means militates against the identity of order, manner of ordination, nature of commission, dignity of office, and general duties.

No where do we find in the history of the acts of the apostles, different orders of presbyters. Paul and Barnabas ordained elders, without

any distinction of kinds, in all the churches. There appears to have been but one class of them at Ephesus. Paul sent for the elders, (Acts xx. 28.) they came to Miletus; if any of them had been merely ruling elders, in the modern sense of those terms, it is not discernible with what propriety he could have said, without discrimination, that the Holy Ghost had made them bishops (exoTous) and that it was their duty (oμaive) to act as pastors of the flock.

The question seems to be chiefly suspended upon a single passage of scripture, by the advocates of the intermediate, or third order. "Let the elders who rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they, who labour in word and doctrine."* This passage shows these facts; that all the elders, therein said to be worthy of double honour, ruled well; that some of the same elders laboured in word and doctrine, and implies that others of them did not. These facts prove a diversity in the exercises of the presbyterial office, but not in the office itself. If there had been two kinds of elders, this scripture might be understood to relate to them. But the text alone will never establish such distinction, because it can be literally understood of various duties of the same order. So far is the word ruling (poolles) from signifying a subordinate class of presbyters,

datus cœtus christianus, qui alias €σ×· πος, πρεσβύτερος, ποιμην dicitur) sedulitatem præstat promtam."

* 1 Tim. v. 17. Οι καλώς προεστώτες πρεσβύτεροι διπλης τιμης αξιούσθωσαν, μαλιστα οι κοπιῶντες εν λόγῳ και διδασ καλια.

that Justin Martyrt makes use of that identical word repeatedly, to mark out that presbyter, who gave thanks and dispensed the elements at the sacramental supper to the deacons to be carried to the communicants. The more advanced pastors, who presided (pos77es) on the most solemn occasions, blessing the elements, deserved double honour, but (aola or‡) especially those, who performed the chief labour in preaching, were not to be passed by as unworthy. "All the saints salute you (mala) chiefly they, that are of Cæsar's household." Phil. iv. 22. Who would ever imagine that the saints of Cæsar's household, were of a different kind from others? Their labours might be different, but they were equally saints, their salutations were especially earnest. This scripture cannot prove two kinds of presbyters, it merely alludes to different exercises of the same office.§

The next which is a mere ancillary proof, is a passage (1 Cor. xii. 28.) which neither names such elders, nor admits any other than a conjectural interpretation of the single word, governments. "And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles,

† Apol. I. p. 127.-Ευχαριστησαντος δε του προεσίωλος, &c. p. 131. Ο προεστώς δια λόγου την νουθεσίαναςίος προσφέρεται και οινος και υδωρ.

The position of or after adica has been resorted to without effect. without an adjunct is a pronoun, and has Ho understood; its antecedent is πρεςβύτεροι προεσίωίες, and the κοπιώντες are also προεστωτες.

"Though when a church hath many, the ablest may be the usual public preacher, and the rest be but his assistants; yet I never found any proof of elders, that were not teachers by office as well as rulers, and had not a commission to teach the flock according to their abilities, and might not preach, as the need of the church required it, however the weaker may give place to the abler in the exercise of his office."-Baxter.

then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." Apostles were instructed and commissioned by Christ; prophets spoke by inspiration; these were extraordinary officers of the church at large; teachers we suppose were the presbyters, pastors, or bishops of the particular churches, and were their ordinary, fixed officers to preach and rule. Of the rest the two first, miracles and gifts of healing, and the last diversities of tongues, were certainly extraordinary, and that the intermediate ones, helps and governments, were such gifts conferred on certain individuals, is reasonable. That helps mean deacons, and governments ruling elders, is wholly gratuitously alleged, and also improbable, both because it postpones the higher order, if such there be, and places them among the extraordinary gifts.

If a single proof of the existence of the order of ruling elders can be produced from the scriptures, it is sufficient. But if we clearly discern by them, that two orders only were constituted by the apostles; presbyters, who are elders, pastors, bishops, angels, or presidents; and deacons; the period of the introduction of the innovation is unimportant. If Ignatius's letters to the seven churches of provincial Asia, furnish a proof of ruling elders in his day, he proves what he never names, and the presbytery in each of those churches was precisely a church session. Cyprian speaks of presidents and deacons* if among those who presided, ruling elders existed, because he speaks of teaching elders; both must have been of the same order, though variously occupied. It is by no means to be inferred from the occurrence in ancient authors of the terms (Presbyteri, Diaconi et Seniores plebis)

* "Cum omnes omnino disciplinam tenere oporteat, multo magis Præpositos et Diaconos hoc curare fas est." Cyp. Ep. 4. p. 174.

presbyters, deacons and seniors of the people, that ruling elders were intended. If these elders of the people meant ruling elders, the name is changed, they are also postponed to the deacons. But the word seniors is limited to those only, who were of the people, that is, uncommissioned. Seniors in several of the fathers is intended appellatively, and not as a designation of office.t

"The book of common order," which had been adopted by the English church at Geneva, was the directory for worship and govern

ment in the church of Scotland at its reformation.

