t " ' ■' '■■-.■ • « ... ,. , •■ .. ^_ ' , . . ' • .> m ' *" - . " ■ . . ' " * *. • . ^ . • ■ ■ • . a t " ^ ■ r ' W^ - V. '^-^1. - • ".■.■■-■.: . ■ . • «( '■ ^ ' • , -. ■ ■ .. ■ - . ' • ;.v. ' • . ' • * ' * , ,^ , Ih' - . - • ■.'•'■/ . • -^ / .,, _ ' 'fr' - - • * " ' .■ ' , p « r*- . o , fV ' ° « «^ • ' * • ^ *"'' . , • ■ #■ ' - " • ' ■ ' , • . ' - '*'■-. "^' L " * „ " ' , '^ -1 « ■•!'■■ 4' (, , . . „ ■ „ • . . *r ^ t ■ " ■ "• , ■» * - ■ , « ■ - . • ■' r , ^ • r o » * V *■ , " " • ' ' ' ■ "» * « ... ' ■ ■ ;" ^ .. ■ .. . ' : ' ■ 'l - ** ■ .-■^ I. ■ ' . ■ , ' ,■-•''.,. ■ - < *, ' * ' Ji ■■ ^ • ■ ,., ," ' . V , m . " fli ... , • s' • «* • * ,-- ^ " ■ ■ ' * *' • »* .- , ..^ .'f I - ' ■ » .. ' ' ■ ■ " i/ J- ClHM Microficfie Series (iMlonQgraphs) i' <-'l •r* ^^^: '4 i-'frr^ "2. Collection de (mdnographies) . M' ■ •&><>' Canadian Inttitut* for Hiatorical MicroraprbducUbna / Inititut Canadian da microraproductiona hiatoHquaa r^, ,"' . ■■', C« p i 1 » ■>.lfc Mi lUM Twhmcal and Bibtiographk NotM / Nottt Mc^niqiMt tt bibliograptiiquM /,. The Institute hat attamptMi to obtain tff tmt orifinal copy avaiialili for filming. Fasturas of this copy which ' may ba biMiografihically uniqu*, wrfiich may altar any of tha imapat in tita raproduetion. or which may significandy chanfa tha Usual mathod of f ilmin«, ara chackad balow. □ Coloured covtrs/ Couvartura da coulaiir Cbi □ Covers 4amatBd/ Couvartura andommagia D Covert Tas^rad and/or laminatad/ Couvartu^astaurte et/ou pallieulte □ Cover title mittina/ Le titre de couverture manque □ Coloured maps/ Cartes gtegraphiques en eouleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or Mack)/ Encre de touleur (ii. autre que Meue ou noire) D Coloured plates arid/or illustrationt/ Plaivchet et/ou iUUstratioiit en eouleur □ Bound with other material/ Relie ayec d'a^tret documents □ Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along intefior margin/ . > La raliuro^serrie peut causer de I'ombi^ou de la distorsion le long de la marge intirieuri Blank/leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever poniMe, these have been omitted from filming/ II ^ peut que«ertaines pages blanches ejouttes lors^'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, meis, lorsque cela itait possible, ces pages n'ont pas eti f ilmiet. vN. t'institut a microfilm^ la meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui aM possible de se procurer. Les details da cet exemplaire qui sont peut4tre uniques du point de WMiographiqua, qui peuveiit modifier una image reproduite. ou qui peuvent exiger Urw modification dans la mtthoda normale de f ihnagi sont indiqufa ci-dessous. ./ « ■ ■* ■ ■ ■ ■ ■' - .' - □ Colour(Ml pages/ . Pages de cduleur Q Pages damaged/ Pages endommagees □ Pages restored and/or' laminated/ Pages restauries et/ou pelliculAet Paget ditcoloured. ttaiiwd or foxed/ Paget dicoloriet. tachettet ou piquiet □ 'Pigesdetached/ '^/"'\ '"'.'" ''-'-'^ ' Pag«s dfttachtos BShbwthrough/ Transparence Quality of print varies/ Qualite in^le de I 'impression Continuous pagination/ Pagination continue I I Includes index(e%)/ n Comprend un (des) index Title on header taken from:/ Le titre de i'en-tlte provient: Title page of issue/ Page de titre de |a livraison I I Caption of issue/ Titre de depart de la livraison □ Masthead/ Gcnerique (piriodiques) de la livraison •*• Adiditional comments:/ . ' Commentaires supplimentaires: . This item is filmed et the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmi iu taux de rMuction indiqui ci^ssous. ' ■ r ■ ■■. ■ i , , ■■; _,:_,. ■■■"., ■■ '}. ■ ■ ' .. ■ •' • . ■1 » ----- IQX . UX 19X ZZX Z6X . 30X 1 ' s/ n. , 12X 16X « -, 2dx •;■ 24X 28X ' 3ix .'IF: -■ Th* copy filmed h«r» his bMn rsproduciMl thanks to ths gsnsrosity of : ThfURiMekMciitf AkMmS' VKiMii UMViiiiiy Mmivn Ths imsgos appsaring Hsrs ars ths bast quality possibia considsring ths condition shd Isgibility of ths orioihal copy and in kasping with tha . fllining contract slMKificatlons; Original copias in printed ji>apar covars arafUmad bsiginning with tba front covsr snd ending on ths last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or ths back cover when appropriate. All other original copies srs filrtisd bsginhing on ths first page with a printed or illustrated impres- Sion, shd snding on ths last page with a printed or Illustrated impression. ■'•_:.. '' ■ ■- •"■ -v- . L'sxsmplaire film4 fut feproduit grice A la gAnArositA ds: . / Tlw Uiiitij Cfcsrdi «f CwMJi Ardiim Victcris UsivMiity A^cki^iu Lss images suivsntss ont At6 rsproduitJM svecJs plus grand soln, compts tsnu ds |a condition at de la,nettet* de I'exemplaire fllmA, et en conformity avac las conditions du contrat de filmagfli/ Las exemplaires originaux dolit la couvarture en papier est imprimis sont f timte sn ^mmen9ant par la premier plat et en terminant soit par la derniirs page qui compbrte une empreinte d'impression ou d'i|lustration. soit psr Is sscond plat, sslon Is cas. f ous lss autrsf sxsmplsirss - originsux sont f ilmis sn comnisn^ ant par la .' premiere page qui comporte una empreinte d'impression ou dlllustration et en terminant par^ la dSmlArs psgs qui comports uns telle empreinte.'.'." '' '■■;"?■• ■■■ I The last rscordsd frams on asch microfiche shall contain tha symbol — ^ (moaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whicHjBver applies. Maps, platss, chsrts, etc.. may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too lar^e to be entirely included in one expbsurs are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frairies as rsquirsd. Ths following diagrarns illustrate the method: Vn des symboloS' suivants apparaltri sur Ik " derniire image de cheque microfiche, selpn le cas: Is symbols — »- signif is "A $UIVRE'/, \0 symbols y signifis"f IN". . ■^'^' ^-*^^ '■$■• ' ' '■ ■ * ' . > Lss cartes, planches, tableaux, etc,< peuvent'Atip^ filmAs A^es taux ds reduction diffArsnts, ''. Lorsque le document eSt trop grand poiir Atre reproduit en un seul clichA, it est filmi A partir^ de Tahgie supArisur gauchs, de gauche ildrolte; et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre . d'images nicessaire. Les diagrammes suivants iliustrsnt la mAthode. • >Ji fr MKROCOpr MSOUrriON tfST CHART (ANSI and ISO tEST CHART Mo. 2) %*' J^^ /APPLIED IN/HGE Ind BT t653.' .;.s-.,v-' ^- •^^nK ^ ^- Ml y \. '- ■ '"M \^ ' ■- ■, ' ■ • »■, ,♦» -.i.-- -'■'. . •' . 1 ' .'■"-.■■> . '■ *,,"'■■■ 1 " \ • SS^ , ^ -.' t-'~ -.'y>~ . ' V w-?^ 4; 9^^" i . : ) CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY THE CHURCH POLITY V ^" - ■ . ■ ■ '. ■■ " - OF TOE ■ '-■-■■ ■ ■ ' V ■ .'. ' ' ''■'■' NEW TESTAMENT. ■ ■ ' '■ ' . ■ ■ ■ . *\ ' ■'"*'.■ ■ .7 .■■■'■ - ■■!-. " ■ ■ - . .■>■,' ■■■.■ ■ " ■%' ■■. - ■ ■.■■ ■" ■ :• \- " •' / '::i-. f^:...„:.l::^:-.i,:-.. ■ , i ^'^^.*.*^ c ■^. .1 ■4V < J. '>' .'. CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY IN 0ONTRADl8TINCtI0N tO EPISCOPACY AND PRESBYTERUNISM : THE CHURea POLITY OP TUC NEW TESTAMENT. MX ■I RALPH WARDLJIi:, D;I). \M''' " Thsrb m a PHiLOsorar which la Kuomso ow rs in rboard to thb SoRiPTUKKa ■Jov Goor— rr consists in using thkii as the toucHaroNB, roR tkstino all tub OPtNioNa iXAXIMa or KKN."— SfELA^iCTHON. > GLASGOW: JAMES MACLEHOSE, 83 BUCHAKAN STREET. TORONTO, C.W.: nJBLISHKD WITH THE BANCTION QF THE PROPRIETORS OP tJIB COPYRIGHT BY . ANDREW HAMILTON. 1864... ■>■ ■.,:•■/".■■ 3X TORONTO t r. I N TED AT THE OLOBE STEAM JgB PUESS.. 25 K ING STREET WEST. '9S'^ £.; i DEDICATORY PREFACE. TO THE DEACONS, 4X0 TO THE •OrasB MEMnEHS, OP the Ciancn of Ciibkt ASSESiftr.rNo r\ West Geoboe Strebt Cuafel, Glasgow :— Beloved Friends AND Brethren, You ftie well aware of the position in wliicli prori- dence has been pleased at present to place me." Eminent medical authority, threefold and unani- mous, has put its veto for a time on my official labours, both public and domiciliary. Such autho- rity, ginng its verdict on previous knowledge and careful examination, I have felt myself wan-anted, and even bound, to regard as, with sufficient clear- ness, indicative of the divine pui-pose. With a corresponding imanimity, and with all the cOi'diaKty of a long-attached people, so gratifying to a pastor's spirit, you have superadded your peremptory inter- dict—the interdict of s}-mpathising love— to that of the physicians. We have thus, under the influence of a common conviction, bowed together to the will of heaven.; I thank you for your sympathy; ■■■-■ . ■■ " /■ ;' -■■ ■ ■ ■ .■■■--^ ■■'.■. » » ;■■....'■-;«►■- -7 " ■ : ■ -' . ■ '. .' •. V :• ■ ^■ "■ .' ■: '- '7- . ■■ '■:.-'■■ ■ -' ■ ■■■"■' ' "'. -'■ ■ & %f '♦*» * 6 DEDICATOBt PREFACE. i thanlVyou for yo« V^-^'^^'^^ W famay, ana. in the' sa^ctaary. They ^bo ^«,erea,_faithWly and gra<»onsly '«»-^- That irtfure. But in what'way. we mnst leave it ^t o^covenant God himseU. in his wisdom and love, to detfennine* ' , \* In these circumstances, when close study ^4 cental excitement have been speciaUy prohibited^ it may seem strange that I- should be sendmg to p,ess a volume necessarfly. to so great an extent, ^Controversial. The ti-uth, however. »..«« J»» among you are aware, that a Wge proportion of Jhe Mol'g sheets bas been lying by m m m^us^I* for a good many year^ so that, all 'h?t ftq^ ;,uref being (to no inconsiderable ex er. I « alteration and enlargement, it occurred to me thH I might accompBsh a long-cherished purpose, and fd61 a long-due promise, without any^such over- ' tasking of the mental powei-s as could be at aH pSicial; or, if at all, assuredly far less pre,udi«^ 'Id a tho;sand.fold less distress^, «ian wo^ have be.n a sentence of absolute inaction. I _am thankful to God for having spared me my nund, Ld thankful to my physicians for ^not having en- tirely forbidden me the use of it. ^ , .But enough,-and more than enough. I ?OuM not, however, but feel, that I owed, and oweclespe. DEDICATORY PREFACE. :i ■i daily to you, some ^ach explanation. I have only to add my fervent prayer,— a prayer to whieh yon tHU all subjoin your hearty Amen f— that this dis- pensation of divine providence,— by the regret which it has occasioned on my part (if eMP I'egret be a legitimate feeling in regard to whilris the Lord's doing), and the sympathy it has elicited on yours, may have the effect of still more closely tightening the bond of love between us;-4and that, in your present interesting and trying/ position, the great •Head of the Church may by liis grace enable you, " with all lowliness and meekness, ^nd forbearance and long-suffering," to "ieep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peac/;" and may "set in order" amongst you "the things that are wanting," in such a manner as shajTprove for his own glory, in union with your and^our children's edification, and the yrorld's benefit ! < ^ But, apart altogether from present peculiar cir- cumstances, to whom could a work of this kind be more appropriately inscribed, than to brethren among whom, by the grace of God, I have been carrying out its principles into practice for a'period now approaching to five-and-forty years ? To those principles I am desirous to settle and strengthen your attachment. While holding, in common [with other evangelical denominations, the essential soul- u -.■s,. 8 DEDIGATOBY PREFACE. I saving apctrines of grace, and feeling this "one faith" uniting you with your feUow-beUevers in | them aU, you are distmguished from them by that f particular church-poUty, the scriptural authority of which it is the object of these sheets to establish, Now, to the true disciple of Jesus, when he is prac- tically pursuing any coiu'se, there is nothing that I can imagine to unpart a sweeter satisfaction, than to havfe the conviction fully settled in his mind that what he is domg is the will of his Divine Master. His way is then clear, and his step firm. And in a church of Christ, it will just be m proportion as its members are thu^ enlightened, that the pastor'S; work, in the administration of rule, will be straight- forward and easy. When by his people the laws according to which he' is to govern are distinctly understood, conscientiously approved, and, for the Master's sak^ who has prescribed them, heartily loved,— he knows what he is doing :— at every step he announces, he can make his unfaltering appeal— " I speak as to wise men,— judge ye what I say :"— the appeal finds an immediate response :— and all goes forward unitedly and prosperously.— May the volume now commended to your patronage contri- bute to this happy result; and may future pastors, whom the- Lord may appoint over you, reap, along with yourselves, the pleasant fruit ! Thus will your 'I --■;— ^rf*- -'^ -i"?5C™w DEDICATORY PREFACE. 9 attachment be not to man merely, how wortK^soever of it, but to God,~not to the servant merely, mit to the Master; an attachment .manifested in a faitW adherence at once to his doctrines and to his laws^ And now, a single word respecting the volume itself; that the extent of purpose embraced by it may be distinctly understood, and that none, among* yourselves^or others, mayexpect to find in it what - it is not intendea to contain. Fu'st of all, then,— be it remembered, that to historical and criticarerudi- ; tion it makes no pretension. The only history to which it at anytime refers is "the Acts of the Apos- tles;" and the Only criticism to be found in it'is Of infrequent occurrence, and of the simplest chai-acter. Had the case been one that depended, at every turn, f)n minute etymological and. exegetieal distmctions, I should have felt my ground too narrow and tremu- lous to wtoaut confidence. All that I hive aimed at, and all, therefore, that my readers have to look > for, is a plain, straightforward Bible argument; re- quiring no more, in order to a clear apprehension of it, than an ordinary amount of discriminative saga- city, and of its patiently thoughtful application.— Then, with regard to the contents of the volume. For reasons assigned in the introductory chapter, I have confined myself, in the sources and grounds of my argument, exclusively to the scriptures. And of ■3* 10 DEPICATOBI flPBEFAGE^ the topics which even withttn this limit might have found a legitimate place, tbere are several, which, although included in my/qriginal plan, I have not introduced, because any ipjproach to a satisfactory discussion of them would have extended the treatise to an undesirable length. Let it be understood* then, that I treat only of the great primary articles ,of distinction between the three prevailing forms of ecclesiastical government,— the episcopalian, presby- terian, and independent,— especially the two latter. The subjects aUuded to, as designedly omitted, are such as these,— creeds and confessions,— the popu- lar election of church-officers,— the nature and ends of ordination,— the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper,— the times and rn^des of worship,— the reciprocal duties o{ the officers of the church to the members, of the members io the officers and to one another, and of officers and members to the surrounding world. These are topics, the dis- cussion of which, without any undue dilatation, would fill another volume. Some of them may be incidentally touched upon, (as in the remarks on the office of deacon, and on the nature and extent of church power); but they do not' unless in the way of obvious sequence, come within the scope of the present treatise.* v » Thft tl«tie3 of the pastoral office are discussed in vario\i8 works ; \ ■..■■ ■ ■■\ . .-■■■X.: DEDICATORY PREFACE. n It is right for me to add, that subsequently to my havmg given intimation of my design to my pub- lisher, I met with the announcement of its being the intention of Dr. Davidson, Professor of Biblical Literature in the Lancashire Lidependent College, to tal^e up the same subject, on a more extended scalejin the thirteenth series of the Congi'egational Lecttire. I 'will not deny that by this announcement my/desire to get forward was stimulated. I am as far as possible from regretting the, coincidence. Tho two volumes will come before the public together, and quite independently the one of the other. Slight discrepancies between the eminently learned lecturer and myself there may, and in all probability will, be: but I am pretty confident they will be no more than slight; and the comparison of the reasonings of iske one with those of the other may serve the better to establish the more essential principles of both. •-of which a large proportion and rich variety oi the cj-eam may be found in— '-The Christian Pastor's Manual, a Selection of Tracts on the duties, difficulties, and encouragements of the Christian Ministry : Edited by Dr. John Brown, Edinburgh," Ac— The valuable Tracts here selected are from JLev. Drs. Doddridge, Watts, and Erskine, and" Rev. Messrs. Jennings, Booth, Mason, Boslwick, Newton, and Cecil.— And on th6 duties of the members of Christian Churches^ I may recom- mend "Christian Fellowship, or the Church Member's Guide.*' by the Eev. John Angel James:— and portions, particularly Section V. of " The Church of Christ considered, in releronce to its members, object*, dtities; officers, government, and discipline." by the Rev. Dr. P-ayne. -Ti- 12 DEDICATORY PREFACE, In conclusion, I haye only to repeat "my heiart's desire and prayer" for your personal and social prosperity,— for your growth in grace, and your establishment and progress in "every good word and work," and to subscribe myself, Beloved Friends and Brethren, ° Yours in christian and pastoral affection, €a((thamlocii,^n'Kar Glasgow, J5ttA'(Ji'.,1847. >• ■■ ^ Si J- • : ^ I . ■ 1 ■ .:.,-. -■,•■■ 0- ■ '• ' ■ • ■■ ■ 1 '■' . ■ ^- ■ ^'■' ■■■■^ < ■ • ■ ' \. -fi ■ •_''■■ 1 ■ ■ , ■ » • %■ ■ "-^: ■'■■J' - •:'..' '- - .- r- *." -' ' /" ■ -i - ■ :■ V ;•;.;■; ■■■. CONTENTS. ? •« >j.. Dedicatory Pbeface, .......;...., .5—12 » CHAPTER I. ^ IxtBODBCTORY OBSfcRVATIOXS. Apologetic notice :-New Testament tl^e sole source of informaUon :- iwo kinds of evidence, precepts and facts :-Divine instructions to be taken «8 given r-DilTerent estimates of tlie importance of our inquiry :^ObHgation to conformity :— Danger of expediency:— Argumentum ad hominem :— Fair demand of consistency :— Com- mumty of goods :-Ki8s of charity : ^Washing disciples' feet:- Love feasts :— Maxim from Paley^ , i7_42 CHAPTER II. "^ The Net^ Testame^ Cuurch, and New Testament ChuIiches. Section I.^G'eneraZ aaraderwias .--fepirituality r-Univ^rsality :— Sunplicitjr^ Section U.- What is a Church of Chm?-^vro senses of the word chureh-The comprehensive, the church-the limited, a church. SEctlON m.— Unmi.thx>rwd uses of the word Church:— €hurch visible and church invisible :— A number of congregations under a commdn government :— Church representativej. . . . 43—9? ;■' .V ■:,. . -.■■•■>■.'..■'■ ■■'"■:: ''-'-^ i ' ■' :cHAPTER.nL ,'\'v: ■• ". • ^.^,- ■. • 'M^ Materials of a Church of Christ. General self-evident principles, John iii. 3, 8:-Proof8 of pure com- mumon:-Fir8t Church in Jerusalem, Acts ii. r-Inscriptions of Apostolic Epistles :-Corniption 8 the occasion of disappointment TT ■'-■S^:!/" -.v-*«:rk- '^■f u CONTENTS/ and grief :— Their exbtencecenBuie^, their correction eryoined:— Separation from the world commanded— 2 Cor. vi. 14—18 :— Pleaa nrged on the other side :-Caae of Judas :-Para^le of the marriage feast:— Parable of the tares and wheat :-Ends of church-fellow- ahip (tustrated by imparity— glory of Christ— edification of the church— benefit of the world :~Concludlng observations :— Parallel between indrvidiial character an* church character :— Fourfold mischief of impure communion..,. . .' ■ • — 93—138 CHAPTEltlV. OKFICEBa OV A CUBTblAX ChVKCII. Division of subject :— Three portions. Sectiox'I.— Proo/s of Sishop and Deacon being the only officers recognized in the New Testament :— General agreement in this of presbyterians and independents:^ Naturalness and completeness of such twofold division :— Bids of the deacon's office spiritual as well as secular :—Proofe from scrip- ture, Phil. 1. 1; 1 Tim. iii. 1—10:— Presbyters or Elders, who?— Proofs of their being same as Bishops, Acta xx. 17 and 28 ; 1 Pet. V. 1—4; Titus i." 5—7: Bishops and elders never mentioned to- gether. Skction ll.—No evidence in Xm Testament of diocesan bishops .-'^VnliMtyol all reference to the Jewish hierarchy :— Ihe apostolic age thie period within which the church's constitution to be found, neither before pentecoet nor after the apostles :— Episco- pacy distinguished from English hierarchy :— Previous proof of BMneness of Bishop and Presbyter enough :— Scripture precedents appealed to by episcopalians :— Case of the apostle James :— Case of Timothy and TitJis :— Case of the angels of the seven churches of Asia. Sbctiox III.— Ao conclusive evidence in suppoii of preOy- terim rulbvj Elder's :— Precise points of agreement and difibrence between presbyterians and independents :—Proofe that teaching belongs to all Elders as well as ruling :— Passages adduced to prove identity of elder and bishop prove th'is too :— Other passages where designations vary, 1 Tim. iii. 1— 7 ; Eph. iv. llj Heb. ^ii, t ; 1 Thes. v. 12, 13; I Cor. iv. 1 :^Naturalne33 of the union of teaching and ruling :— Ruling elder, if an office, a distinct office :— Passage from Dr. Dick :— State of Deacon's office among.presby- terians :— Passages in support of ruling elders full y discussed. Bom- xii. 6—8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; 1 Tim. v. 17 :— Coneluding remarks on '^luralitjT of Eldera in e a ch church , 139—219 1 "*-^.. '^■-1 A' CONTENTS. 16 CHAPTER V. GOTERNMIKT OF THE CBVKCti. Reason for leaving out episcopacy :-Scripture eFidence in support of Congregational Indep«ndency :— Proper import of the two terms :— Evidence partly anUcipated, Matt xviii. 15-17 :— Proof of popular element in church rule firom 1 Cor. v. .--Full discussion of .the esse in that chapter :~EpUtles to the seven Asiatic Churches, Rev. U and Hi. .—General tenor of apostolic epistles :-- Closing reference to Acts XV. 220-248 'i I I 1 CHAPTER VL, AKotMK.NT JOB Pia!:sBm£BfA.vi8M FROM Acts 15. Introductory remarks. Skctiox l.-^:^roof of the appeal from Antioch having been settled by in.s;>ira/i"o»i.— Denial of this the basis of the Presbyterian argument.— No authority other than inspired compe- tent to settte it :— If not inspired, not binding on the conscience :— If Uo inspiration, the appeal was fi-om superior to inferior ftom divine to human :-Nothing in the discussion inconsistent with inspiration :— Nothing thus inconsistent in the terms of the decree • —No necessity for denying inspiraUon, and nothing but necessity could warrant it. Skctiox II.— JStaminaiion of contrary hypothesis. —Episcopacy and its councils briefly disposed of :— Archbishop Whateley : -Essential principle of presbyteHanism, represeniatim:— Was there such representation?— Appeal not made to a synpd to be convened at Jerusalem, but to parties already there .---Even thte church at Antioch not represented :— No evidence of any repre- sentatives of other churches :— Statement of Dr. Dick examined :— Direct evidence of the contrary :— Case thus peculiar :— Chief element of presbytery and of independency alike wanting :— Sim- ple view of the two points to be ascertained, overlooked by both Drs. Dick and Mason :— Lesson taught us by the case,. . .249—290 CHAPTER VIL Objections ckoed aqainst Conorkoational iNOtiPEKoKiiicT. Introduction :— If all are ruliers, who and^here are the ruled?— All not rulers :— Nature and extent of pastoral authority, or church — P9wer, examined : — Not legislative ; — Tru e provinc e of the pastor ; •;fe 16 CONTENTS. . -Motives by which subjection enforced :-Panillel between teach- JT^r:l or between doctrines and laws :-Obedience must be h!t of kno;iedge and convicUon -Tendency of the popuh«r rfement to purity of communion-Independency fine in theory^ but not tii practice :-the allegation reftited-Alleged incompe- ^ty of the 'people to judgeSn cases of discipline :-charge met ^grounds of scripture, reason, and fact-Alleged tendencyof lie Ltem to engender collisions, irritations, and feudsi-the imputa- Uotgr^nteTin one view, denied in others-That independency io^ 'require an extra amount of certain christian g"ce« or^^t; prosperity, a proof of its .scripturaVwithority, :....... 291-3^* CHAPTER VIII. UNION OP CHtUOTES, AND TUEIR "COMMUXION WITB EaCO OTOEB. Charge against independency :-if true, fatal :-Union of churches essential :-How'manife8ted by those of the New Testament :~A membt of one church a member of all ^-^^^^f^^^^^ Sis point :-Interchange of BalutaUoni :-Occasionrt^ s^^^^^ bas8ies:-FcUow8hip of giving and receiving-Liberties of fje churches -mutual consultation and advice --remonstrance against, and withdrawment from, dangerous ^^^y^^T T -ll^^l' poses of common interest --fellowship wUh o her 'le°omin'it^°^; . Ldesirablenesi of such fellowship -principles on which alone attainable i-pleasing anticipation :-conclusion,... ..... .^ia-«>« , :i ■4- ;-c. teach- lOBt be lopular theory, compe- ge ioaet ^ of the imputa- ndency, for its )l-324 CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY THE CHURCH POLITY OF THK NEW TESTAMENT. A *. hurches snt: — A tionsoa ;ial em-w of the^^ agdost* for pur- natioDS : ;b alone 525—354 ., Had CHAP^P^ I. INTRODUqi^RY OBSERVATIONS. Our inciination^ dud our convictions of duty, although the^. -#i. ^. ■=■•£ ■m^f *) \ > V " ( > h- ' ♦ « '""•-^^ •^ i 4^ 20 INTBODUqtpBY OBSERVATIONS. 2. I have represented the New Testament eyide^ce as consisting in ."facta mid precepts combined" This proceed^ upon a principle, too seU-evident to bear dispute. What was actuaUy done under apostohc direction, has the same force of authority with an express command to do it,— the force, that is, of the authority of Christ. As we cannot suppose the Apostles speaking in one way and acting in another, or any thmg to have been done under their eye, relative to the order pf the churches, but what was according to their injunction.-yac-r becomes the Hoaie as prec^t,— example, as Imv. I might take up, as many have done before me, strong grounds of a priori probability, that under the New Dispensation the Church of God would not be left ent&ely destitute of any divinely sanctioned con- stitution of internal government. There can be no unlikelihood greater. I cannot, indeed, tal^p up, on this point, the ground which some have occupied, when, proceedmg on the Apostle's comparison of Christ auA Closes, and rightly assuming that the former must " in all things have the pre-eminence," they have argued that there must be a constitution for the New Testament Church, as minutely perfect, and as distinctly laid down, as tlwtt of the Old, because, without this, Christ Awiuld not have been, as he is affinned to have been, a,' .i'j. INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. 23 dents, of approved and disowned examples, of direct precepts, and pf in4irect but obvious implibations, the necessity is laid upon us of a careful collf|tion of the whole, in the spirit of simplicity and clindour.— For my own part, I am satisfied, that there is little real ■culty in the case, where these principles are in •cise. I am well aware, however, that christian thren, of other denominations, may say the same fl^nay have said it and will say it — in behalf of their respective systems of chtirch-order; and 1 have no- tliing to ask of my reader, but the calm and impartial exercise of a judgment that defers implicitly to divine iauthority,—" trembling at God's word." If the re- sult of the exercise of his judgment, in such humble and candid investigation, shaU be his arriving at a conclusion different from mine, I shall not think the less of him for this-; but, conceiving him to be entitled to the same charity on my part which I claim for myself on his, shall extend to him the right hand of fellowship, as one who, though differing from me as to the form or the act which our common Master requires, is rendering him the conscientious obedience and homage of a spirit as submissive as my own to what it beHevps to be his will. With regard to the importance which should be attached to the subjects of our present investigation, there are two extremes : — the extreme of iigJd indif- ference, and the extreme of unforhearing bigotry. In the former of these extremes are those fellow- christians, who affect to treat {^11 questions about the external order of the church as matters compara- tively so trivial as to be unlrorthy the serious interest of the spiritual mind ; matters of " doubtful disputa- tion," which serve only to divide the people of God, 24 INTRODUCTORY OBSERtATIONS. and of which the right settlement, were it attamabte (which they take* for granted it is not), would hardly be worth the trouble it cost to arrive at it ; the mere "tithing of mint and anise and cumin." To the many fellow-christians who think and talk thus, we would suggest :—l. That theit favourite reference to the "tithing of mint and anise and cumin," as con- trasted by our divine Master with the <* weightier matters of the law," is a very unfortunate one for their purpose ; for they forget, that that highest of all authorities, while he says of the latter—" These ought ye to have done," adds respecting the former, "And not to leave the other tmlone" It was the neglect of the admittedly more important, not the scrupulous observance of the less^ that constituted the crime reproved, — 2. Genuine love will be desirous to know all the will of the Master who is the object of it. It will not be satisfied with knowing and doing the greater and more prominent parts of that will ; but anxious to ascertain aiid to conform to it in even the minutest points. It can never be a legitimate- exercise or indication of love, on the part either of child or of servant, to make light of any intimation, how slight soever, of a parent's or a master's will. Could they make good the ground ih&t Christ has given no intimation of his will on the subjects in question, but has left them entirely open, they would be right ; but true love will not take that for granted, without serious and solicitous inquiry.— 3. On the supposition that Christ, ]?y his Spirit, ha^ given in- structions on these pointSj^ there no presumption on the part of those who make light of them? Ought not the settled principle, on which all his faithfal subjects proceed, to be, — that whatever he has thought I .'i ■f :1f ^ .4--^.— M''^ ;■*> INTRODUCTORY Od»ERVATION8. 25 nabte lardly mere o the 18, we jce to i con- ^htier le for\ est of These )rmer, ,s the )t the ed the ous to ject of doing bwiU; a even kimate> her of lation, s will, st has jcts in would 'anted, )n the ren in- tion on *^ Ought 'aithful thought m ■*^ ^ worth his while to eomma^nd^ they should think it . Ivorth their lohile to olmj? — I believe not a few are. thus pi*e8umptuous from mere inconsideration ; of whose characters presumption is very far from being a general feature. They find chiistians distinguished by deep and exemplary piety in all denominations of evangelical professors ; — and, seeing the various schemes of external church order thus manifesting their compatibility with the existence and exercise of such piet}', which they justly regard as "the priri- . cipal thing/' they draw the hasty conclusion that their respective claims to adoption are not worth the^ trouble of examining. The conclusion I have called hasty. It rests on premises as superficial as they are limited and partial.— 4. By such believers it is forgotten, that emh are effected hy m^ans ; and that the importance of the latter is to be measured by that of the former. External institutes are put Out of their prosper place, when they are regarded as ends in themselves ^^but they are means to ends. The ends are individuah^ification, and the increase of the church; and, if these are admitted to be important ends, it will follow thM the value of the means is in proportion to that iinportance.- The One regulates the other. And, while tliis^ position will not be dis- putecl^either, surely, will briK)ther,— that if Christ Jms instituted means for these ends, his people should seek in earnest to ascertain them,^^n the firm con- viction, that his must hi the Itest :-^^e might go further, and affirm them the only thihf suitaUe means for the ends in view. — In this, as in, every- thing else, it becomes us to lay our own wisdom at his feet, arid in the true spirit of self-renunciati^ "become fools that we may be wise." — ^This is no\ ^x... Ix '"','f^^<''^''^*^t' *' 26 lOTRODtJCTORY OBSERVATIONS. more thaii what is due to him, both on the gio^nd of his supreme authority, ttiid on that of his unerring intelligence :— and it lyilue to him, not in cases only where we might be disposed to doubt, but even where our own sagacity would, with little or no hesitation, have dictated the contrai-y.— Our duty, beyond all question, IB implicit de/eretwe. / " It seems reasonable that christians should consider themselves bound by the authority of the inspired ambassadoi-s of Christ, in matters of this description, as well as in others. Yet it is surprising on what flimsy and light pretexts many shake themselves loose from such obligation, even when they have granted that the constitution of the apostolic churches is to be found in their writings. They allege that it was only the constitution /or tJujtt Hmey and J'or existing circumstances ; and that it was wis^ left subject to modification, as exj)ediency, guided by ^subsequent change^ln the condition of the church, might dictate.^But this is surely, to say the least of it, hazaidous ground. Theife is not, on subjects sitch as this, a more dangeroiis wdi-d than expediency. It unsettles everything; it settles nothing. It means whatever any mind may be pleased to affix to it ; and, being thus a word of aH meanings, becomes a word of no meaning. Surely the people of God, aware of the extent of the heart's deceitfulness, and of the variety 6f biassing influences to which, through that deceit- fdness, their judgments are subject, should be jealous >of a sentiment which allows such free scope to human discretion in regard to divine institutes; a discretion, :. which maybe as vaiied in its dictates >s are the varieties in the constitution, education, and habits of human minds. They who know themselves (as all ■-■* ■.■■ i ' ■M' . \- A nmiODUCTOBY OBSERVATIONS. 27 believers sliould) will not wish for the liberty,— When Dr. Whately says,—" Wluit is left to men's dmrdhm is not therefore meant to be left to their f/jdiscretion," he says what I should hardly have expected his own discretion would have allowed him to say. Unless there be some admitted standard of discretion, it is manifestly untrue. Whatever is left to men's discre- tion is inevitably left, as much to their indiscretion. Who is to diaw the line? What to one ma,n is the very perfection of discreet indwnse policy, is in the. eyes of another the very madness of its opposite. An4 alas ! all experience testifies (and a sad amount of the testimony there has been) that of all subjects whatever the veiy last that should be left to human . discretion are those which relate to religious obser- vances! Discretion! Wlien men leave the bible, • where are we to find it ? We cannot, therefore, be too jealous of the "power to decree rites and cere- monies" claimed for " the diurch " 4n the tweiitieth of the thirty-nme articles of the Southern Episcopacy, even although qualified by the restriction that what is ordained must -not be "contrary to God*s word written." It is a most hazardous latitude of freedom, when it is pronounced competent for the church to ordain whatever to its discretion may seem for edifi- cation, provided the di\'ine word has not forbidden it. Look to history, and' see how boundless and mischievous the licence to which the admission of such a ^wer has given rise. The wretched detail most impressively teaches us, how much safer we are, in such matters, with the maxim— that the inspired word should be understdod as interdicting whatever it does not, by precept* or example, sanction.— Even those who plead for the licence, plead for it in terms .■ ^- 28 INTRODUCTORY OBSERYATIOMS. I I which show their impression of the hazard of evil to be stronger than that of the promise of good. " The circumstances of men and things," says Dr. Camp- bell, "are perpetually varying, in respect of laws, civil polity, customs, manners : — these, in eveiy so- ciety, give rise to new regulations, arrangements, cere- - monies; these, again, insensibly introduce changes in the relations of different cla,gses and ranks of men one to another, exalting some, and depressing others. Sometimes alterations arise from a sort of necessity. A particular measure may be expedient at one tim?, and in certain circumstances,. which is inexpedient at another time, and in different circumstances. But it is equally certain, on the other hand, that changes do not alioays sprimj from prudential coimderatims of Jitn€88. As littla can we say that they are aUoaysfor the better . They moie freqii^itly result from the un- bridled passions of men, favoured Inf circumstances and opportunity."* ' Wha^ is thus sai^f changing circumstances in the church s histoiy jpiring corresponding changes in the church's con^Rution of government, may sojind plausibly; but if even plausibility does belong to itV it is plausibility and no more.— Let the . followiiig simple considerations be duly weighed :— 1. What, . in point of fact, was the state of things in the ' apostolip age itself? Was there no diversity in the . existing forms of civil government^ and in „the man- ners and customs that Vere prevalent, in the different countries in .which christian churches were then planted and organized? Had the apostles confined their labours to Judea,— making converts, gathering * Lect. on Eccl. Hist, vol. I., pp. 248, 249. ' m INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS. 29 chui'cbes, and instituting christian ordinanees, among Jews alone, it might have been sui'mised that what was adapted td the peculiar character and circum- stances of the chosen people, would not be suitable for the Gentile nations; But. it w^as not so. There were Gentile cTiurches as well as Jewish. There were churches, not in Palestine alone: but in all the districts of* Asia, in Macedonia, in the states of Greece, in the capital and provinces of Home. Yet, as imall places the same truth was the means of the conversion of sinners, so was the same order insti- tuted in all the " churches of the saints." Nowhere is there to be found the remotest intimation of any difference. ^' So ordain 1 in all churches" was lan- guage Which, so far as appears, the apostle who uses it could, with equftl truth, have applied to every institute whatsoever in the frame-work of the primi- tive ecclesiastical polity, as to the one particular of which at the time he was writing.* What, then, are we to make of the allegations we hear from many, about the necessity t)f some accommodation of that .'poUty to national institutions, and popular predi- lections, in the different countries where the gospel might be introduced ? In point of fact, the apostles •lelt no s\ich necessity, nor ever thought of any such accommodation. — 2. The reason is obvious. Churches of Christ consisted everywhere of the same materials. They were composed of converted sinners,— -sinners saved by grace, renewed by divine truth in the spirit of thei^ minds, enlightened and sanctified by the Holy Spirit, and separated frOm the world that lieth * 1 Cop. vii. 17. See also 1 Gor. iv. 17. 1 Cor. xi. IC. 1 Cor. xiv. .13. Tit. i. m 30 INTHODUCTOUY OlWEBVATIONB. y in the wiykecl one, to be a " peculiar people" unto God. Now, this being the case,— the church being a body jxr «<■, an association of spiritual people, united on spiritual principles, for spiritual ends; altogether distinct from tho kingdoms of thi« world, aAd entirely independent of them, — it follows, that the same con- stitution,-^the same ordinances and . laws,— which suited it originallj, must suit it always, and every- where. As no change of time, place, or circumstances can alter the scriptural nature of a Ohurch of Christ, so no change of time, place, or circnm8ta%i^, can ever rendpr any change in its govemmeut'lilil tlis- dpline nef*s»«^-^^- nay, if we believe in the divine adaptation of its original constitution, no such change can in any case be even beneficiaL—~'d. It may be further observed, that that constitutioii of the church's government bids fairest to be the true one, — in other words, has most of "the witness in itself " to its being scriptural,— which <« thus capable of subsistence, and of eflectuating its divine ends, in every country, and tinder every variety of national polity. This inde- pendence of the world,— this capability of reduction to practice in all its plates and in every age,— without a question ever requiring to be asked about existing political institutions,— is one of the marks' by which we might, a priori, ejwjgcl the government toi be characterized of a comntunity so entirely spritual and distinct from the worldf^ the church, according to the New Testament, is. ^hfej^ must have been some change in men's conceptions of lohat'a church is, before they could surmise the necessity, under any eircumstances, of alterations in its scriptural consti- tution. , . On the subject, however, of adherence to New ■ * '■'M ^ !»'—•*'< INTKODUCTORY 0B8ERVATI0NM. 81 >l)le" unto ch t)ei^ig a "* [)lo, united * altogetlier \d entirely 8unie cun- y,— which ntl overy- Linistances V ^Christ, ^■P^,. pan / "ahil tlis- he divine cli change b may be E)churcli's —in otJier ► its being ence, and intry, and [■his inde^ reduction —without t existing by which ni to be itual and ording to een some 'hiirch is, tider any al consti- to New 1 Testament precedent, we are frequently met, in Umtm\ witli an anjmnenttim ml fioininern, — an argument which is aimed, not so directly against mir reasonings, as against our consistency.^! you will, insist on a strict conformity to the practices of the first churches, (it has often, in substance, been said) wliy not follow out the principle in every thing ? The question is a fair one. We frankly meet it. There are f/iree jxnntH, which are usually adduced in evidence of our incon- sistency ^— in evidence that our ownpractice is subver- sive of our theory ; — that our principle is thusproved, by ourselves to be an extreme and untenable on?.— These are — the community of uld bear 'a bat their m 8," and a t be the 1 of mere li saints" it should be the token of a sincere, fervent, and pure affection, in their spiritual relation? — The idea that aU that is addressed, in the form of injunction, to h collective body behoves to be done by that body in its collective capacity, is one which no man will maintain who is desirous to have or to keep a reputation for common understanding, as might readily be shown from analogous cases, were it worth the pains. 3. 1 only add, what is also of itself decisive, — that the anomaly is too flagrant to be at all admissible, of anything being designed to be a permanent ordinance in the church, respecting which there is not the most distant intimation, either in the form of precept or of examble, as to ivheiiy or lohere, oi^ioiv, it was to be observedj. Ask, how cften, or on tchat occasions, ordinary or special, the ordinance is to be attended to ? — No one can tell.