in the temple, for the affairs of government, or for dif penfing, in that place, the facrament of the fupper. And it is remarkable, that at the very time that it is faid that the first Chriftians continued in the temple to receive inftruction, it is added (Acts ii. 46.)," that they brake "bread from house to house," or in different houses;

be observed, Ift, That many improprieties, as was before shewn, were admitted even by the primitive church; and that we must try this, as well as all their practices, by the fcriptures, and fee whether it is enjoined or warranted by them. Upon examining the fcriptures however, we perceive that it is not explicitly announced how often this ordinance fhould be obferved in the church; and confequently, though many of the primitive churches cat the fupper every Sabbath, we no more offend against the word of God than they, if we do not eat it every first day of the week. And 2dly, This argument proves too much. Cyprian, A. D. 250. informs us, in his Treatife on the Lord's Prayer, that daily communions were the common practice at that time; and Fortunatus, who lived at the fame period, adduces the fourth petition of that prayer as an argument for communicating every day. Bafil, in the fourth century, recommends daily communion; and fays, that it was the practice of the church of Cefarea where he was, to celebrate the facrament four times a-week, viz. on Sabbath, Wednesday, Friday, and Saturday (Bafil. Epist. 289.)— Ambrofe seems to intimate that daily communions were in use at Milan (De Sacram. lib. v. cap. iv. p. 449.)—Jerome tells us, that they were kept up, in his time, in the churches of Spain, and at Rome (Epift. lii. ad Lucin.)-And Augustine, about the year 410 (Epift. cxviii. ad Januar.), that the eucharist was received by fome daily. If Independents then, when fcripture is filent, wish us to take the example of the primitive church as our guide, and from this contend that we should eat the fupper every Sabbath, why do not they themselves adopt this example in its full extent, and communicate daily, or at least on Sabbath, and Wednesday, and Friday, and Saturday? By these observations it is not intended however to say, whether weekly communion is lawful or unlawful, but only to fhew, that as scripture is filent as to the precise degree of frequency, they are not entitled to declaim with that severity which they often discover against others who cannot, so often as they, obferve that ordinance.

i. e. as many interpreters explain it, and as the Syriac tranflates it, they kept the eucharift, or brake facramental bread *. But if no fingle perfon could be audible, as an instructor, to thirty or forty thousand hearers at once; if they could not meet together with ease and fatisfaction for the purposes of government; if no fingle place could be found to accommodate fuch a multitude, when, as at that early period, according to Eufebius, the houses for worship were extremely fmall; if even in the temple there was no apartment which could contain fuch a number; and, whatever its fize, if it could not be obtained by them, when they chose to refort to it, for the private meetings of their members for government, or even for the public celebration of the supper; is it not undeniable that there must have been a variety of congregations in the city of Jerufalem, furnished with diftinct and feparate paftors, and meeting in feparate and appropriate churches.

SIR,

LETTER XVI.

THAT there muft have been a plurality of congregations the city of Jerufalem, I have endeavoured to fhew in the preceding Letter, from the number of believers who refided in that city. This rendered it totally impoffible for them all to convene in a fingle place for any of the purposes of religious fellowship. And this, as was remarked, was naturally to be expected, for Jefus having afcended to the right hand of his Father, and shed down his Spirit in more rich abundance on the fouls

On this circumstance however, as was before stated, no stress is laid, as it is not certain that it is the breaking of facramental bread which is here intended.

of men than had ever formerly been witneffed by the world, the delightful period had now arrived, when his fpiritual offspring were to be more in number than the drops of dew, "from the womb of the morning :" Pfal. cx. 3.

