eral of the clergy,* who by their holy lives and miraculous powers were much respected by these barbarians; and many of them, from a state perfectly savage, were brought into the light and comfort of Christianity. This is all that I can collect of the extension of the Gospel among the barbarian ravagers.]t CHAP. XX. A SHORT VIEW OF THE EXTERNAL STATE OF THE CHURCH IN THE THIRD CENTURY. It is the duty of Christians to shine as lights in the world, in the midst of a CROOKED AND PERVERSE NATION. That this was actually the case, even in the third century,though much less so than in the two former, and toward the latter end of it with a very rapid diminution of the glorious brightness of the Gospel,-the course of the foregoing narrative has, I trust, made apparent. Those, with whom the real condition of the rest of mankind in those times, is familiar, will see this in the strongest light. For three centuries, luxury, attended by every abominable vice that can be conceived, had been increasing in the Roman empire. There want not lamentable proofs that the severe satires of Juvenal were but too well founded. ALL FLESH HAD CORRUPTED THEIR WAY. With the loss of civil liberty, even the old Roman virtues, of public spirit and magnanimity,-though no better, as Augustine says, than splendid sins in their nature,-had vanished. Civil broils and distractions continually prevailed for the greatest part of this period, and increased the quantity of vice and. misery. The best time was, doubtless, during the reigns of Trajan, Adrian, and the Antonines: But, even under those princes, the standard of virtue was extremely low. The most scandalous and unnatural vices were practised without remorse. Men of rank either lived atheistically, or were sunk in the deepest superstition. The vulgar were * [Milner had several Bishops,' but Sozomen uses the word epes simply, and Philostorgius's expression is άλλους τε και των κατειλεγμένων τῷ κλήρφ.] + [Soz. 1. 2. c. 6, and Philostorgius, 1. 2. c. 5, Mosheim, cent. 3. p. 1. c. 1. sect. 7. et de reb. Christ. Sæc. 3. c. 2 and 3. p. 448. The whole of this passage has been altered, as it had in some way got strangely misplaced.] perfectly ignorant: The rich domineered over the poor, and wallowed in immense opulence; while the provinces groaned under their tyranny: Philosophers, with incessant loquacity, amused their scholars with harangues concerning virtue, but they neither practised it themselves, nor understood its real nature: By far the largest part of mankind, —namely, the slaves and the poor, were in remediless indiNo methods whatever were devised for their congence: venience or relief: In the mean time, the pleasurable amusements of men-as the stage and the amphitheatre,— were full of obscenity, savageness, and cruelty. This was the Roman world. We know much less of the rest of the globe: which, however, in ferocious wickedness and ignorance, was sunk much deeper than the nations that bowed under the yoke of the Cæsars. Behold!-In the midst of all this chaos, this corruption, and this ignorance, arose out of Judea a light of doctrine and of practice singularly distinct from any thing that was then in existence ! A number of persons,-chiefly of low life, the disciples of Jesus of Nazareth, live as men ought to do, with a proper contempt of this vain life,-with the sincerest and most steady ambition for another: They prove themselves to be true philosophers, if real love of wisdom be allowed to consist in the justest views and worship of their Maker, and in actual acquaintance with his character,-in real moderation of their passions and desires, --and in unfeigned benevolence to all mankind, even to their enemies. No sound rules of philosophizing will direct us to conclude all this to have been of MAN. The WORK was of God: and this effusion of his Holy Spirit lasted for three centuries, debased indeed toward the end of that period, but not entirely extinguished. It was necessary, that this people,-diverse from all others, the followers of the same Jesus of Nazareth,should have among themselves some external order,—or, in other words, some ecclesiastical government. An endless maze of controversy presents itself here; nor does there appear to be any certain divine rule on this subject. Men may serve God acceptably under very different modes of Church-government; and, in point of fact, these modes were different in different places during the primitive ages of Christianity. This variety, however, does not appear to have been either so great, or so extreme, as to have excluded all general principles in the regulation of the external Church: History enables us to discover,—at least the rude outlines of a USUAL-of a PREVAILING PRACTICE, which materially differed from most, if not from all the ecclesiastical forms of government, which now exist in the Christian world. The Apostles, who were the first teachers, and, who planted the first Churches, ordained successors,-as far as appears, without any consultation of their respective flocks over which they were about to preside. But, as it was neither reasonable nor probable that any set of persons after them should be regarded as their equals, this method of appointing ecclesiastical rulers did not continue ;—and, undoubtedly, the election of bishops devolved on the people.