opinion.

We are come, then, to one class of permanent Ecclesiastical officers, mentioned in this text; viz. That, which is known by the word, Pastors.

The Apostle is here recounting those officers, which Christ gave to the Church, when he ascended to Heaven: and it must, I think, be admitted, that he mentions all those, which Christ gave to the Church directly, or in his own person. All other ecclesiastical officers, constituted in the Scriptures, were therefore constituted, afterwards, by the Apostles. Of these I know of but one class, mentioned in the Scriptures; viz. Deacons. In Acts vi. seven men are said to have been chosen to this office, and set apart by prayer and the laying on of hands.

The only debate concerning this subject respects the class, or classes, of Officers, denoted by the word Pastors. In my own opinion, this word includes a single class only; spoken of elsewhere in the Scriptures under the names Elders, Bishops, Ministers, Teachers, and some others. This opinion I shall endeavour to support by the following arguments, derived from the Word of God. Of these I allege,

1. The Text.

The text is addressed directly to the pastors of the Christian Church, under the name Elders; derived as is that of Pastor also from the Old Testament. In the customary language of the Jews, the word Elders denoted the Rulers and Counsellors of that nation: as some corresponding word has often denoted, either generally or particularly, the Rulers and Counsellors of other nations. Thus among the Romans Senator, and among ourselves Senator, denote an officer, similar to the Jewish Elder. Human wisdom is chiefly the result of experience; and experience is the result of years. Nations therefore, peculiarly when unenlightened by science, have committed the direction of public affairs, and public counsels, almost exclusively to the aged. The name, in this appropriate sense, was naturally transferred to those, who were to counsel and direct the Church; especially by the Apostles, as being Jews, and writing originally for their own countrymen. These Elders are exhorted to feed, that is, to teach, edify, and rule, the flock of God. That the Greek word oparva, a derivative of which is here translated feed, signifies to rule, in the most extensive manner,

can be doubted by no man, at all conversant with the Greek language, either in the Classics, or the New Testament. They are also directed to take the oversight of it, or, in more exact language, to oversee it, (they had already taken the oversight of it) willingly; not of constraint, nor for the sake of gain. The Greek word, rendered taking the oversight, is saidXOVES, exactly rendered overseeing, or exercising the office of an overseer, or bishop.

Elders, therefore, were to exercise the office of a Bishop, or Overseer; and of course were invested with that office. To this the only reply is, that Elder is a generic term, including both Bishops and ordinary Elders, or Ministers. This will be considered farther on. At present, I observe, that these directions are given to Elders absolutely, and as Elders, merely; and to all Elders, therefore, without distinction. I know not by what warrant we can suppose, that St. Peter, writing with the Spirit of Inspiration, has written so loosely, as to express that in the most absolute manner, which was intended in a very limited sense; so limited, as to exclude nineteen-twentieths of all those, who are apparently included in his direction: while at the same time, he has given no notice, either before or after, of this design. What, in such a case, must be the construction of this passage by the Elders, to whom it was written; and what their consequent conduct, in obedience to it? If it be supposed, by us, who have the whole Bible before us, that this strange construction ought to be given to it; would it be possible for these Elders, who had no other writing of this Apostle, and few of them, probably, any other writings of the New Testament, to understand, that what is here obviously made the duty of every Elder, was really the duty of one only, out of many?

2. I allege, Acts xx. 17, 28, And from Miletus he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church. A part of the directions which he gave to these Elders is recited thus: Take heed, therefore, to yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you Overseers, to feed the Church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood.

On these two verses, thus connected, I remark,

First. That in Ephesus there were several Elders of the Church. Secondly. That all these Elders were Bishops.

The word, rendered in the English Translation, Overseers, is in the original Erixors, the only word, in the New Testament, which is rendered Bishop. The word Bishop, is synonymous with Over

seer.

Thirdly. That the HOLY GHOST constituted, or made, these seve ral Elders, Bishops. The original word is sesro, constituted.

Fourthly. That in Ephesus all the Elders of the Church were Bishops. These were plainly all the Elders of that Church: as is evident from the phraseology. The words are, And from Mi letus he sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church.

VOL. IV.

29

Fifthly. That, therefore, there was no one Bishop, of superior authority; or holding an office, or character, which distinguished him from other Bishops in that City.

Sixthly. That Timothy could not be, although he is extensively supposed to have been, the sole Bishop, or Diocesan, of the Church in that City; because other men were Bishops in that Church.

The Elders, to whom St. Peter wrote in the text, were all who dwelt in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia Proper, and Bithynia; provinces, constituting more than two-thirds of that great country, called the Lesser Asia; at that time full of Churches and Christians. All the Elders of all these Churches he exhorts to exercise the office of a Bishop in the Church.

All the Elders in Ephesus, the chief city in the same country, St. Paul declares to have been constituted Bishops by the Holy Ghost. Both Apostles speak the same language to the same persons: language, which has obviously but one meaning.

These passages in the most explicit manner teach us, that Elders, universally, and Bishops, are the same persons; destined to exactly the same purposes, and invested with exactly the same powers.

3. I allege Phil. i. Paul and Timotheus, servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus, who are in Philippi, with the Bishops and Deacons.

Concerning this passage, I observe,

First. That there is no mention made of Elders in this Church by name.