^ — Ask, in What manner it should be done when it is done,— whether the salutation is to be simply passed almg from one to another, or whether each must salute aU.' — ^No one can tell. AU is perfectly indefinite, — ^not one point explicit, so a.s either to assure th^ professed observer that he is obeying legitimately, or to render inculpation: for ne- glect capable of being brought home to the oflFender. ^^Sittely this can never be an institution of Christ.* *III. Still less necessary will it be to spend time with the washing of the disciples* feet. * The notions which by some have been broached about this ordi- nance of pnblic and promiscuoiiH kissing, hold out a temptation, such as it requires a little self-denial to resist, to some ^all indulgence in the ludicF(»u8 ;. of any sense of which, as well as of the ordinary pro- prieties and decencies df social life (of which 4he churches of Christ should be the last scenes chosen for the violation) its advocates must be most notably devoid, But,tbe temptation must liot be yielded to . J' 38 INTROi>UCTOBy 0D8EBVATI0NS. ' , if : It is time, that when our divine Lotd and Master had performed, with lowly dignity, this act of menial condescension --to th^ twelvcy when assembled with ihem at the paschal table lor the last time, and about ^ to take his final leave of them, he-said, on resuming his seat,— "Know ye what I have dcme unto you? *\ ^ Ye call me Master and Lord : and ye say well ; for so I am. If T, then, your Lord .and Master, have washed your {eet,ye also ought to tpash one another's /ec<;— for I have given you an example, i/iai j^e sfioulddo as Ihaveebne to you."* — ^This is true : — and, . what' of it? I -pity the man, who can be either sor ' Tsenseless or so heartless, as to regard this act of , . **^he Lord of glory " as a meie e:cample of feet wash- . ' ] ingj Ithasbeen said, there ts often but a short stejj ■ • ^' j from the sublime to the ludicrous.— When considered as an emblematic action^ embodying the inculcation of V " a l^eat moral prineiple,-^Qt principle essential to the ^; character of his followers,~the principle oi humlie condesc^}idhlg ?(we,— there is, in the timie, the manner, / ; and every circumstance of it,— witii the 6^ whom and ^ .\ the to whom it W&-S • done,^— an exemplification of the >" true moral suNime. When viewed as a mere pattern of the ^U8 opei'atum, the ^rotot^e of an outward observahce,— ;the sublimity is gone ; it is lost in the .^ridiculous. The gretat lesson taught is, that no be- , liever in Christ should ever feel it beneath hiip^to perform the most condescending act of menial ■ ' service to t^iy one of his brethren; it being under- atood, pf course, that the act is one which will V conduce to his comfort and benefit. ' Am6ng sucb • acts the washihg of the feet may be included, in I S. \ di INTRODUCTOBY OBSERVATIONS. 39 I Master if menial led with ad about ■ estiming ito you ? [1 ; for so Br, have another's ihat ye le : — and. either so is act of eel wfush- liortste]i nsidered cation of al to the >t himiUe manner, horn and m.of the e pattern ontwslid >st in the kt no be- 1 hii)(i.„to I menial g under- liich inrill Sng such lud^d, in Bountries and in cases wherei it is really a rcfiosh- aent, or where (and this can only arise from its ^ biing a refreshment) it has become an act of cus- tcMmary Kospitality.— To speak of it as a public ' observance, or church ordinance, is absolute drivel- ling,; to reason with any man whose nii^d is .so constituted as to be capable of so regarding it, would be to "sow the wind;" and " the whirlwind " of the poor manV blustering passiofa is very likely all that would be "leaped." Bwt, even considered as relating to private life, it is far worse than trifling, to confiiQe the example to the one particular act. It is to deprive a large proportion of the christian church of itfif benefit;— in countri(Ss, namely, where the act is necessarily a K^inty; and in numberless instances, moreover, in which it wOuld be an annoyance rather . than a cratificlition, and in which petsQnSSo»ld liitich rath^-d^ jf themselves or be vnthout it, than- have it • Tlbnfe'to them by another.*— We are qijite sufficiently in dangei^ without the encouragement of such inter- pretations, of resting in outward lacts, and forgetting • Here too the temptation to the luflicroaB is strong.. Well do I ' remember my beloved ffiend and. brother, the late Mr. Ewing, when giving me pome account of a short preacWng excursiota in a rural district in Scotland, mentioning, with great glee, and in his own char- acteristic strain of hitmOur, his arrival onp evening at a well known villi^e,' .fatigued by a Ifiretty fong jouriney on foot, and, ere he retired to rest, requesting water to wash his feet. The siippte-hearted woman by whoraa4t Was brought,— a member of the independent C church in the neighboilrhood, intimated, with a sheepish but signifl- • cant modesty, her wish* to Show her regard for the Lotd'S servant, by % performing the ceremony for him. " !" said Mr. Ewing, in telling • the incident, laughing%eartUy, " little did she know ; it anybody had , but touched, or even brought a finger near, the soles of my feet, I'd have sprung up thn^gh the ceiling!"— I need not say he smilingly and courteously decMled the well-meant offer of service. ■^•. . t' . 40 INTRODUCTOBY OBSEBVAHONS. ,\ inward princij^les ; and, when one precise act is specified, of confining ourselves to that one act, fan- C3dng that in doing it ^e are following the exampie ; al^ough we should be disregarding all other acts whatever which the efxemplified principle binds us, and which the duei influence of it would prompt us, to perfoMu. Such is the unavoidably pernicious effect of regarding this act of the Saviour as ordaining the washing of feet, rather than as ordaining, in principle and practice, universal humility and love. It is just as if a professed disciple, pretending the desire of strict coK^onnityto his Master'^ will, were to interpi;:pt his words— " If any man, will come after me, let him take up Ms cross and follow me," as inculcating the duty of capying on the shoulder, as the badge of dis- 1 ciplfeship, two transverse bars of wood. That would \lbe a very convenient and easy way of evading all the Varieties of self-denial included in " the offe^fece of the <^08s." Equally convenient and easy is th^ evasion, by the, literal and limited interpretation," of the obnoxious lesson of kind and lowly condescension to even the least and meanest of the ISaviour's followers, mai^festly designed to be conveyed in the act of washing the feet bt his twelve diSciples.— It may be worthy of notice, as a general remark, that wteen such evasions are practisejd, and >c^s are substituted for prindples, the* act will come to be performed in a way that fosters the verv contrary principle to thltwhich i^ was meant 'to ex&pUfy.— Witness the moikery x>i conformity to Christ's example, in the Pope \irashing the feet of' his Cardinals! V I might have mentioned ayo?<>/// partiQiilar-lwhich has sometinie^ been cast in ou^ teeth, as a failWe in the appUcation of our own princi|)lfe :—Wliy,— it has r 1 -'4 * / 1 ^ w] lo v# ' is M 81! m te '■ " , < m :Ch :-:7 M * CO ■■.:/: 1 . th ve 1 qv ,w« m m i CO ' "' ■ 1 ■ \ca m 'm „,-.,.: .^,. 'V' •» act is ict, fan- campie ; ler acts inds us, mpt us, as effect ling the rinciple t is just Bsire of iterpi;:pt let him ting the ^ 3 of dis- t would ; all the e of the )vasion, of the ision to [lowers, ' act of may be en such Aed for a a way* t'which jkery x)f ashing 'i ' • . ' INTRODU(!!TOR^ OBSERVATIONS. 41 been asked, seriously or tauntingltfi^Why have not you yov4:y5t}e-fea8t8 /'—The answer w simple. There * is not, iu^ the New Testament, anything whatever that either indicates their nature, or establishes their authority, -^he "language of Jude-^in the only pas- sage that" can be construed into an allusioQ to them^ — " These are spots in your feasts of love,"— is evidently much too indefinite for the sole groun^of a divine institute: ; leaving us, as it does, in complete uncer- tainty even as to tt;Aa< //«e/msf« are to which it refers. There is not the slightest evidence in the pftssage of their being feasts observed by theln in their church mpainfy ; there being no feast of that description,' so far ^s appears, but one,— ihe Lord's Supper. How, then, can that be imitated, which is neither enjoined by precept, nor distinctly exemplified in practice ? — The idea that in 1 Cor. xi.-.tY— 22, the abuses of which the apostl© complaiifs were in these supposed love-feasts, observed antecedently or subsequently to the Lord's Supper, and not in the Lord's Supper itself, • is |;iot only a mere conjecture,— it is, I conceive, incon-4 sistent with the plain and obvious meaning of the terms in the passage./^ The idea has arisen from a charitable incredulity ttat Jb)ie church at Corinth could have fallen into an abnse so monstrous. But the charity, it is to be fea,ted, is misplaced. The very strong language of the/apostle, not in the veSj-ses quoted only, but in fhe whole subsequent context, may . well convince us that me abuse reprehended was indeed a monstrous ohe |/ even nothing le^ than tho, conversion of that sitople and Spiritual observance, under the perverting influence of misapprehension, carnality, and party-spirit, iito a common meal, and 'making it the scene even of intemperate eating and ' f {. 42 INTBODtJCTOR^ OBSERVATIONS. /] -i f drinking !-^uiitl it huH,! think with juMtice, been observed, that the language of the apostle, in expoa- * talating with the, erring chiuch— !* What ! have ye not houses to'eat and to drink in? or despise ye the ' church of God, and shame th^m that have not?" mo,y be fairly interpreted as involving a j3>-o/i/W/ia)i of such ^ feasting in the. assembli^ of the churches."* ' The question respecting the necessity of a jAurctUfy in tfie pastoi'afe of each church, may be noticed here- after, un4er its appropriate head. ' I shall clo^e these introductory observations by remarking, that the. maxim so judiciously laid down, . and so successfully applied,, by Dr. Paley, in the department of the evidence in physical nature for the being tod perfections of God, should not be forgotten . by us in regard to the discoveries of divine revelation'; —namely, that^" true fortitude of understanding con- sists in not suffering what we hioio to b^ disturbed by what we do not knoiv." — Our not being able, with certainty, to explain the use pi the spleen, can be no • reason for our hesitating about the use Of the eye; and its manifest and perfect adaptation to the ptur- [ poses of vision.— In like mdnner ; if , in the New u Testament we «an find, with satisfactory clearness, the great outlines in the^constittition and government of the churches of Christ, the obligation of what we *. do discover ought not to be affected by our not being' "able, from the same authority, lb solve every- diffi- \ culty, an'd to answer every -minute question, respect- ing times and modes, and circumstantials of worship, ■ wMch either -a sincere or a factious curiosity inay be pleased to suggest. ' - . / Orme's Catechism, Sect. II. Qnest. 17. '■''■■ ' ,.].-\ ,.-. ^ • .■ .'-^ix- , k" . ■ ;• - . ■' ' \ , ;-. • -t ' :^'M- CHAPTER II. : t ' ' .\v^ THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH, ANp NEW TESTAMENT v^ ■ v^* •'■' ^. '■^.- j\ CHUKCHEK. ; » -_:■"_■ .'":-,.■■ . ••■■''^^'v ■■>•■:.■.■■'■ ;- SECTION I. OENBBAL CIIARACTEBISTiCf!. t' "■ . ' ;■ ; ,, ■;■■ .,■■■;■ It was once my intention to have' introdnced here a general view of th^ constitution d£ the JeioishiChurch, under *th^ Old Dispensation, or the Theocracy. I have laid aside this intention, for two reasons. In the/r«/ pJ&ce, it is mot necessary to, the object of the pr^se^t treatfee ; which I am unwilling, thfereforS^to encumber ^vitli matter that is at^all extraneous,- or to sVel^ to an inconvenient size. And secor^lh/, recent discussions on the great question of Ecclesiastical Estabjiishments, have, to a very considerable extent,^ involved the points relative to the great and essential distinctions between the church under the Old and the church under the New Testament EcoUoiny:^ and, having taken my share in that all-important con- troversy, I shrink, sensitively, on different accounts, from repetition.— I waive, therefore, the entire range of such disquisitions ; the natuFe of the "theocracy, or Sinaitic coVenant; the constitution and ordinances of thfe church, when under that covenant; the union of the Church and the-State then, and the lawfulness or unlawfulness of any alliance between the Church and the State moio; with other topics of kindred » - *■ V '.^ '. ■ ■ ■• sv^ .■w, \\ "^~ -^. "^v. -•" i'.# ;;> t ■r/r I J I 7 44 THE NBW TESTAiqSNT CHUBCH. 1- * • t wnnld only bbserve in general, that a tSf rd«?^^^^ MessiZwas propbeticaUy announcJed vT S » holv meZf God who spoke as they were Lord hS fiiiisVe^d his work, ascended on high, a^d MfiU^i8%nise to pour out his Spirit upon his iSes to -lead them £to all truth." thus investing Tm wHh the authority of his accredited " ambassa- S' S vice-gerents on earth, these propheic ^rouncements lere verified m point of fact; he c^stitotion of the New Testament ^church being 3ed on principles, and after a model, as widely ^l^p^f^mthoseofthectochofls^^^^ ThHeadinV characteristics of ^the New Economy I. SPiMTUALrry.-We speak, of course, compara- •tivcly. The old economy was not entirely, ^ama^ noristhenewentirelrspiritual. .^Thyeason a^^d. by the Saviour for the necessity of Gods worship ^ l,;ing8piritual,-namely,tha^"GodisaS^t, 18> Reason pecnUar te no period; nor.. indeed, xmi we imagine him wh9 " searcheth the heart and tnetk the rems of the children of men" to have ^^\}r^ satisfied with servimi(!fed y were ter our ;h, and »on his iresting^ ibassa- )phetic 3t ; the being widely 'Israel. .. jonomy ^mpd^ra* camal^ #»igned . tvorship it," is a can we d trieth rer been m"had ensation ity, than pind pre- e of its worship, o nieans ard type !ceptab1e wrapped , 'S- i ^ i up, a state of heart in accordance with the import of the tj-p^j^ras requisite. It was in vain that the wor- shippers "drew ni{j[h to Jehovah with their mouth, and hoiioiuod him with their lipa," while they "re- moved their hearts far from him."*— But, as I have said, there was a great amount and variety of outward observances. As contrasted with the state of things that was to follow, it <*stood only in meats and drinks, and diverse wasliings, tod carnal ordinances, imposed on the worshippers Until the time of refonnation."t— . Yet nather is the system of worship under the new economy entirely spiritual ;^so spiritual, I mean, as to be confined exclusively to the heart, and to admit of nothiixg that is outward or corporeal. It is Just the inverse of the former ; it is characteristically, but not exclusively, spiritual ; so much, in the comparison, distinguished by its spirituality, as to entitle it to the designation/but not leaving altogether unap- pealed to the principle founded .in the complex con- stitution ^f our nature, by which what is external -is emplojfed to assist what is internal;— the eye to affect the heart ;— what is " touched, ^jaste^ and handled," to convey impressions to the minafand to confirm and deepen those already exiting. He 1^0 " knoweth what is in man " has not, under the new dispensation, entirely cast aside this means of gra- cious influence, but has retainecl just bo much of it. as accords witii the i)redominant character of spirit-' uality belonging to the dispensation. It has its outward acts of worship, and its symbolical observ- •Spel8a.i.,10-15. Isa. Ixvi. lJ;4. Jer.vLlS^. Prov.xv.8*; XXI. 27. Psa. Ixvl. 18. Amog v. 21— 24. Ac» /^ * t Heb. ix. 10.. ' >'■ ,■* < ■" ' ■ ■ ■. . i V ■^: ■ ■ '■ ^is THE^EW TESTAMENT CHURCH. 4^ 1 ial But tlie fewneiw .„„e», both f ""■;"' ^,tt™ a Btriking coatra-* .. worldly sananMJ-' j,^;^ diBtinetivo 2. tJNivm.«ALm.-I 'l"- ^-^ ^t mXf1^»^"i^ would have , siatency with *?'''""„. _^„„i„,, themaelves np m been their aim, ?«\ri™ i^^Sgea, to enUghten the pride of «'f ^X- J^^ b^ng the heathen the aurronndmg darKneas, fm ^ j to.ft to the knowledge »AJwora^V.i8C^»nt.-8tin, paHiclpatUm '"^^^^^^^ peeuUar. It •"C'Tfrald tr iTworld at large, bat for larad. ft '•'r^f -^t:;er tem;r S^angera were made- ' aa individual "/"'^ll'PP^^'jt^itt did „ot admit of but the ayatem itaclf was one -"^"J *; "°„ „^ „ot - tranaference._ " *»».''«»'"'l'^i°Xte ita ritea of competent for -J /«*-j;°?^,*°" ^^^toividu ,. wordiip among thfimselvea ^fyf^Xm; buT^t wor shi p at a toto°.-'^*he ?.xl of Abm h ^ . ^ must he:' to^aras his House at Jerusalem ■ U (;' k :%■ itraHt the ictivo Q that ve, so of Hs lot so. ;ople." slaters Pivine )eople ; for the in con- (l have ?» up in ilighten hteathten . md to. a t.— stm, liar. It ►r Israel, reasure." was his ere made- ameision, nation ;" i admit of [t was not its rites of lividual^y, ,m ; but it ■ ¥"; -•"*'-fiW^,^./- OENERAL CBARAGTEBISTICEI. 47 Yet, in this distinctive and peculiar system there was " no respect of persons with God." Though he had " chosen Israel," th*e choice had an ultimate view to the world at large. The system , though itself restricted, was introductory to oiie that was to be uuiyersal. The types and shadows were for the Jewji ; the spiritual import of those types and shaclows was, in common with the Jews, for mankind. The prophecies relative to the new economy were given and recorded in Israel; itho new economy itself was for the whole world.. The christian church was not, hke the Jewish^ to be national, but to be com- posed of believers out of all natioan ; these believers, though confined within no circumscribed locahty,but scattered over the face of th« earth, being united by a spiritual and permanent l)ond. The spiritual peo- ple, and " the better country even the heavenly" of which they are the heirs, and of Avhich many of them have taken possession, were typified^ respectively, by the " Israel after the flesh," and the" earthly Canaan, the land of promise, the "land flowing with milk arid honey."— And the constitution of this spiritual chm-ch, unlike that of Israel, is framed for univer- sality. The spiritual n and rouglit sind iff depar- Q their B been There le Bim- earth, ng the of the igdom. uracter iliinity ; erished ling to low the )etween 3 stable e incar- ;e to the ssiimed, lingness V, when. ' From the beginning to the end of his life, there was an entire absence of all worldly parade. There was a perfect contrast both to the studied magnificence of the princes of this World, and to the external gorgeousness of the Jewish economy.— And of the kingdom' which he came to establish, he himself said- — "The kingdom of Heaven cometh not with observation"— with outward show — with obtrusion on the senses. Between the history of his life, and the history of the Ipunding of his church after his ascension to heaven;^ there is a striking and delightful harmony :— and one of the characteristics of both is a divine simpUcity,— an unpretending lowliness, — a ^iritiial anti-worldliness. The Acts of the Apostles are a suitable sequel to the Gospels ; the dpCcount of the church, to the account. of its founder. There* is glory in both ; but it |s not earthly glory ; — it is the glory of principle, ilie glory of character, the glory of heaven, the glory of God. The manner in which spirituality, universality, and simplicity characterize the scriptural con^tution of the church, will, We trust, be apparent as we advance. SECTION II. WHAT is A CHURCH OP CHRIST? Words of general import frequently come, in the practice of language, to have definite and restrictive acceptations. Hence it must ever be a very preca- rious criterion by which to determine the sense of any term at any particular stage in the history of a language, merely to ascertain its etymology, and its Ktrictly etymological import. The application of this — -t^ — -^ — ■ ■ — ,-4 ly- ^ ■ ','S __._^^. ■■i^^ m 60 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. -I ». ■. .,,,■. criterion has led, and cannot laU to lea^, to many palpable mistakes. The reductionof a word from a general to a limited and appropriate use may be gradual, and the result of successive circumstances ; or it may arise from its happening to be applied, within a particular department, to some one species of the genus which it designates ; thus retaining its generic meaning on other occasions^ but haviiig a jfixed and specific'' one within 'that department.— Thus it has been, remarkably,. with the word in the New Testamenti which wcrender church.* It means, generically, an a«SemW«/; perhaps, in etymologic! ' strictness, a sdect assembly,— an assembly of perr callal out, or summoned, for any purpose ; but ' iism loquendi, it is employed, indiscriminately, ior an assembly. In tjiia its generic sense, it is applied, in the New Testament histo"rj%— (Acts xix. 41)— to me con- vention at the time of the Demetrianriot ot Epheisus, which was a tumultuous concourse of people, of whom "the gi-eater part kijew not wherefore they were come together."! •£««/!.;?()/«.— In English, we have not adopted the noun; but we have adjectives and adverbs from it, which are as strictly appropriated as the word c/iwrcA itself. EcdefiasUcal, in distinction from civU, denotes invariably what ^belongs to ihe church:— m ecclesiastic, not a man who hold* or frequents dssemhlies or public meetings, b^itone con- nected by office with the church.— Tho word church itself has usually been understood to have its derivation from the Greek xvptaxoi to which the Scottish form of the word makes a still nearer approxima- tion,— fcirfc. Archbishop Whately, however," after stating the corres- pondence between the word congregatUm in the 02d Testament and the word church in the New, says resnecting the latter—" This, or its equivalent "kirk," is probably no othei^han "circle ;" i. e. " assembly, Ecclesia."— " The Kingdom of Christ delineatetl,^^ motion of the interests of true religion in the world around them. Of its occiirrence in this acceptation, ' It is uhnecess&ry to quote particular instances.' They^ aliouj^d. ' Read the .New Testaihent ; and ^yoii ynh find no occasion for-.profpund learning' or \critipal , ' acumen, Ifo satisfy you of the uniform consistency, m, this .respect, of its whole phraseology. "N^enapar^; * ticular^lace-^a tow^pr city— 1^ «^oien pf^ wfe hkv6 ^s. the cMp'ch int tk&t pla,Ge,:-^and wheh d, rejgion^ ordfs- ^ trict of country, is referred ti^, we havqlthfi e^iircJi&i'.f in that district. Thus .we read of the^hiurch at . Jerusalem; Acts.viii. 1 ; xi. '^2— ol ^the church at Antioch, Acts 'xBi. 1 ;, xiV.* 27— of the^dhurch at^i^ Corinth, ;i Cor. i: 2— of the church &% CenchreaT ROm. xvi. 1— of the church atPhiHppi, Phil. iv. IS' ' —of the chilrch a^Laodic^ai Col. iv. IjS.^On the other hand, we read of tjie churches of Graiati^,*Gal.. ^i. 2; 1 Cor. xvi. l--of the cWches of Macedonia, ' 2 Cor. viii. l—^{ the churches of Syria and Qilici^,' Acts XV. 41 — of the churches through<$ut JTudea, and * Galilee, and Samaria, Acts ix. 31— of the churdh at » Ephesus, the church "at Smyrna, the church at Per- gamos, the phArch at Thyatira, the chur churches of Holland and of France ; as well as of the various counties, shires, provinces, and departments, of each,— the churches of Yorkshire, Lancashire, Lanarkshire, Dumfriesshire, «fee.,— the churches of tJlster, Leinster, Muiister, and Connaught, or of their respective coimties ;— -the diurches of tte Depart- ment of the Alps, of the P^nnees, of the Seine, of the Ehone, of the Loire, « f 9 '\ \ ^' i 1 '^/ > /^ tTNAUTHOBISED USES OF THE WOBD ckuRCH. 55 — and whien a church, — it signifies any associated section of that aggregate, meeting in one place. ' There is no third sense, so far as I can discoveF, in which the word rendered cliufch^ when it has refer- ence at all <» the kingdom, of tphrist, is there used. V Other senses, however, have been .affixed to it, and New Testament autl^oiitj has been claimed for them. These, therefore,^ we must briefly exajnine. m SECTION in: 4 Y TINAUTH0BI8ED, USJS jOP THE WOBD CHURCH. I. tinder this 'head, I have first to notice the designations, of wl^ch the use is so common, but so vague,--^f the church mfiihle' upA the chui'ch mystical or invisiUe.—'Were the^ designations to be found in ' the New Testament, we -should feel om'selves under obligation to examine and ascertain the sense in which the inspired tilllBlfe use them. This, howevei*,- not being 'the case, we are under no such obligation,— j have no objection, to admit' the distinction between the church visible and the church invisible, as sub- .' sisting under the Old Economy, wlien. th^ Jewish people were; natioflally and under the theocracy, the church of Go4, and when, at the same^ time, the true spiritual chtttchpxisted aiiiQn^st them, consisting of all such as were really possessors of *' like precious ' faith" \\ith Abraham ; inasmuch as tliis^^ is no more than the distinction so fiequently insisted upon bj the apostle, between Israel after the flesh and Israel after the Spirit,— the natural and the Spiritual seed of Abraham. Biit the national covenant having ^1 X ^ \ V:^■ ;. »•» 66 THE NJBW TESTAMENT CHURCH. ceased at the fulij^ss of time, and all succession in* nationality having been precluded by the uen cn8ti- fytion then given e tl^at there is a d.iffic^ty mu^ for- midable on the otheriside.— Neither wot^djblock up my heftrt.and jrestrainj the flow of pleasure with which every christian must contemplate the widening succesfit of *• the i«-eaching of the cross,"— trying, for the ,sake of an, argument relativte to the external order of ihe church, as much aspospble to reduce numbers, which a becoming desire for jts spiritual extension should tejoice to understand in their most enlarged amount. —But let us see how the case, in regard to our argu- ment, actually stands. Observe, 1. If there were in Jerusalem a number of distinct christian congregations, each with its oAvn office-' bearers,— it is surely a very extraordinary thing that", through the entire course of the narrative, or of the epistles, not a single hint of such a plurality should be di^overable. If so it was, is it not natural to conclude that so it would have' b^en represented ?-i^ There was no difficulty in expressing it. Why, then, wasit not expressed? J, >i^^ » ^^ '• 2. We have akeady seen that, invariably, whenever a place is mentioned, we have the singular— c/iwrc/i, and whenever a district, the jilMral-^hurches. Here, , then, is a dilemma. If the church at Jerusalem means a number of congregations in one,- ihen do^ea^ each of the churches in Judea mean a number of congre- gations in one ?--£iiid, if not— if cacA of ^e churches in Judea means one congregation, on what principle is the church at Jerusalem to be interpreted as meaning. mor e ? — T f i t be a d mit ted,— and how c a n it b o doni o d ? A *.. - , -that each of the churches in Judea means a single ,«« . 9' • .1 ..\ A V y ^l^" -_ ;' .M *■ 62 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHUECH. ■.K :.\ •V '' congregatipiij^then, if there were many conceptions in Jerasalem, why are they not called eAwrci/^s too?— ^ Why this distinction between the phraseology regard- ing a city, and the phraseology regarding a district ? 3. In the only account on record of the election 'and ordination of office-bearers in the church at Jeru^lem, the election>. agreeably to apostolic de- cision and order, is tyy the wliole body of the dis- ciples, and the ordination is /(»• the whole. J refer to the election and ordination .oJ^the seven deacons^ \^ Acts vi.— On that occasion,^ " tij^^ twelve called the \ multitude of the lUscipks unto them ;" and to the whole, when thus convened, they spid-*" Look ye out among . you seven men of honest report and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business" — namelj^ the ''serving of tables," or providing for the pdof.— If there were various congregations, why should tnere not be deacons for each? — and if, as some conjec- ture, the diflferent congregations were according to the different foreign languages spoken by Jews from different countries, we might ask with the gi'eater emphasis, why, when the complaint which lecl to the appointment of deacons was by the Greciam against the Hebrews for the neglect of their widows, why was not this neglect, and the possibility of repeated com- plaint, prevented for the future, by the congregations of the Grecians having deacons of tJmr own ? — The argument, indeed, from the case in the sixth chapter of the Acts is twofold. We have, first of all, in the fact of their actually meeting in one assembly, a proof that they co2iW meet in one assembly :-^they didy— therefore they cowic?,— being a kind of proof which lew, one should think, will except against.^-And we have, seco^y, the fact of the officers being chosen iV . UNAUTHOBISED USES OF THE WOBp CHURCH, 63 hy the whole /or the wlA, arid ordained over the ^hole.^Aiid this lead^e to notice— 4. There is a'cojitinuance, throughout the whole history, of the sami6 phraseology about their meeting in one assembly/ It is uniform. Without referring to any passaged in which it may be disputed whether the reference is to the disciples generally, or to the apostles in particular,— we have, in Acts ii. 44, "AH • that believed"— that is the hundred and twenty and , the three thousand mentioned just before,—" icere to- ff ether f—nov is there the remotest intimation of ^ more congi-egations than one, when of this company it is said— Terse 42—" they continued steadfastly in the apostles'^doctiine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers :"-:rthen in Acts vi. 2, " The multitude of the disciples" called togethei; by the apostles, for a special purpose of common interest, the appointment of deacons :-^ih Acts xv, 12, at tlie meeting relative to the point of inquiry and reference from Antioch, "«7? the midfifude^keeping silence, and giving audience to Paul and Barnabas, and " {he luhole church" concurring in the resolution to "s6nd chosen men" along with Paul and Barnabas, to An- tioch ; and " the brethren" joined with the apostles and elders in the decision ^nd in the message :-^and further on stiU, in Acts xxi/20— 22, at the very time when James and the. elders speak of flie "many myriads* of Jews who believed," we find them saying " the 7iudiitude mmt needs come together ; for they will hear that thou art come." Thus, then, stands the/ac«. Theue is not one word ' in the entire narrative, indicating' the existence of • "Thousands" in our English translatioo ; "myriads" in the original.— The passage will eome to be noticed soon again. •»«»■ *-'i'^r -r _%*<__ ■ #' 64 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. distinct congregations ; ^-— at every stage o|' its pro- gress, there are express not|ces of one assembly ; — this one assembly is called the church; — there can be no doubt of there having been one assembly at th difficulty is surely not less iii supposing an inspired writer to affirm as a matter of fact what was an impos- sibility, and what therefore, a^an impossibility, never took place !— Between these two diffici^ties I dare not hesitate. It is a hazardous thing to place con- jectural impossibility in opposition to recorded fact ; especially when the authority' recording it is that of inspiration. Th§*^^course, surely, which, in such a case, most becomes us, is, since we cannot deny ihe . fact, to consider whether there be any circnilnstances by which the difficulty it seems "to present may. bo removed, or at least mitigated. This is clefttly the natural and proper procedure. H our presbyterian brethren smile atvour credulity in believing that the : ^_ . '. . . -■■■-■'■..■ . . ;'...'•'— - JL >_- '^ ■■ . » - ■ - - t # A f . " tf ■» t V, -T^ip^fc^^a^Eii-u g'fyjj*- g"t% , T^ ^^ ny i^: % t UNAUTHOBISEP USES OP THE WORD CHURCH. j65 many thousands could meet in one plake for the or- dinary purposes of their worship,— we cannot exactly return the smile ; we ratlier look, grave to see them treating that as credulity which is no more than the belief of the divine record. We take the fact as we find it, and believe, that, if w6 only had more infor- jnation, the difficulty would disappear, and the con- viction follow that it was a diffic^ty owZj^ to vs. Fur- ther than this I do not feel myself bound to go. It is not necessary to my argument that I should solve the difficulty, and make the possibility of such numerous assemblies obvious. I have already dis- owned the heartless course of trying to make the numbers of converts as small as possible. But still, there are considerations, in mitigation of the diffi- culty, which it would be wrong to overlook. • 1. We have seen, that the inspired hi^orian does, on various occasions, mention the assembling of I'the whole multitude" of the disciples in Jerusalem in one place. On these occasions the fact is stated, ^without the remotest hint of any difficulty existing. The probability, therefore, is, that there existed none. 2. It is matter of notoriety, that the Jews were accustomed to assemblies of vastly larger numbers of people, even on ordinary occasions, than we are ; and that the precincts pf the temple admitted of such assesablies. We need not go to Jose^us, or any other uninspired authority, for this. We may take one of the very passages in the Acts of .the Apostles, that is usually adduced against us, 'as sufficient proof of i*--Acts iv. 4, " Howbeit, many of them who heard the word believed ; and the number of the men was about five thousand." — Our brethren twit us with the question— how could these five thousand, .■1»^' ''/■^ »■ ' VO THE NEW TESTAMENT 0HI7BGB. and the previous three tho^Spiid, and t|ie m'any that . continued to be " added unto them," meet in one place? But what, I would ask in retunij must have been the number of the congregation addressed by Beter and John on this occasion, irhen .in that con- gregation, the male converts cdone amounted to five thousand I Tliere is not the least likelihood, thatV this "five thousand" was anymore than a compare atively small fraction^of the entire auditory; while that auditory might be'a fractiobi no larger of the vast aggregate of people that were wont to crowd to Jerusalem" at the public festivals ;— an aggregate, ac^ cording to the Jewish historian, amounting, with the resident inhabitants/to from two to three millions. And yet this vMt auditory, the preceding chapter informs us^ waPcoUecteUin^the^prehr^iiat was called Solomon's." A stated assembly, th^-efore, even of many thousands,, though strange to us, might have, and probably hjtd, little in it at all e'itraor- ' dinary tofthem. y/ i , /i'* « / , 3. Without fee^g eit^r need or wish to diminish the number o^onvert^belongiiig to Jerusalem, it must not WoveriookecPthat the iiiipression would be a very j^oneous one, wer6 it cpnceived that on all occawons where numbers are mentioned, they include/only resident iahabitants of the city. It was otherwise at the very outset ; the audience^ on the day yof pentecost, when the three thousand were con- ' verted, consisting of jeWs "out of every natioii undej: heaven." ^e mention made too of " many myria^ M believing Jews," in Acts xxi."20, has reference to;^ /the time of a public festival, when, being "all^ zealous of the law," this very zeal, and the anxiie^ to sho^ it under their n^ profession, should bring *\. ■\ . .:^i:l V;.>»>"- -. ■ %: IP ► 1 F" S .... %* UNAUTHORI^DL uses of .the word CHtJRCI^ ^&t them from all Judea and from th^ more distftnt residences. iThere is no. evidence,— there is eveiy- tjiing the opposite of evidence,— that these "my- riads" were oneant to include only the# Members of the chtirch in Jerusolenl. . \ But, be theie things as tjjey may, tfiey are men- ipned, not as beijj^g at all necessary to my argument. —That argument' lies in the short compass already ^ , stated. The narrative- ifepeatedly and expressly aflSrmsof '*the church., in Jerusalem,"— ^e multi- -4^tude of the disciples,"— "the whole multitude,"— that they came together in one place; that they met" inj)ne body: Surely it cannot be necessary to my believing this, that I should be able to tell with cer- taihty ?yAere and 7jof(7;Tto ascertain the -place, and jA-ove its suitableness^find cohvenienee ! " On the authority of the Book. which contains it, I am pre- pared to believe greater' difficulties than this ; being persuaded that it is one which' Urises solely from deficicAcy of informt^ion,— and that deficiency itself from the difficulty not ha^g beei^i^t by the wri- ters, but Ibeing one of after times and other countries. When a difficult^has been oace assumed, nothing is easier than to theorize upon it; to almoslHj^ ex- tent. The^^^sam^ diflScultiy has been started with regard to Ephmcs: In that A||atic city, the narra- ^tive in the Actis informs tis, thiininistry of Paul was signally successful. After the. record of one of, his mfracles,*and of the disgracefui failure of an attempt • at imitation, it is added :—"Ab€l this was known to ^ all the Jews and Greeks also dvfelling/'at Ephesus; and fear fell on them aU, and the name of the Loi:d Jesus was magnified. AAdmai^ that believed came, and c6nfessed, and showed thjbir deeds. Mnn y nf » ... '.-!■ ¥ : - I i- s l.\ I Mk *'f. 68 'Fir* I used cunouB jtrt^„. ^ht them al80.,™_.,_ _^__^^^,_,^_. .^„^ Ji)ooks tocA^^^d l>i^ii^.,iiiei]^ l)efdl^/ttli menL " fifty thol|pi|!yyM^ jpo mi^jli^y gnew< T the wqrd at; <|f^f|m|SA^^^ *^ OoQipaire ^ \\ Mj^ijf'' ^^MK^0^^' " ^he facts that th^^ ^^ffiwlii^^^ building^ for! divine w^^m |-^|^^^^^i|^]jj^^ K) jeal(lttiM^|r thl^^^mll^^d %)|>erstitibnB^ and ^powerfii|l^ii0'airQt|'the'V)|^^ of N^a- c|^. on %|llr Wri^p $A one lorge Company l,^4n timy^l)^ stf ejBt i^^^lipd asK, what must have been th^cQn|4u^ncestotjwchris^aiis? i '^hel'e and how cotild .l^^l^^b^asing iiiultilu^es'liay0- worshiped the Xwdl»l%id,?';'&c .*— '^qphu8|' Iji fe,a«ided, " a mnltiplicqii^^i^ccmgi'^atio^s wlis reMeit^d inevitable. ;, \ l^i^isthVfiyatst'e^P'— And^'firstate^lakhoiil'dbe a^ ', ; «\tre o^-wii*^ SQj^uph is to'^e ma^e,6f it.' This , . !'^ m^^«ity qi ^congregations*. ^mishes ' very con-' , / ' yel^tlyi.*^ ^«6eese; ,iind the" 'Sngei of the church ;; ^ ot ^h;eSilsVjb6 but ' (^ Archbishop q^ Asia, comprehMadbg all the seven * ^ ' under his- arc^iiepiscopal jyriaJfflbn.t-^nd all this ^£ V * M«N#e'a " Lettiwes on tijo Church of England.*'— pp. 37, §8. ; ~V. r :t Mr. M'Neile, indieeiMhFUh ninch adroitnesB, turns 4116 absence of ~ ;^ «»ch a dignitary byejrth^ishops of the Asiatic dioceses into an argu- ment againstpopciry .--"In his (our Lord's) addresd to seven angels i of seven churches in- Asia, we have his sanction for the subdivision, ^ M .» t '■\ vl^AIITHOBIBED USES OP THE WORD CHURCH. 69 -■h- :\^.' id, without the least hint of doubt or diffi- though of all thp seven cities, which were eaUties of this seven churches in Asia, not one ^ fi^^Jnuch as mentioned in the inspired narrative, excepting Ephesus ;* so that we are absolutely with- out the slightest information about the introduction of thfe gospel into any one of thetu, or of the amount of its subsequent success. But from the solitary case of Ephesus the conclusion is drawn, that in each of |hese cities, as well as there, there was the same difficulty of accommodation for the augmenting niid-' titude of converts, the same sulbdiviision into various congregations, and the same union of these congre- : gationa^ in one church or ecclesiastical diocese.— How very much from how very little ! How very little, even as to the one case Of Ephesus itself J That there were more "believers there than could asseniblci in one place, is an affirmation resting on no direct groiind, but onlvj^^j^j^oi^t^ difficulties, of whose. the geog|^^ical sabdiTision, of episcop&lBuplrintendaBce; and more a^ Jpti9) we have the foreseen usurpa^on of a primacy j o* universal bisbop'over the whole chtirch, pojntedlj condemned. There is an angel over »H the pastors in l^heaus: tfiis excludes independency. Thwe li" not an angel over.ajl'the Dost«i!g|iJjb^;--this excludes popery ?"-^Were *li^^l!eflig|^^|P^||^WirtAsia .«' the wAoie .^urcft?" How »^onimi6WK^?^%iW^eCi^^ pastor*! ti^ote ekareh ^^^^d^Bveguall^y xpndemnlil^^^ section of the' chdr^'ISI- tbii archbohdip of QjiiAerbury jk Totk.^ Hually with the Pope -of RSme?' ^ ,^'V ' ^^ * *^ « - ^ Tktfotiramdeed is menti<^|iea ^^^cts xyf 14, llut^nly a» the \ place to wnPrLydy^,^n4resp|iitatTbil{ppf, belonged. In thenar^ V rative of the progiiHs.oT the gospel it is not romA.-^0aa^eeaixmb J^' mentwned in "Waal's q)i8tle to t^.^Coijpssilins, as a "place #Uch bad ^ 'recei^d the gospel, anfwh( ' -* -fc> preach|ng of the truth the: DBTecord. / i.- '* 1*^ .**»' . -i ■^ ■;«. # tre were believers ; but dilBe first . jmber of the convertsj^ W'Mt ... St' V .■**■••%■ i.rt)i9P' 70 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. amount very different estimates may be formed by different minds. All the direct evidence lies the other way. We hare seen that the ordinary use of the word church is for a single congregation ; and that there is no certain instance of its signifying an association of such congregations :-^and to this may be ^dded, that when Paul summoned " the Elders" ol this church to meet him at Miletus, he addressed them all as frwAop* ; not one as bishop, and the rest AS the clergy of his diocese, the pastors of their res- pective congregations, — buf all under the common designation of bishops,— Acts xx. 28,— fellow-presby- ters and feUow-bishops of the same church.— The only.iustance in which any of the other seven churches of Asia is mentioned elsewhere than' in the book of Eeyelation, is certainly not one that favours th^ notion .of its having c<>nsisted of a variety of congre- gations, but evidently, on the contrary, that of its having been a church in the ordinary use of the word. It is Col. iv. 15, 16— "Salute the brethren who are in Laodicea,— And when this epistle is read among yoM, cause that it be read also w tJte church (f, the Laodiceans.'^ yhere is only another instance which I have seen alleged in proof of the word church having the sense of a number of associated congregations. It is 1 Cor. i. 2, compared with } Cor. xiv. 34.— In the former of these passages, it has been said, "the church of God which is at Corinth" is addfessed collectively; and yet, from the latter, that church appears to have con- sisted of more than one :—« Let yowr women keep silence in the churches."— To this it is sufficient to reply— That the two epistles to the Corifllhians, though addfessed. no doubt, primarily in t he church \ s^ .1 / .v- \! j>: UNAUTHORISED USES »P THE WORD CHURCH. 71 in Cdriuth, happen, botli of tUem, to have nijack more general inscriptions ;— that of thei second being " to the church of God Vhich is at Corinthi with aU the aaimis which are in ^all Adma ;^'X—-&hd that of the firat morel bompreherisive still,— the most compre- hen£dv6, indeed,^ any of the epistles, either of Paul or of the other apostles-j" to the church of God which is at Corinth, toifh all thaty in every placet cdttupontlte nmne of our Ijord Je8U8 Christy hoththeira awd oMrl?.'