The first book of discipline was made in a time of confusion. The order of intermediate elders, somewhat resembling those of Calvin, was seen to be an important expedient for effecting by laymen a reformation to which a small minority of their ecclesiastics were well affected. The second book has these remarkable expressions. (ch. vi. p.. 84.) "The word Elder in the scriptures, sometimes is the name of age, and sometimes of office. When it is the name of any office, sometimes it is taken largely, comprehending as well the pastors and doctors, as them who are called seniors or elders.", "In our division, we call these elders, whom the apostles call presidents or governors. Their office as it is ordinary, so is it perpetual, and always necessary in the kirk of God. The eldership is a spiritual function, as is the ministry. It is not necessary, that all elders be also teachers of the word, albeit the chief ought to be such, and swa are worthy of double ho

nour." This language evidently excludes the elders therein recognised from the office of presbyters, the only ordinary and fixed preach

† Dr. Doddridge observes, they "have no foundation in the word of God; nor can we trace the existence of such ruling elders higher than Constantine's time."

ers in the gospel churches; and nevertheless strangely accounts them "spiritual as is the ministry," and authorized to teach the word. There is here striking evidence of vacillation between scripture authority, and their favourite office, without the erection of which the first general assembly of the church of Scotland would have been composed of only six members, or would never have convened.

The form of church government made at Westminster, almost a century after the first book of discipline, and immediately adopted in Scotland, was compiled upon a full knowledge of the discipline in the church of North Britain, and in that of Geneva. Partaking of the same uncertainty, on the subject of the novel order of subordinate presbyters, it declares, that "Christ, who hath instituted a government, and governors ecclesiastical in the church, hath furnished some in his church, beside the ministers of the . word, with gifts for government, and with commission to execute the same when called thereunto, who are to join with the minister in the government of the church. Which officers, reformed churches commonly call elders." There is in these words an obvious leaning upon 1 Cor. xii. 28. Those in italics discover a persuasion, that the governments (xvBEPYNTE) mentioned in that scripture were extraordinary gifts; but the commission of which they speak, is destitute of support. Abandoning the elders or presbyters of a subordinate order, they compromise with the kirk, by allowing governors, who are laymen, to be in fact, though not in name, elders.

The Westminster confession was adopted by the Synod of Philadelphia in 1729; and their form of government by the Synods of New York and Philadelphia in their articles of union in 1758.*

Perhaps the adoption was more early, but of those dates we have certainty.

In the first draught of a plan of government and discipline for the Presbyterian church in North America, proposed in 1786, by a committee of the Synod of New York and Philadelphia, under the title, "of ruling elders," instead of "other church governors," as in the Westminster form, there is subjoined; "elders are properly the representatives of the people, chosen by them for the purpose of exercising government and discipline, in a more convenient manner, than might otherwise be done; and are vested with all that authority which the assembly of believers possess over their own members, to rule the church, in conjunction with the bishops or pastors. This office has been generally understood, by the greater part of the Protestant, reformed churches, to be designated in the holy scriptures by the titles of helps and governments, and those who rule well, but do not labour in word and doctrine."

The same words, except those in italics, and the substitution of ministers for bishops, were continued in the amended draught of 1787, and became the fourth chapter of the form of government, adopted by the church in 1788. They now constitute the fifth chapter of the revised form, proposed to the presbyteries, who are to report to the assembly of 1821.

The term elders had been adopted in the discipline of Knox, but was abandoned for the word

governors by the divines, at Westminster; it was restored in the form of 1788, with the additional term ruling, evidently by a misinterpretation of 1 Tim. v. 17. That they "are properly the representatives of the people," is unquestionable; but how their being "chosen by them for the purpose of exercising government and discipline," can give them the authority of officers in the church of Christ, since it is certain that they belong to neither of the two orders, which were left in his church,remains

to be discovered. The argument of necessity may justify any thing, but in this instance the necessity was artificial, arising from the removal of deacons from the exercise of their original functions. Nevertheless, names are of minor importance: the term elder we interpret appellatively, and ruling understood exclusively, shows us he is not a presbyter; his appointment, ordination, engagements, and work, are all precisely those of a deacon. The mischief therefore only exists, when in the same church there are both elders and deacons ; in such instances the former are not officers of Christ's church.

Three certainly, and we suppose others, of the committee, who reported the draught of 1786, were decisively against ruling elders, and pronounced it "an unscriptural office;" but considered their report a compromise, which would leave every one to the exercise of his own conscience.

