1. In many places there were more Christians than one particular place could accommodate for religious purposes. In other places the number would not be greater. In some it is impossible to suppose this. In Jerusalem, in a short time, three thousand, then five thousand, and afterwards whole multitudes, were added to the Church. Could upwards of eight thousand, at the lowest computation, properly assemble together for fellowship? If so, in what place? The historian Mosheim, whose leanings are not in the direction of Presbytery, ventures his reputation upon this impression: Either I perceive nothing, or this is certain, and most amply confirmed, that the apostles gathered together in Jerusalem the multitudes of Christians, and had them divided into many small communities, and that to each of these were appointed its own place of sacred fellowship, its own ministers, and its own presbyters' (Com. p. 116). The expression 'in one place' (π To auro) must be confronted with that other, 'from house to house' (xar' oixov). While they were permitted, the temple was the general place of resort. But that was only for a brief period. For celebrating the Supper, for instruction, acts of worship and discipline, they were distributed from house to house. So expressions employed to describe the success of the gospel in Samaria, Antioch, Iconium, Lydda, Corinth, and other places, are incompatible with the idea that only one congregation was formed in each city. Thus, at Ephesus, Paul and others laboured long and successfully. Not only Jewish, but Gentile converts were very numerous. These would naturally form separate congregations. Various places are mentioned, as the school of Tyrannus, and the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla, as has been proved. There mightily grew the Word of God, and prevailed.'

2. In these places the multitude of disciples had a numerous body of pastors, or spiritual instructors. Estimate the number of ministers of the Word in Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth, Philippi, Ephesus, &c., and the fact is necessarily established that a plurality of congregations must have existed.

3. That one association of officers governed these congregations in each locality is undoubted. The elders of Ephesus

were together exhorted by Paul, so to govern 'all the flock' (TaVTI TŶ TOIμvíw). For the whole flock in Ephesus, this was the common council (Acts xx. 28). So Peter, writing to the strangers scattered in various places, calls them 'the flock,' not flocks, and commands the elders among them to feed and oversee that one flock, as accountable to Christ (1 Pet. v.) This union of those holding the same essential principles by subjection to a common government, was and is the outward evidence that these several congregations were one Church. Persecution, pestilence, the want of a suitable house of worship, and other causes, prevented them assembling together; notwithstanding, by one common government, their outward unity was attested. Single congregations possessed their own elders; others were unitedly governed by associated elders as their representatives. Hence

Fourthly, These associated congregations are addressed as the one Church of that locality. This is no misuse of the word. Though composed of many parts in its essential conditions, the Church of Christ is one. All who are united to Christ by the powerful operation of the Holy Spirit, are portions of that one Church which He hath purchased with His blood. So the Church visible is one-one in a locality—one in a nation—one in the world. Gaius is not only the host of Paul, but of the whole Church' (Rom. xvi. 23). This Church is to be told of offences, and its decisions are to be heard (Matt. xviii. 17). Though scattered by persecution, its members are mutually addressed as the flock of Christ put under the care of shepherds. It is recognized in Jerusalem, in Corinth, in Ephesus, and elsewhere, as one Church, though embracing a plurality. The selfsame decisions apply to that one Church, whether found in Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Derbe, in Lystra, in Iconium, throughout Phrygia, or the region of Galatia (Acts xv. xvi.) There are

'churches' in Judea, Samaria, Macedonia, for each separate congregation is still a Church. So several together are a Church, and the Churches of all countries are still the one Church of Jesus Christ, according to His Word: Other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one flock' (not, as in our version, one fold, Toiμm), and one shepherd' (John x. 16).

N

The Church of a nation is not less a proper and scriptural expression. Stephen declared of Christ, This is He that was in the Church (v ry ixxλnorą) in the wilderness' (Acts vii. 38). This application of the word is to the entire nation of the Jews, which, in the wilderness, could not number less than two millions. The same term is also applied to that nation when settled in Canaan in the days of David, and numbering many millions: 'In the midst of the Church (v Meow ixxλnoías) will I sing praise unto thee' (Ps. xxii. 22–25; Heb. ii. 12). In the same manner the term 'church' is applied to the Christians of Palestine in the time of the apostles: 'Then had the Church' (not the Churches, as in our version), xxλnoia, 'rest throughout all Judea and Samaria, and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, was multiplied' (Acts ix. 31). This reading is now accepted by the most eminent critics, as Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Bengel. The latest discovered MS., the Codex Sinaiticus, is in favour of this reading; so also the MSS. A, B, and C. These four most ancient and valuable MSS., along with others, give this testimony. The singular form of the word 'church' is thus applied to the society of believers in their collective capacity throughout all that land. The Church of all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, had rest, and was multiplied. As correctly, then, may the entire Churches of any other land—subject, as that of Palestine, to one common government—be designated as 'the church' of that country. And so the Church throughout the world. The one meaning, 'society of believers," is in each case preserved.