*— It is surely no matter of wonder, that in JBuch an epistle he should be found speaking at one time more restnctedly, and at another uiere large%<^ and ^generally. That the church at Corinth itself con^|ste(iof ^but one assembly, is siifficiently^ clear, nojfe. frbm the correspondence merely of the use of ^ the word when so understood with its ordinaiy use in other places, — ^but from the express language of ^e epistle respecting the meetings of the church. " Thus, in the very connexion- in which the words under consideration occur, we fii\d, at verse, 23,— "If therefore, the tvhde cJmrch be come together into one place, and all speak with tol||;aes, and^here con^e in the unlearned or unbelievers, will they "hqt say jthat ye are mad?" — These words have obv-ionstfeference to the meMings of the one church at Corinth^; — while verse 34, refers to the churches in general, a^ included in the more e^iwded address of the epistle. —Thus, too, in 1 Commi, If 20, " Now, m this that I declare uhta yqpTt praise you not, that ye cometo^mer, not for the, better, but foy the worse :— for, first of all', when ye come iogeihevin the church, I hear that there be djmsionis among you :—— when ye coTfie together, therd||fre, into 07ie /pZacfe, thiols not -t*. .» ^■"f^- ■/ 7 •- 72 'Wit' #**•' i THE NEW TKfirr^MBNT CHURCH. authorized uses of ^e word church, I have not ' thought it worth w^to notice the application of it, » " now so common wM^vs, to jiaces (f worship. Jho ' passage last mentiolflW is the only one in the New Te^ament wherelgl]^ is the slightest possibiUty of Its being so undeM)od. Their " coming together in— the Church, howei?er, will by no reasonable critic be ao interpreted/; There is.^o evidence of the word having so early come to be^^ used in this acceptation. The meanmg plainly is, fheir coming together in assembly*— in their collective or church capacity •— ^th* ' same as when it js added, i« the 20th verse, ^' when, : tiierefore,yecometogetlieri'nto,jonc;jface." No word here of different congregations. There is one dhurch —one assembly, «5^ %. ■ \ ^ m. i mention, thirdly, as Ae last butJUol^eleast ',« important of what I conceiveto be uni^thoriiWjises ^ of the word cA«rcA— the appUca«| of #ko the^fcc--"^ ■ pedrerso/the church apart from tMhrethren^—ox as it IS Jjually e;^ressed, to the ckukch ^;emesentalive. >.P***?® ^'''** ^^*'-'• ■ ■ ■.•■■■, ■ %.m:. P-- • ' ■ . J«'- ■"-■■'. . " ■ ; ..•,'. ■ # V ^ -: -I-", Xfc-^ «i*>.->- IWAUTH0M8ED U8ES OF TH^ WORD CHURGH. 73 cussed) J^ing chosen by tlie church, and ordained over it.--Kow it does not seem very likely, a priori, that the same Word should bo used to denote not only the body of believers apart from theiilfofficers, but also their officers apart from them. We ask for ex- amples of tflfc.use of thevirord in the New Testament. We are direcfed to Matt, xviii. 15-^17. In this im- poi:tant passage, our Lord lays down the law for his disciples ip cases of private trespas8,T-of one of them having au^ against anotjjier. The law itself does not come lA^r our present notice. We have now to da only-wjflRhe last^step in the process— " Tell it unto the chur^fe. and even here only with the ques- tiow^Wjiat isM^nt by the (shurchMo which lies the #final appeal? "^H ^ In Miswer, then, t^his inquiry, I would, first of ' all, observe, what seems a fair rule of general criti- cism,— that in any particular pasftage, a word should be understood in the iense in which it is commonly used, unless reasons of necessity, or, at the leasfof sfarong propriety, can be shown for understanding it otherwise. Wo have formerly pointed out the two senses of the word church that are prevalent in the New Testament,— naittsjy, the universal spiritual com- ' munity of the faithful, ind any particular congrega- tion of beUevers. It »>needless to spend time in showing that, in the passage under review, it is not in the former of these senses that the word is used. It se^ms, then to be a fair and reasonable sequence, that it ought ta l?e understood in the latter,— unless > third Berne, fistmished by uaagci cfm be pointed out, and cause shown why it should in this case have the P'gfe^ence. Can «ich a third sense. thenYthus estab- ,^.. Jiahed, be produced? Unless it can, we^e entitied 1 ■ i 4 -■ i H THE NEW TESTAMENT CHUBOH. h to regard the affirmatiol that such thu-d sense is its sense here as no better than a begging of tJte question ; unless another point can be made out,— namely, that there is in the nature of the thing what precludes the possibility of its ordinary sense being i& sense here. -s-We obserre, then,— " ^ 1. That, while no previous proof is attempted of the word church meaning in other instances the representative officers of the church, — nei(/ in his Prize Essay on the oflSce of Ruling Elder, makes the same candid admis- sion witii Dr. Campbell :—" I consider it a fair inter- pretation of the word •«xxA7(yi«' in this passage, to view it as descriptive of a christian assembly, an assembly of professing christians. In this sense, the term is generally, though not always, to be under- stood in the New Testament. I am aware that some limit the term in this place to an assembly of office- bearers, and consider it as equivalent to the word # 4; UNAUTHORISED USES OF THE WOIU) CHURCH. 76 aeasion or presbi/tenj. Others extend the meaning of ' it to all the members of a worshipping society, and consider it as equivalent to the word coiigregation. This latter meaning is the one, which, after a careful examination of the authorities on both sides, I am incKned to adopt."— pages, 42, 43. This, I say, is candid. I am sorry I cannot say the same for what mimediately foUows:~"But the question occurs,— What kind of congregation does it denote?— not cer- tainly a congregation mV^aw^ rnlets; but a congrega- tion consisting of two classes of persons, naineiy, the private members and the elders. The scriptural proof in support of this statement, I shall afterwards more fully adduce."— In adducing it he did a very useless thing. Who ever denied his position? My friend stirely knows better, than to suppose independents to onderstand the church or cmgregatimi here as mean- ing the brethren, without and independently of their office-bearers. No, ceri;ainly. For although, in such special oases as when the apostles and evangelists are said to have " oirdained elders in every church," the word has this meaning, the churches being in existence before the elders were set apari^over them; yet they understood the word cAtffa ^signifying* strictly and properly, a christian socM^r&ized tvith lis appropriate officers, accord^g to to^ mind of Christ, and as fulfilling its functions accordingly.— I am glad, therefore, to findDr. M'K. thus, inad- vertently, (to use the very convenient term of our Scottish Church Courts) ^»«%a gopd,i% » / ■■ .* » e ■ ,* ■ UNAUTH0BI8ED USES OF THE WORD CHURCH. 77 constitution of thfese churches. But, when we have once ascertained this, the supposed allusion becomes useless. We find out the allusion by first finding out the point itself yirhich the allusion should have helped us to discover. We discover the aUusi^ from the fact, and then prove the fact from the allusion.— And, further, when we have found out the conformity so far as it at all exists, we have no liberty or right whatever to press that conform- ity one jot beyond the boundary fixed by the record of apostollic precept and example.'-But,~/S'eoowrf?y, it is on the ground of this very allusion that Dr. Campbell translates it hero "congregation." He shows that the Hebrew word, in the Old Testament, whicl^-is rendered in the Septuagint hj hKH\.rj6ia, '' is used in two different but related senses"— the one, " a whole nation^ considered as cons^utiiig one com- monwealth or polity; in which sense the people of - Israel are denominated na6a t)- innXt/dfa IdpariX and yjtada y kKxXrfdta Geovi the other a particular w^jore- gation or assembly, either actually convened, or ac- customed to convene, in the same place.'.' " In this serise," hie continues, "it was applied to those who • were wont to assemble in any 'particular Synagogue ; for every synagogue had its own i'««A77^,«., And, as- the word dwayooyrf , was soinetimes employed *to signify, not the house, but the people, "^these two Greek words were often iised promiscuously. Now, as the nature of things sufficiently shows, that our LOrd,^ in this direction, could not have use4 'the word in *he first of the two senses above given, and » k -* ^required tha^ every private quarrel should be-fiiade S^f /^^^**^?^*^ a^"** we are under the necessity of un- !>^ -v^Qf^erstaiiding'it jn the lia^t, as regarding the pai^iculajp * .k .. (• . t .; Jt, '■. k ■ «'-;^i^:4- ib^ 78 THE. NEW TESTAUEMT CHURCH. CQUgregation to whiqh the party belonged, ^at- . adds great.' probability to this, as Lightfoot and others hiave observodi is the evidence we haye that the K!ke usia;ge actually obtained in the synagogue a/d in the primitive (^ulrch. Whatever foundation, therefore, there may , be, from thosp books of scrip- . tuire that concern a later' period, for the ttQtion pf a " church representative; ilwoiild be contrary to all the • rules of driticism, to supjjose that our Lord uses this • word in a sense wherein it, couldlnpt then be under- • stood by/\any one 6f M^'hearers; or that he- would j^ay ^on^rMion, for so the word literally imports, when he meant only a few heads or directors."*--. , .Thirdly, the word fpr c}mrc]^ (as CHunj^pll; indeed; • in the above citation^ hints) when it waa used of the synagogue, liever signified the riders^'me synagogue. There was a tlistinct and 'appropriate .term for tlleiji, ./which, had it Vbeen our Lord's intention that th^then' fut|ire^goverhjii€)nt of his church should be a repi'e-'i ". sentativa one, and that complaints Were, by aggrieved,' ' \ parties; to be Md tjefore the rulers of the chttrches -- * alone, and by t^iem decided, he most assuredly, would " 'have used. That appropriate word was the prM>y-- . •^e/-^;— and if it be said, that "Tell it unto jthe ^ ehurch" oj- asseipbly, might be\ised for « Tell it to f thepresbyt^iy,"— we reply, it is ^ot, to say the least . of it, very liiiply, that a^ure of ^eech, of doubtful ^ J^rt, would be used-^W rule . demanding explicit- : Ufiss and felea^inteUigil5|iy.>v Who would ever think ]M say^g igy a presbyterian^ll it to |/v \; ^ tot no tio 'mil ii8e suf the his wai do\ the kin kin ,Ma 'Son 'tier "Spi 'Loi futi kinj elnti cha firsi ist] sufi tioD tion tioi thei hftv abo min -} •\ ■.' • ( tJNAUTHOBiaED U8ES OP THE WORD CHUBCa, , 79 ♦ I am;^able, for my own part, to see the necessity for any such allusion. Dr. Campbell says--" I know no way of reaching the sense of our Xord's instruc- tions, but by understanding his words so as they , 'must have b^en understood by his hearers, from the me.that^henprebdiM:' But this proceeds on an as- sufttptionjfhich ' have clearly, understood^ <^e direc.tions given toth«m ' about the |)rincip|es and practices of its future ad- ministration^/^ this way, the i);^^se meaning of ° 4 I - •'-( ,% 4r. '< r j: »"»» Ijfci^' ^ X. '<^. THE WEW TESTAMjarr CHiOBOH. •, & ■■■''■'■■■■ 'I the words of^Cbe Lord will fall to be ascertained • 'from the ftjibseqiient record of apostolic practice, and from the gioiiasels given by apostolic authority. A ' Ifule isi ||id dowii by the Master jt)ro«pec«tv%, for the subjects (S^his oy^ spiritual kingdom ; and the terms ' etnployed by him ought to be understood according to the sense in :^hich they are afterwards, by hjs inspired and commissioped vice-gerents, applied to the constitution. and transactions of the New Testa- ment church.— And thjw we are still left to inquire, _ on what occasions i% are found using the word cAwrcA' f<# the cAMrcA**^ers, or in the sense of a christian congregation, or christian congregations, as represented (n the persons of their office-bearers? If there was an allusion at all to the synagogues, it is obvious that the extent of the allusion, the amount of conformity meant by it, mu^t Ibe ascertained by an appeal to the subsequent historical records and inspired Directory. 4 Make the supposition, that in the ^ord exxirfdia ~^hurch,---iher& is an allusion to the synagogue, and make the further supposition, that by the church -s meant its rulers, as the authoritative tribunal of ^ppeai;— let it be specially observed, that, be the lUusion what it may, the exHXTfdia, the church, is the ^nal appeal. We are reminded by our presby, , terian -brethren, that " there was a. right of appeal ^ from the. determination, of the rulers of a particular synagogue to their great sanhedj'im, o? council of seventy," a^d thus the supposed allusion is made one of the stones in the basis of their courts of review ; «o that "as in JFewish courts, it is the elders alone ' who are entitled to govern a particular congrega- tion, and these again are subject to the authoritative T ^ \ # • jseen wore . rulei * " \ . i" '1 >■ UJIAUTHORIZED USES OF THE WORD CHURCH. 81 review of other ooui-ta, who can either affirm or re- Terse their decisions."*-^Thii9, in the simple words V tell it to the church" must be included— not only the figure by which the congregation means the ses- sion, but the whole series # subsequent appeals, from session to presbytery^om presbytery to synod! from synod to general assfembly. Now, this is most unfortunate. For if there be an allusion to the syna- gogue,— nay i* the ^HAt/dia even means the syna- gogue,— then, whetiier/the judgment wa& to be pro- nounced by that ixmff6ta collectively, or by its rulers exclusively, —/it is, On either supposition, enjoined, to he fnal:-U"ii he neglect to hear the church— the f««A;/W,-^let him be unto thee as an heathen man and apubUcan." Where is "the gi^eat sanhedrim, or counjfil of seventy," hferej^ The pro- cess stops tit>th& in jXT^dia ; and lithe IxxXr/dta m^ans, allusively, the synagogue,— theii not only is 4here no authority for going higher,— fow gojing, jmd^r the same alhision, to th|b ^anhed^ im ;— ^here is an exijress, interdiction of evdiy- thing of the Mnd. Fof it is - not preten<;led that the sanhedrim' is included iji the luxXridta ; i\i.e sui5i'?me Jewish council and court pt judgment included in every synagogue .-^And where, then, in this passa,ge, is to be found the autliori^ for courts of review in the christian church ? What has thus been said belongs, 'perhap^, more , appropriately to a subsequent branch of our inquiry —the govePnment oi the church: but tWs much seemed necessary, in reply to th^allegatibn of f^e word church meaning church repr^datim, ^^the rulers without the people.* ^x^ 1^ ♦ Dr. Brown's Vindication of the , prfisbyterian fp^k of ebiirch gDTernnlcnt."Letier Vljpage 99; Ed. 1805. . : .6" ^ . > ', "■■ -. ■-■-■■■■■ . :t 1'^ _v_ .V •\f:: • 'I I ... ^» 6' ^:-.\ I- u ■ I- ■ /■■•.. 8»- THE NEW TESTAMENT CHUBCH. But it ma ating that instance of of the for s under not forgi probably o sara^T have gone' to6 far in insinu^ 5. Xew Test^mient there- is 'no other church meaninjg exclusively the rulets fi"6m which a warrant can be pleaded rting it in the passage we, have Just had TChere is another referred to. jt had It is an instance, which would not to many readers of their bibles ;— l)ut, recherchee as it is> and requiring^not a^Uttle inge^ nious argumentatiQBL to make it good, we shall hot, ; on that accoiintj object to it, if%e find the q,rgi^men- tation fair and soUd, as well as ingenious.— It is to be found in Acts viii. 1^3, **, And at* that time there y^aa d great persecution against the church whi/ case should be a very obvious and deci^ siye on^'; especially when much is' made to depend uponitj Pr. Brown says— 'Vlt'! (tl^ wor5 church) "appears even sometimes to mean tfe oflJce-Jbearers of the "church as distinguished from 'the Members." Having said this, his " .<>omef hues''' reSto'lvei^tself into, , ' ikifi one instance .•— and having adduCed'^itVhe adds '*Here, then, is one Instance, in which, it would' seem, that by the chuich we are certainly to under- stand its office-bearers ^is distinguished 'from its members."— The form of expression in the first of these sentences—" appears euoi sometimes to mean*'- -^evidently implies the wyiter's. Jpeing eeosible that. '? li IT .yy,:i ,*- '> m ji .--'■'ii UN^tTTHOmZED tJSES OE THE WORD CHURCH. 83 if the word ever really had tiie sense ascribed to it, the cases were anomalous and rare. Had there been another wj^ch he could have produced, we should, beyond a doubt/ have had it. This one instance, then, we are^warranted to regard as, by the writer's adpissipn, standing unsupported by any other. Even with respect to it— the qualifying terms— "I'^op" pears'^ and " it tooidd *ePwi"—do not indicate a per- fect freedom from hesitation. He employs also, how- ever, the word "certainly .•" — and we are. now to examine the argument by which the alleged certainty is maintained. It is given as. folloiws :— The argu*- ' ment— " that t)y the church here specified, who were aU scattered abroad except the apostles,' is intended only the ministers, and not the members, appears to be. most probable"— (what has becfome of the cer- tainty ?)—" not only from this, t}i|it the ministers would be moire readily marked out as the first objects of their vengeance by the enemies of Christianity, and that all those who are mentioned of them who were scattered abroad, as Philip, (ver. 5,) and Simeon, aiad Lucius, and Manaen (chap. xiii. 1,) were of this description ; but that, even after it is affirmed here th&t oil i\xQ chiu'ch^were scattered ahvoatd except the apostles, it is asserted in the third verse, that a c/i?/rc^ stiU reniained different from the former, and a church which iSaul persecuted, and the men and the women of which, entering into their houses, he committed to prison. But if the tvhde of the chmrch referred id in Verse 1, as we are informed, were scattered abroad except tJw apostks ; and if, lat the same time it be in- stantly subjoined that there was still a church after this left at Jerusalem, of which those alone are men- tioned who were not ministers ; is it not obvious, '■■M W-:- iit; m 11 ^4. w^ ^'^.' ^f ^i**-"f%i ■i^^-ys'^f^^ '*^fi'^ I u TOK NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. that in^^^e'lfQirtner verse, the church who are spoken of, and are declared to have been «?/ scattered abroad except the ajiostles, can have been the ministers only , of that church ?"* What is there to which the aspect of plausibility, may not, by a' little ingenuity, be given? I cannot bnt think a system must be somewhat " hard be- stead ,and himgry," when, on so A-ital a point, this is all the support it can find for itself • — when this Bolitary instance alone can be ctdled from all the books of the New Testament, in proof of the church meaning the church representafive^^^the rulers without the members,— Let tjie reader observe-— 1. How very arbitrary a change in the sense of the word c/i?»*c/i is, by this hj-pothe^is, rendered neces- sary in verse 3, from its use in vetrse 1. In the latter occurrence of it (that in verse 3,) there can be no hesitation about its meaning : — "As for Saul, he made havoek of the ch nrch" &c. Nothing short of the most inoperative necessity is suflficient to vin- dicate so sudden a transition in the meaning of so common a word ; especially when one of the -senses assigned to it (that alleged in verse,!,) is a sense which belongs to it no where else. In the present instance, I know of no necessity that can be pleaded, but the necessity of a system pressed hard for sup- port; a species of necessity, which on every side of every controversy is apt to make way for itself, and to pass itself off for something better than it is, where it oughjt to have no place allowed it, but to.be jealously shut out. What ordinary reader, on findings it recorded in the first sentence of a chapter,^ that .''■''. . . • ■ ■ ■ ,. Si ■ ■■'■', * Brown's Vindication, Ac, pp. 89, 90^ ■ , .« U > * * ( \ », - >>. ■ " ■ ■ .==..■ ■- r- -. '■ ■ ■-. . • ■"- , ,./■ ■ ' .' ^ ■ ■■< ^ ': ■ [ '•- . ■, ,1« u UNAtJTHORIS^ USES OF THE WORD tJHlJRCH. 85 "there was a great persecution of the church in Jerusalem," and in the next (for the second verso here may be regarded as parenthetical) that' »** Saul made havock of the church," would ev6r imagine that in the one case the church meaiit the elders without the members, aiKl in the other the menibers without the elders ?.- Tfould ho not, without one moment's; hesitancy, understand it in both occurrences as mean- ing the whole body of believers, including both teachers and taught ? — ^Yes ;— and rightly ?— for ' 2. If in the first verse, when if fs said '* There^ was a great persecution against the ^church," the church means the elders exclusively of the l^rethren, — ^s it must, if it means anything to the puipose of the argument,— then it must follow^ that of tl " great persecution " the dders alone were the objecl If they are here the ehurch, then they alone we^ persecuted. The p^rseCutioSi was against "me. church f' and by means of the persecution 'Uhey" (the church) " were all scattered abroad." The per- secution and the dispersion ^re co-extensive. Ttey relate to the same persons. If they who were sattt^yed were the elders alone, then they wlb were perseeiited were the elders Alone. There is no avoiding this conclusion. And yet the conclusiop capuot be true. It is oontradicted by the very natuijfe^ of the.thing ;-^it is^t?ontradicted by the designation ^* givenf ifO it, of a "great-^ persecution;" — ahd it is contradicted by the further desdription of it which itnmediately follows in the third verse :— ' Saul, he made havoc of the church, enti every^houfiie, and haling inen and women, c them to prison."' To represent this as if it r a distinct persecution from that in the irst ver^ « r ■4 ^ \ \^ > M NEW TESTAMENT OHUBOH, -^l even to represent it as descriptive only of what was stibaequent to ,the scattering of all that were the objects of the persecution in the first verse, 4s most unreasonable. It is manifestly only a statement of the pan winch Saul actefl in the same persecution. That it was the same persecution, and that Saul, by his characteristic violence, contributed his fyXi share to ' * • the»dispersion^ which it eflfected, is implied in what is immediately ^bjoined—" Therefore they that were -j^ Scattered abroad went evervM'here preaching tlie . word." The dispersion waj^fiM^esult of the per- • secutipn in which " Saul^^^Bvoc of the church." This is the more evi^eiiU^^Pie connexion of the persecution with Stephen^^ptyrdom, and the im- mediate association of it with Siaul's name :— " Now 5 ^aul was consenting unto his death. And at that time there was a great persecution.against the church which was in Jerusalem." Saul was doubtless one of the originators of thV persecution, and one of the most furious agents in carrying it on ; and the third verse is only a more detailed account of the i^hner in WhicL he did so. And accordingly, while the dispersed are said^o have been " scattered abroad by the perse- cution which arose about Stephen/' (Acts xi. 19,) it is 6t that persecution that Saul afterwards says— (chap. xxii. 19, 20,) "Lord, they know that I impri- ' soned and I^eat in every synagogue them that believed on thee: and when the bl6od of thy mart^-r Stephen ^j» was shed, I also was standing by, and consenting iinto his death, and kept the raiment of them thaf slew him."— Bvit ( • 3, While, on sftch grounds, it seems most unrea- sonable to pretend to fasten a charge of contradiction upon independentw, by speaking of" a church as still r ' ' ' ■ ■■•*■•"*■■ ^ ' k -■.'■'*" ■. • • *■. *■■.■ » . ■ " * . . r . - . _» ; ■.•V' .. ■ -. ■■ i ; . \ 1 '■■■■{ ':'■'■ t Hi 0m- ' UNAVTH0BI8ED USES OF THE 5V0RD CHURCl reroairiing dififerent from the former, and a which Saul persecuted," ofler all the church in first verse had been scattered abroad,-4here is _ less unreasonableness in the strictly liteso^interpre-^ tation of the word all ; as if the t)hrase ^* they were all scattered abroad " must necessarily signify, that of those who are mentioned as the objects of the pei-se- cution no< oflc was Icfi^heUnd. — But every one knows in how very general" and indefinite a sense all is fre- quently used. To take a single example. In Matt, iii. 6, 6, itis said respecting the ministry of John the Baptist—" There went.out to hiin Jerusalem, and all Judpa, and all the region round about Jordan, and were baptized of hkm in Jordan, confessing their sins?" No man in his senses will ever suppose that there was not ananhabitant left remaining in city or tsountry. Evei^/one understands the meaning simply vto be, that the ipeople went out in very great numbers. This is the ncK^e evident, from the comparative state- ment given asi to Jesus. The disciples of John said to their Me^ster— " Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold the same baptizeth, and all come unto him." John iii. 26. -And yet in tjie beginning of the immediately _jBubsequent chapter, it is mentioned as a matter of public notoriety, that "Jesus made and baptized more dtWi>?es ///rtM Jb//7^"— ^\liy,then,is^the o^rto be take^ in its strict literality in the instance under considera- tion,? Wliy shoidd it be undei-stood as signifying morethan that the disciples,— bpth rulers and mem- bers, were dispersed' w very great n umljers .^— Even if " ministers of the word," or "elders of th^-clmreh," ,had been distinctly mentioned, as the antecedent to . the statement, there would have been no necessity for *• X. ;'r -.-. . ■' ^■, o T ' » I. ■ '' -r. ■ '. • ,■ ■ '■'?. . ' ■ • II ...••■• 1 . . .-. .'. .":'' :'■;•. . r'. ^ • ■■/"/■' ., 'v-- ■ _ ■ A ' ■■.■ : "■ : • '' '. ''':"' ■'-:■'' . :■■■' ^ : ■•' ■ •, * 1 ^fel^ ' T a ■r .■ ■ 1 - 1 k Ik r. ■ 1 ■j ■■ ■ 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 1 ■■'■■■'•■■ i 1 1 H H H 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ^. ■ 1 H H^l in 1 1 ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ I ■ 1 w . ' I -■* / ■-■"'' " " " ■ ^^^^^^r • i' '■ •" - ■ W^- • * ■•■k--' ' '■ . ■ - ■ ■ . i W , \ ?!£:!■- ■ ■ ■■ .-, . ..r .H ^ / h' M % •t» - ( # • ■ * ■^ S- •.1 " .'■->■' «l' • •' .J. »• ^ ■d •.•-' 1 -• ,y* , « » 'v- ■■w ■«• «" ■ ■ * k 4 ■ , ■ «. . *' *• Mlf' "i- . « 'C, * M , * -VkfS'sv MMMcorr HSouniON tbt cmait (AMI and ISO TEST CHART No. 2) 1.0 ML Lh Ml Ifii ■jjj^Hj ■ 2.0 :fu£ I 1.8 ■/• 1.25 i 1.4 1^1 1.6 >HPR-IED IM<<3E tne 1653 Eott Main $tra«« : Rochy»t»f. Nm Yorti 14600 USA £' (Tt6) 462 - 0300 - Phart. ««» <* (716) 2M-S9M^Foi< 88 THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. 80 iinderstftiuliug thftt statement as that not an indi- viduiil wfts left in Jcnisalem. i^TIuh itself woultj have been a very unlikely thing ;„thttt Ihcy itlnhv,-~t\i^y whose inunediuto and divinely committed tnist it was to ^* take heed unto all the flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them ovei-seors," and w^icj could not but feel a special reHi)onHil)ility attaching tq that trust, in times when the floirk of their charge was exposed to more than ordinary danger,— that //ntntfon having existed) natural and probable. — Thuilhj : 'Uxo phrase '\(j'aj,t l/ie apos- ilcA" m intcH7n-eted (like i\\o all being scattered) too strictly according to Iho letter, when it is inferred from it, i^Mxi because the a|>ostlsiawei'e ministers of . the word, those from whom they wero*excepted must have beejj; ministers too. The particle tA7/k — hero rendered properly enough except— \h by no means always used with so precise an adlierenco to the identity in kind of the thing excepted to that from .which the exception is made. Thus, in Acts xxvii. 22, we find Paul saying—" There shall be no loss of any man's life among you,— b-Avk rov nXotov^ — except of the sTiip ? Every one sees that to render thus makes nonsense ; the ship itself being no part of the men's lives that were on board of it. The meaning is, " l^ut [there shall be the loss] of the ship." Similar is the meaning here. There- was a very general t^|a^rsion of the membeBS of the church, and, it ma^Sely be" granted, especially of those who, whether "by office 01^ othery^ise, possessed any notoriety and eminence among them ;— -but the apostlfes were not Of the num- ber.* The exception simply intimates, that, while other brethren. of note were compelled to flee, the most noted of all kept theii post— Fourthly : On the supposition ' of the church meaning, in this or in any other instance, the chirch representative, it must of course inclifd^ its euttre representation. But if those who were scattered abroad by the persecution were the ministers or preaching presbyters only, as the record of, their " going everywhere preaching the word "is alleged to show, — then an essential part of ' ■"♦ ^I^^A^iAAAAAd ■"■-■■ ■ *■ ■ . V X THE N^TEaTAMENT CHURCH. the pro^jterian church represeHfative' vfA» wanting. "Wlxero were the niling Elders? Our presbyterian brethren would not admit a conrt of tjihusfcrf) alone to bo their proper church representative.— /'(/VA^i/ ; The affirmation that because it is said, in the/oitrth verse, respecting those who were dispersed, that they "went everywhere preaching the wordy' therefore " the church," in the first verse must mean exclu- sively the official ministry, is a mere gratis die- turn — C||i' assumption without proof. It is e%'ident, \^ that ive are as fairly entitled to take our explanation of the fourth verse from the first, as our brethren ard to take their explanation of thp 6r&t verse from the fourth ; and to My, that since the enter upon it, lest, instead of a chapter, I should write a trt'fttiso. — Wo have seen that a church, according to the Now TestazUejit, is & cowjrcijation. It seems very naturally and iiumo- diately to follow, that a christian church sliould bo a comjr^jation of chrinliunH. And it must not bo forgotten, that, in the same inspired book, chrisfians is a designation synonymous, in regard to tho persons included in it, with t^sciplcfi, Mitvers, saints. If THE CHURCH means tho whole , body of tho faithful, A CHURCH means a section of that body,— into, which, therofore, none ought to be knowingly and wilfully received, but such as give satisfactoiy evi- dence of their belonging to the time spiritual com- munity of Christ'p people.— Mistakes there may bo :—- perhaps wo may go further, and isay, that, with men's inability to search tho Jieart,. mistakes there raw mo< fail to bei. But wo lay it down as a position in which the New Testament fully bears us out,-^that the nearer A CHURCH can be rendered, in the spiritual i ■\ H MATERIAlil Of A CBVBCB OP CHBI8T. character of itn matcrialfl, to the church, — bo much the more will it bo in harmony with tho mind of the Lord, antWith tho groat ondH of its formation. Onr Lord said to NicodomuK, — " Except a man be bom again, he cannot aea " (that id, cannot enjoy, or, as ho himself explains it in a subseqaent verse, . cannot " enter into ") " tho kingdom of Gotl."^^"^- The kingilom of God docs not, in such, a connexion, mean simply heaven. It is evidently tlio same king- dom which John tho Baptist alid Jesus hiiuself an- nounced in their ministry as "at hand;" — tho spiritual kingdom, as to which Nicor'M proiuiMt*, — •• contiiitiiiig with tnw orooril in priiy«»r ami mippii- oatiou." — Thin urtH tJio unrUu^ of the ftrnt I'hriMtinu oburch. And wIumi thn day of |Nnit(>cfmt waft ftdty como, find i\\v ii|H>Htl(>ti, iili ttu> HH and fiihi<'NM of their now iuHpiniUtHi, pfiH'liiiiuiNl " r(>|)«>ntunc<« and romiHMioii of Hinn*-'*' in tht* muno f>f tlicir f^loritiiul MtiHtor, who wore th««.y that woro '• nddfd " to this little dovtnit Hocioty ? Thoy w eb^ Hui'h an " glt^dly received the word "— Acti* ii. 41. lliey were in num- ber " about throe thotiHand." They " continued Hteoil- foMtly in the apoftth'H* (h>ctrine and feUownhip, and in the breaking of bread, and in prayerH." And wliat wan the oharacter of thorns who Htill eontinuetl to l»e added to them V The Inst verHe of the Hunie ehapter, literally trannhited, telln uh :-v" The Lord added to 'the church daily o///«' ^iaroZ/i— ActH ii. 47, Our trauHlation — " Hiickp|^tiould ho Httved " — exprcHHcg a truth. Tlu)He wluvwi' Kavetl are, at the same time, thoHO who ^httU Ih' HHved ; their Hiilvation being, in its largOHt extent, yet future. But Htill, Kalvation is a present thing. All who believe in Christ are saved. They are delivere4 from conde4UHatitm, and from Bpirituul death. And .of such the church at Jeru- flolem — the moijel of all future- churches — was ori- ginally composed. " The Lord added " them : Ho did so, by the grace which converted them, and by the authority which enjoined their union. And thus it continued ; those who were added to the church being, such as had' first been " added to the Lord. "-^ Acts V. 14. , ^ 2. I notice next the addresses of the apostolic epistles. — See Bom. i. 6 — 8 ; 1 Cor. i. 2 ; 2 Cor. i. 1 ; ■ 7 ;.'■- -/■ W MATnUALlI Of A OnUBCH OF ORBMT. Eph. J. 1 ; PMl. i. 1 ; Col. i. 1, 2 ; I Tluwii. i. 1—7 ; 2 THmm. 1. 1'— 4. — Every rv«iler, who m in eaniMii in hiM in(|uirtf>M, will tarn to Ami iM^niMo th«ifM) paMMogos. Anil Hurfly tlm {mthhaI of thorn nhotiKl 1m» cnutigb, without a Mjrllahlt} of argunituit u|M>n tlioin, to Nntififj liun tm to tho ono point now in qtitiMtion.—uaintily, of whot (loNcription of p^monii th« chiirchoii wero ka^ poAcd to conniitt, oiul conHfiquimtly, of what ihttcrip- tion of iH^mouH, agnumhly to th«ir cUvinolyJntondo^ coivititution and uharnctor, th(«y onfjht to have con- RiHtiid ; it lM>ing i»)plii>d, that, in aM far (^ thoy woro othorwiMc, thoy wi^ro aiiitlo from thn divine intention, oa undumicMKl by the inspired iiion who thtiH addrefMH od them. To none but to genuine chriMtiann, apiritnal convcrtH, regenerate Hinn«>rH, could the varioua dosig- nations Uj ai>plied, whicji, in thene addreKHeH, aro naed :— " beloved of dod," " culled of J«»huh Chrint," " aaintH, or holy," •• Hanctifieil- in ChriHt Johu»," "faithful in Chriat JeHUH/' "Hnint*! and faithfiU brethren in ChriHt," to whom "the gospel had eomq, not in word only, but in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much aMHunuice.'^— who nhowed their "election of God," by their "work of faith, and labour of love, and patience of hope."— Such wore the characters^ to whom, m writing to the churches of Christ, the apostles addressed themnelves. And in the body of each of the epistles many expressionB occur, confirmatory of what is thus taught us by their inscriptionni^ and openings. I might introduce here, indeed, the entire tenor of their contents. The occasional descriptions of the characters of those addressed,— the exhortations, the rebukes, and the warnings, urged upon them,— and the social and reciprocal duties commanded them, J ^..- MATnuu Of A cmmca o9 cmovr. J ftU proco«- goneotia materialM, from the tiioNt HptritnAlly-tnitt(UNl w child of God to the moat CAri«lt>MM and even profano man of the worUl ?— Tliere ia, in truth, no under- Htandtng of the epiiith***, unUma they are eonHidered aa Iteing addreiMed (aa indiHul we have Heen they actually are) to iKKnetien of lM>lievt;rM. There are nu&ny of the dutiea enjoined in them, whieh couhl not Im) i)orfomied,' nor could the nu^ivea by which ttio perfornitifice of those duticH iH enfor(wd, 1k5 at all appn^oiatod and felt, except by Huch characterp. ' H. The Hanu! Ichhoh in taught uh by tfif rjtptvftghnfi of (litutpfMHulmeut and >jn''f, on t/n',M.(tti of ihv tiispiylU write tM, when, in any of the churmeti, thnrndcm of a' differetU flesct'iftfion apfmireU, whether' by their origin- ally improper lulniifUiion, or by the defectioti of thou© who had proviouHly " rnu well."— It in by a moat extraordinary porverseueHH, that the corniptions in doctrine and diHcipliue, which hud ft)und tlieir way into the churohea of Oalatia and] of Corinth, have ^ been made use of in evidence that purity of com- munion is not requisite.— It must be niaiiifest, that the only possible ground on which^such a conclusion can rest, is, that these corruptions wore not censured, but that the churches in which they were found were, with those corruptions, juttt what they and other churcliea were meant by the Lord to be. — But who can read the epistles to the Corinthians, and to the Qala- tians, and for a moment think so? Is not the very existence of such corruptions the source, to the ^ I » ^ • , " / - *■■■-'• • . . ■ ^ ■ > ' IS * i'^M ; ' ^ '-■. ' / • * 1 „ * fr ,- * ■tn *• , * - ' i ■ .' i ■ , "i .y ''<■,:■ •■ _ 1 ' ■ • t - . '■*' i % • "^^ ()< 1 . •• "^ '■ " " -^ ' - . ' , '" ■ - , ■' . . ., / - ■• 100 MATERIAU8 OP A CHURCH OP CHM8T. apostle's heart, of bittei-ness aud sorrow ? Is it not on account of thcm$ that he writes to the church at • .Corinth, " out of much affliction and anguish of heart, and with many' teare ?" Is it not for this that he threatens, if the persuasion of paternal tenderness did not succeed in firoducing reformation, to " come ^tlnto them witji a rod ?" And does tie not, with a heart ready to; burst with thte emotion of deep con- cern, tell them of his " i^av, lest, when he came among them, he should find them such as he would not,— - and that he should bewail many who had sinned, and had not repented ?"— And is it not in the terms of deep distress, as well as of \\»onder, that he speaks of deflections from the tioith among the Galatians, — *^ fearing, lest he had jjestowed upon them labour in vain,"— and " travailing in birth ^again, that Christ might be formed 'in them ?"^ — See 2 Cor. ii, 4 ; 1 Cor. iv. 21; 2 Cor. xii,20,21; Gal. iv. 11, 19.— Suiely, that christian has not tf little need for self-examination, who can contemjDlate— if not with complacency,' yet with unmoved calmness and peace, what went nigh to the breaking of an apostle's heart ! Sm-ely, that which so grieved hint could not be as it ought to have been, but must have been displeasing to the Lord, — - cdhtrary to his will and to his glory.— And this will appear still mOre, when we observe-r- 4. That thes^ evils are expressly coitdemned, and their correctioiicommattded.—V&vl severely censures 'the Corinthians, because, instead of "mourning" over such as had falleninto sin, and having them ** put away from among them," they had been " puflfed up," and, in the spirit of mutual jealousy and vain- glory, had retained them. He warns them of their danger, from the natural tendency of evil to diffuse Ja MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST. 101 Ja itself by contagion, when tlitis wilfully .<,retaiiie(l amongst them; — the danger of the "little leaven leavening the lump." And, with the authority of the Head of the Church, he peremptorily enjoins them to "put away from among themselves the "^ wicked person,"— to " purge out the old leaven, that they might be ft new lum|^— See 1 CWvi throughout. And to what does this rilrount, but that, as a church, ^as a collective body,— as a section of the church \ universal,— they should cqme into conformity to the terms of his epistolary address to them,— as " the church of God which was at Corinth,— sanctified in Christ Jesus,-^called,— saints?" — ^And how does the Lord himself expostulate with thosQ of the churches ; | of Asia into which similar corruption had crept ? ' ^ \ Does he not blame them for " having there," — that is,* ; . clearly, for retaining in the communion of the church, - "those that held the doctrine of Balaam," and "the ' doctrine of the Nicolaitans,"— doctrineis evidently _/^'f Associated with practical impurity and idolatrous conformity ? Does he not, for these and other evils, • warn them, while they "held fast" what was good, to "repent and do the first works?" Does he not assure them, that if they did not repent, he would "come imto them quickly, and fij^t agaijpt" th« intruders and oiTenders, *** with fne sword of his ' . 1 ^^^ mouth ;"— -intimating that this ought by themselves to be rendered unnecessary by their using this sword, as the sword of excision, against them ?■— And does he. not threaten them with " coming unto them quickly, and removing their candlestick out of its place, unless they repented ;"— meaning, as the nature of the sym- bol indubitably shows,— not any privation of privilege and blessing merely, but their extinction as churches : f ^ .^ 102 HA'nSBULS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST. —for, since it is expressly said " The seven candle- sticlus are the seven churches," the removal of any of the candlesticks must signify the removal of the churches represented by them.— These corruptions, therefore, it was their incumbent duty, by the vigor* ous and impartial exercise of discipline, to remove,— and, as churches, — in their collective as well as their individual capacity, to return to their "first love," and their first purity, separating themselves from the World and fi'om evil," and putting away from them " the lincircumcised and the unclean."-^See Rev. ii. 14—10; ii. 4, 5, ' : ^^^■>-i>•. MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OP CHBIBT. 107 r^too, of every one who, with a conscious hjrpocrisj, neither believinj^j nor feeling, nor living, as the word of God requires, should, hy a hollow-hearted and false pvpfoHHion, intrude himself into the communion of God's sanctuary. There shall bo o. final U'fiting qi the materials of which christian churches have been reared. The fo^f to bo applied is, in the passage, figurative, in correspondence with the figure uged with regiird to the materials : — " The fire shall try every man's work, of what sort it is ;" fire being the uatiiral and appropriate test of " gold, silver, and precious stones," and of " wood, hay, (ind stubble,"— the for- ' mer enduring it, l^ie latter being consumed by it, i might (I repeat) multiply passages ; but I miist /"forbear. It ought not to be hccessa^'. I know nothing which has a better title to be regarded as a self-evident maxim, than that christirai churches should be churches of Chrisfians /—that they should be, what thp apostle Paul denominates them,— and denomin- ates them all, intimating their generic character,— " churches of the saints:'! Gor. xiv. 33.— And yet, scriptHre has been quoted on the other side. The necessity of pure communion has been controverted on Bible authority ! Had there been no such appeal " to the law and to* the testimony," we shpidd not have deemed it necessary to take any notice of the mere theories and reasonings of men. But when such appeal is made, it would be an infraction of. our own principle, were we to' give no heed to the grounds on which it is rested. Let us see, then; what these grounds are. 1. In the j^rs^ place, we have'^/r 108 MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OP CHRIST. ministry : — how much moro, then, may we expect to find improper characters in the churches nf)w !— and this traitor, it is added, — evfen though ^Tesus " knew from the beginning who shotthl betray him," — was present at the first institution of the Lord's Supper; and partook of it with the rest !