Here is a degree of depravity, which we are told "defies all remedy." This goes far beyond the most rigid Calvinistic doctrine of depravity; for every sin, except blasphemy against the Holy Ghost, has a remedy, according to the orthodox creeds. Mourn, mourn, ye liberal men, over the irremediable depravity of "almost all persons," but yourselves lament, lament, that "their eyes are thus effectually closed against the light;" that "inquiry is out of the question ;" and that neither eloquence nor argument is of any use. Oh! if you think your prayers are ever heard in heaven, and the case of almost all men under the dominion of the pride of opinion, does not transcend the abilities of your God, to grant relief, will you not pray for us? If we thought ourselves not quite past all remedy, and believed that you pray to the only, living and true God, we should beg you to remember us in your morning and evening devotions. Ignorant and deceitful as you accuse us of being, and worthless as we deem your prayers, because we judge them to be addressed to a false God, possibly they might do us quite as much good as your declamations against our hypocrisy, pride of weakness, and slavery of prejudice. But hear us, when we say, you of all teachers ought not to deny the depravity of mankind in general, against whom you fulminate such dreadful epithets.

5. Further evidence of the depravity of mankind in general, and even of some 66 persons, who acknowledged themselves Unitarians in sentiment," must pain our eyes, and grieve the hearts of those, who, strange as it may seem, deny the proneness of man to evil, rather than good, in his present state.

"The pride of fashion is of another sort. It rears its head among the wealthy, the powerful, the gay. Religion is taken

into the account, so far as it will add to the show of life, and no farther. To be any thing, it must be a sort of state religion. Where power, influence, and distinction are to be gained, there will be religion, be it where it will. This kind of pride is oftenest seen among a certain class of persons, who depend more on the company they keep, for their respectable standing in society, than on the excellence of their own character. This is a mode, by which they contrive to force themselves above the insignificance from which their just claims could never raise them. Whenever religious opinions come in their way, the first question that is asked, is, whether any of the rulers, or of the Pharisees have believed? When this important question is answered, the matter is decided. The pride of fashion looks not beyond this. It goes along with the popular current, and hopes to please God, by taking care to please men. And I must own, I have sometimes been mortified with finding persons, who acknowledged themselves Unitarians in sentiment, but who paid so much more deference to the opinions of the world, than to the commands of God, that they would countenance doctrines, and unite in a worship, which their reason and conscience condemned, and which they could not believe God would approve. For the credit of religion, I hope the number of such persons is small, and that the time is coming, when every Christian will feel it to be a thing of some importance to show, by his open profession and example, the inestimable value, which he attaches to correct views of his Maker, of his duty, and of his immortal destiny. But at least, we cannot encourage ourselves with much hope, that religious knowledge and improvement will soon be very successful in checking the pride of opinion, and of fashion. Time will do all things."

Here is presented a frightful picture of human turpitude, worldliness and hypocrisy, from which the pious Unitarian few, themselves, are not exempted. This is just such a description of the religion of the gay, worldly and fashionable, as a Calvinist would give, when insisting that it is without any heart, any God, any Saviour; and that there is, in none of these fashionable religionists, any one morally good thing. The whole paragraph presents but one ground of encouragement; for, rapidly, as the editor tells us, (p. 55.) Unitarianism is spreading in

England, this old fox is confident, that himself and friends cannot entertain much hope that religious knowledge and improvement will soon be very successful in checking the pride of opinion, and of fashion: but here is the final "TIME panacea, will do all things." We are not quite certain, that time will prove such a mighty agent as this writer expects he will, in removing inordinate love of fashion, and the preference of man's favour to the approbation of God. Sin, in man's heart, seems hitherto to have been too stout for time: and so far as we can learn, time is but a personification of one of our conceptions concerning a finite duration, that has neither material nor mental substance; neither wisdom nor efficiency. If time is any thing else, it must be that picture in the primmer, with a scythe in his hand, and a single lock of hair on his forehead; and we cannot think that this picture will do much towards the extermination of idolatry, and supreme devotion to the pride, pomp and grandeur of the wicked world.

For ourselves, we despair of any reformation from time, since one who knows all the future, has told us, that wicked men and seducers will wax worse and worse. If, then, sovereign grace shall not interpose, we fear that multitudes will suffer time to pass away, before they become wise and conscientious in their religion.

6. "The success of" what the Unitarians deem the true and reasonable scheme of religion, " is also opposed by worldly interest," and the great mass of mankind evince their depravity, by preferring gain to godliness.

"The love of gain is sometimes too strong for the power of faith, and the light of truth. Principle is thought a cheaper sacrifice than profit. The poverty of error, mingled with earthly wealth, is more dazzling and precious in the eyes of many, than the riches of truth, although they may procure the inestimable treasure of immortal glory. The per

you,

that

sons are not few, who will tell they firmly believe in the Unitarian views of Christianity, but should they openly embrace these sentiments, it would be ruinous to their interest."

We add, in support of the doctrine of man's depravity, that thousands are kept from the exercise of what we deem a pure, evangelical piety, by the same criminal love of worldly profit: and they must be wicked indeed, who would venture upon eternal death, for. the superfluous wealth of fleeting time.

