cates for the Congregational Cause) but in all Appearance abfolutely chofe the Persons too.

I fhall confider these two plaufible Examples (fo much triumph'd in by many) with all the Fairness and Brevity that I can, and haften to difmifs the Argument.

As to that of S. Matthias, it seems a very unaccountable Precedent, for a standing Practice in the Church, in whatsoever Manner it was done; fince, properly speaking, the Foundation of the Christian Church (as it is a Spiritual Corporation or Society of Believers) was not then laid, becaufe the Holy Ghoft was not yet given,who was to endue the very Master-builders themselves with all that Power and Wisdom from Above, by which they were to found and govern the Church of God upon Earth. The Eleven there prefent were Apostles Elect, by the infallible Nomination indeed of their Lord and Mafter: But their Commiffion was not yet feal'd, nor were they furnifh'd with thofe Credentials and Inftructions, which the Spirit was to give them afterwards; infomuch as they prefum'd not to act in that extraordinary Ordination by their own perfonal Judgment, (as at other times) but referr'd the Determination to God alone, casting Lots, and appealing to God by Prayer for it.

Which makes it ftranger ftill, (as to the Cafe at present before us) that the Votes and Suffrages of the People should be fought for, in a Cafe where the Apostles themselves dare fo little interpofe, and where God himself made Choice of his own Apostle.

But 'twill be faid perhaps, that the Brethren then prefent nominated (at least) or propos'd

the

the two Candidates; if fo, it must be granted' ftill, that their humane Suffrages could have neither Authority, Direction, or any kind of Influence upon a Divine Election, which gains but little to the Purpose it is chiefly urged for. But after all, the very Nomination of the Perfons in this Cafe of S. Matthias, will very hardly (if it can at all) be prov'd to have been the Brethren or Congregation's Part, by any thing we meet with in S. Peter's whole Difcourfe. There were about a hundred and twenty Perfons prefent, ('tis fure) and what S. Peter fpake, was in the Audience of them all; but to whom he immediately addrefs'd his Difcourfe, and upon them impos'd the Obligation of providing a Succeffor in the room of Judas, is another Queftion, which the Senfe and Subftance of the Speech itfelf can best refolve for us.

Now, two Expreffions in it afford no small Light to this Purpose.

First, In fpeaking of Judas, who was fallen from his Apostleship, S. Peter's Words are thefe: He was number'd with us, and had obtain'd a Part of this Miniftry, (that is, of the Apoftolick Ministry, no doubt.) Was Judas thus number'd then with all the Brethren there prefent, as Partaker with them of that Apoftolick Function? or with S. Peter only, and the other ten Apostles, in the midst of whom he then fpake? Surely this latter Senfe alone is the utmost the Words can bear, when he fays, he was number'd with us; and confequently they were his Apoftolick Brethren only, to whom he addrefs'd them,

Secondly,

Secondly, In the Directions he gives, from whence the Succeffor of Judas fhould be chofen, his Expreffion is this: Wherefore, of these Men (fays he) that have accompany'd with us, &c. Of these Men! Why not of fome amongst yourselves? or fome Words equivalent to that? if the Perfons to be elected were not only to be chofen from among them, but themselves to be the Electors alfo. That feems the direct Expreffion for recommending the Election to the Brethren, and enjoining them to elect one from among themfelves too: Whereas the other, which S. Peter ufes, is as plainly an Addrefs to fome other Electors there prefent, to choose out of those very Brethren before them, pointing at them (as . it were) by that natural Expreffion; Out of thefe Perfons that have accompany'd with us, &c.

We need no more, I think, (tho' more Remarks might be made) to prove, that the Apoftles there prefent were the peculiar Perfons S. Peter addrefs'd his Speech to; and I prefume it will not be difputed then, but that those Words, (at Ver. 23.) And they appointed two, did refer to them likewife, and to them only: So that the People had no Part fo much as in the Nomination of the Perfons to be propofed as Candidates for that Divine Election.

I am fenfible, the Title of S. Peter's Addrefs in thefe Words of our Tranflation [Men and Brethren has not a little contributed to the contrary Expofition of the whole Difcourfe: But let it be confider'd, that the Particle And is not in the original Text, and own'd by our Tranflators not to be fo, by the different Letter it is printed in; and therefore the Holy Penman's

Language

Language denotes no more, than if S. Peter had faid, My Brethren only; and that the whole Congregation were fo in a general Senfe, is not to be difputed; but that the Apostles there prefent were in a fingular and more eminent Senfe S. Peter's Brethren, as united in the Apoftolick College with him, can't be deny'd neither: And therefore, fince the Subject of the Discourse appropriates the Speech peculiarly to them, there is greater Reason that that Evidence fhould explain the Meaning of an indefinite Term in the Title, than that the equivocal Senfe alone, against the Tenor of the whole Discourse, should determine for us otherwife. And perhaps the "Avdpes ddengoì‚on which the Contrary is grounded, does rather add an Emphasis in the Title, to denote the Sense we take it in; for I should think it no exceptionable Translation of it, were it render'd thus: Te Men that are peculiarly my Brethren, which fhews a kind of Emphatical Distinction of fome there prefent from all the reft. Upon the whole Matter, I think we might very well fubfcribe to the learned Grotius's Conclufion in this Cafe: * 'Tis a Wonder to me (fays he) how fome Men have perfuaded themselves, that Matthias was chosen by the People to his Apoftolick Charge; for in S. Luke I find no Footstep of it.

As to the Cafe of the feven Deacons, they were left to the Enquiry, Choice, and Nomination of the Brethren, there is no doubt of it; but

Matthiam à populo ad Apoftoli munus electum, miror quo argumento fibi quidam perfuaferint, nam in Lucà nullum ejus rei invenio veftigium. .Grot. de Imp. Sum. poteft. circa facra. Cap. X. § 5.

but in what particular Respect, with what fpecial Limitations, and how far it may be made. a Precedent for the People's choosing their own Bishops and Paftors in the Church, a very short View of the Matter of Fact may inform us. For,

First, Whatever Offices in the Church the Apostles Impofition of Hands might entitle thofe Deacons to, 'tis plain, their Referring the Nomination of them to the Brethren was upon that fingle Score of finding out Perfons they could entrust with the Contributions of the Church, for the daily Miniftrations, and for the ferving of Tables; for that was the only thing in open Agitation, and the holy Apoftles affign'd that special Part to them; Look you out Men, &c. whom we may appoint over this Business.

Secondly, The Apostles leave not the whole Matter to their arbitrary and unlimited Inclinations neither; but, amongst other Qualifications, enjoin them to choofe out Perfons full of Faith and of the Holy Ghost, not of Faith (furely) with the ordinary, inward, and fanctifying Graces of the Holy Ghost only, for those were scarce difcernible (with any Certainty at leaft) by Men; but they were to choofe Believers (as the Event alfo fhew'd in the Perfons of S.Stephen and S. Philip, to be fure) who were endued with those miraculous Gifts of the Holy Ghost, which our blessed Saviour † promis'd fhould follow fome that believed, able to caft out Devils, fpeak with new Tongues, heal the Sick, and the like; after the Manner that * Cornelius's Family and

Mark xvi. 17, 18.

* Act. x. 44, 46. and Act. xix, 5, 6.