— On tliis last circum- stance, indeed, the argument is chiefly grounded. Now, I might satisfy myself with simply t/cMymgr the fact of the presence of Judas on the interesting occasion in question. I might make my appeal for this to the precise and pointed testimony of the evan- gelist John to this efiect,:— " He, then, haying received the sop, ivent iminediatehj out "« — Jbhn xiii. 30. Ac^ cording to Matthew, the pointing out of Judas as the traitor preceded the institution of the supper ;r— and according to «/oAn, he was no sooner pointed out than he withdrew from the company. — — I might show you, that Z?d'e, with whose narrative the difficulty chiefly lies,— the detection of the traitor being intro- duced by him subsequently to the scene of the supper, -—is less particular about the precise order in time of the incidents related by him, than the rest,— there being other instances as wejl^as this in his nan-ative, in which he does not adhere with precision to that order. And I flatter myself I could make it suffi- ciently clear, that Judtts had " gone 'ottt"'hetore the holy supper was instituted.— But the truth is, I am not, and I would not wish to appear, at all anxious to make out this point. I am perfectly satisfied, that the fact was as I have just represented it,— but I am, at the same time, as perfectly indifferent, so far as my present argument is concerned, whether Judas waSj or was not, present when the supper was insti- tuted:— and for this simple rieason, that, if his sup- MATpniAM OP A CHUnCH OF CHRIflT. 109 X 4 ' *^- posed presence proves anything, it proves a great deal too much,— a great deal more than tliose who moke their appeal to the alleged fa«t wonld them- selves be willing to admit ; and thus efFeetually defeats itself. I shall muko the Htrongost Hupposition possible, shall suppose that Judas was not only present, even previously made known as the traitor. What follows? Clearly, if any inference bearing on our practice follow^ legitimately at all, it must be this :-^ that wo tiro waiTanted, nay that, the example being set for our imitation, it is incumbent upon iis, it is our duty, to retain in full fellowship with the church of Christ— JuDAHES, — hioichg them to /«, such ; — to retain characters of the same unprincipled baseness, —open betrayers of Christ,— bartereTs of thfjir interest in him for a few paltry ponce,— -selfisly avaricious, avowed apostates,— Av>o/tv*>,< — our setting him by our side at the table of the Lord,— with the full knowledge that no saving change had pai^sed upon him, but that he continued in all respects what ho was, when he " threw down the silver pieces in the temple, and departed, and went and hanged himself." — If any one revolts from this, — if he shudders at the supposition, — then ho must give up his argument froni\/sti- mony and the gospel floraise, and nj^^HWig change of heart and character. Wh^BHJjj^^Bide V parabolic figure, what are the plain jfacts of the case ? vWho were the persons that sat down to the feast? lat were thoy when invited? — and what, when jted the invitation, and had been received? ^ayj^e given in the language of Paul to [•ihthia^g)|lj^ureh ; — "Know ye not that the teous sWiU not inherit the kingdom of God ? Be not deceived: neither fornicators, nor idolaters, ^ nor adulterers, nor eflfeminate, nor abusers of them- selves with mankind, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor reviler8,nor extortioners, shall inherit the kingdom of God. And such were some of you; 4 •* f * !*• »■ s4 lide '£■ MATEBULfl or A OHURCB Of OHBItn'. 118 bat JO are woHhed, but yo aro sanotificKl, but ye aro '''^« jiUtifiotl in the namo of tho Lord Je^uii, and by UmI !*• ^ r^ Spirit of our Ood/'— 1 Cor. vi. 9—11. This iH in ftar harmony with tho parable ; and it is not a fK>lit(ury paHHagu of thaJcind. Tho cano moftt'diatinotly hIio^vs, that tho want of tho wedding garment Vas th« rare excoption : — ^that tho man who, by what moans gooTor, ' had foond his way into the b of ^cr«on5,*-th0 persons represented by the former —the taxes— are not hypocrites. From the manner in which r have heard some express themselves, I am certain, that when they speak of the tares and the wheat " growing togetJwr until the harvest" they have no further idea in their minds, than this— that in the church tlwre always ivill he hypocritical prof essors. Now it is of importance to bbserve, that this is not at all the question. Hypocrites (as ahready noticed) are, according to the very meaning of the designa- tion, professors of religion, who, though destitute of true faith, do not allow this to be apparent in their conduct. There is nothing there, that to men gives any clear evidende of their profession being insincere. They contrive to present to human view so much of the "image and sjiperscription " of Heaven, as that no one can with confidence pronounce them " repro- bate silver." Mark it, th^n:^^e parabl^ does «o« ^.yefer to siich. I might almost go so far as to say that it does not even include them, It represents a disr tinction betweep two descriptions of persons, whose respective characters are equally apparent. There is not, in the parable, the remotest hint of any difficulty in discriminating between the wheat and the tares. The servants distinguished the one from the other without the smallest hesitation* "Then appeared the tares alsp." They saw them, and knew them. I MATEBIAtS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST. 116 To try to make out the tares to have been a pliant so closely resembling wheat as not to be readily dis- criminated from it, is to mai^e the parable, in this respect, self-contradictory. The risk suggested, in opposition to the proposal of the servants to " gather up the tares," is not that of mistaking the one for the other ; for there was no such risk at all in the case. The fear waSj not that they might pull up wheat in- stead of tares, but that they might pull up wheat aloiig ivith tares.— We shaETsee, by and by, how this tallies with what -we believe to be the true principle of interpretation :— what I wish at present, is to show,— and to beg attention to it, — that the tares do not r^M'esent hy.npQrUic((l professors, but knotvn and visible " childreifi^'^ie icidccd o'?ie."— Then notice— •2. On the supposition of the field in which the tares and the wheat are to be allowed to grow to- gether being the church,— ii the thing designed to be represented is the indiscriminate admixture of the godly and the ungodly there ; then may it be worth the serious consideration of those who take this view of the matter, — to ivhom this state of things is attribnted. Whatsays the householder? ^\Aii enemy hath done this !" And what says the interpreter? "The ene- my that sowed them is the devM." Such is the reply to the question, "Whence, then, hath it tares?" The bad seed is not sown in the field by the servants of the householder, and in obedience to any order of his. It is done by "an, enemy." It is done by stealth. ,It is a deed of secrecy and darkness, eflpQcted "while men slept." Does it not, then, fol- low, that, when the servants of iiie householder knowingly introduce into his church "offenders aUd ' them that do iniquifrjr," they are doing the deviTs ^k. -t 1 ?,■» Sf ■ I ■ i 116 MATfiBIAM OF ^ CHURCH O? CHM8T. wc^r And does it not farther *oUow, that ' the field " cannot signify tiie church ; seeing if it is the devWs work for the servants to tnfrotej^he wicked StoL Church, it cannot weUbei^ iorcT. work for thosaservantfltoA^ep^AewfAtere/ ^ ' ^^ 3 If the field be the church, and the parable relates to liie fellowship of the church, and intimates it to ■ be the Lord's will tha^ all vanetaes of character ^. should be admitted wid retained ;-then, what is the t . ^ result? Why, that christian commnmon w at an emt. What is called the church becomes, in that case an . ialcriminate mixture of the godly and th^ worldly, Sn^nd the profane :-and this, w^n the con. to the same thmg with there bemg no church at aU mat can the church in the world be if the word rndtiie church are meant to be so heterogeneously amalgamated,-so mixed and incorporated together, !5hft the ve^y attempt t« effect a separation between th^is anact\)f resistancetotheexpresslyintimated wTof the church's head?- Then the world is the ieh, and the church is the world. There is no f^rlLi which, on this principle of exposition, its ad^cates can consistently stop, short oi--umversal S^ B^d no e.c^^on.-And thi^leads me to notice— .■; Tx TT ,»i, atO^pUp •— " Evert sectarian effort to get what . So says Dr Hugh M^eile.^^^^^^ ^ ^^^ ^.^^^^^ is c*^l«d '^P'J^^/i^t^e^^ H?^^^^^ in corruption, as being l>ya removal of ^e tare^. /« « ^ ^^^^^^^ harmonizing them ** ^^r ^f^f GoTiThte words-representing elsewhere, with ^fe^^^ j:^*^^^i::^S:j^an of ^probation t^ ings ja™*'; ?' ^ Xirches alonjr with others, as " containmg,*cog- God in Christ utterly repudiates." •>! r V^ ■ * ■ "tlr MATERIALS OP A CHURCH OF CHRIST. 117 the the sked L for [ates i to icter } the end. e, an •Idly, con- Lount it oUH. vorld ously jther, iween aated is the is no )n, its versed me to 5et what illeiuupi 18 being ng them rithfeel- lish ftnd g.Acog- hurch pt u "P. 4. That, like the former parabte, this one, when so expoxmdedy proves too wwc^,\an4 so proves nothing. With the exception of those whq hold the notion of such a national church as comprehends all "the mem- bers of the civil community — the nation and the church being of the same extent, — I am not aware that there are any who would be disposed to foUow out the parable, in this view of it, to the full length of its obviously legitimate conclusions.— In the different bodies of dissenters, and in our national establish- ments themselves^ there is a verbal acknowledgment of discipline. They are not to be tolerated 'who lie under the charge of aught that is known by the name of scandal,— th&t is, any gross offence against the laws of morality, How loosely soever even this ex- ception may be attended to in practice,— it stands acknowledged in principle. But^his is inconsistent. The designations used in the parable are of the most general and comprehensive description. — ^What can be more so, than " the wicked," and " children of the wicked one ?" No limitation whatever is so much as hinted. The very word, discipline becomes thus a term of rebellion. It is not letting both grow to- gether until the harvest. They who make exceptions of any kind, only show themselves- sensible that, on their principle of exposition, the parable proves more than enough, and cannot be harmonized with other parts of Scripture. Li every instance in which they plead for the sepaJ^a>tion ot any offender whatsoever^ — even the grossest— they contradict their principle. But let us be consistent. If their is to be separation, let it be as complete as faithfulness and charity united can render it:— and if there is to he none, let there he wo«e; let the mixture be as thoroughly indiscrim- A.-4I 118 MATERIAM OF A CHURO^ OF CHBI8T. inate as the parable manifestt requires it to be. Let W have principles on ^^*ich to act, that are definite and uniform. It will not do, to quote the stares and the wheat " in proof that purity of com- munion is not required,-and then refuse to admit the impurity in the extent which the parable so quoted not only warrants, but enjoins. We must have one thing or another ; and not orders that are contradictory, and that mutually neutrahze each other. , i. xu' ° 5 I have said, that they who have recourse to this parable, as a salvo to their consciences in tolerating impure communion, make it manifest that they feel themselves pinched between it and other passages of Scripture :-and thisfe suggests the gr?n«ra7 observa- tion, that the entire tenor of the New Testament, and every passage in eWier the history, the epistles, or the prophecies, that bears any reUtion to the character wul constitutim of christian cliiirches, might he arrayed, wjainst such an interpi^ation of the paraUe. I have ^eady said enough/in pi-oof of this. The^com- mands-^" If he refuse to hear the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a pubUcan ;"— Spurge out the old leaven, that ye may be a new lump •"— " put away from among yourselves that wicked person ;"—« be ye not uneqrfaUy yoked to- gether with unbeUevers;"— "from such withdraw thyself :"^the*complaints—" Ye are puffed up, and -^ve not rather mourned, that lie who hath done this deed, might be taken away from among you ^'— "tl^o^ hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam ; ^ — « so hast thou also them that hold the doctrme of the Nicolaitans, which thing I hate ;"-are all in the very face of the interpretation of the parable we VAtEBlhJA OF A CHT7B0H OF OHBISt. 119 have been consideriiig. And a prixioiple wbich thus sets the Bible against itself cannot, with imy who admit its inspired authority, be owned as legitimate. 6. The interpretation in question is not inaccord- ance loith the very letter of the parable itadf. — ^In the parable, according to its only authoritative interpre- ter, " the field is the ivm-ld." This is surely sufficiently^ ex^cit. Our Lord afterwards commissioned his apostles in these terms — " Go ye into aZr the toorld, and preach the gospel to every creature." *' The world," then, in which the gospel was to be preached, is the field in which the tares and the wheat were to appear, — ahd in which they were to " grow together until the harvest." In the question, therefore,— " wilt thou that we go and gather them u^ ?"— it must be evident that the act of gathering them up must bear reference to thejield in tchichthey grow. ■ It can mean nothing else than the rooting them out of thatjidd. And, if the tares are persons, and the field is the ■qrorld, we are naturaUy led, for the meaning of the act, not to excommunication from the church, which would leave them still in the world,— -that is, would leave the tares stiU in the field where they were sown, — but to their extirpation from the world itself , by the hand of violence.— And this, accordingly, I be- lieve, to be the real reference of the parable ; this the principle for its just interpretation. It is a lesson pare«f; and therefore this hazard could have no existence, ihe ^Lou assigned for the prohibition is-not lest ye '?- ■0, ^y fW" _^ ' ;;r ■ ._,^ - ■ ■ . : ■ . . . , . . . . il- ■'■■^ ' ■ " ■■ .; ' ■...:..'■'■ UATEKO^ OF A CHUBOH OF OHBIST. 121 mistake wheat for tares, and tares for wheat ;— this is never even supposed ;— but " lest, while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them."-^ The application of this to persecution, is forcible and striking. When the servants of the Lord have taken it upon them (as they too often have) to attempt the work of extirpation, when has it ever failed that they have occasioned destruction to themselves as well as to their enemies, rooting up wheat as well as tares, and not seldom the former in much greater numbers than the latt#? In the field of the world, the righteous ariS the wicked* — good men and bad— are, xmkvoidably, and in all possible varieties of relation, mixed together. To «flFect a separation of the two, the righteous "must needs go out of the world." Such a mixture had existed from the beginning ; but this feature of the moral condition of the world was to be stiU more remarkably exemplified in conse- quence of the spread and the partial reception of the gospel ; when, according to the premonitio^f Jesus himself, there should be "five in oiie housWivided, three against two, and two against three," — and when " a man's foes should be those of his own hou#B."^ This state of things is very appropriately repre- sented by, not the mere juxtaposition of plants of different kinds springing up together in ite same field ; but such an unavoidable intertwining of the ^bfes of their respectiye jroots, as renders it next to il)»possi|ile, even with the utmost cieire, to eradicate one ofbne kind, without loosening and bringing up wiiih it another or more of another kind. And how much more likely such a result, in the heat and reekless3iess«»of the spirit of persecuting zeal !^If, understanding the parable thus, we take it in coil- I ! 124 MATEBUUB OP A OHOBOH OF OBMBT. nexion with the two paseages » Uttle ago '^verted to —namely, our Lord's rebuke of James and John, whenXy were for commanding fire to come down J^m he Jen to consume the Samaritans, --^^f^*^- when he drew his sword to defend his Master -we haye *« motive, brought out, which ""g" *» be effeotuallT dissuasive from all persecution. Th«>™ L,thatevery thingof thelund is taconsistentwith very genius of "the gospel of the tongdom^-K kZl,tMmamerofspirityeareof:-t\^s^. that the Lord has put it under his ban and inter- acted it by penal sanction-" ^«, '%''»« '"^^.'^^ that the unwarranted attempt cannot be raade^ God's people, without involving themselves, or their Siren, in the common destruct on-" Lest, M ^gMe^vpthct^e,,yeroot^ also the toheatwOJ. 'Y'l am aware of but o«c oyerfta to this interpre- tation Ahe parable :-and it is one of which it would Pfeconsistent with candour to make hght, ntadm™ from the close of the parabk,jh.ch Ls»• I grant the plausibility of the conclu«on.-But I ob^™ regarfing it-1. The phrase " The fan^dom • 7ZII& VMri^., is one that is not always W ^th particular definiteness ; the '^«»«°'t^°<^„"'*^'^ TbLg sometimes directly between the langd»i iteeS in its constitution and character, and that with . ri IfATERIALS OF A CHUBCH OF GtfBIBT. 128 eirfced Johni down Peter, ',— we to be lejUrst iththe^ -" I^- second, inter- akethe third, . - ade by )r their ?, whUe nt ivith iterpre- hicli it :e light, , which ill send hisMng- ." The jeho are been in art of it. —Bui I Mngdom ays used B intend- kingdom bhat with . .i which it is compared, and sometimes between the latter and the state of things arising from the institu^ Hon of the Engdom. This proceeds on a similar principle to that on which our Lord occasionally expresses the mere remiU or conseqtience of his com^ ing, and of the diflfusion of his gospel, in terms which» litertUly taken j imply its having been his purpose or design : — "I am come, to send fire on the earth :*'-^- "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, nay, but rather division :"—" 1 came, not to send peace, but a sword."— That Something of the same kind is to be understood in the case before us, seems clear, from- -2. The fact that, in the parable, "the field" is expressly said to be "the wm-ld;" and the "good seed" and the " taresi," which grow together in it, are the "children of the kingdom" v and the "children of the wicked one." These are not represented as being together in the kingdom, but as being together in the tvorld. Such should be the state of things, in a degree in which it had never been before, in consequence of the erection of the '*V^ kingdom. The perfect explicitnesff.of the statement -^" the field is tJie world" — shuts us up to, this inter- pretation ; especially when connected with the equal s explicitness of the distinction between the two des- s criptions of persons, as a distincti^i subsisting in the teoffc? :— the good seed being "the children of the kingdom" in ilie tvorld, and the tares " the children^ of the wicked one" in the world. If the tares and tiie wheat represent the children of the wicked one and the chil^en of the kingdom ; and if both are represented as in the toorld ; then si^ely both cannot be in the hingdoni. — It follows— 3. That," gathering Old of the kingdom " must be intrepreted in a sense n JV#. w 124 . MATBRIAM OF A CHOBOH/oF OBMBT. to the more enlarged,— from msreign^r Us spiritual toael, to his re.gn om^JT^t^. BulJviency to ^^^ ^j^'-^^ I^?;1^2^;tiot »sa":st&r^-^^(« ^rSrisL; supposing this, the meaning seems ever, wiiu iixDi i„ *i,bf ih a kincdom shall then his kingdom ; but only, that tne Kinbuuu* ^ ms joBguuiii ' . . ^ •' ^^lete separation from aU . S;ZW&^'^ " t the ll g dom Shan then tenm- t1 II.'.! ri \.\ \. MATERIALS OF A GBITRGH OF CHRIST. 125 age «i of the ^ begin- sense people, ►rid, in action, though Buch a seems iiscrim- all take ed, the ^longer dth the 3uld be ring out rill thus Led were LaU then from all mingling ifferings, ,s, thence icasioned en termi- nate. — ^We have a «tyle of expression, — not indeed the same, but similar, and illustrative of the principle of explanation — in Col. i. 20. " And, having made peace by the blood of hi3 cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself, whether they be things on earth or things in heaven." Now, " things in heaven*' did not require reconciliation to himself ; and alt that can be meant is, that by the reconciliation of of aliepated and apostate men, a state of entire and holy harmony, should be produced between them and the angels of hght, the*fallen being restored]to union with the imf alien, in one ever-blessed community— under Christ as the common head. There is yet another appeal made to the scriptures, for the purpose of neutralizing the plea for pure communion. It is to the corrnptions of the apostolic churches themselves: — But this appeal has been al- ready met, and I trust, though briefly, satisfactorily repelleds The wonder is, that such an appeal should ever have been made for such a purpose. If, in using the word corruptions, I have used a word which they who make the appeal approve, as containing a just representation of the case,— then, by that very admis- sion, they* stand self -confuted. Strange! Are the corruptions of the churches the points in which we are warranted and bound to imi^te them ? Surely our aim ought to be, to shuu the corruptions, and to endeavour, as far as attainable, to discover, and to conform to, the original standard.— The brethren who take up the opposite ground are in imminent danger. They are in danger — ^instead of being, as they ought to be, ishocked and revolted by the corruptions which arerecordedtohavje found their way into the churches in apostolic times,— olE being secretly not at all ill- ■ ■ ^ e^ t. ,-■ M, HATEBIAI* OF A OB«»CB Of CHBIBT. ^o.*ififla to find tkem there. pleMed,bat »«■« "^^ f^^tionBS»th6ohurche. 5le, afford an apology to^^JP^ ^y^ „, the now. Utt«y«"f"„rLT attempts to prevent 'r""'w'ire1rre"i^^ And Jncethete^p- them now n^nm , , „„™„Wenoy in corruption. I tation to tUe kmd °« f^f ^^rs ol Uty coold toow not, indeed what the^elend ^^ .^ ^^^ have done ^*o«t^*e oteeh _^^ ^^^ their pnrpo^ "O ■"«"• " .^^ jhose of the apostle iiy feeBng8>uch as the.^. wun _ ^^^^^ ^^^.^ of®lG^ntik»! >»f. ^*lXm on it« first for- pa^m ttU tlje thlS •" AdGi*h, or PhiUppi. , maJon?-oi from the chur»a ^^ horoh at - or Smyrna, or Philadelphia! Wa« ^, , S^ntrvith,its con^^^^^^ these. plol, and moie to *«'X,°w« perversion of th^ „ere? « »* f '' "?^^e"™th a recoi'l wUch sets impartial tecoW of 'J"»«, f^' ^^ to take the con- , doL the evil as *f .''.^^^^„Ced and commended y(h6 will say so? _ nbservine, that the I ,h^^ olo- "^^"^^S ct ima^e : due attainnient of e oiy^«n^ ^ had in view to the '°»^'»*^,^|3%end,rs attention to punty m niumon of ™?™°?; „„^ije Without entering at ^''^ "°"S;TiSe«SeWrthesecnds maybe con- large on this »'««^;"f,_ „ nomber -.-J/ie ffioij/ qT sidered as, ^"^^"ff- *'TJj^I,,rcl, ■ and the ben^t Cyi^ ; (Ae «!#« ^. o/j ^ fnoV maintained, dl ^'MTfendY^epi^^^onally frustrated. r_ «'r ..^"' .,'! „!r ^W „^ Th is glory is apparent m 1. The ^cfS "f Ohtia. bere. *-, fches f the event lemp- m. I could . Buits riance postle . I their •st fbr- lilippi* irch at lind of I these A 1 of the- Ich sets liG con- DOtcnded tended? ihat the imagine i in view thecom- purity in tering at ybe con- e glory cf the hen^i edned, aU ed. >parent in ■ \- ' . .. ■ MATEBIAL8 OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST. 127 obnrches, as in individuals, according to the degree in which the holy and happy influence of the truth is displayed. The truth has a aocial influence, as well as a personal. It is not only a ground of personal hope, and a means of personal holiness, but a bond of union, and a spring of social action, and social joy. But these things it can only be, in proportion af^ churches ai-e in a state of separation from the world. Where can be the manifestation of the truth's influ- ence, in a community composed of all descriptions of characters? There may,, in such a community, be not a Uttle of individual excellence ; but where can there be that lovely feature, so prominent in the portraiture of the very first of christian churches—^ " the multitude of them tliat believed were of one heart and of one soul?" This was a feature emi- nently glorifying to Christ, as "the Lord of peace," who " made peace by the blood of his cross ;" to his gospel, as the " gospel of ijeace ;*' and to God, as the " God of peace." The very element of the charac- ter-produced by tlio faith of the gospel in love ; and the peculiar love thjP;t binds the disciples of Christ together, and of which so very much is said i^ the New Testament, is a principle of which the operation can be experienced and manifested in a church, only in proportion as that church is composed of such disciples alone,— of the spiritual children of God,— "sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty." The glory of Christ is visible in any church, in proportion to its social purity, just as his glory is visible in any individual beUever, in proportion to his •peraondl purity. ■ ^^-~~-,.~~^^ ::„_,.,.:;;_--■-.■-".; ;-^-4-,.^->: ,;;- 2. The edificationy or 8pintu(d benefit, of the church itae^. Personal religion is necessary to christian ^ ■■ ■ I ( %\ •^ 128 MATEBIAiJb of a church of CHRIST. feUowship, and at the same time, christian feUowship has been instituted by Him who « knoweth what is in man," with a view to the stability and the growth of personal reUgion. All who know what christian fel- lowship is, know also how eminently the ordinances of its social observance, and the exercises of its social worship, contribute to this end. 'All, too, who are acquainted with the apostoUc epistles are aware, how frequently and "how earnestly the churches are admonished to mind the duties ot rrndnal spiritual edifkaiim. Now it must be obvious ^to the most ' unreflecting mind, that both the discharge of the ■ duty and the acquisition of the benefit pre-sup^ose that the churches are composed of spiritual matenals, and that spiritual union exists among their members. That in some christian bodies there are not a few who become crnimunicants, without having any notion of commMwiow, who, when they come to the Lords table think of no feUowship but that of their own souls'individually with their gracious Bedeemer, is a position which none wiU questioi* who know the stat© of the facts. Of spiritual union with those who come with them to the same table, they nevej^thmk and have never, or hardly everv been taught to thmk. Even when this is the case, there cannpt fail to^be a great deficiency in the working oiJt of the en^ of christian fellowship ;— a fellowship which, according to the New Testament, includes the reciprocal exer- ci^ %f «ai those social aflfections that spring from the consideration of the number and the power of the bonds of union,-the "one body, and one spmt,,^d one hope of their calling, the one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one Ood.and Father of aU, who is above . aU, and through all, oad in them all,"-and which ■'.s ■■ ■ "i ■M :M >M ' MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST. 129 lowsbip lat is in •owth of tian fel- linances J of its loo, iS'lio 3 aware, slies are spiritual lie most > of the suppose laterials, lembera. Lot afew ly notion B Lord's beir own mer, is a the state rho come link, and ko think. 1 to be a ) ends of .ccording >cal exer- from the Br of the pirit,,and tne faith, ► is above id which includes also the practical result of these affections, in "ajl ihe members having the same care one\of another,"—^ every man looking, not on his 0^ thmgs, but also on the things of others." But if ilk ends of christian association must fail to be answered^ even when the members of ft community, considered individually, are of the right stamp, if there be a want of just conceptions among them of the union and communion of all with one another, an(| of the obligations thence arising, as well as of the union and communion of each with the Head ;— how much worse than ineflSciently must they be fulfilled, when the materials are utterly heterogeneous,-rwheA "tlie precious and the vile," the spiritual and the secular, the godly and the worldly, are blended indiscrim- inately together! -Consentaneous feeling, mutual attachment for the truth's sake/reciprocal vigilaiice, and attentive " consideration of one another, to provoke unto love and unto good works," become anomalie« and impossibilities, in exact proportion as such incongruous intermixture istolerated and sanc- tioned. The" one description c^f characters must necessarily operate as a preventive of benefit to the other, rather than as a means of its promotion, — nay as a corrupter instead of a purifier, — a weight that depresses to earth, rather than an aid in the ascent tO'-heaven, — a leaven of ungodliness, rather than of spiritual miudedness. , 3. The good of the ivorld. Th&t this end was con- templated by the King of Zion in the institution of his churches, who can doubt ? They are set down in the midst of a world of darkness and sin, for the very purpose of di£fusing light and purity around them. How miserably must such an end be hindered and ..../■,. .■:-9..-.. . ■-■■ ' -■ - f # • \.' .^-. ^ IIATEBIAM OF A CHtJBCH OF CtelST. laa impaired,^eii there is tbe absence of aU^e^ pUfication of the social influence of the truth, from which, in apostoHc and primitive times, arose so large an amount of the impression made on surroundmg observers, when they were constrained to say--* i3e- hold how these christians love one another, —ana when "of the rest durst no man join himself to tiiem, but the people magnified them !" If individual beHevers are "lights in the world," churches are constellations,-assemblages of sucli. hghts. ^ If each christian is a poi-tion' of moral or spiritual leaven, churches are larger gsi^sses of that leaven. But all such beneficial influence impUes the marked separa- tion of both the one -and the other— both the indi- vidual and the society, from the world. You desteoy the influence, when you destroy the distmction. When you bring the wOrld into the church, you nuUify the efltect of the church upon the world. The more thorough the separation, the more marked and mam- fest the distinctive example, and the principles from whose operation it arises,— the more vivid and the more salutj^ will be the impression.— O, let none adopt the frinciple, in paUiation of the 6vil now complained of, that the intermixture, instead of secu- larizing the church, may sanctify the world!— Alas! which ia tho more likely? Whether is it of the influence Of the church upon the world, or of the influence of the world upon the church, that the apaptle is speaking, vrhen he says— ''know ye not that a little leaven leaveneth the lump? Is it of the influence of the good in corrupting the evii^r of the evil corrupting the good?— Surely, there is littte need for shutting the eyes of the people of God to the danger of amalgamation 1 •1 o^f ^f.^ •$&»- ' MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OF CHKK8T. 131 ,t exem- ^ kh,irom so large oiinding r_« Be- v"— and to them, dividual jhes are If each ' t leaven, ButaU I separa- ihe indi- i destroy Q. When allify the he more nd mani- ples from i and the let none evil now 1 of secu- world!— her is it le world, e church, a— •* know ,e lump?" corrupting good?— • [le eyes of Jgamation ^^ - with the 'worid.^^W'hat success can ministers expect, in warning belie v6ra- against worldly conformity, when, through inconsideratiOUj^ or on principle^ they are mixing up the world with the chm?c^? Surely, the more bold the relief in which the church" ean^ made, to stand out, in holy distinction, from the world,— so that it can be pointed to as a community constituted on principles, and regulated by laws, of its own,— the greater advantage has the minister of Christ in appealing to the world for the divine excel- lence of those principles and laws ; and the more powerful and impressive becomes the testimony borne by the church against the world, that " the deeds thereof are evih"— It was because Jesus bore this testimony against the world, that "the world hated him." And, on the same pi^nciple, he says to his disciples — " If ye were of the worlcf, the world would love his own ; but because ye are not of the world, but I haye chosen ye out of the "world, there- fore the* world hateth you." What a strangely incongruous scene, theii^/is produced by the blend- ing of the church and tne world togethei*, — ^by the introduction into the former of " the uncircumcised and unclean," — the known votaries of the latter! — no other than the realization tlnthin the church its^ of the very hatred by which the world is declared to be distinguished from/it !-:— of the enmity between tiiie seed of the woman! aiid the seed of the serpent I Is this a state of things to which there is a single sentence in the New Testament that gives counte- nance ot sanction ? Ought not the church rather to bear to the world the relation of an antagonist power, visibly distinct, and working i^ainst it^ j^readii^ corruptions with bH the combined force of spiritual ■'V .Ift!. A ) im MATERIALS OF A QmfROH OP CHRIST. principle? The amalgamationt of the werld with the church has the same effect, in regard to the latter, which the early compotinding of th? principles of - human philosophy •(" science falsely so called ") ^th divine doctrine had upOn -the gospel,-^the effect of Obscuring its glory, and weakening its power. As it was the truth in its purity that was '' the power of God unto salvation;" m w&s ii. the church in its. purity, as the grand and permament exempliiacation of the influence of that truth in both renewing hearts and uniting them, that evinced its divinity, and promoted its acceptance. By impure commlinion, according to the extent in which it prevails, all this is done away. The incorporation of the two is the effectual counter- • working of the divine purpose with regard to the salutary effect of the one upon the other. It is wjth the churchy as^t is with an army. Union is strength. WJien, in an arktyj^here is " one heart and one soul," --one principle of patriotism and of loyalty,— one . conviction of the righteousness of their cause,— one ^ feeling of attachment and devotedness to their com- mon leader,— there is an energy in then: combined, assaults, which carries, all before it. Theintroduc- .tion of ey(pn a fe^ disaffected spirits may infuse a paralyzing panic into the whole host, or may divide it against itself, and ^cr<^ than destroy it^ efficiency. Thus it caainot fail to be with the church,— the " army of the living God." The success of thek aggressive efforts lipon the world depends, to an incalculable . degree, upon the union of the memb^ in the faith . and hope and love of 4he gospdl,— and ihe vit^ warmth and, energy thrown by these into all their efforts. Disunion is boldness, weakness, Jassitude, « 7andfailure. . . i " *• > m « '»' ■> \. MATEBIAIS OP A OHUBiCH OP OHBJST, 133 ith the latter, pies of ")^th )£E'ect of As it of God ',rity, as of the bits and omoted cording \,e away. sounter- ■ L to the ; is "wjth trength. , le soul," by,— one 3e, — one eir com- jinbined. Qtroduc- infuse a ty divide Eciency. e " am^y ygressiye alculable the faith . the vital all their lassitude,* • :i '»« ;*' One observation more, and I close this chapter, which has extended to a touch greater length than I anticipated; for which the vital imp>ortance of the subject must be my excuse.— The observation i»--- What strange conclusions we should come to, were we to SL-pply to iiidividiial c/tarader the principles which are so frequently and so thpuighllessly applied to the cmdition of the- churclies. In the scriptures, there, is the very same evidence that churches should aim at purity in their eommunioiii, as thiBre is that believers individually should aim at purity in their " personal character. That the latter cannot attain to sinless perfection in the* present life, is no good reason why they should not desire it, and make it their aim. That jthe former have* never attained, to a state of ^ communion absolutely pure, is no better reason why <^ih»u should not desire it and make it their aim. To i/bay that 'wiB need not seek & pure church on earth, * because we shall never gre< a pur^ church till we reach heaven,— ris no-sounder logic than t© say that, we need not seek a pure heart on earth, because we cannot get it till we reach heaven. As it is our duty, and ought to be our unceasing endeavour, in the prayerful and diligent use of prescribed means, to bring owe personal purity as near to the purity of the i* spirits of just . men made perfect" "as we can,-^so is it the duty of chiM'ches, and ou^ht to be their unceasing endea- vour, an the diligent aild prayerful use of prescribed to»Anl, to bring their caUective purity, — the purity of theiri fellowship,— ^into as.''npar conformity to the purify of the communion of heaven as they can. As the Ijhurch on earth tod the church in heaven are one ,;— as believers, while on earth, are represented as ^ come to the spirits of just men made perfect"— V V : . ^ * . 1 , . ■ . • ■ - ■ ♦ . f . " • . . ■ ■ '. ■ ' - 1 ^B -«. ■•' ' "• ',■ "'i ■■ % .» 1 '■' ■^^' ■ » 1 •".,".■; ■\ -^ ■* 1 .'■■-. * " . ■ , y '■♦" '' *V ■.' *- *"■- ." ■*,■ • *i^H i ■■.■■ - "*, ■ ..■■ \. 'i ■ , / 134 MATEBIAIil OP A CHUBCH OF OHBiaT. themselves constituting, in this world, " the general assembly and church of the first-bom, which are written in "heaven ;" it is surely natnrfd and right, that what appeals as the church below, and passeB under the nalne, should be i&ade to bear as near a resemblance as possible to that which is above, — ]^e earthly to the heavenly,— the militant to the, triumphant :— that assimilation should be our aim, rather than contrast. This, surely, is more reasona- ble, than to act as if the corrupt condition of the church on earth were divinely intended to enhance the pleasure arising from its holy fellowship here- after ; so that the greater the present corruption, the m6re exquisite the zest and relish of th^ future, purity; and, therefore, the- more corrupt JXOW the better! How would this do, when applied to the individual believet? How would it do for him, instSad of " crucifying the flesh,''' and " striving, agsdnst sin," "overcoming the world," and "folhnrifng lioliness;"— to make it his study to keep himself, while here, as spiritually dead and worldly-minded as possible, that so he might enjoy with the. greater zfest the life and holiness of heaven!— When the excellent John Newton remarked to a lady, on xyxir |)re8ent subject,- « We'll never get a wjre church tiU we get to heaven; and if there were a^ pure church on earth, it would no longer be pure if yon and^I entere^ it;"— wise man as he was, he either epoke foolishly, cfs^e spo^ more in jest than in earnest,— ^niore to ""turn aside^ by a good-humoured pleasantly, the point o3E an unwelcome argument, or the edge of ft too true reflection, than gravely to settle a pOii;it Of duty. It amounted to no more, than this, that because he and Jiis friend, and every -oihefbfeliever on earthy were — " -V . _ 1 : . . S /■ MATEBIAIA OF 'a OHUBOH OF CHBISt. .^1 . 136 imperfect and' still sinM, therefore they needed not startle^or scruple at ^ -most intimate Mowship with the unbelieving and the worldly. He must sorely have thought her one of the apostle's " silly yiromen" when, if she had indicated any conscien- tious scruples on the subject, he imagined such an evasion suffident to remove them. We should cer- tainly desire no greater amoimt,. of purity iii the church on earth, than to ha«e its communion com- posed of stlch characters as Mr. Newton. In these remarks, I have said nothing respecting the effect of ^admission, into the church— to the ex- ternal enjoyment of what are termed its priyikges — on the minds^of those persons themselves, whoarB so admitted;— admitted without lany evidence of their ^ having "passed from death unto life,"— of their ^ having been the subjects of that new birth which the Saviour declai-ps indispensable to a sinner's being a subject of his kingdom. I am fully persuaded, and have ever been, that ministerial" unfaithfulness in this particnlar, — indiscriminate admission to christian or- dinances,-— has ruined4(more . souls than' almost any other single cause whatever. O the multitudes, in ^whose' bosoms it has fostered "strong delusion," — whosfe " deceitfd hearts" it has contributed to cheat into a false estimate of themselves and of their state, and whom it has sent down to ihe ^ave with " a lie in th^ right hand!"— Having a nominal member- ship in the chufcli on earth, they have never discovered the cruel delusion thns pfactised upon them, tin tKe^ have found themselves excluded from the church in heaven !— T4ie truth is, that- in every such admis^on of unworthy inembets into the church, I'there %a&/our/M evil The soul of the individual is f^ A/ 4- 1B6 MATEBIAM OF A CHUBCH OF CHRIST. :'ii I- decMved ; and deception, especiaUy iii a matter of such importance, involving the interests of eternity, can-never be a. privilege, but, under the semblance of, a benefit, is the most serious of wrongs :— the -Lord, the church's head, is dishonoured, by the marrmg of the spiritual character of his kingdom, tind.the ,^ obUteration, so far as the evil goes, of its distinction from the world i— the chiu'ch itself is injured, by , the spoiling of its appropriate loveliness ; by the . introduction into it of a corrupting leaVen, which endangers "the whole lump," by planting ih it "roots of bitterness," to " spring up and tafotible it :/ —and a stumbling-blpck is laid in the way of an ungodly world, when, instead of having before their eyes, in the holy character of the chureh as a sepa- rate, and spiritual community, an exemplifieation of what the, gospel, personally and sociaUy, effects, it can point to the members of this community, and say, with the taunt of scorn and' the bitterness of sarcasm— " what do ^e more than others ?"^AJ1 these things theWoStle of the Gentiles evidently felt,, when he motoed over the backsjidings and corruptions of certainof the churches in his day;. And surely, when anVchristians, instead of sylnpa^, thising with thq^ spirit\of his lamentations, alm6st regard these backsUdiilgs and corruptions with a • sentiment of coD^l^cen^, as 'furnishing them .with an apology for'^fe^tatedMatpanty ^9^, they' are fearfully itstray from rectitiide, both in thei»-tiews, and in the frame arid tempe\ of their minds. They are making the same fearf^y perverse use of the corruptions of churches, which has sO often, so madly, and so fatally, been mMe of "the errors and sins of individual saints. The niaii who in the social .':^' Z^mateJuals of a c«urc^ op CHMST. 137 tter of lernity, mce of „ 5 Lord, ring of ad ^the^l ibction red, yy by the . which. I ih it bleit:*V ' of an re their asepa- ation of Sects, it ty, and naess of ?"