defcending then upon him in a bodily fhape (LUKE iii. 22) did afterwards, before his ascension into heaven, fend and empower his Apoftles, (giving them the Holy Ghost likewife as his Father had given. him) in like manner as his Father had before fent him (JOHN 20, 21) to execute the fame apoftolical, epifcopal, paftoral office; for the ordering and governing of his church, until his coming again; and fo the fame office to continue in them, and their fucceffors, unto the end of the world." (MATT. xxii. 18, 20.) This I take to be fo clear from these, and other like texts in scripture, that if they shall be diligently com pared together, both between themselves and the following practice of all the churches of CHRIST, as well in the Apostle's time, as in the pureft and pri mitive times nearest thereto, there will be left little caufe why any man fhould doubt thereof."

That there long has been a difference of opinion upon this fubject, is a fact well known; and that this will continue to be the cafe to the end of time, is a circumstance to be lamented. But, had CALVIN been a bishop when he feparated from the communion of the church of Rome, this difference of opinion, with refpect to the particular form of church govern. ment, would, I am inclined to think, never have

taken place. For that CALVIN's objection was not to episcopacy, as the inftitution of CHRIST, but to the corruption of it in the perfon of the Pope, we underftand from the sentence denounced by him and BEZA upon those who separated from the reformed epifcopacy in this country; namely, that they were worthy of every anathema, "Nullo non anathemate dignos." Had CALVIN entered into communion with that reformed branch of the church whofe epifcopacy he approved, it had been happy for the peace of the church in general, and that of this kingdom in particular. But CALVIN, though a man of distinguished and highly refpectable character, was not without his infirmities. One of them I fear was, the pride of being looked up to as the founder of a new form of church government. To juftify himself in that novel proceeding, authority of fome kind or other must be brought from fcripture and the primitive writers. But CALVIN (though it rarely happens that a man of information is at a lofs for arguments to support a cause which he has warmly efpoufed) was too well acquainted with fcripture and church history, to feel himself at all times fatisfied on this fubject. His disciples have been more decided and unequivocal upon it. As the Prefbyterians removed from their

founders, they became more rigid in their principles; at length they loft fight of epifcopacy fo far, as to commence open war against it: and they have now been engaged for these two centuries in producing and re-producing all thofe texts and arguments, which, in their judgment, appear to favour the cause they have previously adopted; because they would not be thought to have efpoufed a cause, for which nothing was to be faid.

Some of these texts and arguments you have thought proper to bring forward, by way of counterpoise to the purport of my fecond discourse. Had you done justice to that church, of which you profess yourself a member, by making yourself acquainted with thofe celebrated writers whofe object it was to maintain the caufe of epifcopacy against that of Presbyterian church government; I am perfuaded you would, as a churchman, have felt yourself standing upon more firm ground than you do at present; and that you would not, by an ambiguous mode of writing, have left your reader in fome doubt with respect to your conviction on the fubject. It would be foreign to my purpose to enter into the whole extent of a fubject which has been fo often and fo fully

handled; my duty will, I truft, be discharged, by returning a brief reply to thofe particulars which have been brought forward to immediate notice.

Your first obfervation refpecting the promifcuous application of the word prefbyter and bishop appears intended to prove, that the earliest bishops and prefbyters were the fame. "To argue (faid King James, at the Hampton-Court conference) from the practice of a church in its beginning, and before it was perfectly formed, to a church fettled, and in a flourishing condition, is no good reafoning." COLL. vol. ii. p. 675. Indeed before any advantage can be drawn from it to your present fubject, it must be proved, that the words bishop and prefbyter conveyed precisely the fame meaning in the Apoftolic age that they do at prefcnt; if they did not, we fhall mifinterpret the Apoftolic writings, by taking words in a fenfe dif ferent from that in which they used them.

ExоTоs, literally tranflated, is an overfeer; a word which is taken in different fenfes. The Apostles are ftiled bishops in one fenfe, as overfeers of the church at large. The prefbyters whom they ordained, might be called bishops in another fenfe; as overfeers of that particular district, over which the Apostles had placed them. But will it follow from hence, that because

the name of bishop is applied occafionally to both, that they therefore acted in the fame character? - The word ПpesCUTspos, literally translated, is elderman; a word ufed to exprefs age and authority, and applied to men in different characters and stations in life. In facred fcripture it is applied to the Apostles; whilft those who were ordained by the Apoftles, and over whom they exercised authority, are distinguished alfo by the fame title. But does it follow from hence that there was no difference of character between the Apostles and the elders they ordained?

The word Alanovos literally fignifies a minifter or fervant. In the fifteenth chapter of Romans we find JESUS CHRIST called by that name. Are we thence warranted in concluding, that there was no difference between the office of CHRIST and that of deacons in the church? Of the fame kind, in my judgment, are the arguments which, from the etymology of words, are brought to prove, that bishops and presbyters in the early church were the fame. But, Sir, when it is considered, that it was after the Apoftolic age that these two titles of bishop and presbyter became diftinctly appropriated to thofe officers who now poffefs them in the church; our conclufion will be, that we cannot determine in what precife fenfe, according to