and partisan view of bishops, we might say that they always have existed since the times of the apostles; the Episcopalians might affirm that the early churches were presided over by bishops, and the Presbyterians that every ordained minister was a bishop,—­that elder and bishop are synonymous.  But that is a contest about words, not things.  In reality, episcopal power, as we understand it, was not historically developed till there was a large increase in the Christian communities, especially in great cities, where several presbyters were needed, one of whom presided over the rest.  Some such episcopal institution, I am willing to concede, was a necessity, although I cannot clearly see the divine authority for it.  In like manner other changes became necessary, which did not militate against the welfare of the Church, but tended to preserve it.  New dignities, new organizations, new institutions for the government of the Church successively arose.  All societies must have a government.  This is a law recognized in the nature of things.  So Christian society must be organized and ruled according to the necessities of the times; and the Scriptures do not say what these shall be,—­they are imperative and definite only in matters of faith and morals.  To guard the faith, to purify the morals according to the Christian standard, overseers, officers, rulers are required.  In the early Church they were all brethren.  The second and third century made bishops.  The next age made archbishops and metropolitans and patriarchs.  The age which succeeded was the age of Leo; and the calamities and miseries and anarchies and ignorance of the times, especially the rule of barbarians, seemed to point to a monarchical head, a more theocratic government,—­a government so august and sacred that it could not be resisted.

And there can be but little doubt that this was the best government for the times.  Let me illustrate by civil governments.  There is no law laid down in the Bible for these.  In the time of our Saviour the world was governed by a universal monarch.  The imperial rule had become a necessity.  It was tyrannical; but Paul as well as Christ exhorted his followers to accept it.  In process of time, when the Empire fell, every old province had a king,—­indeed there were several kings in France, as well as in Germany and Spain.  The prelates of the Church never lifted up their voice against the legality of this feudo-kingly rule.  Then came a revolt, after the Reformation, against the government of kings.  New England and other colonies became small republics, almost democracies.  On the hills of New England, with a sparse rural population and small cities, the most primitive form of government was the best.  It was virtually the government of townships.  The selectmen were the overseers; and, following the necessities of the times, the ministers of the gospel were generally Independents or Congregationalists, not clergy of the Established Church of Old England.