* Their appearance to vote on these occasions, their constraining of persons sometimes to accept the office against their will, and the determination of Pope Leo, long after, against forcing a bishop on a people against their consent, demonstrate this. The characters of men to be elected to this office were very strictly examined. Public notice was given, that any one might inform against them, if they were vicious and immoral. The decision on their MORAL CONDUCT was left to the people ;-that on their DOCTRINE belonged chiefly to the bishops who ordained them. For the power of ordination belonged properly to bishops alone, though presbyters a second order of men, who appear to me all along distinct from them,-concurred with them and with the body of the people. The same power of electing, was, in some degree and in some instances, exercised by the people in the appointment of these very presbyters: but the case is by no means so uniformly clear: and, in filling up the LOWER offices of the Church the bishop acted still more according to his discretion. The use of deacons, the third order in the Church, is well known. These three orders obtained very early in the primitive Churches. The epistles of Ignatius,-I build on those parts only that are undoubtedly genuine,-demon* Bingham, book 4. chap. 2. Antiquities.-Du Pin, end of third century. strate this and, in general, the distinction of these offices was admitted through the Christian world. Yet, if a Christian people were grown very heretical, the bishops thought themselves bound in duty to provide for the instruction of the smaller number, who, in their judgment, loved the truth as it is in Jesus; and for this peculiar service they were accustomed both to elect and consecrate a bishop. Likewise in sending missionaries to the barbarous nations, it would be absurd to suppose that they waited for the choice of the people. They deputed and ordained whom they approved of for that end. Besides those, which have been mentioned, there appear, in the third century, a number of lower officers, as doorkeepers, sub-deacons, acolyths or attendants, who, by degrees, had grown up in the Christian Church. A much more candid and true account of them may be given, than what has been imposed on us, with sufficient malignity. It could not be to administer to the pride and sloth of the higher clergy, that such offices were instituted. Christians increased in number, and more labourers were required. Besides, as they had not then any seminaries of learning, the serving of the Church in these lower offices was made an introductory step to the higher ones: And this was their most important use.* The authority of the bishop was by no means unlimited; -but it was very great. Nothing could be done in the Church without his consent. The extent of his diocese was called Παροικια. Some of these DIOCESES had a greater, others a less number of Churches which belonged to them. The diocese of Rome, before the end of the third century, had above forty Churches,-as Optatus † observes;—and this agrees very well with the account before stated, namely, -that under Cornelius the bishop, there were forty-six priests. Cornelius, according to the usual practice in those times, must, himself, have ministered-particularly at the chief or mother-church: and the priests of course, must have taken care of the other Churches. But, distinct parishes, with presbyters allotted to them, were not yet known in Bing. book 3. chap. 1.-Calv. Institutes, book the last. cities.* It appears that the bishop sent them successively to minister according to his discretion. The neighbouring villages, however, which were annexed to bishoprics, could not be supplied in that manner: And they had,—even then,--stated parish priests, who acted under the authority of the bishop. That bishops were not merely congregational pastors, seems evident from the nature of things, as well as from the concurrent testimony of all antiquity. There were seven bishops who belonged to the seven churches of Asia, called Angels in the Book of the Revelation. It is absurd to suppose that the great Church of Ephesus, in the decline of St. John's life, should be only a single congregation; and, most probably, the same is true of all the rest. Supposing the Christian brethren to consist of only five hundred men ; these, with their families and servants, and occasional hearers, would make an assembly large enough for any human voice. But, it is more probable that the number of Christians at Ephesus amounted to many thousands. This was the case at Jerusalem: † And, in Chrysostom's time, the Church of Antioch consisted of a hundred thousand. Perhaps it might comprise half that number in the latter end of the third century. Nevertheless, it is still certain, that dioceses were then much smaller than in after times: and the vast extension of them proved very inconvenient to the cause of godliness. Archbishop Cranmer wished to correct this evil in our national Church and HE wanted neither zeal nor judgment. But that and many other good things slept with the English Reformers. The choice of bishops, and-in part at least-of presbyters, by the people, is a custom which seems to have grown naturally out of the circumstances of the Church at that time. The first bishops and presbyters were appointed by the Apostles themselves; nor could I ever discover the least vestige in Scripture of their appointment by the people. There was not a sufficient judgment in any of them for this trust; the world being, at that time, Pagan or Jewish, or at least, infant in Christianity. Apostolical wisdom and authority, under God, supplied the want in the next succession of bishops. As the judgment of the people matured, Bing. book 9. chap. 8. + Acts xxi. 20. Acts xiv. 23. |