The fame conclufion may be argued from the number of miniflers, who, for a very confiderable time, were continually employed in labouring in that city. Among these were the twelve apoftles, and, as most expofitors apprehend, the feventy difciples, together with many prophets (Acts xi. 27, 28.), and many elders (ver. 30.). The firft clafs of these minifters. moreover, and confequently we must fuppofe the rest of them, were fo engaged in preaching, that they were obliged to inflitute an order of ministers to ferve tables, that they might themselves be enabled, along with their fellow-minifters, to give themselves continually to prayer and the miniftry of the word: Acts vi, But if there was only one congregation of believers where each of these teachers miniftered in his turn, how extremely unaccountable muft this representation appear? But one congregation, and above a hundred minifters, fo unceafingly employed in preaching the word, that they could not find leisure to distribute among the poor the money which had been collected for them! It may be faid indeed, that while one of them preached to this congregation, the reft were itinerating through different parts of the city. But fill it appears very extraordinary, that while only two or three were neceffary for the instruction of this particular congregation, fo many teachers remained in Jerufalem even for the purpose of itinerating, while they were much more needed in many other places, as well as the furrounding country. Can it be believed, if there had been only one congregation in that city, that fo many minifters would have refided in it ftatedly for almost thirty years, while the reft of the world was fo deftitute

of the means of religious instruction* ? Such a fuppofition feems by no means to be probable. The only way then in which we can account for this fact appears to be this, that there was such a number of congregations in Jeru falem as furnished fufficient employment for all of them.

In the third place, The diverfity of languages spoken by thefe Chriftians at Jerufalem, clearly evinces that there muft have been a correfponding diverfity of congrega. tions in that city.

We are told, A&ts ii. that among those who were converted on the day of Pentecoft, and who heard the apoftles fpeak, each in their own language, were devout men, from Parthia, Media, Elam, Mefopotamia, Cappadocia, Pontus, Afia, Phrygia, Pamphylia, and the parts of Libya about Cyrene, and alfo from Rome, Crete, and Arabia. We are informed alfo, Acts vi. of a murmuring against the Hebrews, or Jews who fpake the Syriac tongue, by the Grecians, or Jews who, having come from places where the Greek language prevailed, fpake that language. Now admitting even that fome of these might not remain at Jerufalem, this diversity of languages would ftill exift among those who continued, and render it equally neceffary, as on the day of Pentecoft, that the gofpel fhould be preached to them by various minifters, and in different congregations, in their native tongues. It may be faid indeed, that they might underftand the Syriac, as the Jews at present, though they use the vernacular tongues of the various countries where they are fcattered, ftill have their religious fervices performed in the Hebrew language. It is an indifputable fact however, that the Jews are in general ignorant of the Hebrew; and the performance of their religion in

*The only instances recorded in fcripture of occasional visits to other places by any of these ministers (Barnabas excepted), are extremely few, and appear to have been but temporary.

that language no more proves that they understand it, than the use of the Latin in the Romish church proves that the common people are acquainted with it. Befides, the exclufive ufe of the Septuagint tranflation by the Jews for near 300 years both before and after Chrift, and the writing of the New Teftament in Greek (as Lardner fhews to have been the cafe), proves beyond queftion that the Syriac, at this period, was underftood neither by the foreign Jews nor by Gentile profelytes*. So little indeed was it known, that even Philo tranflates the most common Syriac word on the authority of others. And it will be obvious to any one who examines with attention the Targums, or Talmuds, that fo ftriking a difference fubfifts between them, even in point of language, as fhews that the Syriac, at that period, could neither have been generally nor uniformly understood by the Jewish nation. Let any one, in fhort, confider whether it is probable that the native Jews of Rome, and Crete, and Pontus, &c. with the profelytes from these countries, could be fo well acquainted with the language of Judea, as to be able to receive in it religious inftruction with the fame pleasure and advantage as in their original tongues?-Or that the apoftles, who were enriched with the gift of tongues for almost thirty years, did not exercife this invaluable endowment, though it was abfolutely requifite for diffeminating the gofpel among frangers and foreigners, or when at leaft it must have been much more conducive to their edification to have heard the discourses of thefe minifters of Chrift in

It was only after the Targums, or the Translations, and the Talmuds, or the Expositions, of the ancient Scriptures in the Syriac Language had been finished, that the Greek versions of the Seventy, and of Aquila the Jew, ceafed to be used by the Jewish nation. And the difcontinuance of them was produced only by the decrees of their doctors, who forbad the ufe of them, left their countrymen fhould be led by them to embrace Christianity.