^AJ1 vidently ig6 and lis day;, sylnpa-a, , ahn6st I with a em .with ;hey' are tr tiews, }. They e of the >ften, so rors and he Bocjial J oor^lrtions.of apostolic times finds a vindication for similar social corruj)tion8 in our own days, proceeds on the very samj& principle— ^a principle in. which there is no principle— with him who, iii spite of his own personal viceSj encourages hims'dtf in a good opinion of his personal sajfety, from th^ recorded trespasses and falls of good .men, — ^As tlfet\latter are |^orded,'not that they may he imitated in Individual character, or th#it security in sin may be flustered, . but that they ma^r be abhorrently shuimed, attd thisit self-jealousy may be kept awiake in prayerful vigi- lai)ice; so are the corruptions of churches recorded, not that other churches may follow them, and feel at ease amid worldliness and pollution, but that i^ey may be warned and put on their guard; that they may pupfy, and preserve in purity, the temple of the Lord. . . . Let pastors, and let churches, oiLQll the grounds that have been mentioned, "take heed unto them- selves," in regard to this primary? and fundamental pointr— ,ihfi.>apostles— namely,^ • Bishops SLud Deacons. N. P" 2. That there is no evidence in the New TdfitamlBnt in support of diocesan episcopacy, -^v of bishops in- vested -wdth authority over the chutches in more 1 or less extensive districts; and over th^. ministers- %- of those churches as their inferior clergy. « • 3» That there is no conclusive evidence for the existence, in the apostoUc churches, of an order of . bishops or presbyters that |jore rule m the church, ' but did not teach,— usualjl^ called by our^presbyte- rian brethren ruling elders. ' ' J ■ 140 OFFlCEIlfi OP CHRISTIAN CHUBCHE8. SECTION I. '■'.'■■' PROOF THAT BISnOPS AND DEACONS ARK THE ONLY ORDERS OP OFFICERS, IN THE CIIURCUE8, RECOGNIZED BY TH* ■ ^ NEW TESTAMENT. . ' ■ tfr This first position being one in which, under this general form of it, our presbyterian brethren are agreed witlxus, I shall not dwell so largely on it as otherwise I*inight have done. It is necessary, how- ever, to present the proofs of it, on account of its bearing upon the refutation of the claims of epis- copacy. The precise point of variance between presbyterians and independents will be fully discussed under our Mird position. : * - In support of this our first position, then, we observe— 1. There are some institutions and arrangements, which have in them a kind of a jpnori recommenda- tion from their naturalness, ,They are such as ctr- cumstances ncUuraUy suggest, C-or such at least as, when suggested, the obvious exigencies of the case at once show to be exactly suitaUe. They correspond to the exigencies ; and they exhaust them.— This seems to be very much the case on the present subject. l. There are two descriptions cf interests, which belong to every christian individually ;n,nd (since societies are composed of individuals) which belong to every christian society,— -to every church. I ijieed hardly ■" say what these are — ^the spiritual and ihp tempore^. ■ Undei the one or the other of these two heads, all that concerns the well-being of a church may be easily included. Now, it does seeaii as if nothing could be more natural and simple, than a distribution .;■ -I ■:%- BISHOPS AND DEACONS. 141 of officers according to these two classes of interests or of wants; — the efficient superintendence of the spiritual and of the temporal necessities of a church comprehending all that it can require. — Here is sim- plicity. Hero is nature. Here is all that is needed, and no more. And this consideration should at le&st prevent our being^surprised, should wo find the distribution of offices in correspondence with this simplest classification Of existing wants. In making this simple' distribution of the interests and the corresponding offices of; the church, I feel myself quite entitled to assume, without an argu- ment, that when episcopalians rank the deacon as one of the orders of the vkrgyt fliey put him quite out of the place he originally occupied, and confer upon him functions which did not then pertain to his o£^ce. The occasion of its first institution, and the charge then explicitly assigned to it of the^' tables,", or temporal provision, of the poor, and, inferentially, ' of the temporalities of the church in. general, tho reception and distribution of its bounty, mvmt be i^^itted to fix, with quite sufficient clearness and definiteness, the nature 'and objects of the office. ' " Serving taUes" is the phrase employed to express the "business," for the management^ of which the " seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom," were tion of that spiritual love,— that benevo- lent andybeneficent kindness, which is the very grenitw of Christ's kingdom, and which, '^^ in the beginning of the gospel," was so honourable to himself and his doctrine. How lovely, — how full of all that is inter- esting and attractive,— how fruitful of glory to Christ andyof benefit to souls, was the scene presented by the^ first church at Jerusalem, when not only was reat grace upon rill them th^t believed,"— their "spiritual prosperity abounding by the use of their spiritual privileges ; but when, by christian sympathy and christiaii bounty, no temporal distress was left unrelieved, and no temporal want unsupplied. This was part of the manifestation of their spiritual p^ois- perity; and it tended to the conviction of others, to the recommendation of the principles by~ which eflfects so unquestionably excellent \Mffe produced, and thus to the conversion and salvation of Jkrals. When the "murmurings" mentioned in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apblsttles arose, they were calculated, as far as the cause of them existed, to hinder these desirable lesults :— and when the distri- t::. lU OFFICEBS (»■ CHRISTIAN CHUBCHES. "'I: ■ '■ bution q{ the churches 1x>uiity was committed to the deacons then chosen for the purpose, and the whole existing need was i^egiilarly and adequately supplied, the hazard of such fi. prejudicially counter^wor^ng influence was taken out of the way, and the full efficacy of the display of practical love was restored. In this way, it wil} at once be seen, the diaconal function, with aU its seeming secularity, operates most efficiently to th<3 increase of spiritual good; It tends' to the circulation of love,=r-^" brotherly love," — that love which isiihe very life-blood of the body of Christ. The principle by which jrfie means of tempo- ral benefit are supplied, is this^love ; and then, the distribution of those means is designed, not merely to relieve the actual want, but to promote the exer- cise of the same divine principle. Every thing temporal is to be regarded as subservient to what is- spiritual. This being the case, it must be. evident that, in order to the full influence of the function of the deacon, there must be a correspondence between the manmr of discharging it and the spiritml ends intended by the Lord to be served by it.— When, amongst the members of Ihe civil community, a public subscription is set on foot for the relief of any particular class of sufferers, whether from some sudden local calamity, or from the more general pressure of the times,, the distributors of tjiat bounty may be considered as having discharged the trust committed to them, when they have given to each sufferer the share of the amount, either allotted to him by the roll of distribution put into their hands, or determined by the principle of proportion accord- ing to which they have been, instructed to act. But J-:t. mt' y BISHOPS AND DEACONS. 146 ^dtothe the whole supplied, f-working the fuU restored. t—-' diaconal operates goodi It rlove,"— V 3 body of 1 }f tempo- 1 then, the I ot merely j the exer- ■ . '. ry thing 3 what is- ; that, in a of the between Itiud ends When, lunity, a relief of om some ' ■ general A bounty B the trust !| to each i lotted to Ir hands, | 1 accord- \ bct. But 1 not so the deacon of a christian church* When he visits Christ's poor, he visits his brethren of the family of God >— he visits them in the name of him whose commission he bears :— he visits them with a message of love from his other brethren, by whom he has been chosen and set apstrt for the execution of this trust. ' In such circumstances, can he be said to have d^ie Ms duty, when, like the mere agent of a civil«^fiiM|Mular society, he has simply doled out the poun^ W|p yb.e shillings, or the pence, required? Far, wPila^, very far from it. In executing the^ merely secular part of his function, how faithfully and judiciously soever in regard to the proportional allotment to the different cases claiming the supply, he has overlooked one of the ends,— and that, too, the very highest, which the distribution is designed to effect. He has forgotten the Lord's purpose, — to cherish love ; love to the Lord himself, for having said—" Inasmueh as ye did it to one of the least of these my brethren, ye did it unto me,"— and the warm reciprocation of love to one another in the hearts of his people. He has neglected what ought to have been held by him as of primary importance, —the rendering of the pecuniary donation— the tem- poral relief— the instrument of promoting spiritual feeling. It belongs to the duty of the deacon to accompany the supply of the means of comfortablo subsistence with such words of soothing consolation and encouragement, or of salutary admonition, as the pbveHy supplied, or the affliction relieve(^l or the circumstances and character of the individual or the family, may require j anfl, at the same time, by prayer and thanksgiving, to draw out the gratitude, •and establish the confiding dependence, and warm 10 . - ^ m i"' M ' — : 1 -T-^. 'f/. .»■ ^• f •:.^t' -146 pFFICEBS'.OP CHJtlSHAN CHUBCHES, . ' tiie cfanstiein affections, oi the poor and sufifering j>1>retjltren tmd sisters, and so to rivet the m6re closely ."tibeit attaQ^tjEieSht to tiie Lord and, to 14s church. 'Christ has SQoh e^ vie^; the churcl^ has such ends iA view; aiid he t^ho' is the servant qf Christ iond o| liiij^ church has not^ adequately exonerated iim&^lf^jof his .d unless he has fulfilled it in stich a tnanner a^^effectutdly to promote theln..^ \\ * Thus, u|)on^ the principle that,' in a spiritual com- ..fittiinityj every thing. must be associated with spiritual ' fends^ there may be,— -nay, there inust be, no small, amount of Wheit- is spiritual infiised ihto the discharge '"' of the deacon's trust.— And to this I would add, that, ' mceall the secular icpncenis, of the church, as Wefl.^* asK-the provision for ttie jjoor, naturally fall into the ^deacon's handsj-^ialf that relates to the pecuniary means and the support and progress of the cause of God in" general, both in the- christian society with ' which they are connected^ and in the world at large ; ■pit may, I think, be fairly regarded as a part of their ' official duty, to maintain a supervision of the practi- ' eal operation of the principles df liberality amongst ' their brethren :— so that, while the pastor, in his ptibUc ministrations, expounds and inculcates the principl€^~>nd urges the apostolic motiveT—'* Ye know > the grace of our Lord Jesiis Christ, .that, though he was rich, y^t for your saJkes^ became j^oor, that ye, through his poVeriy, might l^e made rich,"— if : any deac6ii,^r if the de^ns generally, have grouiid to believe that in certain quarters the influence and coiisequent produgt of these principles ' are not what they ought to be,— thait there is any egregioiis failure or deficiehcy,— I cannot but regard it as incumbent on them, individually Or co]lec^t4y,> T V# •L .*iv BISHOPS AND BEACONS. 147 /'not to suner sin upon theii* blather," but, with the ' * needful tmion Of nffectiod, fidelity, -and deKcilcy, to remind him of the neglected or the defectively fol-- filled diity; Thia, indeed,- may be regarded as tlte course which, the fellOw^membera of a church 'in gjpneral are l^ound to follow towards one another ;— but there seeps naturally to rest a special obligation on the deacons> in such case^, to deal, in faithful kindness, with any who are not duly; " hotuourm^ the , Lord with theiy Substance," whether. ii| regard/to contribution foy the poor, or to tl^e support of 'the ' gospel and the advancement o.f the . caused of Ood." .They have a -charge of^ the treasury':— tmd it is .i-incumbent On them to see to|. it that "it is hot de- frauded Of any of itS'dues, butj inits ^ev«raLdepaH;r; ' mentsi suitably replenished^ ^-^ v, ; *i- ^ ^^ TPhtis, while the official trust »of the iie'ACons is' secular, thei'^ is in tlie Jduty connected ;with: the lAanagement of tha^ trust, mio^ that is spiritual^ an4 promotive of spirituality.*, , ". » -ici, . * I have hot in the t'ett taken any nbti(!e of-;^ qnedti(9^which, on ■ ,^ tbesabject of the 'Deacon's bfficp, I9 fi-egnpiltly put^-Why have you ,-not deaconesses ? My reasons ar^ two^ Mrsi : It is npt^a.ques^ion of which the Mfflculty to 'answer it (were .there any)'pre88es'on,4o^epen^ deisicy aliuP.'' Ja other ^eooQiinations, th^re are., oe-deaconesses, iior fenjale office-bearers, any more than^^mong^ lDde|)endent8.--i^cdru% > There is 1^0 sach di^cultj' 1. T£erq were no deaconesses in the^rsi ehurcb,-r-the m():^dl'charch, — that of Jepisalem. 'Although, the' elaea of per^^iiiwof whom the neglect complained of occasioned theinBtito:- tk>tt of the 6fflce was a description of fepiak8,-"-thoae appointed there to bold it were men— 'f seven menof honesireport,"— 2. /pie evidenceV' of the oxisteabe' of .deaconesses afterwards, in any of the -other Qhurohes, is so exceedingly scanty, as to make it matter, of sorprite ' .that it should- have been so generally assnmed. Iliere -is one passage only, and. that ft, merely incidental one, that at all l^earis tipon it. Tut passage is Rom, 16. 1, " I commend nnto youvPhebe' onr sister, irjbo is a servaint (Staxoyov, deaconess) Of the ctorch which is %t -m - '■■*>■ ^f-". r^ •irA- 'i^K A-» 148 OtFICEBS OF GHBISTIAN CHURCHES. :i iL While, howeTer, I plead for the naturaluejss and oompleteDesa of this twofold distribution of official services in correspcmdence with the twofold classifi- cation of a church's requirements, I would not be Cencfarea." Even hero, the Btrictlj official tae v( the dosigaation, how probable soever, 'is not indisputably certain. And then the other paalsage, UBually cited on the Bubject— 1 Tim. V. 9, Ac, "Let not a widow be taken into the number,'' ^c.—bas ever. appeared tome (were it not for tBe high authorities to the contrary, I sb^ould be tempted to say demotisirdbly) to refer to an entirely different matter. The apostle is describing the age and qualifications of such widows as • should be " taken into the nuiQber'' of those who were propu/ed/or by the church. Provision for widows is the principal subject of the chap- ter. The iiyunctioif in the third verse—'' Ilonour widows jthfit are widows indeed"— has no relation to putting them info office, but to maintaining, them in respectable comfort. The injunction imme- diately following shows this. It ia an injunction to "children and nephews," or rather grandchildren, to " requite their parents ;"-^that is, evideatly, by n^aking the requisite provision for them: an4° th^ injunction is rei>eated in a more extended form in verse 16, where it includes all near relations— "Let them relieve them, and let not.tl|^ church be charged ; that it may relieve them that are widioiws indeed." And in verse 3, the man is uaohrislianlzed— denotlinced a^ havbg "denied the faith, and being worse thAn ap infidel," who fails in this duty, binding on him alike by the obligations of nature and of grace —the duty of "providing for hia own, and especially for those of his own house."— And while, in this respect, both previous and sub^ quent context leads to this interpretation,the latter confirms it inanother way— namely, that all the reasons ftssigc^d for " refusing the younger widows" are such as might be summed up i: "•?'> -thfi mischievous tendencies— the moral and spiritual dangers— ot maiUc-fiaing in a condition of dependant idleness those who were able, and who ought to have been willing, to gain their own livelihood. (Compare, in regard to idle men, 2 Thess. iii, 10—12.) "Whatever partial, occasional, temporary relief even " ttie younger widows " might stand in nepd of' they were not, for the reasons assigned, to be taken entirely on the bounty of the church. Such complete and comfortable provision was to be reserved for those aged and excellent women described so feel- ingly by the apostle, i^ a suitable re^un^ for their long-cdntinned course of active and self-denying beneficence. 3. If in any case females were instalted in offlao, it was where the customs ot society y< V ' j^ J BISHOPS AND DEACONS. 149 ■■*\.s>- imderstopd to lay stress upon it, as if it had in it any absolute conclusiveness ; welt knowing that man's theoretical anticipations are by no means always in aceotdance with 0Od's actued institutes. AU, of dki not admit pf 8uch easy ^ecdom of intercourse between the sexes as existed among tlMt^^ebrews, and as exiuts amongst ourselves. Out of Buch<>a sti^e of society a necessity, or an approach to ncccssi y, might arise^r^be employ Oient of fembie agency. And if any church, in parts of the world so circyrastanced, should employ it still, under the conviotioh of their having the divinely-approved example of the church at Ce^chrea, if not of others, ta8 concerning giving ^d receiving, but you ypnZy ^"-^and without doubt, the church at Philippi was one of the V cAwrc/ies of Macedonia;;" mentioned in ' '2 Cor. yiii. .1, 2, with such commondation for their exen^lary Hberality.-— The letter, then, is' addressed to a christian church ;-^and in the add!ress, or inscrip^ tion,the inspired writer mentions the m6m&^r« affd the officers ,•-—"' &11 the minis, with the" bishops and deacons" We are surely warranted to conclude that tl«re were no others besides the two specified. It is not sUpposable, bn any fair and natural prin- cipled—nay, the suppositioii would be in the highest .f ■ -:■■.. a ■ iK - ■ ■■ ■ *• of their own sex. He is, in some points, pltutdble in support of this gloss. Seeing, however, aged men, aged women, ^oung women, and young men, are aii introduced ib tW passage in immediate snc- cession^ it seems arbitrary to underatand any of them otherwise than «a referr in g to rel a tive a ge s, or tiroe s of life. 5- '- •*C; 1^ ft »■ •*C; /- BI8H0M Aia> DEACONS. \ 161 degree unreasonable, that the apostle would mention the superior and inferior classes of offioe-bearers/and omit entirely an intermediaite class, without even the remotest allusion to them. The fair conclusion firom' the passage is, that there were noncf but the hiahopa and ^Q deacons in the Philippian church ; and tliat^ as all the churches had the same oonstituttoni there were no others in any of the rest. The ^econd of the two passages is, 1 Tim. iii^ 1—10. — In this^important passage, Timothy has expressr instructions given him, with regard to tlie requisite ' qualifications of those who should bear office in the churcjjes of Cfhrist. The officers «)ecified are^. as in, the former passage, two in number ; uid their de^i^ * signatiohs, respectively, are th& Ba,me,—bi9h(^ and efeoco/is.— Here, then, in ihe Jirst place, we have the same conclusion as before forced i4>on us,-^namely, ih&improbabiUty,-I might sajrtiie moral impossi- biliiy*^ that; m giving these minute instructions, the apostle g^ould have altogether omitted an interme-' diate office' between that of the bishop and that of the deacon ; not only assi^iing no dis^UI^t' or pecu- liar qualifications for the discharge of lis functions^ but not, even so much as naming it i-r^Secondlp, the two passages confirm each other. The, exclusive mention of the two offices in both, serves to.give us tlie greater assurance in both it is out q1 the "question: — aJid^ thircUy ; in- both the one and the o^er, the mention of the two officers bears altogether the aspect of a thing undbr- ■stood and/qmUiar. In reading the passages, we are ; ' at once impressed with the conviction that the churches' then knew of no other offices than these. — I ^ • 1^ ■'. w ■ v«S li.: 162 If the 0FFICEB8 OP CHRISTIAN' OH0BCHES. passages thus elted be not sufficient to settle the point, that these two are the only classes of ' officers recognized by the New Testament, I knoif not wh&t accumulation of evidence could establish it. 3. We find mention made, in other places, oiprea^ , byte^s or efo?€r«;— Wlio, it may be asked, were they? —We reply ; there is evidence sufficiently clear, that Ulder is only another designation of the bishop ; that both designations express the same q^ce. For proof of tins, we appeal to the following passages :— Acts zi. 17 and 28.— In ttie former of these verses; we read that •' from Miletus Paul sent to Ephesus, and'called the Elders of the church ;"^and in the latter, he thus addresses them:— "Take heed, therefore, unto , yourselves, and to all the flock, oyer the whict the * Holy Ghost hath made you overseers" — {tittiftoKovi, hishxfps) *'io feed the church o! God, which He hath purchased with his own blood:"—! Pet. v. 1—4. " The Elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of tiie glory that shall be rev^aledi— feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof" (ixidHOTtavvrei, fdM- ling the charge of bishops) "not by constraint, but willingly, not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind :— neither as being lords over i&od's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock. And when the chief shep- herd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory >ihat fadeth not away."— Titus i. 6, 6, 7. "I*orthi8 cause leift I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, ai^ ordain ddera in every city, as I had appointed thee :— if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful ■. ■* . . .. ( y.**. ■ :.■■;./:. fl X,,...,',- .. ■ B a .o . "-■ ft • •■/^ fl < • * 1, /■. ■■■ I f ^ ' ' . ^. 8 - r V '• . ' ' -^ -, t t ' • u BISHOPS AMD DEACONS. 158 :# children, children not acoosed of riot or unnily.* For a bishop, mxisi be blameless, as the steward of God," Ac. The passages thus mentioned do appear to me quite sof^cient to establish the oneness of the office meant by the two designations :— and this receiyee additional confirmation from observing— « 4. Thai Bishops and Elders are never mention^ together . When the former are spoken of, you never find tiie latter; and when the latter 'are spoken of,, you never find the former. This is strong collateral proof of .their being the same. Had they been dif- ferent, we might sutely have expected *to find occa- sional mention of bisJiqps and dders, as we do find repeated mention of bishops and deaeons.f . * I have h'ere repeated tb9- word chUJfen, to show the Engllsb reader, that the words " not accused of riot or unruly^^ refer, io the original, to than;— 8nch a reader being natliraUy apt to understand them as form- ing piurt Of the character of the Elder. The t^ms, in tiie original, are in concord with the ehUdi^ of the Elder ; shoi^ing thii his family, as well as himself, should haVB a'character creditablsv to his profession and his prominent position In the church. \ t With the highest deference for tiie eminent critical anthority of the late Mr. Ewing,! confess myi^elf somewhat sceptical respecting ioiiore than onte of the positions wliich he occupies, in regard to the meaning of the designation— ^Iders.^ — When he says, in the first sen- ' tence of the section of his woink on Church GoTCfrnment, which relates to the " Elderi'of the primitiv^ churches," that " The first converts to the foith of the gospel appear to be frequently spoken of, in the New Testament, under the general appellation of elders," — I cannot but desldctrate more conclusive evidence of the aflSrmation than is ad- dnddd. - No passages are qopted, in ^liich the deugnation of " elders" is given to these first converts, either during our Lord's life, or after his ascen8ion.r— When it is afterwards added— " 6ther elders were those who Were the earliest converts added to the church, after the ascension of Christ, in consequence of the preaching of the gospel with the Holy Ghost sent down firom heaven,"— I haie the same doubts, ■:■/: i ■I V--1 — "i^fe: ■m ■ji-W :A .m^ -%P^:- ■■. '^ m^ OFFICEBS Of CHBISTIAN CHURCHES. I proceed to mj second position. I and for the sanie reikaon,~th»t no pMsage ia cited, In which such ftrst convorto are bo denomioated. That they are called " first fruitu," may be freely granted;— bnt this I» Act the tame with eUert. Wh«t« are tlwy called elders f— and where Is the evidence th»t Jirat-fruUt and tidera are >ynonymoii« ? "From among these eldem," ifc is subseqaently said, ('the flnt ordinary office-bearers appear to have been Belected."— It is certainly more than probable, that fhese office-bearers wonld be sheeted from among those who were both men of experience and men endowed with the spiritual gifts which then abounded. This may be admitted, without admitting that elders was a general dcsiifnation of either the flnt converta or the ^rihially gifted ; and that thitt It was notp<-oper)y a term of office itself, but a term tor those from among whom the two des- criptions of office-bearers, the bishops and the deacons, were selected. This view renders an ellipsis necessary in those passages where •' Meri'* are spoken of as having been " ordained," such as has olways, I con- fess, appeared to me t6o violent to be admissible. Thus, In Acts xiv. 23, it Is said— " Wben^they had ordained them {(hat vn,ib or tor them) elders in every chilrch, they commended them to the Lord, In whom they believed."— -On these words the cotav^ni is—" the expres- sion 'they had ordained to them elderd in cvery^church,' is elliptical, and supposes the reader to understand what they had Ordained those elders tp be. The persons ordamed were elders before : they were now ordained to be bishops and deacons to the dlaciplcs, in every church."— I liave called this a violent ellipsis. Such it seems to me to be:— that the very offices to which the election and ordination took place should not at all be mentioned, when it required so few words to do it !— only the words ixtdxajtovs hvatxat Staxor ovinia he biahopa^and deacona. I cannot but think the passages which I have referred to in the text are, by for, most naturally Interpreted on the principle of Elder and Bishop being the same office ; and that they require unnatural straining to explain them on any other. - That Ijie word for efcfers is also sonietimes used uno^ctoAy, is granted. Bqt there is no difficulty in distinguishing when it is to be taken in its official^ and when in its unofficial sense ;-^nd the uru^fftcial use of it is no more evidence against tlfe official, than the general use of the word draxovo? is evidence against the appropriate application of it to the Office of deacon. When once decidedly appropriated, it cannot be said, properly, to continue the secondary, but becomes the primary, sense of „ the word. What is second in time becomes, through usage, firBMn asao- ciation. ~^^ o-j -r -^ "™^ ;53- t |. w " -#•- KO EYmEMCE FOB OlOGBa^ BPI800PA0T. IBH 8ECTI0 ■fw THBRB 18 NO EVIDENCE IN -.—FORT OF DIOCESAN pPIgCO |. E8TAMCNT IN BVP- At JB^IOW BIBHOni THE 0HUBCHE8 IW INVESTED WITn AtJTHORITT MORE OR LE8^ EXTENSIVE DISTRICTS, AND OVER TBI MINISTERS OF THOSE CHURCHES, AS THEIR UltlBlOB OLERGT. ;•'■ ■ ' «■ #. •*'^ "t* * In entering on the establishment of thin position,! would assume the following things : — '■ 1. That all attempts to find the constitution of the christian church by reference to that of the Jetvishj are altogether unwarrantable, and of necessity fruit- leBS. I shall not, therefore, consider it worth my while, to take the slightest notice, in the way of refu- tation, of the parallelism which high-mindeigmisco- palians have imagined to themselves, betl||Hi^ the gradation of ranks, — the high priest, the priesfs, and the Le\ites, under the old economy, andLthe similar gradation which, according to them, w^ (or rather must have been, for it m more a matter of favourite theoi^ than of appeal to fact) appointed in the church under the new. — It is manifest, that our reasonings on such a subject must be drawn, not from presump-! tive theories, founded in a system which " decayed^ waxed old, and vanished away,"^but from the re- corded facts, and* the directions, by precept or exam- ple, of the New Testament scriptures. All else haii its basis in human fancy, not in divine prescriptipn. ' 2. In our reasonings from the New Testament itself, respecting the constitution of the church of Christ, -'-< «i' 160 OFFIOERS OF CBBI^tUK 0HX7BCHES. 2. Beference; is made, in support of the principle of the system, 'to scripture, precedents. Xt is not affirmed that anywhere diocesan episcopacy is' form- ally instituted ; but it is alleged to be exemplified. And could the allegation be made good, our own^ avowed principles would oblige us to yield subm^ sion. Thi'ee cases are referred to. Thej.are, — tHat of the apostle James, at Jerusalem ; that of Timothy ■ and Titus, at Ephesus and Crete ; and that^ the angels of *Mie seyen/Aaatic churehes.— I musty4flfer.A . few remarks on these, kq th^r order. * • --/ / -^ ^- ' ■ FmsT CASE. James, it is alleged, was Bishop of , Jerusalem,— exercising episcopal authority/not mere- . ly in dommdn with* others, over "the Multitude of 'the disciples^" but over aU the other /ministers of th^ord',' theinselves. These minis^rs were what,^ in modern phrase,' would be calle,d his clergy, subject to his authoritative dictation. Jfce position is bold. Where hf its "prpof? ' ' 1. On several occasions, Jiimes js singled out in a ' way that seems toiifiply and to indicate such distinc- tion and suj)eriority^:— as when Paul, u\ writing to the Galati£^. speaks of ^persons who had come from Jerusalem to AntiocB, as having " come/row ^amhs •" — ^when the historian of the Acts of thfi Apostles represents Paul, on his arriving, at Jeruoiil 3m after ji^e Demetrian riots at Ephesus, as " going in,"-Mth himself and others, "^nto Jarries^,'* "and " all "the elders being present ;"— and when P6ter,-on his..de- . Uverance from prison by the angel, charges those in 'the house of John Mark, to " show those things unto JcMne», and to the brethren.'*— Gal. ii. 12; Acts xxi, 18 ; xii. 17.— Now, suppose we grant that in these modes of expression there is something distinctive <\. . \ n ./■ ■y f ^ .\ -v»/ a a ti o t] tl ii I k b b oi J< ai tl tl w 8C "T is tv Pi se ai in Is pi lOJ ^1 fri he mi ^'y # ./■ ■y %0 EYIDENCB FOR DIOCESiAN EVISCOPXCT. 161 "' : ' - \ r and p^cui^ar as to Jaine^j^^to what do^ it amdoiht? To Qo.more, I apprehend, if to anything, than to ^ this ; that, after a certain time at least, the apostles wpre accustomed to leave Jerusal^, for the purpose of canying^the gospel to o&^r. places. This was the ^ase with Petei:. At the tveiy time referred to in tiie first of thei^^ passaiges, he was at Antioch, Gal. ' ii. 1 J ; jknd at otter times we find him " passing tiiroughout all quJ^rters," and at JOppa, "tarrying even many days.'* That the r|^t oceadbnally fol- Icji'wed" a, •similar course, wci have . every reason to bjeli^ve. But it would not .ha^Jbeen sui:^able that by .the use of thia Uberjfcy, pr rather in the discharge ' of this duty, oZr the apostles should be absent from Jerusalem, af owce. What, thfn, if , by agreement among th0 jj)©s was beyqi limits !-^to whose jHJBdiction soever it mi; " posed to pertaJniaHjpsuredly canre • not boundyaries of his; no^ could his episcopal i there%:e, be either appe,akled tj? from it, or itai deoBions.— 3. And yet it was not at Antiocl thi^t the decision come to in the assembljlat ^%k: %-^ V V n ^ * i^ « I 4 - 1 1 ^ .*' '4-^- ^ / » 1 1 H • J e 1 I i h m II "b a n . 9i g ,a tl ■ "n . 'ai :t bi w ,^tc ' . , '--i-a.! Ta % , =■*!!#*, V. Ef>" :M f- '-"T^ » no" liVIDENGB FOB DI00E8AM EPIBOOPA.Gr. 168 leiii was reoeiye4 and owned as obligatory,— ^but by "all flj» chnrclies of the Gentiles." Was James* bMpp 'of tUd whole christian population of the heathen world? A large dioOesel— 4. The original ( Vor^s for- **^y sentence is" do not at all necessarily V express the pronouncing of an officially authoritative decision. In his previous address, James refers to what "Simeon "(Peter) had said ;--agrees with his judgment in thfe matter, and confirms it,— -delivering, ^t the same time, his own, in full coincidence with it! And then the whole assembly—" apostles, elders, and brethren," unite in the same judgment — and give it forth,, thus unitedly, to the churches at Antioch and . Syria and Cilicia." If the "sentence" of James is here to bd taken as implying anthoriti/,— the authority is the same as that with which Peter had spoken .before him,-i-that of an apostle.— Then, 5. This accords with the terms' of the appeal. It was not °**^^*^ *^^^-^ James alone, or even, to James 9spe> it Was issued Neithl^ijpaeB, ^OT a^ Spepial office be^found m the-' d^iunW in that %as associ&i came oVM ■: '. ■ * : ;• ■ ■'."'■ "■', * SeooIid Tiiey are take them it^ proceed^bi Jt is that of Tinrnhyta 4; but from '*"^ ^' U > ^t •I • ^ ^^ t*^ H-'W' Wy-Hft^^,^ ■'^M ^4iiX^ A.*'. •^1^ I ,../> •'p' 1 1 164 OinOEBS OF CHBISTUK OHUBOHEff. The former, it is alleged, was clearly the bishop of Epheausj and the latter of Crete. The affirmation rests on the charge given th^m, respectively^ by the apostle Paul, in reference to tiibse places ; a charge which, it „is affirmed, eyidently implies the possession of diocesan authority.— To Timothy he writes: — "As I besought thee' to abide still ^ Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mig;htest charge some that they teach no other doctrine^'' i&c.:^and again— " agratn«r an -cfcZefj (a presbyter) receive not an accusation, but before two or three wit- ijj nesses. Them that sin rebuke be/ore oZ/, that others also may fear." (1 Tim. v. 19)— And to Titm:—'' For this cause left I thee in Crete,! t]iat thou shouldest. sd in order the things that are tbanting, and ordainS ddera (presbyters) m every city, as I Jiad appointed emas hath forsaken me, ha^g loved t]^ present world, imd is departed unto vjlii^hessalonica; Qrecens to Galatia; Titus to Palmatia; only Luke 4s '\|lth me. Take Mais, and bring him with thee; for he is profitable to me for the ministry. And^ychicufl ^lave I sent to Ephesus."— Here let the Iwiowin^ ^'^^"^ ^® noted.— 1. We have, in ihese - verses, Titus, who^hon Paul wrote to him, had been "left in Crete/' gone inito Xl^lmatia: and whether « the Epistle to Titus or tlp,^ond to Timothy be supposed the prior in ^te, — ^whether Tiijiis went " from Crete to PalJhba. ^^ was l6||i in Crete subse- quently,7— it is, in eitnpF case, obvious, that the stay in , ^g^neither the one place ^rtl^e other was officialhrper-' . man^, jbut that thei^^Mb a rdmov||g from ^ce to. placed as circumstance?'tequired.?r-3,*^Tl^|prgh TimOj^ « ' thjjT was at Ephissus When t!^e first oLy||.'i|wo. efnstles j|»^ waijvritten to him, these vers^|t^n^^it a matter of"* ' nnckrtainty whether he was ^Iflpa^ ^^ date of the second. "J^ enter nol^into th«OPspute among <;fitics MJp their respective dates, an^the precise distance ^jFlame between the one and .the other. But the "language — " l^chious have t sent to JSphesuSy' ia much more likely to have been used of a place where Timothy, to whom the letter is addressed, was »o/, _ than of the place where he was : — and the likelihood, . %aa. ^/rt<% l^emarks, of his having been at the time -^ — s omewhere in the lesser Asia i s confirmed by thg!: ' ■"% ■ * '' ■ "■' ■ _■ t ■ ; m " '/. ;>/;. «* i' ♦• NO EVIDENCE FOB DIOCESAN 4 ^# )%:4 ■1 V EPI8OOPA0Y. 167 • •. "'% .;•?»■ * ■ '♦ 'V.;* " ■■"-«. reqaest in the subsequent Terse, to bring with him the doak, the books, and the parchments, which the apostle had left with Carpus at Troa8.—3. Where- eyer he was, whether still at JSphesus or elsewhere, the passage shows us that h#stay was to be short, —evidently for some special purpose, the completion <«^which the apostle urges him to expedite, so that he might "come to him shortly ;"— in a subsequent verse, " before winter." All this goes to show that he was not stationary, as, the office of a Dio«emn hop would hjjve required him to 1^.— 4. When to verses q^ted we add the twentieth and twenty- j— "Erastus abode at Corinth; but Trophimus ^*^^K ^®^ "* Miletum sick. Do thy diligence to comT%efoye winter. Bi|bulus greeteth thee, and Pudens, a^ Linus, and Claudia, and all. the breth- ren;" — we »ani, that there was a number of minis- ters attendant upon the apostle, who were left by him, as circumstances required, at different places, for special ends,^^ and were recalled and exchanged as he saw needful or expedient jiiolding n5 permanent official charge in any one place.--When this- is takei§ in connexion with.the previous proof that bishop an J^^ presbyter are designations of the same office, th© point seQwjJi^ to be settled by quite a sufficiency of e\idmce,—Oi(it in those days there was no such office as thai of a dui^'jsan bisJiop. Were there any evidence whatever, iudeed, in what Paul says to Timothy, that could make him out to have been the bishop of a diooese, it must have pi!pved him to have been some" < what, more,— & bishop of bishopsr-an ap^ica-idxo^os, an archbishop; seeing it is not the qualifications of presbyters merely that are described for his direction, that 80 he might " lay hands suddenly on no man," I ,r ' f^ ' _ ''iWiW^*'* 168 0FFICEB8 OF CHRIOTIAN CHURCHES. — but thode of bishops ; so that he was to ordain them, and oonsequentty to have them under his archie- pisoopal jurisdiction. And such have some actually fancied Timothy's official distinction to have been ! Archbishop Timothy! I think I see the youthful evangelist smile ^t the honour thus put upon him by modem criticism :— but it is not the smile of self- oomplacency and conscious elation, but the smile of pity for the httleness of ecclesiastical ambition. As the commissioned legate of an aposffe, he was in reality higher tl^an any such modern dignitary; — ^but in his own estimate, liis greatness, like that of the apostle whom he represented, lay in his being " least of all, and servant of all." . Third case.— The only other scriptural ground, that I am aware of, which has been taken up in sup- port of the office of diocesan bishop, is that which is found in the addresses of the epistles to the seven churches of the lesser Asia, — in Rev. ii. and iii. — "To the ANOELof the church at Ephesus," " To the ANGEL of the church in Smyrna,'* :'' 1. It must have been well and readily understood at tJte time, tor it is given as the explanation of a symbol :— " The seven stare are the angels of the seven churches; and the seven candlesticks (or lamps) which thou sawest are the seven churches."— ^As no #ffi* ciilty would then be felt in understanding what was' meant by the Bexen churches, we may presume that -> *.-*-* n e ith e r would there b e any about who were signified by their angds, „ • -"!-iW^|H^*t-» y. - ; V ; ,/ -W /NO EVIDENCE Foil DIOCESAN EPI8CX)PACY. 169 2. The diatinction 80 pomtodly expressed between the two symbols and the two things signified by them, is certainly quite*^sufficient to set at once aside what has appropriately been termed the '*vUra congregational view of the import of the designa- tion— namely, that it means the church itself, in itg corporate or collective capacity, contemplated and designated as a person, — an angel,— a messenger. This, for the reason just hinted at, as well as for others which might be mentioned were it worth a moment's while to notice them, is an outrage on all propriety and common sense, which one cannot but feel ashamed should ever have been resorted to in sup- port of any cause, how good soever we may otherwise consider it. 3. Not much more defensible is the presbyterian interpretation, which regards the angel of each cfilirch as signifying, according to a similar figure of personification* the coWw^ory o/Jthe etdership,— either the session or the pre^jtery, according as they take the word church to mean one congregation or more than one; — in a word, the rulers of the church regarded as oJidaMy oruf; and so figuratively embodied in one person.— This is far^mm natural. To me it appears one of the mO; j&t3prdinfery exemplifica- tions of the power of«na^^iijent to system, and of the force of habits of Sffenttll association, that men of sound judgment and eminent learning could ever bave brought themselves to think it so. That a, unit may be an appropriate symbol of a colkctive wttrnfier is alleged to be exemplified in the vision of the " angel tying in the midst of heaven, having the eve rlasting gospel, to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nataon, and kindred, and 1^ ^ 170 OVFICEBS OF dEBSBTUJX OHUBOHES. y-. tongue, and people." " As this gospel," it is alleged, " can be preached only by meUf this angel, who has it to preach to eyery nation, and kindred, and tongae, and people, must be the symbol of a human ministry. And as it is perfectly evident, that no single man can thus preach it, but that there must be a great company, of preache;rs to carry it to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, the angel men- tioned is, and of necessity must be, the symbol" of that "great company"* ThC'example is an unfortu^ hate one. Pere, the angel is one Of ttfe heavenly " messengers, and is Jiimsdf the sipnhdl :—m the other case, the angel is an earthly minister, andj instead of being th«. symbol, is tlte thing symbolized/ It is the " seven stars " that are the symbols,— the symbols of "the angels of the seven 'churches." And, as each of the stars is a unit, so must each of the angels be. To inake;the stars symbols of the angels, and then the angels, in turn, symbols of collective bodies, — ^is to make ^ caricature of symbol.-— The cases, then, are niot at all parallel. And" even apart from the irrelevancy of the pxample, the idea of a collective body being symbolically personij&ed in an individual, not of a higher order, as in the "angel flying in the midst of heaven," but of their own order— nof them- selves,-^, I repeat, anything but naturaL* "It is • ♦ "The claim? of cpiscepacy refuted"— by the late Dr^ Mason of ,. New Yprk, page 108",— the Italics are his. • Dr. Mason endeavoHrs to show, against the Episcopalians, tht^t the fiiotofthe sm(]ru2ar andp^uroZ'bumbetiS^being nscd promis^cuonsly in . these ejiistlcs, js cleaf proof of the coUecfive, import of the designation "the angel ;^^ peeing he is ■bometfnies^pddressud 'as one, and souieiSmes H8 more than one. He uses the argument d^te^omly. But .any little \!/).' plausibility it might possess is completel;^ neutralized ° by the f4Ct,r-fji|K> fact, to which hei never so much as allude^.-n-that the epistlekj-"^-' "' ' . % ..> ^ '.'■*■ A J • • p^^ mm cient to set aside the e^pi^cojpoZmn explanation of the ANOEL, as meaning the diocesan bishop of the several congregations, with their presbyters, conceived to have been in Ephesus, and, of course, in each of the ..other six cities, which were the seats of the churches ; ^-and also to the proof that bishops and presbyters were originally the same.