ORIGIN OF CHURCH REVENUES. 385 princely incomes, and, in a course of time, to engross to themselves a very considerable part of the wealth, and even of the landed property of Europe. If we look back to the constitution of the churches of Christ, as recorded in Acts ii. 42, we shall find that one of the things which were statedly observed by the disciples, when they assembled for public worship on the Lord's day, was what is termed the fellowship, Gr. Koovia, collection, contribution, or communication of their worldly substance, for the relief of the poor and other necessary purposes connected with their joint association; and this was always observed at the time of the Lord's supper, and committed to the deacons for distribution. Until the times of Constantine, the different churches had no other revenues than the voluntary offerings of the members on these stated occasions, the laws of the state prohibiting their possessing either landed or funded property, as we now term it. If peculiar circumstances called for extraordinary exertions, such as a time of famine or more than ordinary distress, the disciples had their attention called to this particular institution of their Lord's kingdom, as the proper time and place and occasion for the manifestation of their liberality. In all the New Testament we read nothing of monthly, quarterly, or annual collections; of the opening of chapels; or of anniversaries instituted for the purpose of collecting money. We indeed find that, in the days of the apostle Paul, there was a famine throughout all the land of Judæa, and, the disciples in that quarter being put to great straits and difficulties, it was proposed that a contribution for their relief should be made. among the Gentile churches, in which their apostle took a very lively interest.* The directions, however, which he gave the church at Corinth respecting this matter are worthy of our notice. "Now concerning the collection for the saints, as I have given order to the churches of Galatia, even so do ye :-upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him, that there be no gatherings when I come," 1 Cor. xvi. 1, 2. It is surely to be regretted that there is so little attention paid to the apostle's direction, by the pro VOL. I. See Gal. ii. 10; 2 Cor. viii. 10-14; Rom. xv. 26, 27. 2 c fessed churches of Christ in our day. The practice now so universally prevalent of observing the Lord's supper only once a month, instead of every first day of the week, has introduced a total change respecting the fellowship, which appears to be in a great measure lost sight of; but surely the churches of our day would do well to review their proceedings in these respects, and return to the practice of the primitive societies. It was in the days of Constantine that the revenues of the church, like most other things of divine institution, were put upon a new footing. In the year 321 he issued an edict, addressed to the people of Rome, in which he gave full permission to every one to bequeath whatever they chose to the churches of Christ, besides restoring to them the confiscations which had taken place under Diocletian and Galerius; it was also enacted that the estates of such of the martyrs as had left no heirs should be transferred to the churches. This edict laid the basis of a new order of things; for the consequence was, that, in process of time, many of the churches came to possess what was called their patrimony ;—that is, they had an endowment of property, altogether independent of the weekly contribution, or fellowship, and the church of Rome in particular, in the sixth century, had a very considerable one, both in Italy and other countries; and to inspire a greater respect for those endowments, or patrimonies, they were called after the names of the apostles or saints that were more especially respected in each; thus the territories belonging to the church of Rome obtained the name of the patrimony of St. Peter. The enormous pitch to which this evil has accumulated in a course of ages, I do not say in Catholic countries, but even in our own Protestant state, is a point too glaring to escape notice; and yet it is one which, were I to enlarge upon it as it deserves, and expose it in all its enormity, might subject me to imputations which I would gladly avoid. Otherwise I might request you to look back to the weekly collection for the poor, the supply of the pastor's table, and various other purposes indispensable in keeping up the public worship of God in any place as wisely ordained by the Lord Jesus in his kingdom, and, having examined that ordinance as you find it laid down in the New Testament, then turn your attention to the rank and reve TESTIMONIES TO THE COVETOUSNESS OF THE CLERGY. 387 nues of his Grace of Canterbury, the bishops of London, Durham, Lincoln, Gloucester, Worcester, &c. &c., and you would have a tolerable specimen of the monstrous abuses that have been engrafted upon the simple and primitive institution of the ordinance of the fellowship as recorded Acts ii. 42. One of our ablest and best historians has remarked, that "it was among the first effects of the conversion of Constantine to give not only a security, but a legal sanction to the territorial acquisitions of the church. The edict of Milan, in 313, recognizes the actual estates of ecclesiastical corporations. Another, published in 321, grants to all the subjects of the empire the power of bequeathing their property to the church. His own liberality, and that of his successors, set an example which did not want imitation. Passing rapidly from a condition of distress and persecution to the summit of prosperity, the church degenerated as rapidly from her ancient purity, and forfeited the respect of future ages in the same proportion as she acquired the blind veneration of her own. Covetousness, especially, became almost a characteristic vice. In the year 370, the emperor Valentinian I. prohibited the clergy from receiving the bequests of women-a modification more discreditable than any general law could have been; and several of the fathers severely reprobate the prevailing avidity of their contemporaries."