00000275 |
Previous | 275 of 304 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
APPENDIX B. 271
nent form of discipline; as soon as the death of the last of the
Apostles had deprived them of the more immediate guidance of
the Holy Spirit, and left them, under God's especial care and
providence, to the uninspired direction of mere men; so soon had
every Church, respecting which we possess any distinct information, adoptedthe Episcopal form of government. The probable
nature of that government we shall describe presently; but here
it is sufficient to mention the undisputed fact, that the religious
communities of the Christian wrorld universally admitted the,su-
perintendence of ministers, called bishops, before the conclusion
of the first century. In the next place, it is equally true, that neither our Saviour nor his Apostles have left any express and positive ordinances for the administration of the Church; desiring,
perhaps, that that which was intended for every age and condition
of man, to be the associate and guardian of every form of civil
government, should have the means of accommodating its external and earthly shape to the various modifications of human polity.
It is also true that, in the earliest government of the first Christian society, that of Jerusalem, not the elders only, but the " whole
Church," were associated with the Apostles; and it is even certain that the terms bishop and elder or presbyter were, in the
first instance, and for a short period, sometimes used synonymously, and indiscriminately applied to the same order in the
ministry. From the comparison of these facts, it seems natural
to draw the following conclusions: that during the life-time of
the Apostles they were themselves the directors, or at least the
presidents, of the Church; that as long as they remained on earth,
it was not necessary, in all cases, to subject the infant societies to
the delegated authority of a single superintendent, though the instances of Titus and Timothy clearly prove that it was sometimes
done; and that, as they were severally removed from the world,
some distinguished brother was in each instance appointed to succeed, not indeed to the name and inspiration, but to the ecclesiastical duties of the blessed Teacher who had founded the Church.
The concurrence of ancient records confirms this last conclusion;
the earliest Church historians enumerate the first bishops of the
Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Smyrna, Alexandria,
| Title | The comprehensive church |
| Creator | Vail, Thomas H. (Thomas Hubbard) |
| Publisher | Appleton |
| Place of Publication | New York |
| Date | 1879 |
| Language | eng |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Title | 00000275 |
| Type | Books/Pamphlets |
| Transcript | APPENDIX B. 271 nent form of discipline; as soon as the death of the last of the Apostles had deprived them of the more immediate guidance of the Holy Spirit, and left them, under God's especial care and providence, to the uninspired direction of mere men; so soon had every Church, respecting which we possess any distinct information, adoptedthe Episcopal form of government. The probable nature of that government we shall describe presently; but here it is sufficient to mention the undisputed fact, that the religious communities of the Christian wrorld universally admitted the,su- perintendence of ministers, called bishops, before the conclusion of the first century. In the next place, it is equally true, that neither our Saviour nor his Apostles have left any express and positive ordinances for the administration of the Church; desiring, perhaps, that that which was intended for every age and condition of man, to be the associate and guardian of every form of civil government, should have the means of accommodating its external and earthly shape to the various modifications of human polity. It is also true that, in the earliest government of the first Christian society, that of Jerusalem, not the elders only, but the " whole Church," were associated with the Apostles; and it is even certain that the terms bishop and elder or presbyter were, in the first instance, and for a short period, sometimes used synonymously, and indiscriminately applied to the same order in the ministry. From the comparison of these facts, it seems natural to draw the following conclusions: that during the life-time of the Apostles they were themselves the directors, or at least the presidents, of the Church; that as long as they remained on earth, it was not necessary, in all cases, to subject the infant societies to the delegated authority of a single superintendent, though the instances of Titus and Timothy clearly prove that it was sometimes done; and that, as they were severally removed from the world, some distinguished brother was in each instance appointed to succeed, not indeed to the name and inspiration, but to the ecclesiastical duties of the blessed Teacher who had founded the Church. The concurrence of ancient records confirms this last conclusion; the earliest Church historians enumerate the first bishops of the Churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus, Smyrna, Alexandria, |
|
|
|
|
|
|
| B |
|
| C |
|
| G |
|
| H |
|
| M |
|
| T |
|
| U |
|
| Y |
|
|
|