— There is no evidence what- ever of " the church at Efprhesus," or the church in any one of the other cities, meaning any thing else -than is meant by the same word throughout the New Testainent ; nor that there were any oth«r t)ffice- bearep in anyone of them than those which are ordered to be addressed "to the seven churches which were In Asia ;". that they are expressly said to contain " what the Spirit saith unto the churches;" an.d yet; that if the plural address be to thp " collective mtnistry," the churches are not addrcssO^d at all ! And in different .iostances, the plural address cannot; with uny semblamce of reason, bo understood as. referring to no more thpo the pastors of the churches. See Rev. ii. 10, 13, 23, 24j,iii. 20, Ac. Surely, when it is in each epistle repeated-" He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit vSMth unto the churches," the natural and pUviOHg meaning is, that eTeny member of the churches individaatly sbouU givte^ear to what WAS said to the churches collectively ; not every one of the ^iastors merely. . . '. , » , * "Anglo-Galholicism, not apo9tolical," & V','.. 1- ; ; ■ ■> : 'm: -» r K* it • li^.'' i •■ A-' ■ '■■ '■: ■ ' » ^ ' ' ■J^■• :^^- ■'■■■■■■■ - ■ -'.'i . ' ■ . "" ■ • >■ ■"'■': 172 OFFICEBS OF CHKI8TIAN CHX7BCBES. represented aa.haviiigbeioiiged>to all other charches. We have seen, that by Paul, in his time, the' eldem or presbyters of the church in Ephesus were ad- ■ dresi^ed, each and all of thein alike, under tlie desig- nation of bishops. Whosoever, therefore, the onjjreZ in (Bach of these churches is understood to have been, there is an utter destitution ol, all proof that he was a hishop in the episcopaHa^ senSe of the tierm. Jt is pure assumption, and nothing more. And what can be more preposterously unfair^ than to^assume, for the explanation ^of a paiSsage cofifessedly ohscurei what all other and plainer passages contradict? ■ 6. There remain tivo'^wppositions, in th§ pibe or the other of which, it appear^ , we must acquiesce, • Thejirst (and incomparably the- s^plest,60uld it be made good) is the hypothesis of those who holcl that at that time th0re wa/s oidj owe pasto)\, dde)% operseery , or bisJiop, in each of the seven chm^ies of Asia'; and that he,, of course is addressed, uudciT the designation of the angel of the church, and the church collec- tively through him. — The obvious /)bj(ection to this, drawn from the fact that in the church of Ephesus, as the 20th chapter of the Acts of the- Apostles in-/ forms us, there was a plurality of >bishops,— is met and obviated, on the part of those who take this ' ^ouiid,.by referring to the interval of thirty years' which had elapsed between the one time and the '^th§F,' a«i^ ftuight have ' 6f this, and as evincing its probability, what i^ said, in the apocalyptic epistle, as to thedciclension of that /ehurch.frdm its. " first love" and from ^e abundance and purity .**Qf its " first works."— JThe obj6cti6ns to, 1 tlu?- hypothesis (ot^ierwise not beyond, the limits of ,>' .. . ■ ^,*/ .i '1 - , .« ;• * . ^ ., " .-y , '• io^-i.' ' ' '^: ■ y ■■ ■ --^i'- ■-•'. .•; ■. . -v"- ^^. .■■. ■■■,--.-■■ ■•.-/■■■■. ^§^ttw ^^f^^B^^ -which, during that ^^h, vefipKeh place j— and they bring in support ...^.tj.; »*... •■p :^ t / '. V- V \ i .,-<■- f ■'■■'■'■ .r' /: < "\i v.t.T. NO EVmEKfcE FOR DIOCESAN EPIBOOPAO?. 173 V the reasonable) are, Jlrst, that it is hardly oonsiBtent TOtJi pro]bability, that in the period specified the , Ephesian pastors should have been reduced to one^ l^d that the. same should have been the case in all' the 'rest of the seven churches,— in some of which at- least, if not in all, tliere is every likelihood there was — :(as both at Epjiesus and Philippi we. are sure there /Was)— a plurality :— and seoondly, th„at in the earliest records -subsequent to the apostolic, to which this is a . fair^c'aise for reference^there is evidence t>f a plurality ' haying continued to exist at Ephesus. The second of the hypotheses adverted to is — that^ in the eldership of tliesc churches there was, at that i aarly period in the church's history, & president,^^^ :,j)ri7mts inter pares, — to whom it is that the epistleSj 'respeetiv6ly,i are. addressed.— In this view of the' matter^ a number of eminent congregationa|lists are disposed to ac,q«iesce, us, at any rate,'^the least objectionable.— It has been urged again^r it, hji^w- ^ ever, that , if ; a' j^residcricy such as is supposed " %as permcunent, it constituted a species of avfif^Ushdpric in jeioch'^ church,.-of wlii6h nowhere r«lse |i» the New; Testament is the remotest hint discoverable ; — and tliat in the idea. of its t)oingll^ juJM|fccy i>y XQtation, ^ for a limite^time to each MQBl^t^- *^ circum- stances mignt suggest, there is a wai^ of tjidt dignity antl. settle^ness of jjrder which ,cha;racterises the Gonstitiition of tjie-churches, as it appeal^: ii;*' other part» oJ the New Testament ; — and, at the dame time, ' "thdt ^'-THE angel" is much liter the designation of a. ^ • pei^manent ofl&cial relation than that of a mer^.pre^-, dentr^ro tempore, — for the month, 4)r th^.' year, >iu - bourse of which the epistle happened to' be sent. ^ ,. * On the whole, the point is one of dubiety apd diffi- ' ''■^■S.;- ■' *..■' ■ - • '■-. ■' » ''^ . ' . " * .--'•■ ^: . ■ ■- . .'.♦ '**«£* ■ ' , " " ♦■■'«• WK^ * . ^. } : \ I , I . -y p ' /'%. 1_ •/»■ ■if ■■:: 174 w 1 ITFI0EB8 OF 0HBI8TIAN OHtTBOHEQ. iVV '1 ' ^ /•*«*« •.ft )j^^-r-^^ yMch it is not either fair or safe for any l^adrty tordit much: — and it cannot be allowed to supersede the evidence dednoible from plainei^ pof- i^ons of the word of God. It is one of those poikts, (of 3frl^^ch there are very few) which would be qnite intelligible at the time, but whicfi to us have beconie somewhat uncertain and obscure. And it is a prin- ciple of biblical interpretation, of which no one will l^iiestion the ^bundness, that when, on any subject, .passages are found of which the meaning is plain, and" one presents itself in which it is difficult and dubious, the plain shpuld settle the point against the difficult and dubious; not the difficult and dubiotis against the plain. Obscurity and dubiety are enough for my present purpose. 1 proceed to my third position. SECTION in. . ' THERE 18 NO CONCLUSIVE EVIDENCE FOR THE EXISTENCE,* IN THE APOSTOLIC CIIDRCHES, OF AN ORDER OP BISHOPS, OB PRESBYTERS, THAT DAD PART IN THE RULE OP TUB CHURCH, BUT DID NOT TEACII,-r-USUALLY CALLED BY OUR PRESBYTERIAN BRETHREN— ^RULING ELDERS. ".-•'> ■ ■■ ■ ■ V- *■■■■•'-■ * " . ^ ■■ , - I hav6 formerly mentioned the a^eement of pres- byterians T|i|^th independents, as to there being only, two orders of officers recognised as permtinent in the churches of Christ, in the New Testament scriptures — rnamely bishops and deacons ; aiid, consequently, as to bishops and presbyters being desi^atioris of the same offic6. — This is the ground taken % both my "two esteemed and at61e friends Dr. King and Dr.^ ''•. '«:■ ■J. vv.\ '■■■■" ►^ \fi ■ V ■ '.•■,■ ' " ■ * V ' ■ ■■ i ■■.■ ■.'';" < 1 i 1 < £ i \ \ m f ■■ u A ' 1 c • 1 .t ( '• fl 'I ' h • . " / tl , -^ ' ol 1 "« ..,;*■■ ■:■■;-:■ • V ■'■•■■■ - ' ■, ■-■ • ■ V' • ■ 1 ' -• : .;•■;■■■.,;; /t^::.:,v' "V,. " ■ .1' « \ .,''' •'. .' - . - ., '.:..: -.^ikJ....^^ ' ,^:.**' ;.-. .■■■-, ■.-' ""^4 ; ::^ ■' :^ im i: NO EVIDENCE FOB BUUNO I^LDEBS. 176 • \ 0' lu M'Kerrow* I could not, |n this tespsct, wish my own sentiments, as an independent, more simply^ and clearly expressed than - in - the following sentences of the former (pages 15, 16.) " Whenever a number of persons were converted under ^the preaching of the apostles or their fellow-labourers, these, converts weire formed into a society, and obtained for their stated and proper officers, bishops a^d deaeonii Only some churches Were favoured with the ihinistrations of apostles and evappgelists ; and. these churches enjoyed" that distinction only for limited periods, and at remote intervals: — but ^fevery chu!rch, no matter when planted, or by whom watered, om to what country belonging^— Jjad bifehops and d^confr' for its fixed and abiding office-bearers: The epistle to the Philippians »is addressec^ftofUl the saints in Christ Jesus who are at Pliilippi, with tfe bishops and deacons:' — no'.niention is made of other office- bearers."— Thus, too, Hr. M'lLeiTow, (page 13,) when speaking of Paul's first ejiisile' to Timothyj as con- staining a delineation of £^ plan of goyernmeiit for the churches,—" 1. He • men^ons t^o classes, of office- bearers, and only two :— thesie are oversipefs (or .elders) aiid deacons ; ohap. iii. 1 — ^12." Where, ^hen, in this departmetft of out^ subject^ lies the difference between us ? , In^Tiii^. Our pres- byterian friends divide the fotmer of the two descrip- tions of officers into two closes ; namely, eldei-s that hotli temh ami rvl^i and elders that ruie only : — dder the gQTiu^; teaching el4er and ruling eider the two species: —or, eldei> the specks; teaching elder and ruling elder • In thoir rospeetive Treatises, entitlQd.W^^TheruliiJg elderehip at the christian Jshurch,"— aiyd "The office of. rliiing 'Elder in tli« o\jri8tian. church.: its divine authority, duties, and respqnsiWlities." \ V • "A „ A ■ ■;•.■«. -* P ■ r. .,..-< ■ ■■ % <\ » ■! \ <■• L ■V.V. 176 OFFIOEItS 01* OHBXSnAM OSUBOHBS. ' ■■ ./■■>*'^-- *;'■.■: :••.■■:..■■■ '■..,;; ■■■: \ -'■..■■"■^'■■■7 ..•:- two varietiea. Independents qnesiibn fhe scrips authority for this distinction ; holding not only- bishop and elder are designations of the s(^e e, but thatj'iioi eyery case, that one office indlkaes '£la. the departments of teaching ^d ruling ; — that aU bishops and elders alike these twofold powers [vested ;-^that there is no scripture authority for ^ that rule but do not teach.— On the subj#t of the Officers of the Church, this is the grea* point OF DiFFEBENGlf. And to the full discussion of this we ^^ow beg the reader's cldse and candid attention. We shall first {^rodilce the evidence that all elders, or bishops, are scripturally commissioned both to teach and to rule ; and then esiamine the proofs adduced in support of an eldership that have ■ the power ^o rule, but not to teach^ \ *The evidence of the former of these two positions m&j be stated as follows :— 1. Those very passages which prove the identity of the offiCQ expressed by the two. designations, prove, at the same time, that teaching ia one of its essential functions. Having before ad4uced the ' passages for the former purpose, let Us now look at them again as they bear uppn'the latter. " Acts' XX. 17 and 28i.-^^hi|, compaidson of thesfe two verses', we have seeh, psov^s that elder and bishop, are the samd iofflc<6 j^ " the elders of the churci" being here ei^joine^tb''' take heed unto them- selves, and. to all, the flock over the which the Holy Ghost had m«de them overseers^'-^iAie same word as that usually t^nslated bishops. But the passage Contains satisfac^ry proof too that the ^jp&cial duty of these overseers, or bishops, incluiled teaching. The words which 'follow clearly imply this : — " to ^- \ /I . \" i ., HOiTiDiKOK Mb BtiLraa eij>xbs. Vfj JM «.« eiaach ot God, yUoh he hath purohitted («.^«K«,) signifies to/«J>S the/mctu^ '^. .'.♦>,, . \ ■ :\ -.Xi' \ '■■■■■ u '^Pi ■mr^l^ Jl'-. 178 OnnCBIiS OF GHBIBIUII CHU^QHSCi. ooudofliyd eridenoe it is-~ihat eUier va.d bithop Bite designations of tibe same office. But the passage is no less oondnsiTe in the proof wl^ch. it furnidies thai of Uie elders or bishops thus ordained by Titus, pvHtc inatrudion was a leading and essential di)tj. For wh^t is the oonduding qualification in the apostle's delineation of character ?— " holding fast ihe futhful word, as he hath been taught, that he may be (ible,iy > souwi doqtriney b(^h to exhort ^ and to convince {or con- fute) the gaimayers." . . : .^ IPet. v.i— 4. Here, as in ^cts xx. 28, the elders are enjoined to "/ccc? the flock of God, taking the oversigM"— diaehax^g the episcopal funckon— " not, by coribtroint, but ^willingly."— The /ee(?twgr, as jn the;' fonner passage, means acting the part of shepheirds ; 'and to their bemg under shepherds there is an allusion '■. in the immediate following words— 'SAaidwhelf. the,, chi^ shepherd shall appear, ye also shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away." And we hav^ " seeuji and need not repeat, that providing appropriate nburishment belongs as essentially to thct duty of the spiritual shepherd, or pastor, as tiie exercise of rule. ' I have mentioned these passages first, as nafuraUyr first suggesting themselves, and as having in them- a special force of evidence from' the circumstance already noticed, that the very proofs o| the -identity v of the office of bishop and elder shottld each be a proof , at the same tpaey of teaching being one of itsr duties.^-But— '^.ri:s^:^_ ^l^ .1, / ■ '■, ■'■■:.^''---^^, ■■: 2. There are other passages which; independently 6f this speciality, are quite as conclusive on the ; point to be established. .In* some of these the same, and in others different, designations of die office aac:^'. used : — ^but under every designation the same union '; of teaching and ruling appears. ■ > ' ~. - ,^- ;V.:'>.o - ..vV ^■.;-.^- ;- . - -V • -- ^- ^ - '__ --;-, '■■■ ' ■-:■'■ ■ ■•.■■..;:":>: V ■ . ■ : . . J . j- ■ ■ ■ ■•/. ,";•-■■ , , ' „ „■ f ' I • '■ -■ V^ - ).- . " « V , ■ ■ 1'. '. ,i-''' 'y',: I • '■■ . * "•«*»■ ■ I t ■V. ■■ . ■ b '■. ■ I \' V ; \ I,. ■ -■-:-/. ■'fjj "' ' ''i ■■' - ■> •l • . \ ' :,f - ."•'■"/.v !" - .. \ , ' l ' 'I , -h ,/ « ■■ - ■ • •" % t '■•*. ; ; HO KttDCNCE lOB VUlSFa "iSLVWBB^ " 1T9 1 Tim. iii. 1—7. » the passftge— including to fpne i2,-^ha8 beford been iidduced, in proof that bishops and deacons are the only |wo clastos of permanent officers in the church. The pairt of it now cited describes the qnalificatiQns of the bishop. And ot thei^e ope is, that he be ," apt to' teach." So far a* ; VthM passage goes, then, ^fitness for tmchtng'iB&jt6^A . qtured qnalifieatioii in ctH ftwAops; and, by eonse- qtfence, in alJ^ e?cfers,^-bishop aad elder" being, confes- ^ L sedly, the saime. — ^In veraes 4 and^, too, the apostle ma]^es %n allusion, iij the way of illustrative compati^ son, to the {)ateri)[al trust: .^* for it a man kno^'not «. how to rule^l1tf^odt^yal)\irtsi own House, how shall , he take care (tnr/yusJivtfcrai) of the church of Ood?*' Now Bip-elyrthG rule of a- family hero; in t^^ed, is, not a rule indejmdmt of hMntcUJii. It ^|^he general ; pareiital 'c|»,arge ; a ch'argiB ^mbriadp^ duties, , of 4-which instrflction js, Uone of the;least imperative and important,— being t)ne,*iQd€ed, which is indispens- able to duly principled subjection, and which it be- hoves the parent^ to ijonduct in such l^manUdr as to , secure this subjection,'~^this respectful * and submi»^ 'sive oljedience. Itis in illus^rfttion dJNhe bishop*B .- functioii thai; the e6mp'M^i^6^ is ^trodueed. Of th^t - ^pffic^j as we* have seen, " i^pt to teacli ", ia_a necessary . quaHficatioii, So it is of the change of ^Cither. And the plain meanihg is, that if, ia one depdirtment or in lltnotlt^er of his domestic foi^otion ari a; f ai^eap,--- r: whether ininstrudtion dj? discipline, (wid indeed the two are So inseparably eoimeote d ; Jh at exci^llence hi ^ . the one it)an harcUy be imaginedUflMtt thpr^^is muoh ;defectivejaesd i^ the. oth^r) ^'^H^ -^esired tl^ f> ofioe of a bishop'' was' egregiouaUjHk^ proyed - himself cUsqualMed for the offi^ sKfsight-r^liet 'I e7rt;u£AjEia/ ;^ general qiare-^" of .thi^chtl^||L<>^ Qed." "^ — "^ — "* : — »■ "'/ ♦V. 7r*-r -■ ■% •1, \^ owncsBn or ohbuixas chubphis. Eph. iv. 11. "And some, paatois and teachers.'* —"Another title," says Dr. M'Kerrow, "by which dders are designated, is that of shepherd^ or pastor." (p. 68.) My friend quotes it in '^ proof that to the elder's office ruU belonged. But it no less concla- UTely proves that to the elder's \Moe proviaion ot noum^men/ belongs, — thai is, tMtching.-^koidL the words just cited from the epistle to the Ephesians gcfto prove that the "pastor and teacher" are joint designations of one ojfwe; so thav aU pastors were teachers, and jMwtor/be one elder diouir " pastors^and designating one o tachers pastors :-^and thus, if ^signatipns of the dder^ every sacher.— That in Eph. iv. 11, ^rs " are to be taken together as is to me clear from the struc- ture of the sentence in the original ; and, indeed, it is. not less apparent in our English translation. They come in at the close of an enumeration, and constitute together its last item: "some (to be) apostles; some, prophets; some, evamgelists ; some, pastors and teachers." Had |^|)a»n, obimectM w{th the exercise of rule-4 - Vl - ^, . ■V . .■ ■ ■ ".'^'''' ■" .• ' .• ." ■' ._ ' ;-'''„ : ' "'. i i'.'V ry, I-'': \ \ •0 %> f \ \ ■'■ ^' ■"■ ■< I ■ • ■ ■• ■ :^- ' . ■ > \ ■ ■ . ;;■■ l. ■-.- .' ■ t *• ■■-'.•■'^■^' ■ V "i* -■ . ' MO EVIDENOK IY)S B^ " toko have spoken itnto you the t tile same : — mling and teaching unite ^^ 1 Thes. V. 12, 13. "Now ^ beseecli^^u, breth ren, io*^ow them that labomv^among you, and are over yon in the L6rd, and admonish* you, and to esteem them very highly in love, for their work's sake.'!^ — ^Here too is the same imion. The word gendered "who are aver yqu" i» itpotara^evovi. "It is," says lb*. M'E., ** another of the titles applied to elders," and "signifies & preftident or ruler." And the passage is one of those cited by hifn in instanc- ing its occurrences. It is hardly necessary to say, thai the "labouring among them," the " being over them in the Lord," and the " admonishing them," do ■not here express the functions, respectively, of three distinct offices, but the united functions of the same office. The one definite article, in the original, pre- ceding all the three clauses, settles this point, were it otherwise doubtful. Had distinct offices been meant, the article would have been repeated before each.* It is very likely that the term for " being over them " does here denote^ especially rule, although, like the others, it is somewhat indefinite. " Labour- ing "is general, though usually associated with the preaching of the gospel, "labouring in word doctrine." And, whether it here includes iki noty ** admonishing them" embraces the entire p cess of moral and spiritual training, though chiefly signifying exhortation to duty, and reproof its opposite. The passage, therefore, comes among the • It stands— rot;( xoittatyTdi iv 6fitVf xat Xpoterafievovi li^ioovivHvpioOyHai vot^OerovvraS t)yuaS.— It would have stood — rovS HOXttovrai iv t^fttVyxatrovi i^poi t'%. / ■f » '\ •-■■-^■-:;(:'-''-r-'^ v' ; "^■-:: '•■■:■- -L^-'.'. UmM07M: ^^^^^^^^B^k, ' - ' ■ .■/■ -1'. ■* ' ■ -. ''■ V-: ^W ^^^^^ "/■■■;<.. ^ (t - .. ' ■ '■ ■' > ' . * '.■'■- ■*■..*■■ ■■ ■ . .-■".' ■ ".' .^ - ■"'* ■ ■ r'* , ■"' .■•''■.'■'■. ■. ' ■ ■ ■• ' * '■■■*■■ . - " . ■ ' ' '■ ■ ■ - '.■'.'.■■■■■■"■.: -,.'."'■'■ ™!:. ■■-.;' V ■.'' ' ."■". "■■'.. ■■-'■.'■^■^- . ■'■;'V ••/•'■■■.; .."■ :->";■,,■; .. ■- ■■■\ _ • .-■■:": ■;~";~' '■.. -■''•:■'■ V --. 'V- V-''^^' ■■.'■.'' ''^^ ■■■"■' ' ■ . .'• '■•.;,' ' ; ." ■■■■. .'■■' "*. '■', ■"'■:.■ ■ "* - ■ » ■ ■ . . ■ .-.-.-■,' - ■ ■ . - - -■--■.:♦;,■■ ■■«*,■',: ' . V ' ^ ► . ..- • ,; . • . M .'" " -^ . ■■ "'.' ° ■■ w ■ K' HKMUTION 1U1 Qi$M1 (ANSI ond ISO TEST CHAlIT No. 2) ' lU I I3j2 1.23 ■ 1.4 I 1 ntita 2j 2.2 2.0 I.S 16 . *»,<«»■ ^ ^ /1PPLIED M/OE Ine ■•S^ 1653 eot< Main StrMt " ^~ '.2 RochMtv.' Nm York .1460» USA =» (716) ♦a2-0X)0-P»K>o« (716) 286 - S«Sa - Fox \^,.;^-^.*^ 182 OfnOIB8 OF chbibhan chubohib. proofs thai there were none whoroled, who did not, at the same time, teaoh. And it is admitted to rMkte to elders. "Another title given to elders," adds the name author, ** is steward ;" " Let a man so account of us, as of th6 jninisters of 'Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God"— 1 Cor. iv. 1.— "A bishop (or overseer) must be blameless, as the steward of Ck)d." — This too, he shows to be a situation of authority and rule :— " A steward {otKovonoi) is a per- son invested with authority, to rule either in a family ox in a city :"— >-and, having given instances— Qid. iv. 1, 2, and Rom. xvi. 23, he addih-" When elders, then, are described as stewards of God, this certainly implies that- they are invested with authority to rule in the house of God."-^Be it so. But is authority, or rule, cJl that the designation iiiTplies? Is not one of the first associations ihat occur to our minds in connection -ypth an oixovofioi, the supplying of the family with suitable provision,— ^the mctitaUing of the household? Is not this the chief, I might almost say the sole idea suggested b;^ our liord himself, when he uses the comparison,' as belong ing to the superintendence, or rule, of the domesti< steward?—" Who, then, is that faithful and steward, whom his Lord hath made ruler ovc his household, to grtve them their portion <^ meat jin due aeflwoa .5*" Luke xii. 42.^ — And indeed, what jit, in the * terms of one of the passages al)o ve ci to be "a steward of the mysteries of God?"— but to be entrusted with the dispensation of jllhose ditinely revealed truths which are "the wisdom of God in a mystery ?" And in what, accordingly, does Paid represent his own stewardship as ha'^djug con- 'I ■» \ MO ITIDKNCB FOR RUUNO ELDEBS. 183 dkied ?" " For, thongh I preach the g^^pel, I hare nothing to glory of : for necessity is laid vlpon me ; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel For if I do this thing willingly, I have a reward ; but if (or though) against my will, — oiMoroMtaK itnttanvMot — / am entrusted with a stewardship."* 11 then, the bishop, or elder, be a " steward of the mysteries of God," the ministration of the word must be an essen- tial department of his trust. Thus, under all the designations by which elders, or bishops, are distinguished, we find teaching a part of the dutierf devolving upon them,— entering essen- tially into their charge. — Observe now, — 8. How perfectly reasonable and natural this is: — I mean, the union of teaching and ruling.-^Why, one of tlie very departments of the teacher's business is, to set forth clearly in their scriptural simplicity, and to enforce by the motives of gospel grace and divine authority, the principles and laws according to which rule is to be conducted, and the church, by admisnon and discipline, to be'preserved in its purity. It is by'thieir very competency to expound these princi* pies, and to elucidate and oany home these motiveB, that " pastoi% and teachers " give their peo]>le confidence -^ enlightened confidence -^ in yielding obedience to the power with which the divme Head ^-of the church has invested them ; or, in other words, in goipg' unitedly, intelligently, and heartily, along with them, in following out the mind, and executing thtf will, of that Head. The Association of the teach- ing and the ruling i8,Jn this way, just such an * In our rernacular rersioa— " ft dUpensatioD cif Oe ^oapcl ia oom- mitted unto me." * -«•- * /■- If f i^-'- IM OfnOEBB OF CHBUfTlA^ CHURCH^ association as commends itself to our judgments, and exompMes the wisdom of the church's Head .in establishing it. The study of the laws of Christ is as much a part of thejeacher^s duty, as the study of his truth. And, as it is the Htudy of them thai enables him to understand and apply them himself, — it is^ his ability to expound them that renders submis- sion to them, on the part of the people, an act of enlightened and conscientious subjection to Christ, . — aseyery act, whetmr of churches or of individutds, ought to be.^ — Let it not be placed to ttie account of th^ liigh-mindedness of office (a feeling io whichj we humbly trust, we have no very overweening propensity) when we adEd, that we are iiot prepared to adnait ^e iderUity of the office sustained by the "teaching and ruling elder, Wd by the elder "that merely rules;— to admit, that is,>the latter to be tfiJE>, same office ^vitli the former, minm the teaching. We. maintain, that the " pastors and teachers " hold a rfi«/jii6'< Q^ce in the churches; and that, if there be any authority in the scriptures for miling elders w^ do not teach, they must be regarded as holding a distinct office also,— a JAiVrf, intermediate between the former and the 4eacons. A{|4, in point' of fact, they are almost alwlpiy^s so distinguished in the cur- rent terminology of presbyterianism. How seldom. If ever, do we hear the two spoken Of under a ^common designation! They are never "the ddera" hni " the. ministers and dders." "The last ctass of office-bearers in the church," says Dr. Dick, " cein- sists of ruling elders ;" language in which he repre- sents these as, not a mere division of the first of two classes, but a class by themselves.— So too Dr. Thonison, of Coldstream, in his " comparative view X i .i>f. i ^i^ NO EVIDENCE FOR BULINO ELDEB8. 185 of finglisU^and Scottish dissefitera :" — "Two sorts of officers aire recognized by both : — and what are decuxma in the one are just eldqrs ik the other. Names are nothing." Here, elders are distinct from hiahopBy and identical with decuxms. . \ But, passing from this, as what may be regarded in the light of a point ,q| yerbal propriety rather than matter of fact,— we q^ist now go on to consider the groimds on which oar brethren maintain the distinction between elders that botlv teach and rule, and elders that rule only, — whether the latter be held as a distinct office, or as a division of one more comprehensive. Into this subject, as being one of the great turning points of the controversy between Presbyterians and independents, we must enter, as ^eady said, somewhat carefully and at large. The passage of Dr. Dick, from which the few v^ords just quoted are taken, stands tlius :*— " The last class of office-bearers in the church consists of ^ruling elders : — in speaking of whom ii| will be neces- sary to enter into greater detail; as the divine institution of such persons is cpntroverted,— by jepiscopalians, who deem it incongruous that laymen, aa t^ey caU them, should be admitted to any share in ihe government of the church ; and by indepen- dents, who maintain that the scriptures make no mehtion of any other officers besides pastord,, except deacons. It is acknowledged that our information rejecting the latter is more explicit and ample, as - we have not only an account of their institution, but a de8<^ption, in anoi^er place, of their qtialifica- tions.t Still; hoyever, we believe that there is a • Lectures pointed, because all that they coi^ do can be done by the elders, without encroaching upon their other duties.'.' Bishops and deacons are thus admitted to have been. office-bearers in the churches as con- stituted by the apostles. Tliey are expressly mentioned ; and their respective quallflcations are speclflcally dellpeated. And here it is dctglared u aaiitfaclory apology for setting aside— not occasionally or in 8p«cialinstancesmerely,but8y8tetnaUcalIy and universally— the one of these offices, because its duties can be sufficiently well brought under another, for whose primitive existence the evidence is granted not to be so Itall and expHoItl— And if the office of deacon niay.be set aside. <^'^ ./ / i NO irmiNGI POB BULDiO ILDUS. 187 of tlie pafMagdli wbioh are alleged to oontaiB ihiB " distinot recogmiion," lei the reader mark wh|tt is b0re admitted' :— not merely what has already been oa Um principle of tiw loferior being Included In the supArlor,— th«o, since " ministera bare the powen of eldert '' m well m " elden Um powers of descons,— since the elder Is included ^ the minister, •I well ss deacon In the elder,— why msy not both deacon and elder be set aside, and a " aatisfkctory apology " be found by the mlnisleni for the absorption and monopoly of oSce-power* in themseWes, — ia tb<)Ir own official charge! A convenieat principle this (bow little soerer so meant) for clerical ambition. ' {Since the peeceding part of this note was written, there has bMD a material and gratifying change. To a very considerable extent, oar presbyterian brethren have . ceased to be satisfled with acknowledg- ment of the deacon's office, in their " second boolt^of discipline^" ai ''aa ordinary and perpetual function in the ^iHl of Girist," and allowing that acknowledgment to stand as a dead letter, and a testl- nOoy against their practical inconsistency.— In reply to a not* of Inquiry to my friend Dr. BuchaniMi in regard to the law and pfactice of the Free Church, he thus writes, after making reference to the terms of the "second book of discipline :"— "Under the sanction of this Direo- tory, which was framed in 1578, and which continnes in Aitl force In th« Free Church, the office of deacon always bad a place in the Cburoh of SooUilnd, although in mor« molTem time* it bad, to a great extent, hllra into desuetude. In 1643, when it became necessary to diaka special regulations as to the management of our church's secular affiJrs, ikn Act was passed, the week after the disruption (on the 27tli May, 1842) entitled ' Act anent the administration of the secular affidn of the church, and the appointment of deacons.' — This Act directs, 'that each oongi;pgation should h|^e a sufficient body of deacons,' fto.:— but, as it 'may be impossible, in some instances, immediately to accomplish this,'— the law directs that 'in such cases, and in the meanwhile,' elders should 'attend to these matters (the secular aflUrs of the congregation) in addition to their own more peculiar duties.' — There are other Acts, prescribing the mode of eleotinf deacons, and of setting them apart to the duties of their offloe.^It will be obvious, from what I>bave ,now stated, that the office of deacon is a part of our system, and tliat every congregation is expected and required to have deacons." This is well. Of the extent to which, by the numerous congrega- tions of the Free Churchy the terms of the Act have been practically -/■■■■ ■)■■ " ■ ■ ' -m . X' «,», / 188 orncuw or cHiutrruN CHrncBBfl. ■ / noiicod, the distinotnem of the offices of pastor and raliog elder; but, moreover, that the latter, the nding elder, is an office of whose institution we have nowhere any account, and of the qualiiications for the discharge of whose duties we have nowhere any •description! From such admissions there surely arises a strong previous presumption against the (Hriginal existence of any such offiee. Notwithstand- ing this, however, since our brethren conceive the office to be " distinctly recognized " in certain pass- ages of the New Testament, let us see what the passages are, and what their respective amounts of proof. The passages are three in number — Bom. xii. 6— 8:— 1 Cor. xii. 28 :— and 1 Tim. v. 17.— Of these passages we consider the last as the only one really deserving of serious attention, l^ey are all, how- ever, insisted upon by presbyterians, with more or less degrees of confidence ; and we must examine them all accordingly. ^ 1. Rom. xii, 6-T-8. "Having then gjifts, differing oomplied wllb, I am not oufflcientiy informod to nay. 1 presume, how- ever, it ia considerable, and will, in duo time, be general and nniversal. In the two able works which have recently issued from the press, on the subject of the Elder's offlos, by ministers of the United Presby- terian Church,— Dr. King and Dr. M*K«rrOw,— the obligation of the Deacon's office in the churches, as having the express sanction of the New Testament, is distinctly acknowledged, its desuetude condemned •nd deplored, and its revival pleaded for.— This also is well, and indicates a likelihood that in that church too the s»mo restoration of the office will by and by have place.— Could toe find authority for the office of the nding ttder, as Vuy have found it for that of the deacon, we trust we should have grace to follow put our convictions as they are doing theirs. We want more light, however, for this, thaa ev«i these volumes, acute and able as we admit them to be, have afforded % NO ETIDIIICI lOa BPLDIO ILDUa. 180 I J Aocordiiig to the graoo that is gi?en to us, whother prophecy, lot ufl prophoHy according to the pr()iH)rtion of faith ; or miniHtry, let U8 wait on our miaifltering ; or ho that teacheth, on' teaching ; or ho that oxhori- eth, on exhortation ; ho that giveth, let hun do it with simpUcitj ; ho that ruleth, with diligence ; he that vhowoth mercy, with cheerfulness." Sttroly this uood not detain us long. — Tliere rought, with any decisiveness, into the argument, t each of the phrases used would be distinctly Vough understood by those to whom the episUe was aiddressed, there can be little doubt. But we cannot, "V^th any certainty, ascertain what that understanding was. The whole passage might be interpreted as k simple direction respecting the spirit and manner in which the duties of prophecy, of ministry, of teaching, of exhorting, of giving, of ruling, and of showing mercy, ought to be fulfilled, without designing to/ express any distinqtiye appropriation of each of tibese ^ omcmm op mnurruM oruvcbi .»» 190 lo A pArtionUr official cImm. Our conclomoiui moat real on torma much mora Huro and dofinito in their import than those of nuch a paMago, to be at all ■atiafaotor^ yatiafactory it can never bo, to My— thai "many oommentatora are of opinion" that "pro- Tphticy" and "minuitry" are general diviaiona, nnder which the different offlcea of the church are arranged; the former comprehending '\trachxng" and **exharting,*' and tlie latter "giving," "ruling;' and "tihotmng mercy:' * It Would, flf course, be quite a iiuflicient reply to thia, to aay, th«it.*niany commentatora think otherwiae. There ia not in tl^ atyle and atructure of the paaaage, the alightoHt indioation of "pn^thery" and ** ministry" being general tcrma, each including a certain portion ^ of thoao which follow. On the contrary, every Hevoral clauae stonda in the very same diatinctivo separation from the reat; "Whether prophecy, or miniatry, —^yr, he that teaoheth,— r>r, ho that exliorteth,— he thatgiveth,— he that ruloth,— he that ahoweth mercy." So far as the constijjiction of the pasaago goes, any man might iusiat upoiJ it that each one of the clauses is the designation of a diatinct class,— with whicii none of the others had a right to interfere. That prophefty is not to be regarded as a generic term, inclusive of teaching and exhorting, — we have evidence in other passages, whore "propheta" appear, in enu- meration, as a distinct class of persons from the "pastors and teachers:* Thua in Eph.iv. 11, "And be gave some (to be) apostles; and Bome^ prophets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, past&rs and teachers:* —When it is said— "At any rate it is plain, that riding is distingoialied from teaching, exhorting, and giving ;" who deniea it^— but when it is added, in the way of explanation, and as being of equivalent import 1 m KfmmcB roa suumo iloiMi. m «i 1 ^"or from the p«fi* . oxprotwoa the peculiar function of tho tbtcityr at teacher^ who ia suppoHcd to have had the iiphere of hifl labour among catccKumonit, or appUcanto for baptism, whom it wa« hin ^{Hicinl province to iuMtruct, r-whilo " teaching" ezpreaseH tho special department of the '/ jHutor" — w an osHumption altoguthor gratu- itouH, and withal having in it no small amount o^ unUk()lih(H)d. **^i It must bo obvious, tliat, in arguing from such ft pasHAgo, we cannot bo entitled to take one of the enumerated particulars as expressing a definite o^Sce, and another one of the functions of t||^>t>ffieo, and tt"' third tho exercise of u pritate and dOncial gift or grace, — just as it may suit our purpose. Wo m'ust have some definite principle of interpretation. If that principle be not what has just been mentioned, but must be that of official distinction ; then let it, in this sense, bo consistently carried out. And if it be so carried out, a presbyterian can have no more right to assume, (as, from the power of habitual association, he may be apt to do), that "he that teacheth" is a ruler as well as a teacher, than another has to assume that "he that ruleth" is a teacher as well as a ruler. So far as the fair exegesis of this passage goes, iJie teftcher is as distinct from the Tuler, as the ruler is from the teacher. The teacher must not rule, uiy more than the ruler teach. The ofnonn OP oE&urriAM OBUioHBb T. OM 9«Anol rnfe, nor can the oihor UMch, withoal their encroaching, n^spocUroly, on each other'* pro- ▼inoo and prorogatir«. Dr. M'Korrow «ay»— "The apoeiloM fixoM our attention, not onlj on teaching and ruling, aa diMtinct gilU, hut on diffurent indiriduahi as ojcrciiiing tho«« gifta— 'he that tcachoth'— and-^ •ho that rulath.' I app<)al to tho coamon senile of ' mj roadura, if thin phraMeology doeH not lojul ua to the oonclaaiou, that there were {loraonM ap{H)inted to rab, diHtinot from 'thoao who arc appointed to teach.'" —Page 86. Appealing, with equal confi- dence, to tho common HonHo of my reader, I have only to auk, whether the converge does not, with the same conclusiveness, follow from tho promise«,~-that there were persons appointed to teach distinct from • those who were appointed to rule ? If the ruling and the teaehiiuj are not only different gifts, but gifts exercised, respectively, by different persons, I sea not » how this can possibly bo evaded ; how the argument which warrants tho inference that there were rulers who did not teach, does not, of necessity, warrant the inference also, that there were teachers who did not role.— It will not do for Dr. M'K. to say—" / admit that teaching and ruling ore united in the same person, in the case of the elder who labouni in word and doctrine." No doubt, he admits it. So do we ail. But this is nothing to tho puipose. The ques- tion is, whether such union of the gifts is to be found in this passage. To me it ia clear aa day, that on«^r. M HO iriDlllOt fOB BUUMO iLDSlill. J of the dtHcial function of ntUng. If thfl nd«r b« • (UbtiBct claiM, M4> iM tho t«*ohur. Thom) rtt marks pntctttul on th« nip|K>iiition thftt Ike •* teaching " ami tho " ruling" have rof«)rtmco to publio official dutiuM in the ohurob. Bui, jnsl m a ipooimen of tho indoAnitonoM of the deaignationM, and of th« uneertatnljr of their preoiao import, it majr not be uaitm to notice for a moment, without at all (Iwefling upon them, the different interpretationa put by critioa and commeutatorM on the 6 iipoidraMirot~^*he that nileth," traniUated hj tome of them, oonaiatentlj with their interpretation, "he that prenUUth." By Catvin, it is explained of rulers in the church, but, at the Hame time, ia extended, in the principle of it, tp all duHcriptiona of confldential miperinteudance; — bj Henry, of " those miniHtera who, in the congregation, did chfefly apply themselves to ruling work;"--<-bj, fVKilby^ A8 corresponding with " nvfltprtfattu gov^- emments" in 1 Cor. xii. 28, elsewhere designated itpot(ir , e , •I' ' . t —/ ' ' ) . , - " " • . ' - - \ "" 1 ' « * « Xy/'^'v iM' 6. V '■' v-...^' ■„, ■■■ f '^ V ,1.- .. ■■.■"-,'' i ■'■' * - - ' > n . '■ .* . , t l- ''■ ■ , , '■ ■ ' ';"". J ' / t ..^' % ■ f :*m 194 OFnOEBS OF CHRIBTIAlf CBUBCHE8. \ who preeddes over distribution to the poor;*' — Olark, of those probajbly who received Imd provided lor strangers^ es^oially the pernefmiied;— Stuart, (who disouases the point at length, and with almost a superfluity of- learned argument), ^ corresponding with « f) xpoStwvi," the term applied in Bom. xvi. 2, to Phebe, and rendered a **9iiccsurer of many," and as signifying, in the sense put upon it by Clark, "one who receives and entertains strangere."— 1 have nothing to do at present with the reasonings in support of each of these interpretations. I refer to them, merely to ^how the indefinitene^ of tiie designation, • And then, further, what are we to make of all the other items in the enumeration, if they are to be taken offtciaUy? — ^J* Ministry" is most generally un- derstood hero of ihe d&mirCs office; but by Whitby \% is interpreted of the office of £'vrt;wreZ««^— Supposing the office of the deacon itatme reference, then what are the offices, a\mstinct from the deacon's, of "him that giveth," ant of "him that showeth. mercy?"— And again, if;."he that teacheth" designates the official teaching elder,— ^are wo to have a separate office for "him that exhorteth?" And this latter,!^ the way, is by Boothroyd undcirstood, specifically, of "the Bishop or Posfor, who not only enforces christian duties, but applies the doctrines of Christi- anity for the comfort, hope, and joy of the faithful :" while by "him thdt teacheth" he understands " any peirsons of competent: gifts, who taught.the ignorant, or such as were called catechumens." ■ How precarious, then, I repeat, must be the*ground funiished by such a passage, as the basis for any sure conclusions on the subject under review!-— My own f- ■ if r '■^ ., i : if 1.' i NO EYIDENOE FOR RULINO ELDERS. 196 ^injoii of the passage has been already indioated/ hk <£e oonnftxicm in which it stands, and for the purpose it Wfts designed to serve, not only is it nOt necessary that the enumerated particulars should be understood offidcHUy^ — ^but it is rather the contrary. 1 am persuaded, that by the very use of the word " c^ffke'* in reference to the furiftiona oi y|| bodily members ("all the members have not the siO^ oj^"} an illusory .effect is produced on the miQds of incon- siderate English, readers. But it is obvious that aU the brethren were members of the church corporate, the spiritual body; and as obvious, that the apostle is speaking of the several/t»ic^ion« of all the members. As, ii;i tl^e natural body, each fhember, how little and insignificant soever, has its own place and its own appropriate use; so, in the body of Christ, every individual member has some function which it may usefully discharge,— some special end it may serve for the general benefit. And it is a great misfortune, when.the membiers of churches get into the habit of 'interpreting passages such as the one before us, as if theyjiad reference only to those who bear office in the christian community. They are thus led to think too much about their officers, and too little about themselves. But the spirit of this whole passage manifestly is, that all have their places, and »11 their functions. The whole church is addressed; and the duty inculcated is, that all should use the peculiar gifts possessed by them, whatever they were, official or private, natural or miraculous, for the general good, without self-conceit, or pride, or envy, hut with qU becoming humble-mindedness and self-diffidence, and with all incumbent assiduity and zeal. Our official distinotions, and our forma of church order 196 OFFIOEBS or /oHBISTIAN CHUBOHES. '"C. . ■ / ■ . ■ ■ ■.■■■■ w» mnBt seek elsewliere than in a passage which, from its very connexion and stractnre, gives BO "nncertain a sound? as this:— and elsewhere they may, with sufficient/ clearness, be found. a. And i* the plirase " an uncertain sound *' be applicable to 198 OFFIOEBS OF CHmSTUN iOHlKSblfes. \ ;■■ '(■- Then again, by the same critics and commentators, ** governments*" are understood of mling elders who were not teachers; of bishops, or elders who both ruled and taught; of "those who had the gift of discerning spirits, and were thus fitted io direct the ohurch;" of "those who were qualified to preside over the secular aflfairs of the church, as governors;" —of " suital^e persons to be left in authority by the apostles, when they were forced away from newly planted churches, that they might set in otder things that were wantmg ;" of " persons endued with a deep and comprehensive mind, — wise and prudent;" of "such as had the disposal of the charitable contri- butions of the church, and dealt them out to tiie poor."*-^Thus strangely diverse and mixed up with each other are tiie views entertained of these and the other designations in this enumeration, a& well as of those in the former passage in Bom. 