* Jerome, who was born about the time that the emperor Constantine died, says that in his day the church had indeed become more rich and powerful under the Christian emperors, but it had become proportionably less virtuous; and, with regard to the general character of the clergy, he tells us that the priests of his time spared no tricks or artifices to get the estates of private persons into their hands: he, moreover, mentions many low and sordid offices, to which priests and monks stooped to obtain the favour and the estates of old men and women who had no children. Chrysostom also attests that the bishops forsook their employments to sell their corn and wine, and to look after their glebes and farms, besides spending much of their time in law suits. Before I put an end to the present Lecture, it may not be amiss to glance at the ground we have gone ever, and attempt something like a practical improvement of the subject. * Mr. Hallam's History of the Middle Ages, vol. ii. ch. vii. p. 199. We have seen that, for the first three hundred years after Christ, his religion had no legal establishment in the world; on the contrary, it was every where and almost incessantly the object of persecution;-it was propagated by means of the preaching of the Gospel, and the disciples were collected into churches to observe the ordinances of public worship, which Christ himself had appointed. The pastors and deacons were the servants of the churches; and so far were their offices from being an object of competition, as ministering to worldly ambition, that they were always placed in the foremost rank of sufferers from their merciless persecutors. But in the beginning of the fourth century, and during the reign of Constantine the Great, the scene changed-outward persecution ceased-Christianity was established by law as the religion of the Roman empire; and from this time those who ought to have been "the servants of the church for Jesus' sake" began to be its lords and masters, in direct opposition to the Saviour's own command, and the example of his apostles. And, having now become "part and parcel of the law of the land," Christianity must change her attire, in order that she may with dignity fill the throne of her discarded rival. The clergy must raise their heads, extend their views, and become "lords over God's heritage." The simple institutions of the Gospel are found altogether unfit for this new order of things. Instead of meeting in a school or upper room, magnificent temples must be built, and a hierarchy of ecclesiastics-bishops, priests, and deacons-must be appointed to officiate at their altars. A spirit of innovation rages of courseSuperstition opens all her paltry treasures-Ignorance erects her leaden throne-the doctrines of the Gospel are corrupted, and its institutions mutilated-offices hitherto unknown are invented, and filled by a race of ecclesiastics under names and characters as foreign to Christian institution as that of a magician or a soothsayer :-and to all this they were pleased to give the name of Christianity! But, no: the religion of Christ disowns it in toto. It is ANTICHRIST, the Man of Sin-the Son of perdition-the mystery of iniquity, concerning which Daniel had prophesied eight hundred years before-and Paul had warned the churches of his day—and of which John had been favoured with visions and revelations in the isle of Patmos. LECTURE XXI. State of the Empire under the Successors of Constantine—Progress of the Arian Controversy-Constantius favours the Arians-Some account of Athanasius-Orthodoxy regulated by Imperial Edicts-Turbulence of the Catholic PriesthoodReflections on the existing state of things—Importance of dis tinguishing between the kingdom of Christ and that of the Clergy-Pomp and splendour of the Bishop of Rome-Contentions for the bishopric-Reign of the emperor Julian-He attempts to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, but fails-Estimate of Julian's character-Jovian-Valens-Gratian-And Theodosius the Great-Utter extinction of Paganism.—A. D. 337 to 400. Constantine the Great, at his decease, left three sons, among whom the government of the various provinces of the Roman empire was divided. The names of the brothers were Constantine the second, Constans, and Constantius; but none of them inherited the genius and talents of the father. They, however, so far trode in his steps as to extend their favour to the clergy of the Catholic church, and discountenance Paganism. To the eldest son, Constantine the second, the western provinces, viz. Spain and Gaul and Britain, were assigned. To his brother Constans, Illyricum, Italy, and Africa; whilst Constantius inherited the east, comprehending Asia, Syria, and Egypt, with the city of Constantinople, to which his father had transferred his imperial residence and made it the seat of government. About three years after the father's death, a quarrel arose between |