I.

PART II.

CENT. deacons of the church, being chosen from among the Jews, who were born in Palestine, were suspected by the foreign Jews of partiality in distri buting the offerings which were presented for the support of the poor [i]. To remedy, therefore, this disorder, seven other deacons were chosen, by order of the apostles, and employed in the service of that part of the church at Jerusalem, which was composed of the foreign Jews converted to Christianity. Of these new ministers, six were foreigners, as appears by their names; the seventh was chosen out of the proselytes, of whom there were a certain number among the first Christians at Jerusalem, and to whom it was reasonable, that some regard should be shown, in the election of the deacons, as well as to the foreign Jews. All the other Christian churches followed the example of that of Jerusalem, in whatever related to the choice and office of the deacons. Some, particularly the eastern churches, elected deaconesses, and chose, for that purpose, matrons or widows of eminent sanctity, who also ministered to the necessities of the poor, and performed several other offices, that tended to the maintenance of order and decency in the church [k].

Bishops.

XI. Such was the constitution of the Christian church in its infancy, when its assemblies were

cons of the church of Jerusalem, of whom the Greek Jews complain afterwards to the apostles (Acts vi. 1, &c.) on account of the partial distribution of the alms. I might confirm this sense of the word young men by numberless citations from Greek and Roman writers, and a variety of authors sacred and profane; but this is not the proper place for demonstrations of this nature.

[] Acts vi. 1, &c.

[k] For an ample account of the deacons and deaconesses of the primitive church, see Zeigler, De Diaconis et Diaconissis, cap. xix. p. 347. Basnagii Annal. Polit. Eccles. ad A. xxxv. tom. i. p. 450. Bingham, Orig. Eccles. lib. ii. cap. xx.

I.

PART II.

neither numerous nor splendid. Three or four CENT. presbyters, men of remarkable piety and wisdom, ruled these small congregations in perfect harmony, nor did they stand in need of any president or superior to maintain concord and order where no dissensions were known. But the number of the presbyters and deacons increasing with that of the churches, and the sacred work of the ministry growing more painful and weighty, by a number of additional duties, these new circumstances required new regulations. It was then judged necessary, that one man of distinguished gravity and wisdom should preside in the council of presbyters, in order to distribute among his colleagues their several tasks, and to be a centre of union to the whole society. This person was, at first, styled the angel [7] of the church to which he belonged, but was afterward distinguished by the name of bishop, or inspector, a name borrowed from the Greek language, and expressing the principal part of the episcopal function, which was to inspect into, and superintend, the affairs of the church. It is highly probable that the church of Jerusalem, grown considerably numerous, and deprived of the ministry of the apostles, who were gone to instruct the other nations, was the first, which chose a president or bishop. And it is no less probable, that the other churches followed by degrees such a respectable example.

copal dig

XII. Let none, however, confound the bishops The nature of this primitive and golden period of the church of the episwith those of whom we read in the following ages, nity in this For, though they were both distinguished by the century, same name, yet they differed extremely, and that in many respects. A bishop, during the first and second century, was a person who had the care of

[1] Rev. ii. 3.

I.

PART II.

CENT. one Christian assembly, which, at that time, was, generally speaking, small enough to be contained in a private house. In this assembly he acted, not so much with the authority of a master, as with the zeal and diligence of a faithful servant. He instructed the people, performed the several parts of divine worship, attended the sick, and inspected into the circumstances and supplies of the poor. He charged, indeed, the presbyters with the performance of those duties and services, which the multiplicity of his engagements rendered it impossible for him to fulfil; but had not the power to decide or enact any thing without the consent of the presbyters and people. And, though the episcopal office was both laborious and singularly dangerous, yet its revenues were extremely small, since the church had no certain income, but depended on the gifts or oblations of the multitude, which were, no doubt, inconsiderable, and were, moreover, to be divided between the bishops, presbyters, deacons, and poor.