'xii.— Respecting the "A«/iw" and "g(yvermMnt&" Doddridge says— "I think we can only guess at the meaning of these words; not having principles on which to proceed in fixing them absolutely :" and Pearoe— "These two words, (notwithstaftding all that the commentators say about them) I do not understand." In the ninefold enumeration of gifts in the begin- ning of the chapter, and tha enumeration of offices in the close supposed by many to correspond to it, an evidence fbat it refers to a distinct and permanent qffiee in the cburoli; biit may refer to aid rendered by any class, in any way. ^ Probably many persons were profitably and usefully ^m|»loyed in varioas ways aa aids in promoting the temporal or spiritual welfare of the Omrch:'— Albert Bamea, Ccmm. on 1 Oor.— What proof, I repeat, oan a term whose import is so indeterminate furnish on such a subject? . • See the writers before named, and others. L .-* NO evidence: yOK RULINO ELDER8. t 190 I eminent bishop of the Anglican episoopaoy fuuciod he found a gradation of rank to this extent to have existed in the apostolic church ; and on this ground he undertakes to vindicate the equally numerous gradation in our southern hierarchy! — The truth is, it is foolish for any party to pretend to build on passages 80 necessarily obscure, and which, from this obscurity, leave so much room for ingenious conjecture and fancy, and can afford to no systenf any thing like a solid and satisfactory support. On such a subject as the one before us,' we must find our ground, as before said, in passages more definite, and which have less in them of evident reference to the peculiarities of the era of spiritual gifts, which was to pass away, and more of direct relation to the ordinary and per- manent constitution of the church. 3. 1. Tim. V, 17, "IJet the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour ; especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." ' This passage is undoubtedly entitied to a some- what closer examination than either of the former. Even if the point in dispute had been previously settled on the presbyterian side^ the interpretation of the former would still have been exceedingly doubtful and conjectural : — ^how much more when they are themselves numbered among the proofe of ' that point ! I consider the third passage as, in the present argument^ really standing al&ne. Let the following remarks upon it be candidly weighed :■ — Iv It has, w;e trust, been successfidly proved, that elder and bishop are designations of the same office, and that the office of the bishop— the iituSHortoi—^ includes in it the charge of teaching as well as of ruling; both being naturfdly, as well as by actual •* .r^ *.' ■S: OmCERB OF CHW8TIAN CHTJRCHE8. presciipupn, comprehended in the oversi^t which the origin^ word expresses. If these things havd been fairly inade out, then the entire weight of that proof goes iuijo the scale of a friora probability that in this text to^he term eider (being manifestly, and by universal consent, a term of office) is to be under- stood as synonyn\pu8 with hishqp; that it ought to be iso interpreted unless it absolutely cannot, or can- not without unnatural force. This is a fair principle of exegesis,— a principle universally applied. We have seen that the evid^e of ddkr and few/top being designative of the same office is, by presbyterians, in their argument against episcopacy, admitted to be conclusive. On the other haM, there is no evidence whatever in favour of eWer havmg any other official sense — any sense inferior to that of bishop, as just explained,-^any sense that divests^ of the teaching ■ department of oversight, and conHmas its functions to ruling alone, thus convertmg it, ih fact, into a distinct office,' and making the qgfcial cbtjfipiemeiit of the churches three/old instead of tico/aid y—th&t there is no evideiice of the term dder being used in such a gense,— UNLESS IT bSe found in this passage itself. Candour^ therefore, should admit the previous likeli- hood, that the sense established by other pass'ages is the sense here. 2. Theword in the first clause of the verse, which is used to express the official duty of the elders— ^^ irpoetfrwrcs— which is here rendered "rule," is suscep- tible of a more general or a more special signification, ^cordjaig ^"the circumstances and connexion in which it is found. It, may denote the general duly of **being over" the iphurch, considered as compre- hensive of both the departmenta of teaching and :' P • F, r .f^. ■ . . : •" (• •r NO EVlDBNCE FOR BTTtlNa ELDERS. Wl "4 ruling. It is eqnallj appro|mate, wh«ii tised of either.— Or, if it happens to be introduced where the former of Uie two departments is otherwise mentioned, and is thus used distinctively^ it may denote more specifically the latter, the department of ruling. — ^I am not sensible that it is of any great consequence to my present argument, whether it be taken here in its more general or in its more specific sense. I am inclined to understuid it in tli^ former,v-as meaning— "the elders who discharge the fonptions of their ofSce well,"-^these functions includmg the twofold oi;6r«tell,i^ those whom he thus designates and describes were not elders that only ruled, but such aa must also have " laboured in word and doctrine ;" which is precisely the Tiow of the case taken by independents ; a yiew which leaves not • vestige of room for the mllng older of prcsbytorianism, and yet • ▼lew which presented itsolf naturally to this able writer's own mind, when he was arguing on another subject ; «- Dr. King (on the Ruling Eldership, pp. 44, 48,) say8,-~r"It must be Admitted, that the word translated " honour "does sometimes denote p*y or wages, and that tho allusions which follow, to the feeding of the ox and the rewarding of the labourer, seem to fiivour this interpre- tation." He subsequently adds, "But U must bo carefiiUy observed, that this question about the meaning of " honour " does not affect in the slightest degree the countenance which thif passage apparently Tenders to t])e distinctien of teaching and ruling elders. The apostle, on this supposition, enjoins that ample recompense be given to eldefi who spend a proportion of their time In ruling well, and. especially to thSise elders who occupy themselves' more entirely with the aflkin of the church, by not only ruling well, — but^''o labouring in word and doctrine. Where the officers were poor men, as most of tlioin are Imown to have been, there was nothing in this equitable compensation fbr iMt time very unreasonable or improbable, and nothing certalnlj to obliterate that distinction between ruling and teaching elders which the language of the apostle so clearly expresses. Surely the functions of elders are one thing, and the fittest mode of honouring them another."— That the apostle's language "elearly expresses " the dis- tinction in question, is precisely what we dispute. But, granting the reasonableii^ of the remuneration for lost time, &c., — I have only to ask (for here lies my argument) whether froin ady other passage than this any precept or example can be brought for the remuneration, in 20i OFnCEBB OF CHRISTIAN CHURCHra, f th« iarm description, fulfilling their official functions ioith different de^jrees of fidelity arul Miligence.-ln tne former of the two clauses of the verse, this is beyond dispute: "L^t the elders that rule weU be counted worthy of double honour." We^have here most dearly.the idea conveyed, that the duty of presidency, or oversight, might be discharged with vanous degrees of faithfuhjess, disinterestedness, and laW "kdus appUcation; and that from this there ouj^t to b^ wnsidered as jusUy arising superior akdmfenor claims Ut honourable acknowledgment and cdi^pensa- tion—That a distinction of degree in the *^^*f^^J] the duty is meant by the word hAoa, translated weU, in the former clause of the verse, might be confirmed (were confirmation necessary) from the use of the same phraseokigy, in chapter third, respecting the office of the (ieocon .-verse 13. " For they that have used the office of a dea^ well* purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness m the faith which is in Christ Jesus." It was not the mere^occnp^cy of the office that could*prooure the benefit described (whatever its precise import;) but the faithful, a^ec- ' tionate, and diligent fulfilment of its duties ; and the degree in which the benefit would accrue, would bewr /the way of maintenance, of any officers of the church besides such m /"pr«Shed the gospel f I s.^" from any other p««age ;" for to JZms as aShorily for such remuueration is at oncoto h«g t^^ ^^n aid at the same Urn) t» stamp inconsistency and failure of dX on thTentire extent of presbyterian practice. Not that in such toconstocy there would be any argument against their system. I Sd Sso to make use of it The inconsistency of any body oT men '^tri own principles, is but a pitifal proof against the validi of the principles themselves. ^ ^ *MaXo!>i StaKOvndKvtti, corresponding precisely to xaAoof ' KpoeiTtorei. V '#•- NO BTIDENOI fOB BUUNO BLDEBfl. ao6 proportion to the degree in which the duties were so fulfilled. Thus, too, with the Elders. The honour and the recompense wore not to be bestowed alike on them ail ; but an ampler amount of both was to be conferred, and conferred proportionally, on such as excelled in those qualities which the dutiop of their office specially required. — If, then, a distinction in degree be the principle of explanation for the nrst portion of the verso, there arises thence a previous probability that the same principle is carried on to the second ; and that the word " labour" means to be laborious. It is not enough here to say that the word in the original imll bear such an interpretation. It is its proper meaning. It does not denote tvork merely, but labour, and labour of an exhausting kind and degree, — labour to fatigue.* And hence the parti- ciples of the verb in the aorist and perfect active, and the present passive, signify being exhausted, fatigued, weary.t Even, therefore, when it is used for the labour of a particular office generally, it still implies that in tha^t office the labour required is of no easy and perfunctory kind. ^^ That in the verse before us the verb is used in its legitimate and proper acceptation, for being laborious, the circumstance (clearly apparent in the former part of the verse) that the apostle is not speaking of the mere discharge of official duties, but of the degress of commendable and meritorious fidelity a^d zeal by which the dis- charge of them was characterized, renders, in my *"xo>riaa}— laboro, molcstos laborcs tracto, qnibus corpus debr tigatur ao vires e^hauriuntur,— a Honoi labor gravis^ molestia."— Sohlenandr. '; \ '* Kdkiaddi—tuor. 1, delassatua; pert. fttKoittaxcoi, lasBus, Ikti- g»taB. praes. part. paaa. xo;r(a>/iei'o$, fatiscens."— IledericuB. iii i:. "Wi- 206 OtnOlBfl or 0HRI8T1A1I OHUROHn. 1 1 jadgment, next to certain. Thus a soniio is yielded, in full ogrocmont with the use of tlie dewgnation Elder elsewhere. Hero as in other places, the office includes both the functions of ruling and teaching; and "double honour"— ampler recompense— is en- joined to bo given to such as fulfilled the one of those ftuK^ons well, and especially to those who were laborious in the other.. This I believe to be the true meaning. Why (we are naturally ready to ask) should there be a " icell" in the one case, and no^a " loeM" eipresscd or implied, in the other? Jpfy should " double honour" bo claimed for eldep why excelled %n ruling, and then specially claimed for oldorS who '•laboured in word and doctrine," whether they exrcdled in their toork or not ? If they but ruled well, was it a matter of comparatively Uttlo moment whether they tauyht vfe\\% The teaching, surely, was not the least important f^ of their duty. But, when we take the word "laboutl" in the senaoof Mng laborious, vre have, as the ground of the special claim, not thct duty itself merely, but the faithful and self-devoti^ diligence with \^hich it was fulfilled. And let not the reader forget, that in so interpreting the word, we are neither pervertiQg it^om its proper signification, nor even giving it otteSjJMa yioore of meaning than natively belongs to it. ^!^|j|^g^ '^^ V# 6. These vieMpK^^^i^sBagld receive decided confirmation ^^^jp^l?®^ ^l^i^^ °^ ***® ^^^^ e8peeiaUy--ot o^^^)(^nal vff Iho fiame olaiw, diatingaiiihed by a I particitlariiy. I am not awaro of an inHianco iho iford in uHod othorwiHO than to ningle oat a part, a6 ^intinguinhod, of the moro gonoral wholo that had boon prcviouHly montiunod. Lot me give two or throe inHtancoa. — 1 Tim. v. 8, "But if any ma^ provide not for his own, and spocially (^aXtta) for thoHo of his own houBe, be hatl^ doniod the faith, and is worao than an infidel." Here, "Mr^e of hit oton home" — thyHO belonging to hifi own family — are d ftpoeifically distinguiHhcd portion of the more com- prehensive designation "his own" which may bo nndorstood of his relations at large.— 1 Tim. iv. 10, "We trust in the living God, who is the Huviour (or preserver) of aU men, ftjjceially of those that believe." "Those that believe" are includcMl among tlio "afl men" b&t diKtinguished from the iimt by their faith. — Gal. vi. 10, "As we have, therefore, opportunity, let us do good unto uU, cup midly unto them who are of the household of faith :"'— on instance of the same ki^^^th ih4 one preceding. — Tit i. 10, "For there . ar^^Kny unruly and vain iallccrs, sjiedaUy they of the circumcision." The vain talkers who were "of the circumcision" are thus specifically distinguished, as a portion of the "many vain talkers" mentioned more gem^raUy, that called for peculiar vigilance, and determined opposition. — lilxamples might be multi- plied. Established usage, tihen, compels us to consider the "especially" jn the present instance, as signifying that tho^e mentioned in the latter port of the verse were a portion of the preceding more general description. To conceive of the two parts of the verse as referring to distinct offices is to assign to the adverb a sense whioh it never bears. If the former part of the verse .// <»- «r . > (to - • «», .1- ' ■ « » " - rt •'' '^-■-^' ,n ■ ■ 1 .^ « • . -•. ^,'/ ■ ■' * , rf' ( • 908 OFFI0EB8 OF OHBISTIAN GHUBCHE8> be explamed as refemng to toy eWer«— to elde«t that rule M do not feocA— then those in the latter part of the vei^e, who both rule and tecich, are not compre- hended in tlie previous description. To give the eepeciaUy its proper sense or effect, it is not enough that those in the latter part of the verse be a proportion of the elders; they must be a propoiftion of the elders described in the former part (^ it. B^ut if those described iii the former part of it be eldeirs that roie but do not teach, and, as such, constitute a distinct doss of officers^ then mark what becomes of the /iaAzsa, the especiaUy. The substitution of other terms will best show the absurdity which is thus produced:— 'Let the ruling elders who fulfil their duty well, be counted worthy of double honour, especially the teaching elders f—oty 'Let the elders who rule biit do not teachj when they do their duty w:b11, be ,^xdy honoured; especiaUy those of them who both teach and rule r putitinanyformyouplease; unless it can*l)e made to signify, with consistency, that the* last described are a part of the preceding wjhle, it will ^ot be agreeable to the proper sense of the csjofet^^y. On no other principle can that adverb have its legitimate signification,— the sigoification which the idiomatic use of it in the original language has .fij^d as its appropriate import, except on the principle that the "Elders who rule well," iii the beginning of the verse, are the same order of office- bearers of which those in the end of it, who "la)t)ouK in word a,nd doctrine," are a stiU more sd^ct description, adding to the^distinguishing excellence of the former a further distinguishing excellence of their own :— those elders, namely, who to eminence in^ ruling joined laboriousness in teaclung ; or rather, perhaps, who. V . A NO EVIDENCE POft BUMNO ELDEItS. 209 h .:ti 01. while fulfilling in an exemplary manner the functions of their charge in general, devoted themselves, with commendable diligence, and with a sacrifice, it might be, of time, and ease, and interest, to the ^'ministry - of the word^* Taking all these considerations, then, together;— the direct proof that fmhop^ a.nA dmcona were the ; only two recognized classes of stated officers in the church;-— the direct proof that elder or preshjter is only a different designation for the former Of these offices,— the same with bishop:-— i^e absence of all other evidence besides this one text of any interme- diate office, and iy&e a jL)»-ion improbability, on this account, of its meaning ani^stich office here;— the general impoi-t of the- origiiinl word iov rule, as in itself, and according to the use of it elsewhere, including the whole of the elder's or bishop's charge, instruction as well as government, both being by other passa^§.,.»rseertained to belong to the office ;— the clear evidence that honour here signifies recompense, and th^t we have no law of Christ for any but such \ as "preach the gospel living of the gospel," or. being supported by those among whom they labour;— the proof, on the face of the passage, that the distinction ^ expressed in it is not one of ©ffice, but of degrees of excellence in the. manner in: which the different functions of the same office were discharged; and the > confirmation of all this,' by the proper meaning of the^word asjpmoZ/?/,— or the Word in the original so rendered,^— as, m invariable usage, denoting that those whom it specifically distinguishes formed a part of the previously mentioned and more comprcr hensive whole ;— taking, I say, all these considerations together, I feel myself warranted in affirming that thig .14^ ■ *| m il l ■" 210 0FF1CEB8 OF GHW81i|N CHURCHES. -4~ passage- the only one in which the office of the^ lay or ruling elder can with any plausibility be said to rest is not only inconclusive in support of that which it is adduced to prove, but conclusive of the contrary, —and that, as I have ah-€ady said, the legitimate meaning of the verse is this:-" Let the elders (presbyters, bishops) who fulfil well-with superior fideUtyand zeal-the duties of their oversight, be counted deserying of the more ample recompense; especially those of them who give themselves assidu- ously to the department of the ministry of the gospel,- ^ who^" labour in word and docti-ine."-The eldei-s or bishops, might, every one ot^ them, ^aye aM the required qualifications for office,-but m different degrees; one excelling in one department t)f dilty, ., ftnd another in another; and, at the same time m each of those departments, there might be manifested a Weater measure and a less of exemplary animation Snd diUgence. This-and not any distmction of office— is evidently the ground of the apostle's direo- tian in the passage. Timothy was to sec to it,-that geatwas duly .stimulated, and irulvMry duly rewarded, ■ * An authorUy of high critiflal cminenGe, and, Irom hia situation m the oresbytorian Church of Scotland, it mufltbe presumed, impartial, ; PriiSnpalCampboll,thn8write8:-Mtha8.inmodcrnt.me.,beonmad^ ; aqaeation,wl^thcrtho prcBbytcrB, even exclusive of U.o.rpr^,d«^ could all come under one denomination; or whether some of hem^ ; were proncrJy pastors and teachei-s, and others only assistants ^Itt ^ matters of government and discipline. Some keen advocates for i*, presbytery, as the word is now understood, on tho„model of John *^Salvin. have imagined they discovered this distmction m these words i of Paul to Timothy (1 Tim. V. 17.) " Let the elders that rule well be : counted worthy of double honour ; especially they who labour in ^e f word and doctrine." Here, say they, is a two'ol'l P'^^*',^"" "J. 'J^ ' Officers comprised under the same name, into those who rule and those who labour in the word and doctrine ; that is, into nilmg elders and NO EVIDENCE FOR BULINO ELDERe. 211 :>> .f yr There is Bti^ one point remaining to* ^e noticed;— a, point early alluded to, and of which the farther mention, then promised, may as well^ h& introduced here as anywhere else :— 1 mean the point of a plurality fihmg ekler». To this it is replied, on the other side, that the Mly is not intended to indicate a different ofBco, but to distinguidi ^rom others thoHe who aasiduously apply themeelveB to the moQt important as w(i:U as the mnet difficult part of their office, publio teaching; that the distinction intended is thcrerore not official but pcrsooal ; that it dues not relate to a ditTerencc in the powers conferred, but solely to a difference in their application. It is not to the persona who have the charge, but to those who labour inii,6i xomtovrei. And to this exposition, as by far the mont natural, I entirely agree. W^hat was affirmed before, in relation to the coincidence ot the office of bishop and presbyter, from (ho uniform and promiscuous application of the same names and titles, may doubtless be urged, in'the present case/with still greater strength. The distinction is too considerable between a pastor and a lay-elder, eUdera to liave been, not^thec^oa^ordatwrf/rowj, but P the ojice ordained to, f should consider myself as "handling the word of God deceitfuUy," were I to take up any such ground. T desire, above all things, ' lo be preserved from this, as one of the gieatest of sins.— But — 3j If we am in inconsistency, our presbyterian ' friends muat even be content to share the charge with us. We cannot let them off. It is not enough to fiee them of the charge, that they have, in their congregations, a plurality of elders. The question is, ^ are they the same description of elders with those of / the apostolic churches? We say, iVb. We conceive the evidence, jformeily adduced, to be quite conclusive, ". that of those Churches the elders were, all of them, / teaching elders :— and, since Dr. King admits ^hat the i jresbyterian pliu'ality is not a plurality of fj^cA elders, we must contend that it is not the New Tes^amefit - phirality, more than our o^vn.— But — 4. I have before hinted (Note, page 202), and. must hare more formally repeat, that the inconsistency of those who hold a principle, in not acting up to the principle they hold, can never be admitted as dis- . proving, or even in the sHghte§t degree affecting, the \ soundness of that principle. There are presbyterians - . who admit that the "double honour" duo to "elders that rule well"— 1 Tim. y. 17,— has jielation to mainte- nance. Now I should thmk I was doing a very silly thing, were I to say to such presbyterians— Yob must be wrong in holding that there is such an office to be fou^d in the New Testament as that of yom riding * cWer^,— for you do not pay, you do not support tJiem. Theymij;ht fairly reply— Well; be it so that we are t. .? .1" -—.-7- NO EVIDENCE FOR RULING EliDBKS. 215 .<& inconsistent in this part of our practice, this haA nothing to do with the evidence and the validity of our principle. It may be very ^ight that they should be remimerated; and we maybe wrong iii not be- stowing such remuneration; but the ruling elder may be a bible oiffice after all. And so may we say, on the ^omiotpfuraUfy. It maybe so that in the apostolicr churches theriB was a plurality; and it may be so that there ought to be a phirality still; but , the teaching and riding elder may be Hie only elder of the New Testament after all— Even of this description of elder .the payment, or suppoit, is not, in all cases, indispensable. The right to it is divinely ehartered; but it is a right which he who possesses it may, in special circumstances, and for special rieasons, decline asserting, and place in abeyance. Thus, on different occa>sioAs, did Paul himself, "lest he should hinder the gospel of Christ." And thus he admonishes the elders of the church at Ephesus to do in imitation of his example:— "Ye yourselves know that these hands have ministered.to my necessities, and to those who were with me: I have showed you all things, how that, so labouring, ye ought to support the weak, and to remember the words of the Lord Jesus, how he said — 'It is more blessed to give than to re- ceive.' " Acts XX. 34, 35. The dufy on the other hand is universally obligatory upon the churches; but the fulfilment of the obligation may, in some cases, be rendered impossible by the circumstances of the , people; and then comes the farther duty of the many helping the few,— the . strong, the weak. I would, then, with all diffidence, ask— 6. May not a prindple of a similar kind be appli- cable, in regard to the number ot officers in the church? ' \ 216 OFnCERS OF CHRISTU!^ CHURCHES. ; i Is not the office itsd/y and the actual ^ciency with which its ends are accomplished, the main concern ? It seems abundantly manifest that the principle of proportion is the principle by which a matter such as this must be adjusted; and that to speak of fixing any definite number, would be the vei*y height of absurdity. I once had a member in my church, who^ because the number of deacons in the first churchy the chm-ch of Jerusalem, ^as seven, insisted upon seven being /Ac number for all churches,— so that the smallest should have no fewer, and the largest no more. This was the principle of conformity to the primitive model, pushed to an extreme which, while we may respect the spirit of it, cannot but provoke a smile at its eccentric absurdity. In the deacon's office, as well as in the bishop's or pastor's, /a/'ojoor- tion must regulate; so that, if the ends of both offices are effectually answered, it matters compara- tively little whether it be by the ministration of two, or three, "©r seven, mmao definite number, then, can, in either ease, bel|jBd as YAc number for which aj)Ostolie authority can, be pleaded, — ^and if the main consideration be the office, and the effective answer- ing of the ends of its institution, may* there not be as much of concern about the form more than the substance, in .contending for a mere plurality, as in co;|itending for a certain amount of plurality,— in insisting on the necessity of two, as insisting on the necessity of twelve? I have been amused sometimes at certain churches pluming themselves on theiiv strict conformity to apostolic practice in having their plurality of eldei's, and teaching elders too, while the plurality is the one concern, — not tiie amount of actual efficiency with which the ends of NO EVIDENCE FOR RUUNO ELDISIS. 217 as the office are answered :— for it has just been » plurality, and no more,— -and the two, composing that plurality, instead of " giving themselves wholly" to the duties of their ministry, have had their mifldls and their time occupied jfrom Monday till Saturday with the engagements of their secular calling. Witi^ how much greater efiectivetiess are the ends of the office likely to be served by the undivided labours of one devoted pastor, than by the necessarily limited and distracted attendance upon their official Suic-. tions, that can be given by any * two whatever so circumstanced! The questions— What are the offices? and. How are the purposes of their institu- tion efifected?— are assuredly questions of ineompar- ably more importance than the question — How many should there be in each? — -In what Paul calls "the beginning of the gospel," persecution augmented ^the number of dependants in a greater or less degree upon the church's /bounty, and thus rendered the duties of the deaconrs office the more extensive and onerous, and the necessity of a larger number o| those who held the office *the more imperative. Ajidsotoo, in those days, when in so many places the number of converts was large, isind, all paving just passed from heathenism themselves, and being surrounded. mth the heathenism of others, and there being no such means of instruction by reading as are enjoyed amongst us, — the number of teachers required, as well as the constancy^ and quantity of instruction jfrom- each, must have been so much the greater within the ch\^ch ; and the heathenism amidst which the churches were planted, and from which their numbers were to be kept up and multiplied, called for the greater number of teachers and preachera 918 OFPIOEBB OP CHRISTIAN CHtRCHES. 1 I J..___.__^ / \ • 'J / I / ^ without the ch&rch, to work upon the dense mass of environing darkness and corruption ; — and then, too, to meet these obviously existing exigencies, the num- bef of gifted brethren- -of brethren endowed ^ with the preternatural gifts of the Holy Spirit— made a large number of qualified teachers so readily accessi- ble ;-- -that we can see temporary reasons for a more nnmerous ministry than continued afterwards to be necessary, as also the wisdom, and the ' power, ahd the goodness of the exalted Redeemer, in. nccoijjk^- • dating the supply to the demand. ^* ' ,' « I am far from thinking that these remarks settle the question either way. The object of them is rather to show that it is a question open to doubt. I must candidly say, that the evidence for the fact of a plurality of elders, or bishops, in the apostolic churches is, of the two sides, the stronger; but, there being no precept or example whatever ascertaining the extent of the plurality,— fixing any sipecific num- ber,— the principle of proportion is l«ift to be the regulator,— and the grand concern is/the existence, , and the efficiency, of the' office. It /is to this that the churches ought most solicitously to look. A church that is punctilious about f<)rm, may plume y^ itself on its conformity tcviSie apostolic model, in having its plurality of pastors, when by its two the ends of the office are farlless effectually answered than they are by the one oiotfe^ churches. I have taken no notice of the rbasonings on either side derived from eAj/)Cf//ewCT/. The truth is, that reasonings on this principle So exceedingly plausible have been urged on both sides of the question, that the balance may be considered as oscillating between the t w o scales. — I can ente i* into no such discussions; -I ( > 'i MO EYtPBNCE FOR RULIMO ELDBK8. 219 my sole objeot, in every case, being, as far as possi- ble, to settle the question of expediency by settling that of fact and of divine authority. — Neither have I at all Availed myself of the early maxim of posi- apostolic times — " one church, one bishop " — having laid down and av6wed the resolution, in no case to go beyond "the law and the testiniony"— the inspired record. f-'*. '4- ' 4' r ■" ' :* II m m ■:7. ■:■■•.••• ■■■ CHAPTER V. OF THE GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH. On this part of my subject, it is not my pm-pose to say any thing at all about epiffcopwu. My reasons Qxe,—Jirst, that according to the episcopalian form, the government of the church lids in tjl^^hands of the bishops,— the archbishops and (he diocesan bishops. Now it has before been our encfeavour to prove, that for I3uch an order of officers in the apostolic churches tlie^ is no evidence to b© found in the only authori- tative standard,— the Scriptures of the New Testa- ment. It would, therefore, be a very superfluous, and for that reason a very preposterous tiling, to occupy time in discussing the nature and extent of the author if yoi an office, after having shown that there is no wan-ant for itn existence: And secondly— when we come to the consideration of the fifteenth chapter of the ^cts of the Apostles, we shaU have opportunity for a remark or two (as much as may be deemed sufficient) on the subject of councils.— At present I confine myself to the controversy between independents and presbyterians : that i^, between the popular and the jepresentcdive systems. I shall, as usual, begin with the evidence from Scripture of the system which I believe to bave its sanction— that of Inmpendency— To this subject I shall devote the pifesent chapter. The discussion of the passages of Scripture which form the basis of independent and congregatiopal church government, wiU of course, f\ "»■.' •\i ,■*•* ,, V ' ^GOVERNMENT OP THE CHUBOIT. 221 to a oonaidoraple extent, involve the collateral diBcufh sion of the reasoningH of presbyteriana ogninBt it, and the arguments by which they support their own views. The two cannot well be 8evere(\; and, in truth, they are more satisfactorily examined con- jointly, as well as with less of repetition. I begin with a few remarks on the dempiatiwia by which this form of church government has been distinguished. These remarks will, of ^course, bring before the reader the distinguishing characteristics of the system. The designations to which I have special reference are the two which I have just used —INDEPENDENT and CONGREGATIONAL. — It is to me obvious, that the designation by which any particulalp body of men, whether inJheir religious or their secular capacity, has come To be distinguished, may be contemplated under two different aspects,— the mora defnik and the mote compnheimve. The designation may have been originally taken from one only of the distinctive peculiarities of the body; but, having once becomej^the designation of the body holding that peculiarity, it associates with it, when so applied, whatever other peculiarities are held or practised by the S(ime body. This I take to be precisely the case in the present instance. Indepen^ dency eaid cQiigregatioriqliam are designations of the same system of church order,— and indepmdmts. mA cmgregationaliats of the same christian body; although each of the designations may have been derived from a different feature of the system.. The great general and fundamental principle of the system itself is this:— That every regularly consti- tuted christian society, or church of Christ, with its own offic e b e arers, haft within itself, ^ w i t hou t appeal course, ,-_!, \' / I %\ I OPVEROTIENT OF THE CHUftOH. to any higher authority save that of Christ the Church's Head, the full power of its own govern- ment, in the admission of members, and in the administration of all instituted discipline, even to the utmost limit of its exercise.-^^xelusion from the body:— and that such government, in all its parts, is to be administered in the presence, and with the authoritative concurrence, of the church collectively : considered. . i. I have called this the /undainental principle of the system. You will at once perceive, however, that, properly speaking, there are here ttco distinct princi- ples ; and that from each of these principles one of the distinctive designations is derived ;—MMi^>cn- dmcy from the {ormeT^congregationaUsm from the latter. But still, in usage, the one comprehends the other. Independents are congi-egationalists, and congregationalists independents. The independency of the system, then, means,— not of course independency of the Head,— either of his grace or of Ub authority ; as if, whether individually or collectively, there could be dny prosperity, or eveni spiritual existence, without the former ; or ^s if there could be any right to take a single step^thoutihe latter, or tO frame a single law for the d%^on either of their personal or social conduct, beyo^ what He has ei^acted for them, and has recorded, in the form of precenl'or example, in his own word. This kind ' of independency we leave to any (and such there have been and still are) who may choose to lay claim to it in theory, or to proceed upon it in practice, — by ad^g at tiieir pleasure, as to them circumstances may seem to require it, statutes of their own to those laws of his kingdom whioh are sanctioned by the ■ -Kiili- , fyf'^:'V^^ -.r OOVEBNMENT OF THE OHUBCH. 223 ist tti© govern- in the 3ven to rom the • )arts, is ith the eqtivelV' '. e of the iY, that, t 'prind' \ one of indepen- «om the mds the )ts, and as,— not )r of his vidually (Oreveni I if there boutjthe m either K^haiHe the form [lis kind Bh there lay claim actice, — oastances to those I by the ,{ & \ inspired messengers of his will.— Neither does inde- pendency mean such an independence of the churches upon one another, as that each should regard itself, and be regarded, as disunited and insulated from all the rest ; unconnected with them by any bond of union, having with them no common objects of interest and no power of association for their ac* complishment,— unconcerned in any thing but what immediately and exclusively pertains to itself. There %8 a union; a union of love; of mutual fellowship; every member of each being virtually a member of ?^ ; of giving and receiving; of prayer and of occa- sional counsel; and of concentrated co-operation for objectH of common interest ;— a union of which more paxticular notice inay bo taken by and by.— Th© independency, for whose scripturtd authority we plead, is the independency of each church in regard to the execution of the laws of Christ, of every other church, and of all othel* human power whatsoever than what is lodged in itself. It is the Iitll oom- • PETENCY OP EVERY DISTINCT CHURCH TO MANAOB» WITHOUT APPEAl., ITS OWN AFFAIRS. With regard, again, to the Congregationalism of the system, I cannot better express Uie distinction betweejk it and its independency, than in the follow- ing statement by my learned friend ^r. Alexander, on which, when I have laid it before the reader, I shall ojOfer a remark or two :—" The views which are held amongst us, in relation to chm'ph order, are divisible into two classes ; — those which belong to us as iNDEi'ENDENTB, and those which belong to us as GONGREOATIONAIJ8T8. By many theso two terms are understood as if they were synonymous ; or at least, as if either might be used indifferently, as alike ■it !• I. ! ■ ■l!f ^24 GOYEBNKBNT OF THE OHUROH. comprehensive of all tlie views of ecclesiastical polity peculiar to our denomination. This, however, is ft mistake; independency and Congregationalism are perfectly distinguishable the one from the other. They relate to distinct provinces of ecclesiastical economy ; the former having to do with the external^ the l&tter^ith. the internal relations of each church or society of believers. As iwcfepencfente, wfe aflftrm that each church stands free of all extrinsic interfer- ence, whether proceeding from private individuals, ecclesiastical functionaries, or synodical bodies. As oongregationalists, we assert the right and duty of every member of a church to take an interest in all matters relating to the management of the church's affairs. By the former, we denounce all intrusion into the church from without ; by the latter, we pro- test-^gainst all encroachment upon the privileges of the body from within."* The remarts I have to make on this statement relate, not at all to the corriectness with whiph the im^t of each of tlxe designations is given in it ;— but to the seemingly alleged impropriety of using either of the two as comprehensive of the other; and comprehensive indeed of whatever peculiar prino%)les or practices are held by the body that is indiscriminately called by both. This impropriety I doubt. It is true that " a church may be indepen- dent, without being congregationaL"t But still, it cannot be what usage\as distinctly called aw tncfe- p&ndmt church. .That designation is gpiven to no ♦ " Congregationalisin : l^ng the substance of an address on that subject, delivered in Argyle Square Chapel, Edinburgh, on the even- ing of Sabbath, Oct. 18, 1840." flbid. i i Ul QOTEBKl^irr OF THE CHURCH. 225 I polity er, is li BTCL are other, iastical xternai, church > affinn nterfer- viduals, es. As duty of st in all ihurch's itrusion ■we pro- leges of atemeiit liph the in it ;• — >f using ) other ; peculiar f that is ►priety I udepen- ; still, it an inde- i to no resson that D the even- churches but such as are also congregational. A congregation managing its affairs by a represen- tative session, even^ although standing alone, and declining subjection* to any superior church courts could not, witii propriety, because it could not con;- sistently with usage, be denominated an independent cAttrc/<.— This proceeds on the same principle on which, although, according to those views of tho ordinance of baptism which, both as to mode and subject, we hold to be scriptural, we pucdobajAisfs me baptiats, it vronld be both foolish and false to call our churches baptist churches; — on which, too, though wo have what we deem the scr^tural offico of tho bishopy^vfe never dream of callidg ourselves episcopa- lians; — and on which, once more, while holding the unity of the Godhead,it would be a misnomer far from palatable'to us, because usage has appropriated the designation to the abettors of what in our eyes is a heresy subversive of the gospel, to call xlh unitariam. Tj3 sic void'. i^5W mastbe bowol to, if W3 w^uld avoid e^sposing our^elvea to the m^st absurd and mischievous misconceptions. — At all oyenta,, indepenr dents arid congregationalists mean the same body of believers, although each designation expressoa a different feature of their distinctive polity. That distinctive polity, then, consists in tho fivo particulars /—firsts that each church is entrusted vn h it» own government ; and, sedond^ that that government is to be conducted f not bi/ the office-bearers idone as its represmtatioest but by the o^js-bexrers and the congre- gation conjointlif. It is impossible, hdwever, to adduoo the scriptural evidence in support of each of these particulars separately; inasmuch as, the texts which prove the brie involve also the proof of the other. To these texts we now proceed. 15 -♦*• SQ6 OOViaaJMENT Olf THE CHtlRCH. A considerable portion of t^he evidence on the present point, has been aheady before us, in con- siteing the proper import of the word church. " We have shojvn, that by a chnrch is mej^nt a congiega- tion, or society of believers ;~and that .there is no instiance in the New Testament of its being used m iia &\hged repre^eniative acccplaf ion, —that is, as denoting the clinrcJis ^certi indcpen thronghout the whole chapter^, has an imvarying reference. That reference is to the, 'brethren collectively. And what is the injunction? — "For I, verS^, as abseiit in. body, but present in -*—*--- r^■ 'a - * ' \' ■ ■ ■ . / .228 OQYEBiniEirr of the chubgh. •HJ T ! I i 1 gpitit; have judged already, as though I were present, .oonqemmg him that hath so done this deedf— in* the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our liord Jesus Christ, to deliver such an one to Satan, fdf the destruction, of the flesh, that the' spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus." It has been alleged' that the case is peculiar; that ' this is not a sentence to he uMctedhj the chwch at all, but the avowed determination of the apostle as tb what he hirmef should do, ^in the exercise of his apostolical authority, and his miraculous powen — «* It is worthy, of attention," says Dr. Dick, "that^. from this, case, which ^was evidently peculiar, no legitimate inference can be drawn respecting the Ordinary procedure of the church. The Corinthians had neglected to do their duty ; and Paul, inter- * posing by His apostolic authority, pronounced a aanfcence, and called upon them to execute it.' It was'Paid, and not the Corinthians who oxcommuni- catod the incestuous man; and their office consisted , in publishing the sentence in their assembly, and acting conformably to it, by excluding him from /their fellowship. There is liO recognition Hjf power in that church to judge or to ceQSure; their\business \i : i A violV' miaisterial. This I consider as tho propax ospiiuation of the passage; which,, thu9 viewed,^ give;? no CDunteaance to independents.".