port and maintainance of minifters depend upon it, and are fecured by it, much might be faid. For, if church-members are bound, by the laws of Chrift, to communicate to their pastors and rula ers, thofe, who were entrusted with the legislative power, at the dawn of this connection, did no more than agree to fulfil that law, when they rendered fuch communion of their carnal things a fixed, inftead of a precarious, encouragement. True, indeed, that was a kind of fecurity, which the first Chriftians never gave; but, it is equally True, that, in their circumstances, they could not give it. Unlefs, therefore, fomething, pofitively contrary, be afferted in the New Teftament, we may, without the leaft abfurdity, contend, that, if thofe in authority, during the miniftry of the apofties, had made fuch provifion for their fupport, without requiring any thing finful in order to their enjoyment of it, even the apostles might have thankfully embraced the favour.-For, why fhould the woman have refused to be helped by the earth? OBSERVATION II. That, in the church at Antioch, fo conftituted, there arofe a question, about which the prophets and teachers could not agree. Upon one fide, there were certain men which came down from Judea, Acts xv. 1. That these men were office-bearers may be inferred from their acting in a public capacity;"they taught the brethren," Ibid. And, that they were conftituent officers in this very church, is more than probable,-both, because "prophets came from Jerufalem unto Antioch,” Acts xi. 27. -and because, upon their having come, "certain "prophets and teachers" are faid to have been "in" that church, Acts xiii. 1.-Not only Agabus, who is expressly condefcended on, Acts xi. 27. but others alfo, who were fcattered abroad after the death of Stephen, Acts viii. 1. and might, by this time, have taken part of the miniftry there. Upon the other fide of the question, Paul and Barnabas (who were both office-bearers, and called to act in that capacity at Antioch, as will ap Pear) are condefcended on. They had no fmall "diffenfion and difputation with" the "men which "came down from Judea," Acts xv. 2. } 66 The brethren, or Chriftians at Antioch were, no doubt, deeply interested in this matter, as the con troverfy refpected a doctrine which they behoved to receive or reject at their highest peril." Ex"cept ye be circumcifed (faid one party) after the manner of Mofes, ye cannot be faved," Acts. xv. 1. And," behold, (faid the other) if ye be circum"cifed, Chrift fhall profit you nothing," Gal. v. 2. Nevertheless, when it came to be publicly canvaffed, they prefumed not to go from their own fphere, by claiming any legum ftandi with the of fice-bearers of the church, or right of acting in their exclufive capacity. Whether they should acquiefce in the deliverance to be given, was an enquiry entirely open to the difciples, and competent for them afterwards; but previous to fuch decifion, prayer for direction was the chief, if not the only, thing to which they were called. In oppofition to this, I am aware, it may be faid, That, as an evidence of the brethren's judicative right, Paul's epistles were directed to them, as well as to their office-bearers. If this, however, proves any thing to the purpose, it proves, by far, too much. For that a poflle directed none of his letters to a society where office-bearers are mentioned, except one; and, therefore, if what is inferred from his directing them to the brethren holds, all the churches, to whom he wrote, had a right, the church at PhiJippi excepted,-- not only to exercise discipline, but to exercife it without any officers at all. In any view, fince it appeared before, that a fociety of profeffing Chriftians, without elders, fometimes bears the denomination of a church ;we may as warrantably alledge, that every epiftle, where church officers are not mentioned in the addrefs, was fent to the Chriftians or brethren alone, as others may interline office-bearers, where the facred text is filent. But, because Paul judged it his duty to correspond with fuch focieties, muft it thence follow, that the power of church difcipline was vefted in them? To begin, for example's fake, with the first, according to the order of our New Teftament,-how does he addrefs his apoftolic letter to the Romans? -To the conftituted church at Rome, elders as well as brethren?-Then, indeed, we behoved to lold our peace. But, if the apostle may be allowed to fpeak for himself, and if his words are underflood according to the common rules of interpretation, no fuch thing will ever be inferred. The ad drefs is, "To all that be in Rome, beloved of God, "called faints," Rom. i. 2. And will thefe terms, without fqueezing, bear any meaning fo natural, as an addrefs to Chriftians in their private capacity? His first letter to the Corinthians, indeed, is directed to "the church of God," which was "at "Corinth," Cor. i. 2. I But, as if Paul had foreseen what wrong ufe might be made of fuch a general addrefs, to prevent men's forcing an in terpretation terpretation of that kind upon it, he explains what he intended by the church at Corinth-But does he explain it in the fenfe fuppofed ?-Does 'he tell us that the church, he meant, confifted of elders, deacons, and brethren ?-No." To them that are fanctified in Chrift Jefus, called Saints." ---And, as a farther evidence that he intended the address to faints,not as a church constituted, but, in their private capacity, does he not add?— With all that, in every place, call upon the name " of Jefus Chrift our Lord, both theirs and ours," In every place! Then, according to the fup pofed hypothefis,-faints in a different church,nay, from all the churches on earth, might have claimed a vote in judging about the affairs peculiar to the Corinthians. Than which, nothing can be more the reverfe of their general idea of church por licy, by whom fuch an hypothefis would be moft readily adopted. His fecond epifle to that people, is addreffed 82 to the church of God at Corinth," 2 Cor. i. 1. Having, juft in the year immediately preceding, explained that mode of addrefs, the neceflity of being more explicit was evidently fuperceded.Notwithstanding, the adjected claufe, "with all the "Saints which are in all Achaia," plainly argues, that the apostle meant not the church conftituted at Corinth, but the private Chriftians there, with their brethren, through the whole province, whereof that city was the capital. Paul's next letter, according to our order, is directed to "the churches of Galatia," Gal i. 2.But, is it abfolutely neceffary, from thence, to infer, that they were all conftituted churches; or even that, in the direction, he meant any of them as fuch? As neceffary, dear Sirs, as to infer, that, because, in the 32d and 39th verfes of |