7. "Another obstacle" to the propagation of what Unitarians call truth, and another proof of the deep depravity of human nature, "scarcely less formidable than any yet mentioned, is indifference."

"A large portion of the community never find time to think of religion at all; and another portion think only enough to undervalue and neglect it. They go up and down in the world, and dream out their existence, without seeming to be aware, that they are not always to be strollers and dreamers. I am sensible, that this apathy is much more the result of circumstances, than of necessity. It has been caused, in no small degree, by religion itself, or rather, by what has been represented to be religion. The popular creeds have so little to enlighten the understanding, engage the affections, and induce rational thought, that men have turned with disgust from unprofitable speculations, which the more they contemplated, the less they were edified, and the more they found themselves wearied and perplexed. Some, who were more inquisitive and persevering, have been driven to absolute scepticism, and compelled to doubt the truth of any religion, because they could neither make consistency, nor sense, of what the most strenuous advocates for the gospel have set forth as the leading truths of revelation. They came very naturally to the conclusion, that God would never reveal doctrines to men, which no human powers could comprehend; and as the schemes usually adopted by Christians are of this character, they have not thought it worth while to examine further. I venture to say, that nine-tenths of the unbelievers in this country, and perhaps in every Christian country, have been driven into the gloomy regions of scepticism by the false notions of religion, which have been circulated in the world. They suppose the advocates of a cause will of course report it fairly,

and there is so much absurdity on the face of their report, that they reject it at once, and seek only for arguments to disprove a deception, which they think is thus practised on the world.”

Both the indifference and the assigned cause of it, are calculated to establish the doctrine, that the understanding of natural men is darkened, their conscience stupid, their memory little retentive of good, their heart debased, and their will perverse. If even the religion of the greater part of mankind is a source of pernicious influences, how depraved must they be in other things! Men must be wicked, or stupidly alienated from God, whose "popular creeds" tend to make men cast off restraint, reject divine revelation, and rebel against their Maker. Oh! deplorable state of the mass of the human family, when the very religion of nearly the whole of Christendom, promotes aversion from God, disgust at his moral precepts, and drives inquisitive persons "into the gloomy regions of scepticism!"

Reader, these proofs of man's depravity are derived from a single number of the Miscellany, and from the single piece of " An Old Unitarian" in that number.

Can you doubt but that the future numbers will confirm and establish the doctrine, that mankind, until they are converted by the special grace of God, are the enemies of the truth, and the lovers of sinful pleasures more than of God? If any thing from us can be desired, in support of this humiliating truth; we would simply refer to the existence and circulation, of such a work as the Unitarian Miscellany in our country; for did men "like to retain God in their knowledge," even the "true God and eternal life," none would have written the little pamphlets, and none would have purchased them, unless they had been ignorant of their contents, or had designed to neutralize their poison.

VOL. I.

E. S. E.

On Ruling Elders and Deacons. No church in the world, it is presumed, can be shown to be perfectly conformed in officers, government and worship, to those, which were planted by the apostles and evangelists. Nor is it essential that they should be. A conformity to them in doctrines and practice is sufficient.

Neither are the denominations agreed, nor the members of the same societies, whether in the first churches there were three orders, or two only. If, as we suppose, a plurality of presbyters and a plurality of deacons, the former to oversee and teach, the latter to aid them in the temporal concerns of the society, were left in every church, they could not continue. Changes in ecclesiastical government are no more excluded, than in civil. Accordingly there soon obtained among presbyters, a first among equals (primus inter pares) an angel, president, or bishop, whose power accumulated and advanced from a single church, to cities, provinces, kingdoms, the Christian world. The residue of the presbyters of a church, superseded by the talents and usefulness of more conspicuous teachers, yielding for the sake of public good, would be reduced in the exercise of functions to the very duties originally assigned to deacons. This hypothesis might account for ruling elders, but with Vitringa we doubt the early existence of such officers.*

If ruling elders existed in the first Christian churches, this affirmative ought to be shown, or it is not entitled to belief. Although concerned only to weigh the evidence upon which its advocates profess to

have founded their opinion, we can offer some countervailing proof.

Caution must be exercised not to confound names of officers, with the appellative senses of the words. Peter and John were old men (gerBulegor) not elders, for apostles are distinguished from elders. Acts xv. 6. Private men were (acroλ01) messengers of a particular church, not apostles of Christ. 2 Cor. viii. 23. The apostles were (daxovol, 1 Cor. iii. 5,) servants of Christ, not deacons of particular churches. The first fixed officers of the churches, who were generally seniors in point of age or grace, (goBulegor) were designated by the official name elders; but were not always appellatively such. By virtue of their commission they were overseers (ETFOTO) bishops of their particular churches. They were appointed to feed and rule their flock, and were shepherds (TOIMEVES) pastors, which designated their office. They who presided in worship, or government were (goerales) residents or ruling presbyters. But the same men were at the same time elders, bishops, pastors and presidents of the same church, by virtue of the same ordination, and appointed to the same duties. If there were two kinds of elders, there were also two kinds of bishops, and two kinds of pastors, otherwise elders and bishops were distinct offices. And thus ruling elders are so far from being essential to Presbyterianism, their admission is an abandonment of it. But such defences are immoral. We are Christians, and should fearlessly follow truth, regardless of consequences. When the duties were various and the elders numerous, prudence must have assigned them

