The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1881-06-15

through which it made its way into the
Church. 1t came in, Just as the Pope
dom OF the Bishop of Rome afterwards
came in-not by divine appointment or
by virtue of any apostolic authority or
usage, but entirely as human innova-
ton on the simple and pure Presbyterial
constitution of the Church in the DAYS of
the apostles And it was introduced
either under the promptings Of human
ambition Gas the popedom certainly was)
or as the result of a mistaken policy which
sought to strengthen the Church by CEN
Trailing and extending the power of a
prominent presbyter and making him a
diocesan bishop. And, however intro
duced, it was unsustained by any inspired
teaching, or appointment, or usage.
The genuine writings relating to the
early part of the second century where
they speak of the appointment of bishops
may all be reconciled with the idea that
these were all presbyters, and that if re-
cognized as presiding over their fellow
presbyters, such position was only tenn
porary and for purposes of policy and not
according to divine appointment.
And these views are confirmed bv the
fine historic demonstration which DR..
Lightfoot has given that, when Episco-
pacy in its modern sense did begin. it
began in Asia Minor, and made its way
very slowly, and only after centuries of
trouble, into Greece, and was never known
in Rome until hundreds of years after the
death of the last surviving apostle. This
is what we might have expected, and is
proof of its human origin. For in Asia
Minor, monarchy in its most absolute
and oppressive forms had been so long
the rule that peoples minds were schooled
to 1t; while in Greece and Rome, men
had traditions ofa liberty and republican
ism that submitted with reluctance to the
lone man power" in the Church of Christ.
So much of this communication as ap-
pears above, had been written before
had an opportunity of reading the clear
and well-pondered article on Apostolic
cal Succession and Catalogues of Bishops"
by Rev. DR.. Andrew Cameron. which is
the leader in the May plumber, 1881, of
the Catholic Presbyterian. This article
well deserves attention. 1t quotes large
ly from the same work of DR.. Lightfoot
to which reference is herein made, and
dealing entirely with the crumbling
ground of pretended catalogues and tao
tual succession) shows how untenable is
that ground according to the most weighty
testimony of English prelates themselves.
In conclusion it is proper to congratulate
all honest enquirers n, every Church, on
the final triumph of truth in the transla-
ton of the Goth chapter of Acts. The
" Revised Version, 1881, just published,
makes the truth appear IN English.
" And from Miletus he (Pau) sent to
Ephesus and called to him the elders
(marg. or pres6yterS) of the church"
And, after the first part of his address,
we have in the 2Sth verse the following:
I" Take heed unto yourselves, and to all
the flock in the which the Holy Ghost
hath made you bishops (marg. or over
seers)." Therefore, elders or presbyters
then were bishops according to the in
spired word of God Does that Word
afterwards degrade them, or put diocesan
bishops over them? If so, let the de-
grading or appointing Scripture be shown.
R. R. H.