These explicit declarations of Scripture being unsuitable to the plan devised and adopted so recently as seventeen hundred years after Christ, special efforts are made to destroy their force. Thus it is asserted that there was no such Church in the house in the city of Ephesus. It is said that Ephesus stood within the Asia of the Scriptures, and that Paul's salutation from the Asiatic Churches included the Church in Ephesus. This is too forced to be accepted. Continually that apostle is found sending salutations from Churches widely separated, and yet singling out individuals: 'The Churches of Christ salute you. . . . Gaius mine host, and of the whole Church, saluteth you,' he wrote to the Romans. So

in writing from Ephesus to the Church in Corinth, with one dash of his pen he sends the salutations of the Churches of Asia; but he does not forget that small congregation assembling in the house of his friends, a beloved portion of the saints and faithful at Ephesus. Then it is maintained that their house and Church were not within the limits of Ephesus; that, if so, the salutation was unnecessary. So Paul, inspired though you were, you are to submit to the correction of the uninspired of this nineteenth century! You are, it seems, guilty of redundancy. And this is not enough. Aquila and Priscilla, it seems, never had a Church in Ephesus! Paul is here made out to have erred. Who will believe this? Writing from Ephesus, and sending salutations to the Church of Corinth, he says, 'Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the Church that is in their house.' That he speaks of a Church at Ephesus is evident: 'I am glad,' he says, 'of the coming of Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, for they have refreshed my spirit. . . . All the brethren greet you' (1 Cor. xvi. 18-21). Can any one, realizing that Paul was then in Ephesus, understand that 'coming' as to any other place, or that these brethren were not the faithful in that city? The other reference must, therefore, also be to Ephesus. This passage proves that, when the first Epistle to the Corinthians was written, there existed at least this Church in the house, as well as the larger Church in Ephesus.

To whatever extent, then, that union of congregations under one government of associated elders can be carried, such a united body may be lawfully termed ' one church.'

Every emblem employed proclaims that the visible Church is one. It is the kingdom of heaven,'' the olive-tree' (Rom. xi. 17), 'one body' (1 Cor. xii. 13). And there must be no schism in this one Church of Christ. These declarations cannot refer to the Church invisible, for therein are found members good and bad, wise and foolish-gifts bestowed even upon those who are unbelieving-offices instituted for the instruction, conversion, sanctification of many, while others are cut off. These members are addressed by Christ and His apostles as genuine saints, for they are treated according to their profession. Even were it possible that the branches of the Church were composed of none

but saints, where were its unity if these were totally independent of each other? The term 'independent,' as applied to the Church, is unscriptural; and the thing is both contrary to Scripture and to right reason. It is impossible to regard a number of entirely different fractions, distinguished by a variety of different practices, as one. The body of Christ has members in particular, but that body manifests its oneness by one doctrine and one common government.

QUESTIONS.

1. What are the two ideas by which some localize this government? 2. Mention, generally, the origin, extent, and indefiniteness of Independency.

3. State the principle of Independency, and the proper question involved in this discussion.

4. Mention the first proposition which, if proved, refutes their idea.

5. Enumerate the fourfold proof presented.

6. Prove that the appellation, the church of a nation,' is scriptural, giving the proper reading of Acts ix. 31.

7. State and refute some objections urged.

8. What is the conclusion to which these facts conduct?

CHAPTER X.

THE GOVERNMENT LOCALIZED.

'Decrees ordained of the apostles and elders.'

CHURCHES WIDELY SCATTERED WERE GOVERNED BY REPRESENTATIVE ASSOCIATED ELDERS.

THIS is the second proposition requiring special attention. A common government, over those maintaining the same essential truth, being the outward bond of unity this was exercised in

tolic times, and that not only where

other, but over those far remove