The origin

and chor

XIII. The power and jurisdiction of the biof dioceses shops were not long confined to these narrow episcopi. limits, but soon extended themselves, and that by the following means. The bishops, who lived in the cities, had, either by their own ministry, or that of their presbyters, erected new churches in the neighbouring towns and villages. These churches, continuing under the inspection and ministry of the bishops, by whose labours and counsels they had been engaged to embrace the gospel, grew imperceptibly into ecclesiastical provinces, which the Greeks afterwards called dioceses. But as the bishop of the city could not extend his labours and inspection to all these churches in the country and in the villages, so he appointed certain suffragans or deputies to govern and to instruct these new societies; and

they were distinguished by the title of chor- CENT.

I.

episcopi, i. e. country bishops. This order held PART II. the middle rank between bishops and presbyters, being inferior to the former, and superior to the latter.

in the first

XIV. The churches, in those early times, were whether entirely independent; none of them subject to and metroany foreign jurisdiction, but each one governed politans are by its own rulers and its own laws. For, though to be placed the churches founded by the apostles had this century. particular difference shown them, that they were consulted in difficult and doubtful cases; yet they had no juridical authority, no sort of supremacy over the others, nor the least right to enact laws for them. Nothing, on the contrary, is more evident than the perfect equality that reigned among the primitive churches; nor does there even appear in this first century, the smallest trace of that association of provincial churches, from which councils and metropolitans derive their origin. It was only in the second century that the custom of holding councils commenced in Greece, from whence it soon spread through the other provinces [m].

XV. The principal place among the Christian The princidoctors, and among those also, who by their the apostles writings were instrumental in the progress of the and their truth, is due to the apostles, and certain of their disciples. disciples, who were set apart and inspired by God, to record the actions of Christ and his apostles.

[m] The meeting of the church of Jerusalem, mentioned in the xvth chapter of the Acts, is commonly considered as the first Christian council. But this notion arises from a manifest abuse of the word council. That meeting was only of one church, and, if such a meeting be called a council, it will follow that there were innumerable councils in the primitive times. But every one knows that a council is an assembly of deputies, or commissioners, sent from several churches associated by certain bonds in a general body, and therefore the supposition abovementioned falls to the ground.

I.

CENT. The writings of these holy men, which are comprehended in the books of the New Testament, PART 11. are in the hands of all who profess themselves Christians. Those who are desirous of particular information with respect to the history of these sacred books, and the arguments which prove their divine authority, their genuineness, and purity, must consult the learned authors who have written professedly upon that matter [n].

The time

canon was

fixed.

XVI. The opinions, or rather the conjectures when the of the learned concerning the time when the books of the New Testament were collected into one volume, as also about the authors of that collection, are extremely different. This im portant question is attended with great and almost insuperable difficulties to us in these latter times [o]. It is, however, sufficient for us to know, that, before the middle of the second century, the greatest part of the books of the New Testament were read in every Christian society throughout the world, and received as a divine rule of faith and manners. Hence it appears, that these sacred writings were carefully separated from several human compositions upon same subject, either by some of the apostles themselves, who lived so long, or by their disciples and successors, who were spread abroad through all nations [p]. We are well assured [q], that the

the

[n] For the history of the books of the New Testament, see particularly Jo. Alb. Fabricius, Biblioth. Græc. lib. iv. cap. v. p. 122-227. The same learned author has given an accurate list of the writers, who have defended the divinity of these sacred books, in his Delectus Argumentorum et Syllabus Scriptorum pro Verit. Relig. Christianæ, cap. xxvi. p. 502.

[o] See Jo. Ens, Bibliotheca S. seu Diatriba de librorum N. T. Canone, published at Amsterdam in 1710, as also Jo. Mill. Prolegomen. ad Nov. Test. sect. 1. p. 23.

[p] See Frickius, De Cura Veteris Ecclesiæ circa Canon. cap. iii. p. 86.

[q] This is expressly affirmed by Eusebius, in the xxivth chapter of the third book of his Ecclesiastical History.