word of God; together with an ability in illustrating and applying the same, in an extraordinary degree successful in winning souls to Christ, as well as in edifying the church of God; if these qualifications in any degree constitute true goodness, and true greatness, then were they truly good and truly great men. They were men of a plain, common education, yet of strong, vigorous intellects, of sound practical sense; and thence brought to the study of the scriptures that peculiar artlessness and simplicity of mind so essential to a right understanding of the word of God. Books they had none. The Bible alone was the man of their counsel, their great and almost exclusive study; and hence they became mighty in the scriptures, thorough and correct expounders of the doctrines and precepts of the gospel.

They were unlearned in many of the modern modes of interpretation, untaught in many of the nice distinctions of a speculative theology, but were not therefore, we imagine, the less evangelical in their sentiments, the less successful in their ministrations.

They seem to have received the scriptures

in their most plain and obvious meaning, without seeking to conform them to their prejudices, or to bend them to the support of a denominational creed. Indeed they had no such creed; and if prejudice at any time they had, it was a prejudice consequent to, and dependent upon a diligent and prayerful study of the Bible, and might therefore be supposed to be in harmony with truth. Doubtless, like all other good men in similar circumstances, they were not aware of the greatness of the work they were performing, of the far-reaching influence of the principles which they had embraced, and were laboriously inculcating.

Hence the absence of all policy and design in their proceedings touching the future. They left truth where the apostles left it, not to be transmitted by means of creeds and heartless subscriptions, but to be handed down from generation to generation in the experience of those who should embrace it, trusting in God that the line of the true spiritual priesthood would continue unbroken, and the church thus be perpetuated to the end of time.

We are disposed, however, to trace all this to the superintending providence of God, to

the guardian influence of the Holy Spirit. To us it seems evident, that God, through the agency of these men, was preparing to give the world a practical illustration of that great truth, which the church has ever been so slow to learn, namely: that the Bible understood, the Bible believed, the Bible loved, the Bible practiced, is the best, the only safeguard to ecclesiastical purity.

We have thus sketched, with as much brevity as justice to the subject would permit, the history and character of the age that witnessed the rise and organization of this church. It remains for us now, to present in detail some of the most important facts and events of its own history.

The first record subsequent to that of the organization of the church, bears date of October 3d, 1762. It records a petition of the pastor to travel, and preach the gospel wherever God might open the way before him. The church gave him full liberty to go, and improve his gift wherever God should call him. The next record, of October 17th, 1764, is of a somewhat painful character. It describes, very briefly, a course of discipline which the church were

constrained to take with their pastor. The charges against him were as follows: first, that he had given occasion to the people to think that he was actuated by a hireling spirit, in demanding a stated salary for his services; and, second, that he professed to have an internal dismission from the church, and in virtue thereof pronounced the church dissolved. Touching the first charge, he plead guilty and confessed his error; but as to the second, he firmly maintained that his internal dismission from the church was from heaven. On the second day of November, 1764, the church, as the records state, after much labor, resolved to withdraw the hand of fellowship from their pastor. The ground of this was, that he persevered in declaring that the church was dissolved, and that he had an internal dismission from heaven. The next record, of October 3d, 1765, presents the doings of a council, called in relation to the case of elder Palmer. The names of the council were Nathan Avery, Timothy Whightman, Simeon Brown, Joseph Ayer, Richard Williams, Amos Burrows, Joshua Birch, Eliezer Brown. The doings of this council, furnish an interesting specimen of

the manner in which they transacted business of this character, in these early times. First, they offered prayer to Almighty God for direction; second, they inquired of the church for what purpose they had called them together; third, they proceeded to hear a relation of the matter from elder Palmer, and also a statement of facts from the church, after which they adjourned to a private dwelling, and came to a decision in the following manner: the moderator, probably elder Timothy Whightman, proposed to the council the following questions: first, had elder Palmer a right to withdraw from the church in the manner and form he did? answer in the negative. Second, has elder Palmer, by withdrawing from the church, rendered himself worthy of discipline? answer in the affirmative. They then proceeded to advise elder Palmer to reconsider his conduct, and admonished him in the following manner: 'Dear brother, is this agreeable to your ordination vows, and the solemn charge committed to you? If the church, as you say, was in a languishing condition, then where was your love; where your pity; where your faithfulness to God, to Christ the good