* That elder and bishop (peoßulερος and επίσκοπος) designated the same officer, may be seen by comparing Acts xx. 17. with ver. 28. Also Titus i. 5. with ver. 7. Also 1 Peter v. 1. with ver. 2. These were the "pastors even teachers." Ephes. iv. 11.

different employments. A plurality of them in the same church was, in the gospel days, important, not only because of their state of danger from persecution, but for the arduous work of instructing the Gentiles, both in public and private. Had one pastor only been fixed in each church, their existence would have been obviously too precarious.

The duties of elders and deacons were not the same, because the latter were appointed in relief of those, who ministered in the word. Acts vi. 2. Had there existed mute elders in the apostolic churches, deacons would have been unnecessary. Elders must "feed the church of God;" (Acts xx. 28.) deacons as such were exempted from labouring in word and doctrine; yet in all our churches the office of elder is now precisely that of the deacon in the scriptures, and our elders expect only to serve (daxove Acts vi. 1.) not to preside in worship; they are therefore elders, as seniors, hot (προεσίωίες πρεσβύτεροι) presiding presbyters.

A requisite qualification of a bishop or elder, as prescribed to the evangelists Timothy and Titus, to guide them in ordaining, was, that he should be " apt to teach," but this was not expected in a deacon. They were to serve tables, and they served at the sacramental tables.† The qualifications, "full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom," were proper for any officer in the church, and necessary to them in their visitations and prayers. Evangelists were deacons in the appellative sense of the word, as servants of the apostles. Philip had both offi

Justin Martyr, Apol. I. p. 127— Διάκονοι διδασιν εκασίῳ τῶν παροντῶν μεταλαβειν απο τον ευχαριστηθενιος αρίου, &c. This was within about forty years of the apostle John. So in the apostolical constitutions, which are less credible, (c. 13. p. 405.) it is said, "O de dranovos κατεχείω το ποτήριον, και επιδίδους λεγεί ως αιμα χριστου, ποτήριον ζωής.

ces in succession. Stephen taught, and so might any gifted man.*

appointed

That there were but two orders of officers in the churches, may be shown by the addresses and letters to them, and numerous references in early writers. Thus Paul and Timothy writing to the Philippians, address "all the saints in Christ Jesus, which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons." Phil. i. 1. If elders inferior to bishops had existed in that church, it is unaccountable, that they should have been omitted, and the deacons named. Clemens Romanus, who was cotemporary with the apostle Paul, says the apostles "appointed their first fruits for bishops and deacons ; not for ruling elders. The letter to Timothy was framed evidently with such views. That evangelist received no directions about ruling elders, his business was to select suitable persons, and ordain them as bishops, and others of different qualifications, as deacons. The same two orders, elders to preach the gospel, and deacons to help them in other duties, were to be ordained by Titus. When we ordain elders in our churches, we never mean such as are named elders in the epistle to Titus, nor do we enjoin the duties there given in charge to elders, but others prescribed in the first letter to Timothy, and in the epistle to Titus, for deacons.

Peter (1 epistle, v. 1-5.) addressing the presbyters of the dispersion, makes no distinction between them,

but supposes them clothed with the same office and powers; and equally charges all and every one of them; "Feed the flock (osava) eToo, act as pastors to the flock) of God, which is among you, taking the oversight (EITHOTOVES exercising the office of bishops) not by constraint, but willingly," &c. There appears a semblance of inconsistency in some of our brethren, who argue with effect from this and such scriptures, that presbyters and bishops are the same officers, and that elders (peßulεpor) possess parity with each other; and yet strangely adopt a distinction between preaching and ruling elders; whilst the same arguments, by which they exclude diocesan episcopacy, destroy their own hypothesis. refer not this to disingenuousness, it is a blindness springing from prepossession. If Presbyterians can find among presbyters some, who were inferior in office, Episcopalians may discover in the order of presbyters, others superior in office. The opinion is the same, except that ruling elders must not preach, which exception finds no support in the word of God. But the scriptures equally oppose both schemes; in the passage last cited, all without exception were elders (peßuTεpor) all pastors, (ποιμαναεποίμνιον) and all bishops (επισκοπουνίες).

We

Presbyters must have differed in their gifts, graces and talents; some were best qualified for teaching, others for exhorting, or comforting, others for governing the church; each was required to exercise his particular powers. But this by no

§ Mr Baxter wields this argument thus: "While we prove, that God appointed such entire presbyters, as are here described, and they cannot prove against us, that any one text speaketh of a lower order or rank, I think we need no other scripture evidence."

Rom. xii. 8, here alluded to has been pressed to the support of ruling elders. "He that ruleth, with diligence." 60 postΠάμενος, εν σπουδη. Hear Schleusner. "Præses ecclesiæ (cujus curæ est deman