The form of government, at present submitted to the presbyteries, has carefully retained the alternative, and gives to neither side just ground of offence. In it we cheerfully acquiesce. These outlines of the reasons upon which three orders have been refused, in, we believe, a majority of our churches, have been reluctantly drawn up; but the confident style of several recent publications of certain brethren of our church, who are of the opposite sentiment, have rendered the defence of our own opinion, and that of our fathers, a duty. The question is extremely simple. Did such a distinct intermediate order exist in the apostolic churches? If there did, let the affirmative fact be proved, and

Sheppard's Sincere Convert,

ABRIDGED BY E. S. ELY.

(Continued from page 34.)

CHAPTER II.

God made all mankind at first, in Adam, in a most glorious estate.

God made man upright, or righteous. Eccl. vii. 29. There was a glory in all inferior creatures; but a greater glory in man, for whom they were made. Let us make man, said the Deity, in our image. A council was held on this subject, that the wisdom of the Trinity might be seen in man. The glory of man consisted in his bearing the image of the divine holiness. Inferior creatures exhibited God's wisdom, power and goodness; but he would have men only appear in the likeness of his holiness. God beheld his own infinite glory and excellence, and man originally had a correct understanding of these divine perfections;. for God loved him, and revealed himself to Adam.

In his affections man bore the image of his God; for God loves himself supremely, and Adam loved his God above every other object. His continual delight, for a time, was in the Lord. In his will too, man resembled his God; for God wills only from regard to himself, as the last end of all his actions, and wills nothing but what is good; and Adam, while holy, had a supreme regard in his volitions to the will of God, and chose nothing but good. As the Deity would have conducted, had he assumed human nature, so did Adam live, agreeably to the divine law. Holiness, like a lamp, burning in the heart of man, shone through his bodily organs : so that he pleased God, and was

ments. But the conscience feels no obligation, unless the government of Christ's church is seen to be founded, not upon vague conjecture, but upon legitimate authority.

him, in freedom from sorrow, sickness, tears, fears, death, hell, and every evil. Had man stood in holiness, he would forever have remained happy.

But it is demanded, How was this estate ours? We answer, As

Christ's righteousness is a believer's, by imputation, though he never performed it himself; so Adam's righteousness and image were imputed to us, and accounted ours; for Adam received our stock, or patrimony, to keep for us, and to convey to us. Hence, he proving bankrupt, we lost it. We had it representatively, in his hands, as an orphan may have a great estate left him, though he may never receive one penny of it from his guardian, who should have kept it, and conveyed it to him.

may

This doctrine be of use, 1. To show us the horrible nature of sin. It plucks man from his throne of dominion over the creatures, and expels him from the society and friendship of his God. One, and the very first fault of man, weighs him, and all of his posterity

down to endless ruin.

2. We may hence learn, what cause every man has to lament the miserable estate into which he has fallen. Man, who was beloved of his God, is now rejected; and he who was once lord of this lower world, is now a fugitive and vagabond upon the earth.

3. God's people may derive comfort from this doctrine: for if all Adam's posterity were perfectly righteous in him, much more are the children of God by faith, perfectly righteous in Christ. They are as much more happy in the righteousness of Christ, than Adam was in his own, as the righteousness of the former exceeds that of the latter. Adam could and did lose his righteousness, but Christ cannot; and unless he can be damned, believers must be saved.

Some

yes,

4. Our subject should reprove several classes of persons. are ashamed of holiness: ashamed of the image of God, which was once man's glory; and they now glory in sin, which is their shame. The world calls holiness, folly; preciseness, pride and hypocrisy; and pretends, that whatever

show the pious may make, they are

as bad at heart as the worst of men.

Hence many, who are almost persuaded to become Christians, dare not, will not, for shame of the world, enter upon religious courses. What will they think of me ?" is their alarming question. Our gallants are ashamed to be out of the fashion, and hence will defend indecent exposures of the person, and strange apparel, as things comely. Oh! time servers! that have some conscience, and desire to be honest, or to be reputed so, yet conform themselves to all companies. If they hear others swear profanely, they are ashamed to reprove them: they are ashamed to enter into holy discourse in bad company: and pretend discretion, or fear of casting pearls before swine; but the truth is, they are ashamed to be holy. Oh fearful! is it a shame to be like God? Oh sinful wretches! It is a credit with you, to be any thing but religious; and religion is a shame. I wonder how you dare pretend to pray, or with what look you will behold the glory of God in the last day? You are now ashamed of him, who will then be admired by all men, angels and devils. Do you look for wages from Christ, when you are ashamed to own Christ, and to wear his livery?

Some hate holiness, and this is worse than being ashamed of it; while others are are contented with a certain measure of it. Perfect holiness was the image of God, by which Adam pleased his Maker, and shall a little holiness satisfy us?

The formalist contents himself with so much of the exterior of holiness as will do him credit in the society which he frequents. The name of religion is an honour: the power and practice of it, a burden; hence men take up the first and shake off the last. They will be like their acquaintance, if they are merely civil; but if they appear to pray, read and confer on religious subjects, formalists will be more