The saints, with the Bishops and Deacons, are expressly mentioned. If there were Elders in this Church, who were distinct from the Bishops, the omission of them is inexplicable. If Elders be allowed to have been officers, inferior to Bishops; they were unquestionably superior to Deacons; and it is incredible, that this letter should not have been addressed to them also, when it was addressed to the Deacons. The important interest, and office, which they held in this Church, rendered it highly proper, that the contents of the letter should be addressed personally to them: more so, certainly, than that it should be addressed to the Deacons. Had it been addressed to Bishops, Elders and Deacons, it would have been thought, by an advocate for prelatical Episcopacy, absolutely decisive in favour of three orders of Ecclesiastical Officers. As it now stands, and as it is uncontradicted by any other passage of Scripture, I think it is equally decisive, that there

were but two.

Secondly. It is certain, that in the Philippian Church there were several Bishops; and, therefore, whatever was the case with other Churches in this respect, there was not at Philippi a single Bishop, presiding over a number of subordinate ministers. But there is no reason to conclude, that the Philippian Church was, in this respect, differently constituted from other Churches.

4. I allege the fact, that no mention is made of Bishops, by way of address, (except the text just quoted from Philippians i. 1) or di rection, or salutation.

The word Tooros, (Bishop, or Overseer) occurs in the New Testament five times. Once it is applied to Christ; viz. 1 Pet. ii. 25; and four times denotes officers in the Church. The word Brixon, is once used to denote the Office of a Bishop; viz. 1 Tim. iii. 1; in two instances, to denote visitation; Luke xix. 44. and 1 Pet. ii. 12; and once is quoted from Ps. cix. 8, to denote, by way of accommodation, the employment of Judas as an Apostle. Exoxone, to oversee, or exercise the office of a Bishop, is used once with that meaning; viz. in the text; and once, Heb. xii. 15; where it is translated, with exact propriety, looking diligently.

In all the addresses of their several letters by the apostles to the several Churches, there is not, except in that just mentioned, a single allusion to Bishops, as a peculiar order of men. In the numerous salutations, with which the Epistles are concluded, and in the several directions, given to the Churches, there is not the least mention made, nor the least hint given, concerning this class of officers.

Had such a class existed, to whom the government of Churches and subordinate ministers was chiefly, or wholly, committed; is it credible, that no mention should be made of them in the numerous directions, given for the government of the Church? There are several proper cases of discipline mentioned in the Epistles to the Corinthians: particularly, the case of the man who had his father's wife. St. Paul directs the whole Church of Corinth, when gathered together in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and his spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver this person to Satan for the destruction of the flesh: 1 Cor. v. 1, 4, 5; that is, to excommunicate him. The Church did excommunicate him. Of this fact St. Paul gives us an account, 2 Cor. ii. 5, 6; where he says, Sufficient to such a man, is this punishment, which was inflicted of many; UTO TWV TXslovWV; by the majority, or the chief part of the members. Had there been a Bishop, entrusted with the government of the Church at Corinth, (and if not at Corinth, where could we expect to find such Bishops ?) is it credible, that this important act of Church government should not have been assigned to him; and afterwards recited as having been executed by him, or at least under his authority? Is it credible, that in all the mention, which is made of government in the Church, there should no where be any mention made of Bishops, as particularly concerned in this subject? What is said in the Epistles to Timothy and Titus, and may be thought inconsistent with this remark, I shall consider

hereafter.

In all the salutations also, directed universally to all the saints, and to many humbler individuals by name, there is no mention made of Bishops. Yet several of the Epistles are addressed to

churches, in cities of great eminence; where Bishops must, if any where, have resided. The passage in Heb. xiii. 24, Salute them, who have the rule over you, I shall examine in another place.

5. Fallege, also, the Commission, originally given to Ministers of the Gospel.

This is found at length in Matt. xxviii. 19, 20. Go ye, disciple all nations; baptizing them into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching them to observe all things, whatsoever I have commanded you. And lo, I am with you always unto the end of the world. Amen.

This Commission is plainly given to all ministers, because it is given without discrimination, and because it is given to them unto the end of the world. It is their only commission; and conveys the only authority, under which they act as ministers. The authority, which it conveys, is also the same to all. Unless, then, this commission is qualified elsewhere; there can be no distinction among Ministers. Those, to whom precisely the same authority is given by the same commission, it is hardly necessary to observe, sustain exactly the same office.

6. I allege, as proof of the same doctrine, the fact, that the same duties are assigned to all Ministers of the Gospel.

The duties, assigned to Ministers of the Gospel, are public and private prayer in the Church; preaching the Gospel; administering Baptism, and the Lord's Supper; ruling; and ordaining other Ministers. All these are assigned to Elders universally, in as plain language, as any which is used about these subjects. With regard to the three first of these duties, this will not be questioned. The whole debate respects the two last. I shall, therefore, consider these particularly.

Concerning ruling the Church, we have the following passages. A Bishop must be one, that ruleth well in his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity.

For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God? 1 Tim. iii. 2, 4, 5.

Let the Elders, who rule well, be counted worthy of double honour; especially they, who labour in the word and doctrine. v. 17.

1 Tim.

In the first of these passages, a Bishop is required to rule well. In the second it is required, that the Elders, who rule well, should be accounted worthy of double honour. So far as these two passages are concerned, it will not be questioned, that Ruling is assigned as explicitly to Elders, as to Bishops; nor that the Elder is equally entitled with the Bishop to the employment of Ruling. But this is the only passage in the New Testament, in which Ruling is expressly assigned to a Bishop; unless the word rendered, Bishop, should be supposed to contain such an assignment.

The character of Timothy and Titus, as Bishops, will be hereafter considered.