to him the care, the tenderness and the vigilance of the good shepherd are recommended. This duty is to be performed, not under the impulse of worldly circumstances, but from inclination; not from a primary view to the emoluments of offices, but from the dictates of a mind devoted to the moral purposes of the gospel. St. Peter exhorts ministers not to assume authority in the Church, as officers appointed to dictate and rule in the concerns of religion, and possessed of a divine right to control the consciences of men, and govern religious opinions; but he directs them to preach the word of life, and to enforce their wholesome counsel by an exemplification of the virtues they inculcate, that the people of their charge may take them as their examplers as well as teachers. To inspire the ministers of the altar with the most animating motives to faithfulness and perseverance, the apostle carries their minds forward to the consummation of the present system of things, when Christ shall appear for judgment; and he assures them they will then receive their reward, even the crown of glory, honour, and immortality.

Happy would it have been for the Christian world, had the successors of St. Peter regarded his sacred directions, imbibed the spirit of their Master and of his apostles, and supported the ministerial relation in conformity to the rules enjoined them. But in subsequent periods, how many who bore the name of Christian ministers, inattentive to apostolick precept and example, manifested the spirit of the world, assumed dominion over conscience, and ruled as lords of God's heritage.

The audience will. recollect, that on a former occasion, I proposed to review the primitive state of the Christian Church, consider the causes which led to the superstitions and abuses of the Roman Hierarchy, examine the nature and extent of the reformation, and state our duty as protest

ants.

The second branch of this general subject is the object of our present attention, viz.

2. The manner in which ecclesiastical power and dominion were gradually assumed by the Christian priesthood,

Under this proposition, I shall review the general state of the Christian community in ages immediately succeeding that of the apostles. The usurpation of the Bishop of Rome, and the corruptions and abuses of the Papal Hierarchy, will be particularly discussed at a future time.

That your view of the subject may be distinct and clear, I will divide the proposition into two branches-First, briefly state the circumstances that introduced different orders of priests into the Church, and led to the establishment of the offices of Bishops and Archbishops; and then describe the manner in which ecclesiasticks gradually assumed power and dominion over the community of Christians.

Let us, my Christian hearers, carry our reflection back to primitive times, and consider the condition of the professors of our religion in the age immediately following that of the apostles. At that time, the number of Christian disciples composed a minor portion of the population of any city

or village. Then a single Church embraced a large city, and perhaps a considerable extent of country.

The body of professors generally were noviciates in our religion, and required extraordinary attention from their spiritual instructers. Many of them, on account of their local situation, could but occasionally attend the stated place of the publick ministrations of the word and ordinances of the gospel, even in the most peaceable and quiet times of the Church.

The members of the Christian community being thus situated, a custom carly prevailed of ordaining two or more ministers of the same Church. These were co-equal in office, and mutually aided in the performance of all the duties of the pastoral relation among a community whose members were widely separated from each other. As converts to the Christian faith were multiplied, professors within the limits originally embraced by a single Church become too numerous ever to meet in one place for the purpose of publick worship, or a participation in the ordinances of the gospel. New Churches were therefore gathered in the same city; or the distant members formed into distinct Churches in their own towns and villages; and it more fre quently happened, that some of the ministers, who had been ordained pastors of the parent Church, were located as parish priests in the newly formed societies. But this separation of those who had once been members of the same Church was not complete. These were holden to be associated Churches; and they were considered as having in a peculiar sense, a community of interest. The

ministers of these respective societies often had their meetings, to consult and advise with each other respecting measures designed to promote the cause of Christian truth and virtue. From respect to the parent Church, its minister, who having been selected for this office on account of distinguished talents, gravity, &c. was acknowledged as the moderator of these assemblies of the clergy. And in consequence of this office, a distinction was made between the terms Bishop and Elder. In the New Testament, and during the apostolick age, these were used synonimously, and neither meant any thing more than the minister of a particular Church; but now the minister of the parent Church was, by way of distinction, denominated Bishop, and the pastors of the newly formed societies were called Elders, and the united societies were called a Diocese. In this way two orders of ministers were established. Deacons originally were considered as the almoners of the Church; and no service was performed by them, in the offices of publick worship, but serving the bread and wine to communicants, and providing materials for baptism but when Churches were multiplied, and ministerial labours were increased, the Deacons were often requested to give their aid in offices of worship; and in process of time candidates for the ministry were appointed Deacons, as a station in which they might, with the more facility, prepare themselves for the higher duties of the priesthood; or, to adopt the language of an ecclesiastical historian-"The Deacons, who seem at first to have been chosen merely in consequence of a particular

exigence, as we learn from Acts vi. 1, to wit:-For the inspection of the poor, and the distribution of the charitable collections, were admitted very early to an inferiour part in the sacred ministry, such as attending the pastors in the discharge of religious offices, and acting under their direction. The deaconship served in fact as a noviciate to the ministry." Finally, deacons were admitted as a distinct, though inferiour, class of the priesthood. In this way three orders of the ministry were established, bishops, elders or presbyters, and deacons.

But the bishop of that age bore scarce any resemblance to the bishop of a later period. There was no revenue appropriated for the support of the bishoprick he claimed no authority over the presbyters, he exercised no spiritual jurisdiction over the associated Churches. Nor did the several orders of priests, as a body of ecclesiasticks, pretend to power and dominion in the Church, in right of their clerical office. The bishop was merely the first among his brethren of the ministry. In his name, invitation was given to the elders or presbyters of the diocese to meet, when their assembling was thought expedient; and he acted as president in their meetings. But the rights of the brethren were not yet invaded. Bishops and elders were elected to office by common suffrage; and all transactions of the Church in which there was a common interest, were managed in meetings of clergy and laity, as one united body.

As the darkness of Paganism vanished before the light of the gospel, Christian Churches were