*^- Trute— "thus view'ed :"— but is it i%htly viewed? To ascertain^ this» observe •?- 1. It seems an extraardiiiiiry iiSsettioM that "there was no tesognitipn 0/ power in that church tojudgctor ' Loctureu on Theology, ^ol. iv., p. 357. > , - .-J •I -a i i f ft . / resenti jdf— in* ye are )wor of one to e' spirit kr; that ' mrch at ostle as » of his owerj — , "that,, liar, no in'g the ijithians I, inter-* meed a . it: It •mmuni- [>nsisted < d\j, and m from |f power business as the 5h^ thu9 nts."*^ Qd? To t," there jitdffe,OT < _± .U i OOTEBNHEN^ ,<5P tBE OHUROH. , 229- to oemure." What says the aj^tle? In yerse }2, he pnts the question— a question which involves an affirmation— "Do not ye judge them/that are within?" Is this n^t a recognition of the power of judging ? Is it not^ an express declaration that all who were "with- in"— thiit is, evidently, the members of the church —Were, by the law of Christ, and the constitution of his churches, subjected to their ju<|fcial authority, -r-the member^ individually to the judgment of the church collectively? — And to whomsoever it is that judgment is committejcl, it musti follow, that in the same parties is lodged the power of censures The judicial and the executive stand here in immediate connexion. The sentence and the censure are placed in the same hands :-r-"i>o not ye judge ^ihem that are ' within ?: — Wherefore, pid away from among yourselves that wicked persoii." .» " ., ^-- _ ' 2. It must be evident to the most cursory atten- tion, that ^ the apostle 7'€prchendii tJie church /or not haviTi^ done sooner f ond of their ewn oceorc?, what" he now enjoins them to do.^This is admitted by Dr. Dick, in the expression— "The Corinthians had neglected^to db their dutyJ*—^ln the. second verse, the apostle says— "ITe are'-puflFed up, and have not rather mourned, that he who hath done this deed might be taken away from among you:" Now, hew should he have been '^ taken away from '- among . them?" By any other than themselves? > !0y any otl][er power, or /any other act, than tl|0ir ^wn? Assuredly not. The'^word here translated "tuhen away" is the same wluoh, in the tMrteenth verse is rendered "pui Q.way" when thigy iire charged to exoommnnieate the offender. This, then, was what JheyougMto have done before. This was the "dnty" /■ ■ i l> ;V ■■•■ .,, » ■J M 1 L I, j m \l i-'l if; 230 OOVBBNMENT OF THE CHURCH. which (in Dr. Dick's phrase) they had "neglected Jfco 'do." It is vain, therefore, to speak of its having been "the aposfe and not the Corinthians that . excommunicated the incestuous man:"— for suppos- :ing this— not granting it— tf it be admitted' (and how can it be denied?) that in doing so,--^fn follow- ' . ing out his intiniated det-ision,- he only did what it was their previous duhj to hove done, the argument from thj) passage is the veiy same. Tlie preA-ious duty is eipKeitly admitted also by Dr. M'Kerrow:— " Those persons to, whom the matter belonged had not taken any steps for maintaining the discipline of ' the church, hj havimf this person cut off from their commmim "—page 33— It ought, then, to have^beeu - done before:— that is, there w-erelaws of discipline, which they. ought before to have applied and exe- cuted, mthout requhing this decision and Hirec- ' tion of the apostle. And yet, how dbe^ my friend go on to argue?— Thus.— "Does he (the apostle) require the .members of the church to sit in judgment upon the pfiEending individual, and to deter^nine . whether any, or What, censure should be inflicted On • him? No. Hp tells them that this was a matter concerning which he, ^^as an apostle, had already , determined: ' I verily, as absent in body, but pre- : sent in^-spirit, //ave judged already Concerning him ..that hath so done this de^d.' Wfcy, then, does be write to- them at all about it? fl^ writes to theiOr * siaiply for the purpose of informiiig them what his decision was, and in what way hie wished it to be ^carried into eflfect.. His decision was, that the per- son who had been guilty of so hoinou? "a sih shov^ he out off from tJte communion of the, ^tirch ; and he commands that this decision should bo solenml^ and" \- '..■■ "i \-' :,i icted "fco having ns tkttt M BuppoB- 3d' (and follow- • what it •gument jre^nious srrow : — red had Ipline 6f om their ive been - scipline, md exe- d direc-' y friend apostle) udgment eterjnine . licted on • i matter already but pre- lihg him does Tie to thenir what his it to be the per- liii shoidd ;, and 'he \ ■ , ■/- .«**■ '■ ' ■ ■ ■ -, >'. - " \'-: ,t ■ ■ .■ '.'■■'■-.■ ■.-.'.V- ■ \'e\ ■■■■;:■ ■■ \' ■% ;,' (^VERNMENT OF THE CHURCH, y/ ^1 omly and publicly .earned into eflfect,,as a sentence tiB^tified by Christ himself, the great HeAd of the Churciii"— Eut had not Dr. M'Kerrow just before ifepresentedk this— ^ ' the "having this person cut ^fif from their coib^mi^- nioni*'— as the very thing which it was their duty before to have done? — and ia it true, then, that 4he apostle 1^- writes to them "simply for the purpose i^ informing them what his decision was, and in what way he wished it to be carried into effect?" No. If , it was'the very thing they should have done before, it foll€)ws that they did not stand in .need' of th^ information:— and he evidently writes to them, not merely to inform them what to do, .but to reprove them for not having already done it. And, whatever be*the way in which lie here admonishes them now ^ to set about the painfiil but necessary duty, the same was the way in which they ought to have set about ' irt)efbre.VBut— " " ' ' ^ ^ 3. It wa>l 7*0/ the apostle that exco^imim^ated the incestuous man, ^?rf Me church. — It is, true, that the apostle pronounces authoritatively, asLan apostle, the law of jQhrist respecting the case. He tells the Corinthians what he himself had ** judged," or deter- mined, should be done in it. feut this was not the nilan's excommuiiication. It Was, no dotibt, their in- cu^ibent duty to acquiesce in this judgment, to pass ■ sentence in accordance with it, and to carry the sen- tence into execution. What might have. been the consequences to them, as a church, had they failed bo to do, in those days when the poorer of the exalted Lord was lodged in the hands of hi^vinely accredited and endowed vicegiereftts, ife is>needless for us to inquire, or to conjecture. Our proper inquiry is,— what was the part which, in this matter, belonged to the church? ■\ . V 282 %. '■ / OQVERMMBNT OP THE CHURCH. And surely the passage leaves no room for doubt here. The man wcun not esccommunicated till the church fulfilled the injunction— "Put away fropi among your- selves that wicked person." They did fulfil it:— and then, 4. We have further evidence, in the apostle's own explicit testimony, that it was not lie who excommuni- cated this offender, but the church— &nd the church coHec^tveZ?/.— It appears that the discipline had had a sahitaryefi'ect; that the man had been brought to repentance; and that he had intimated his desire to be restored to. fellowship with his brethren. And in the passage in the second epistlei to the Corinthians, from which we^ learn this, we have at once evidence by whom he had Ikm cut off, and hy ivhom he leas to he restored. In 2 Cor. ii. 6—8, Paul thus writes:^" Suffi- cient to such a man is this ppnishraeut, which was inflicted of mauv. So that contrariwise ye ought rather to fcjrgive liini,and comfort him.lest perhaps such an one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow. Wherefore I beseech you, that ye would "confirm your love toward him.'*— Here, then, we learn tyy lohom the punishment was inflicted,^6?/ ichomiho offender was exeomtnunic^ted ;— not by the apostlo liimself.— but u?ro ^tynXttovoav, "by the many;"— that is; if ^vo are to allow words to have their obvious m'eaning, by «/t8, the affirmation might have had •ome colour of truth and fairness. But this we', cannot allow to be assumed. And in the passage itself, where is there the remotest hint of the pre- judgment of a session of officers, of the execution of whose sentence, by one of themselves, the people were only to be the assembled witnesses? I need not say, there is nothing whatever of the kind. The only pre-judgment to be found here is' that of /Ao apostle. But an apostle is not a session; nor is a session an apostle. And we have already seen thai^ the sentence pronounced by him is one which oughf to have been pronounced and executed before : and we have seen too by lohom ; even by the churdb — that is, officers and nierabers togethd^ (for that both are included we have, as we -shaU see immediately, Dr. M'K.'fl own admission) when they were '* gathered together, with the power of the Lord Jesws Christ." It is not to be wondered at, that when Dr. M'K. wrote thus, verse 12th should have stared him in the ioGQ and more than whispered — How can you say so? That verse is — "Do not ye judge them that are tmthin?" Let us see, then, how he disposes of J^e d^ection which the terms of this verse so palpably interpose' "Should it be objected," says he, "to the ^ew which I have given of this case, that the apostle addresses the members of the church of Corinth as :persona who did judge in the church, when he says (verse 12,) "Do not ye judge them that are within?" — rl answer, #iat he shows us, in the beginning of the following chapter, in what seense he affirms that they .judged those that are within. He there gives us to understand, that it is in the s a me fle nB & a s it is affirmed 1 'ti Si '' M $- ^f the saints that they shall judge the world— and i -rr »ir^ OOVEBNMKNt OF THE CHUIIOH. 235 %ye hBA this we'- passage the pre- mtion of I people aeed not id. The kt oi tJte uor is & een tha^ jh oaghf ore: and ;hur(^ — bat both ediately, gathered Christ." )r. M'K. im in the a say so? that are s of ^e palpably ),"tothe e apostle 3rinth as i he says within?" ag of the bhat they ves us to it affirmed even judge angetH. "Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? And if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that ye shall judge angels? HHow much more thingH that i^ertain to this Uf©?*- (chap. vi. 2,3.) Burelyno one i^-ill affii-m that the saints shall judge the world, or judge angles, in person. ^They shall judge them in the sense of being assessois along with Christ, acquiescing in the sen-^ tenoeB which he shall pronouuco upon men arid devils. In the sttvie seme are w^ to understand the apostle's language, when he spealcH d the members of the church of Corinth, "judging them that are within." Their judging was nothing else than their acting as assessors, along with tfee office-bearers of the church, by acquiescing in the sentences which they pronounced.. This is obviously the meaning which he affixes to his own language, when he speaks of the saints judging the world: and the rules of just criticism demand, that, when he speaks of the saints jndgihgjn the church, the same interpretation bepnt upon his words in the one case, as in the other." Pages 35, 36. ; / Let us look calmly at this position, that we may see how far its esteemed author adheres in it to "the rules of jtist criticism." To me^^the position appeaTS a very extraordinary one.— ObMiTe, respecting it,-— First.-—" In the epistles which Paul wrote to, this church," observes Dr^ M'K., page 32, "thcddera must he considered moAdresaed, as loellm the other members of the church. In that part of the first epistle ib which a reference has been made (the fifth chapter) hft callfl the attention ot the office-hearera and <^ the ^' )rld — and t members generally, to a case of grievous delinquency — - ^-- t ^ /•■" 236 OOYERNMENT OF THE OHTJBCH. which had beeii tbleratecl amongst them," ^c.--Now, the very same style of address, which is mamtained throughout ikej/th chapter, continues in the begin-' ningof thestite^A. How is it,then, that on coming to it, the elders, or rulers, are dipped out, and the members only considered as addressed? Is this quite conste- r- tent with what ^'th^lHiles of just criticism demand?" —or isit consistent with his own previous and correct % affirmation? I cannot but regard it as neither.— ^'v:VThen— ■,■,.•■,■; -"',::':,■.'■'.■■ /Seco/uKy.— The people, according to Dr^M'K,, are,*- I in matters of discipline, assessors with the mlers;— '^;' the rulers judging and pronouncing sentence, and 'the people, as in duty bound, bowing assent,— neither judging, nor sentencing, but simply witnessing, with submissive acquiescence, the carrying of the sentence into eflfect. Well. Jf from, the fact that ♦'judging the world" and "judging angels" signifies not judg- ing "in person," but only being " assessors with Christ," it be a fair sequence that in judging in the church the brethren must be regarded merely as assessors with the rulers; then we have to ask, how stands the case as to those rulers themselves? They, ^ let the reader observe, are not. assessors. They are the principals,— the judges tvith whom the people ara a^saaaors. Th,ej suatain in the church, the samo official position which Christ sustains in the judg- ment. Is not the sequence inevitable, that in tho judgment itself f/je?^ are not to be assessors merely, but principals?— that iJiey, though not the people, are to f judge ^*in person?" If from the people's being only 1 ' assessors in the judgment, it follows that they must be only assessors in the church ; then does it not also follow from the rulers being principals in the church. OOtEBMHENT OF THE CHUBOB. 287 that they must be prinoipak in ihe judgment? A nice morsel this, though not so meant^ for the pride of clerical distinction.— But still farther, TAtVc?;^*— If from the reference made to "the saints judging the world," and "judging angels," it follows that the judgment to be exercised in the church by thosia who are addressed can be only that of assessors, giving their assent to a judicial sentence in the framing and pronouncing of which they have had nothing to do,— and that the word "judge" has no higher sensp than this either in the end of the fifth chapter or the beginning of the sixth; then where, in the whole passage, is the proper idea of "judging " to bo found at all? There is nothing of the kind. The people, it seems, are 'addressed. When they are addressed— "Do not ye judge them ,;^that are within?" means only tjieir being assessors sin judgment^— not judgffig, but only assenting:— and the same continues the meaning in all that is said about "judging" in the beginning of the sixth chap- iter. By whom, then, is the judgment to**be formed and pronounced, ::to which these assessors give their assent? By "i^ios&f persons to ivliom the matter Ije- longed" replies Dr. M'K.— that is, by the elders, the rulers, the session. But, although, by the power of a habitual association, these are, naturally enough, in my friend's mind, tJuy are mt in tie paisogc, Iho people only (according to ilm) are addressed :--- there can be no judgment but that of tho«j^ who aro addressed as judging :--that judgment is the judg- ment of assessors only. And thus in the proper sense of the terms, there is neithor Judge nor judgment in the passage :— there are assessors without judges; % there Is assent to a judgment, witiiout the judgment :.H- : . ■ ■ .■ '■■■ ■,:. ■•■- ■■ V ■:'/■■.•■■■•: r 3^ m GOYEBNMENT OF THE CHUBOH. it)ielf; Thei-e is »o consi^ent principle on which the pflpsagelcan be jiBiplained, but that of the church collectively, as composed of rulers and memoirs,, being addressed throughout. , It is not fair to dip oat the rulers, and slip them in again as occasion requires, — or to slip them out of the passage, and keep tiiem in the mind and the mental theoiy, An^ this leads me iio notice—- , FowriA/y.— There being, manifestly and confess^ edly, more in the judgment spoken of in the begins ning of chap, vi., than mere assent to a foi-med and pronounced sentence,— namely, the forming and pronouncing of that sentence, — the judicial investi- gation and decision ; '.then, if the people alone are here addressed, it will follow, that this judicial in- vestigation and decision is placed in their hands exclusively. The nilers have nothing to do with it. Instead of the people being assessors Avith them, they must be content to be assessors with the people. How writes the apostle? *' I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not a wise man among you? no,' not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren T'--* Among you." The reference can ex- tend no farther than to the persons addressed. If these be the people,,it is among them that the "mse men,'^ competenf to investigate arid to judge, are to besought and foimd. But the passage, it may be' alleged^ relates to the settlement of differences Jby private arbitration, and to the selection of the arbi- trators from amongst their fellow christians. Be it StiU, two things are to be noticed: — the first, BO. that the judgment is something widely different from that of mere assessors; and the second, tl^at the arbitration must be of 'such a character as to admit OOVEBHXEirr OF THE GHUBCH. 23ft ol a final'appeal to " the chnrch;" thai being the i^^nropriate dbcistian court of judgment, as contrafh ted ivHh the heathen courts, to which reference iiT evidently made when they are spoken of as "going tCr4aw one with another,"— "going to law before th*: unjust, and not before the 8aint%."-T-I hate only to, arfd- Fiftldy. — I^|^|||^s4iie view of the people's " judg*- ing," taken bj^HH|'£^errow, accord with the spirit and force of tUpipral^e's reasoning? According to that view, it can amount to no more than this— if, in the judgment of the great day, yoi; are to be asses- sors with Christ, are ye unworthy or incompetent, to be assessors with your church rulers?— if you are to have the honour of giving your assent, in that day, to his sentences, are you unworthy of the honour of now giving your assent to theirs? Tame enough, certainly. The inference of the apostle is not so. It is not of mere assent that he speaks, but of bona , fide judgment :— " are ye unworthy to judge the small- est matters :- — -things that pertain to this life ? If, then, ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. I speak to your shame. Is it so that there is not a wise man among you? — no, not one that shall be able to judge beitoeen hi^ brethren ?" — I grant, as a matter of course, that " the saints '* are not, in the ^arict and propei^ sense of the word, to he judgeBia. the great day. inhere is one Judge. But thiat one Judge will first pronounce their sentience of aeqilittai and acceptance; and, that having been done, they shaU appear, in the character of his approved and- accepted people, as, taking part with him in the judg- ' ment of the ungodly, — entering into the principles ■'■ ■ ♦ ,'V tMO oqIbbsiibnt of the offUBom- imwhioh that jndgmeBt shall proceed, disoerningf the nghteqasnesa of its awards, Jbd affixing to the spn- - > tences pyDnounced their intelKgeiit miA solemn AicpN ! "Was it right and becoming, then, in the members ^J the Goiuithijm Ginrch, to treat ^ Stuch contume- lious pretention thoisa who were destined by the liiord himself Ijo ^a: distinction bq high? "Was there any congn^ty in their preferring to theii- jildgnient that of a heathen tribunal,— that of the very men in whoso final sentence of banishment and " dj^strtietion from the presenco of t!i|p "Lord" these despised brethren . vfeviLto take part?—" Set them to judge who aro ''■leasViil^ed in! the churcl^." " te^'t esteemed" is '"Wt'a-tra^lation of the origmai word— «Cou9£yj7Atc»'ou?. It means neither more nor less thun desfised — treated tnth contempt.' They were so treating their brethren, when they tlius passed them by as mcompetent, or as undeserving of their trust, aiid earned their matters of difference ^before the heathen:— and" his injunction is, that they. should no more act thus, contcriiptuously toward them, but constitute thoso their judges whom they were in this manner despis- ing. And while the terms of the injunction— "5e< them tojudfje^^^^^^y^ with all propriety, bo regarded aa addressed to them individually, respecting the ap:.^c''tT\i'^;.ifc of arl^itrators in matters of private ofi'oncS aii'i disagreement; they may, we should think, with no less propriety, be interpreted as rating to tho procedure of the church collectively, when in such cases it came to, bo appealed , to as the final tribunal. The procedure recommended, as the best .for bringittg all to a clear understanding, and a^ satisfactory issue, appe&rs to be,— the nomination oif ench individuals pf their number 'as, from,oharactor, ^^H * ^^^^B .^^K 1 t 1 ^ ■• \ \;\V Hi i1 li? It'll ■■<> f .,4"^ ■ <■,.■■■ ■■;■": . ■'^ ■ • • ■^ '■» ' '■ :'\ ,'•' \ .■• , ^ ' ling the ihe ei^n-^; > >ntuine^ lie Jjord ere way ent that n whoso on from )rethren ^ ivho aro med " is 'Tffieyov?. —treated retfaren, npetent, ed their -and'his tct thus te thoso ■ despis- n—"Set •egarded ting the private Id think, ating to when in the final the best It and a nation ot ^aracter, OOVERNMENy OF THE CHURGIf. Uk ocpapation, itnd habits, oiight, in each° case, be best t qiil4^ed for 'the task, who should institute a full ^^investigation of the facts, should form a judgment on the merits, and shoidd -report both, ^ore or less aiinutelj as the nat^re^of- the mqjitter iii controversy might require, to the church; that, thus enlightened, , they mi^ht pronounce thejr "collective dnd anthoritar ' 7 tive-sentence.; ■■ -■ ■■*■■.»■ ■'"-■■ •■:.'•■/■ ■::'■• .•,> ■■'■'•' ' My two remaining observations relate to° the nature; - ' of the sentence itself , ordered to be pronounced "and , ^ecuted:^^ . ■ -' <8^ia!i)Wy.^Bi the" representalidn of thfe case by the, Apostle himself inthe passage already referred, to in. . Ids second epistle, taken in connexion viatihthbti^.ithp- first, we have satisfaetoiy Evidence* thd-kthe *VpiUDiil0h- ^ iiiei\t" of Which hi^ speaks \^li«^urf la. pvpishnieht^(as a6me haVe insisted) of tm^ exirawUinhry Mnd^-'Wmch. . he threatened, and declaxl^ hii^^^H' deten^ined, to v ; inffict, by the intervepition of his ow^ wtroceifoMS % power, I Tht^.. ce.rtain ex|>o^tors v have interpreted "ddiver'ingto Saiqm fot the deatructibn'q^ tiiejlesh/^g ' as if it meant the inmcljion, and that thibiigh Satllnic ' agency, of some bodily distemper apd sl^ We ' might argue ajpinst thi^ on various pounds. We' might justly allege th^, Unlikelihood, that, if inflictions oi bodily distress aijd' pain were\meant, the wdrd "destruction^ would have been used^ this word being . perfectly appropriate when "the fles^f'Ms understood '* of tjie carnal or corrupt principle,' but ^ijite the coii- trary when it iS understood of the body, as the subject of such .miraculous pelialty.^ — We might urge .^Ihe improbability . of the apostle's representing the inflic- tion, in such a case, as effected through so strange '. sta '. instrumentality as the agency of Satan, when the >■ U"^ ■ 'i :^-' ■/-■, jffcr. ^6- ' r 4 * ^^^ \ - '^?f •* , ' , / :; ■X.r: *^ 242jai^ GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH. pTinishmenl) is the exptessidiTof loye for the petBoA : as well as hatred of his sin, — when the /object of it, is his spirit's final salvation,--and when, oft pother occasions, (as in this very epistle, cha^. ju.^30— 32,) offenders who were directly visited with such inflic- tions of corporeal suffering on account of their depart ture from Christ's wi^, are described as "chastened of the Lord, tliai they might not he comlcmned with the eWorld."— But there is no need for sUch grounds of argument. The statement of the apostle, that the "punishment" was "inflicted of the'many," settles the point ;— since by this express statement we are • necessitated to interpret the pimishment itself in a* sense consistent with the persons inflicting it.— Observe, then^— . - - v Seventhly. — Such interpretation is UOt at all diffi- cult.— "To deliver such an one to Satan" is far :^m'> being an unnatural phrase for excommunication, when the riepresentations of Scripture are borne in mmd, respecting the division of mankind between Ood and the Devil, who is called "the God of this world" and , "the prince of this world,"— between the kingdom of Christ and the kingdom of tfee wicked one.. To "deliver any one to Satan" comes thus naturally to mean— ejecting him from the one kingdom, and declaring Jiim, so far as the conduct for loMoh he is dealt icith indicates, a subject of the other.— And the end is one which, in all acts of discipline, must, by ^ every church, be kept steadily in view,— "i/te destruc- tion of the flesh" This is an expression, for the meaning of which no one can be at a loss who is even superficially acquainted with the phraseology 6f this apostle in various other parts of his writings; pa r ticularly in his epistl e s to the Romans and thtf 4 -^-— v- \^: s'- I petBoti : $ct of it, b other 30—32,) sh infliO' LT depart lastened with the )tmds of bhat the "settles ; we are* self in a* hg itr- ali diffi; ' far ffom^ on, when in mmd» God and rid" and igdom of me.. To mraily to om, and liok he is -And the must* by e destruc" , for the }s who is eology 6f writings;' and the* i A' "♦!, GOVERNMENT OF THE CHURCH. 248 Galatians. Even in^this epistje it^«lf, and only a paragraph or two before, he had used expressions of the same kind^*4as, tvhep.in chap. iii. 1—4, he had repreaented the Corintluan^ as "still cai^al, and walking as men,"^hat is, asunder the too uncon- trolled infliiipnce of the principles and tendencies of corrupt nature,' and behaving likelnien who had not the new nati&re in them. Jt is' the obvious and gracious end of all discipline to sub(^e tp repent- ance; by this mfeims to overcome and destroy the power of the carnal principles, and restore that.o'f the spiritiial; and thus *Hhe Spirit," recovered by penitence, cleansed from the guilt of sin by the renewed application of the blood of atonement, and from its pollution by the supplicated ^ace of the Holy Ghost, may eventually, instead of ' perishing nnder unrepented, idiremitt'edi and unremoved trans- gression, "be savea in the day of the Lord Jesus." The only further observation I deem necessary, isi that ail thiHiiiB^n perfect agireement with what ih^ apQStlfe says ofv"/M« oivn spirit" being present with tJiemm the execution of \the sentence, Ther,e is' not the slightest evidence that by "my spirit" hei means the Holy. Spirit.. The phrase in the' fomrth Terse obviously coiTQspO|ids to that in the third, and is explained by it. In ^e tiiird verse he, speaks of himself aeF "absent in, body hut pi'esent in spiHt:" — and when, iu^the verse loUowing, he says— "When ye are gathered together, anci my «ptrify ' what more should he be understood as* meaning, than that, in the execution of the sentence authoritatively essoin- ed, .he shonld be present with them inspirit; and that his spirit shoidd go entirely and heartily idong with them in the painful but indiBpensable fnlfilment i < .. A' '■■.'pekra, was regarded^as comr ° peteht to do for itself, withotit appeal to any of the '^ rest, or the right of any pf *^e 'est authoritatively tp interfere. Each is censored for th6 admission an.d " ; continuMice of its dwn y corruptions, and eacl^ is enjoined to put thei^n away.— In this respect, the - case of these sevefa churchtes is in perfect harmony with thaf of the chm'ch at\06ririth which has just been under review. V. ; -^ 2. In ho on'ec subjects which by this chapter are brought before us, of which Mch might be leparately discussed; and were it our present object to set forth the^ntire case, as forming a part of the early history of nie church, the (^stinct discussion ojf all the three would be indispensable,^ The three sulbjects are — 1. IJ^e gteat point appealed from Antioeh to Jenysalem, and settled at the latter place:— 2. The reatnctiom with which the decision was accompanied:— and 3. The i^tmxl^ the authority by which the verdict was- pronounced.— Of ihe three, the first, as being a vital point of evangelical truth, essentially connected wit^ t h e grou n d of human s alvation, i s , beyond qu e stion^ t <> H incfomparably the most important. But neither it 250 ABOUMENT FOR PRESBYTERIANISM .. _L .:.^ not the second belongs to our present inc[uiry. It is the last of the three we are now to examine ; and the others have no farther relation to our subject, than ap the introduction of them may, in any way, contribute to its elucidation. ' In entering x)n this inquiry, it is right for me dis- tinctly to state, that not by presbyterians alone, but by (Afferent denominations of Christians much more has, in my opiiaion, been made of this portion of «cripture,in support of their respective views, than, tdth regard to any of them, it at all warrants. 1 trust that, before I have done, I shall be able to convince my readers, that, whatever lessons may bp incidentallj', and by inference, deduced fiom son^e parts of it, it does not furnish a model for any one of those forms of church government between which the christian community is divided,— episcopalian, presbyterian, or congregational ;-nr-but that, with re-, gard to the chief point, the point of doctrine, the determuifation ultimately adopted, and communicated to the church at Antioch, and to thife Gentile churches generally, rested, not on the authority of a chm-ch court, by what title soev^ designated, but on that of apostolical inspiratimi. I sl^all diyide this discussion into two -sections :— first adducing proof of what I believe to have been the, fact, that the appeal from Antioch was settled by inspired authority; and then, secondly, examining the evidence to the contrary, pleaded on the part of the suppcrrters of presbytery. ,;.*,. I!- W^' FROM FIFTEENTH CHAPTER OF ACTS. 251 SECTION I. PROOF THAT THE APPEAL FROM ANTIOCH WAS SETTLED BY ' INSPIRED AUTHORITY. ■"-.■-'■■ « ' ■ "■'■.'•■■ ■■-■■". In order to the reader's clearly understanding the present argnment, it is indispensable for him to bear in mind, that those fellow-christians who conceive the appeal from Antioch to have been made to a church court, oi whatever description, gFive up the idecc of inspiration as having had anything to do with its deli|)erations -and decision. In the terms of one of t^g ablest and niost elaborate advocates ^of the presbyterian scheme,* they regard it as an " au^iori- tative, thongh an uninspired, ecclesiastical court." And in this view of it they all agree, it being, indeed, essential to their argument; of Which, by tlie adihis- sion of inspired authority, the force (if force it otherwise had) would be annihilated^r— the supposi- tion of such iauthority setting Ihe case at once a^ide, as a model for pemianent imitation. It is hardly necessary to add authorities on this point to that of Dr. Brown. I may, however, just mention other two, of at least equal weight, the late Drs. Dick of Glasgow and Mason of New York.— The former writes:-^" It has been said, that the reason for feferring this cause to the 6hurch at Jerusalem was, that the apostles were there, who were inspired men, and could decide this question by infallible authority; and that this was the ground of the submission of the churches to their sentence. But this Supposition. is of no avail tathe cause of independency, because it appears not * Rev. Dr. Frown, of Langton. ■s>- f* 252 ABGUHE^ FOR PRESBYTEBiANISM to" be foimded on JrutlL * * * * There is no evidence that the reference was made to the apostles as infallible judges. The reason of this allegation is, that it was made W the same time to the elders who were not inspired. If the apostles were consulted as oracles, whj were^Jhe elders also consulted, who were ^ not oracles?"* We may find a satisfactory answer to this question by and by. What I rfow quote to prove is simply ttffe fact of the denial," in the present case, of apostolic inspiration. — To the same purpose Dr. Mason:— '^ The apostles, on this occasion, jicted simply at members of the synod; they did nothing in virtue of their extraordinary, which was their ap^t^- eal, character; nor introduced into the delib€l-{raliiis 'of the assembly any influence but that of /etc?*, of the ivi'itten scnpture, and of reasonings founded on the comparison of both."t This, then, is a point which we must closely and_^ carefully examine, t shaU by and by endeavour to show, that, even :5yere inspiration put out of the question, our presbyterian brethren must find their model, not cir<;unifliaiKfcially alone and in minor par- ticulars, but in its most, essential elements, defective and untenable. At present J take up the one point just stated. I avow it as my.,firm conviction, that tY «7bServe — it i)orms no eart of that word. The record of the decision, as a matter of fact,'fonns- part of a divinely inspired narrative; but - '" ■ ' . -^ 3. If this is cpnceived to ljave,been a mere unin- spired ecclesiastical coitocil, then, by those who think so, the appeal must be regarded as having been made FROM THE StrPERIOR AUTHOrapy ix) THE INFERIOR, FpOM THE DIVINE 'M THE hS&. |j. You say— O no; the appeal was from the lower .to the higher jy-from the representatfle court of the one congregatioii at Aiitiooh to the sujSfer representa- ; tive court at 'Jeroisalem. I answer ;— of the refJfe ' sentatiye character o£>ji3us latter assembly, ly^ticewm come %o be taken by and by. tn the mean time> however, it must not be forgotten, by tohMnihe doc* trine had been taught at Antioch, for a decision between which and tile doctrine of tha. judaizing teachers whq had cpme down tliiither from Jerusalem, the appeal was ma^. The teacher of that doctrine was Paul,*— was,, therefore, an inspired apostle op Jesus Christ. ^ You \yill not questiop Jds inspiration! .revli«i|i6n o{>re^u8 Christ ;" apd ttt^ ;ly; >ras }ii^ ^perfect kn ____.-,-_-,„ m, .|he other appptleSj^^" '■'■''' ^^^^^^'-i^lM^s. Ce^as, 'idlMcjpl^"— "in .c^)iil^reilp,.-: ' -,'^^ to ^m.?5^iiB«tt«ltoi therefor^i f64*;i : Vv^J^t^fent t<#i5ftte th^ 8u^o^iion,^hat the ol)j^t of : ;^ ; ' ^ depiitcition t(m Antic^c^ ^as, or ^ssibly cOfll*' "'^ i^*^^^**^*^ * Aw»4ft»^ decisioli pn his divwic cdm^fe ^^; ^iji^or r^ soundness of;:m^ ^ ^ '5 Sfiiii^^^eV^ 4ocJtrine. Tc> nothing of '^hatltll^ ': , ^i^^ijieew have submitted; liQ^OuId he ever^sl^ - . - ■ im^: ietA, w^ " by reoSilion" (as he tells the Gala%ins ^#as)tor^ny suoh purpose. It would have ^een ^fTbii appealing iomenl 1; .. ^i Tfie manliest object[ of the appeal was,-^to"a tain whether* fthe dictates of inspiraiioh mhim ' te^j)Onded wijJh the dictji^tes of inspiration injh e awystlks; which haHben brought into q»/""" the false pretensioSjHi these unauthoriz^ --This' is Qonsistent, and plain,^ The othe / tion i^ncoiisistent with every reasonable can tJSe of the official dignity of this in servant of the Lord, as well as of the di|i^n^ i^ ^^ fsjal/. 1^' :?«* # > m ff > V FROM FIFTEENTH OHAPTEB OF ACTS. 257 ;or the hondiir of inspiration, — of God's jealousy for \J)tiiB own gloi^, and the glory of his exalted Son. 4. There isnothing in the facts on record regarding the DISCUSSION'' of the subject of appeal, in the Jeru- salem ftssem'bly, that is at all inconsistent with ^ THE INSPIRATION <5f THE DECISION. ■^r-^-.r---:--;--^:~rr~:^^^^--~--- It may sJBem, at j&rst view, othei-wise; but a very brief examibation "may suffice to show that it is in appearance onlyi— ^The statement in the seventh verse may appear at variance with the idea of inspjiration — ^" and when there had'been much disputing." , How could this be, if there was present, and in eixercise, the authority of inspired men !^ The question is natural and fair. But the i^nSwer to it is simple. Tlie "disputing" was not among the apostles. There can be no question,''that they, from the first, were all of one mind, holding the same truth, under the inspiration of =1;he^alB|fti Spirit^ and between the vieWB they nad byinspirAtiou and their^ sentiments iadependently of it, i^'were ^monstrous to suppose any discrepancy. But in Jerusalem, as in Antioch, there were "zealots for the law;'^and these zealots ^were disposed jbQ. take paj^^^^those who had gone from;, the j|^l^tt||j^^^H^|%i a^nd taught the docj^ne %^hP^W61^|^^^|^'' ^geal. It was ' /i iii'irTTii riijil^tliri disputal^^JEtrose.^Ajpid is it any evideh'ce^aiiist tlil^i^pirat^cngi pf i&> Ipostif^ lit ike tiine, that thele men s!homt Antioch he and Barnabas are related to have had " much dissension and disputation with them,"-^that i is, with the siame description of men? Men who would dispute the point in the face of one apostle, would not hesitate to, dispute it before the rest They were not so easily daunted. And at such a tinie, when men belonging to their OTjm party Jia^ ha4 the boldness to face Paul and Barnabas a» An|iioch, and had proved so far successful as to« necessitate this reference, were the membei's of that pa%at Jerusalem to be abashed, and to shrink from coiing forward to support their associates, and to assert and defend their favourite dogmas? It was » season when the whole force of the esprit de corpk wotild stir th^m up, and urge them on, to stand by\ ^ir friends and their principles. It was with them,\ then, the apostles and elders had to do, in the way ^ of disputation. The perfect unammity of the apostle^ v themselves on the occasion, appears on the whol^ face of the unadorned narrative.— -No one of the*^ other apostles rises to dispute with Peter the view;* given by him of the facts connected with his own^ commission to "open the door of faith to the Gen- tiles," as determining "the mind of the Spirit;"— nor does any one express a doubt, or start an objec- tion, as to James's interpretation of the prophecy of If Con- »l their I onder- I casion, ' »gmas? iration I there that ft>t ve had '—that I n who ipostle, e rest, such ff ty ha4^ ,bas a,W as to » of that ikfrom and to t was a le corpt^ tand b^ \i themy\ ;he way^ - ipostlei| V ) whold^' of the^:^ he view* ' lis own tie 6en- ►irit;"— a bbjeo- )hecy of tBOU.Vi^Tm^m CHAPTER OF ACT8. ■ 269 Amos. Instead. of there being "mnch disputing" among the a|)68tles, there was eyidently none at all. Their " disseusibn and disputation," just as in the case of Paul and JBarnabas at Antioch, was entirely with the judaizmgiheretics,— This leads me to notice-- . 6. Neither [is there ai^ thing inconsistent with inspiration in( THE terms OF the decree rrakLP. There safeitivo points which may Itppear so;: but which, in resja^^pxe not.— 1. The first df these ip, the circumstp,nce " of ^^ the ekiera and brethren " being joined with tjie apostles in tjie decree. If tfey were not inspired / (and no^o^ j^ntends for their having' btfen so) dops it not naturally follow,^ tihat neither were the ap4stles ?— that all ^eiught^ be regarded in their ecclesiastical and deliherative, not in their inspired^ capacity?— I answer: this doe^ not, by any mea|is, follow. The decree, or decision, is given in the form of a letter, addressed apd transmittedto "the brethren of the Gentiles in Antioch, and Syria, aud Cilibia." It is fair, therefore, to compare It with othfer letters, — letters of which thil inspired authority ip not ques- tioned. Paul's first epistle to the Th^ssalonians commences thus:— "Paul, awrf Silvanus, and Timo- theus, unto tho church of the- Thessaloniaiis which is in God the Father, dnd in the Lord Jesus Christ." —This fotth of ^jul rpduction is never regardedfas eiiher diBprov^MSB iuspiration of Paul, or proving; th^ of SylvaniSl^ Tiinotheus.— Still more decisive ^^e opening of the iepistle to the Galatians :— "Paulj an apostle, (not of men, neither by man, but by Jesua Christ, andOo^jjJie Father, who raisied hii§ from the Ae&d,) hnd aUtm^ethren which are toif^^, unto the Churches of Galatia." Doe8*thi8 co t^ ^ ij^i r to^ gfit %* * '. • ' aside the inspiration of, the writer in that e; r-*-- M- f ■% -<€ ». _^ .15>'- ■m AROUMfiNT FOR PRESBYTBBIANISH ^the very momept he is asserting it.-r-or, if . it, to admit along idlb it the equal mspira- tion tol'^lkll the brethren who were with him?"-;^!! not «re not the cases parallel ? If one apostle might m v<\- m f ... ii . '•■ ¥\ M: thusi^hen himself writing with inspired authority, Its^bciate brethren with hun in the inscription of his,, letters, withofit being understood as by so doing ©ithex comprising his own inspiration or affirming ^ theirs,— why might not the apostles collectively ^ ao Jhe sam^?— "The apostles and elders dnd h-emen send gfieeting unto the brethren who, are of the GentUes in Mioch and Syria and Cilicia," is a form of address from "jwhiclj^ no inference, on the ^^ point before us, can legj^^^ia^ely be dra^yn, which < might not, with equal concl&ivehess Bfe deduced from "/Paul an <|^tlfiCW Jesu|' Christ, #n(i all the Ifrethr&i wlio are «ySrme».unto the churches of Gala- tia."— 2. The mode of expression in the deQrejPr-"**"* * aeemd good to the |^ Ghost and^o w«"-^ unlike (it has beeii conceivef*) the langu^ ^ i^^*^'**^' V • ^d resembles rather that of men i^ft ^Qscuased, mm /t 'a©liberated, and pronouncedto ji»l|^<^t:— But thisT is'^a mistake, into which 4H^#^*^ reader alone ought" 1(1 fall. Thp 5hrase?W s#wa/ grood 'I would ' ^Abe falselt interpreted, wdre i^onsidered as convey- ing the idea of any .kind or degree of dubiety or •^ heBitation,-^such as men are" wont to express, when ^they deliver an opinion or sentence of their own, founded upon, or infetentially drawn from, particular ^ premises, which have come under their deliberative review. The word in the original Greek is one often- employed for affirming the mind oi him who use* |t of himwlf ; or for affi r ming the mind of anoth e r, if it is of another he is speaking :— so that the phrase " *^ m ii.?h';. .r.f ^.r ./.- *\" V ■*. 4 T-ar, if; aspira- ) might ihority, of hia. doing finning jctively rs dnd 3 are of la," is a, on the , which [educed I all the i Gala- ^— ".*■< |i unlike liratiSh, aed, flifu i Butthir? 3r alone 'Iwpuld ' convey- biety or 8S, when eir own, Etrticular ^ iberatiye me pfteii- ousetfiit bh e r^if it 'fA FROM FIFTEENTH CHATTER OF ACTS. 261 ^%cwiW good to the Holy Ghost" is precisely equiva- lent \i^"it was the m{n(l of the Holy Ghost."* About\)his there was no hesitat»n,— no doubt. The apostle^ by their apostolic auftority, might simply ha|^ asserted At, and, in the name of the Lord, required submission. They might have said — "If any man think himself to be a prophet or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things which we write to you are the commandments of Ohrist/'^T-But to ice the cpttumacious legalists, and to satisfy and the milids of the brethren, they do more than affiilD%Lthey point to proof. Peter does this in verses 7,'8,lKMen and brethren, ye know how that a good while ago. God made clUiice among us, that the Gentiles bjH^y mouth should hear the word of the gospel, and oellei^e. And God, which knoweth the • *E8oU ytto] Tto dyitp jtvevjaaTt xai ^/iiv.— I do not d^ny tbat the verb ^oxeu bto a looser and a inore determinate Bigoiflcation ; Bometimes signifying the opinion piereiy^ and at othertimes the more fixed and definite judgment. Its meaning depends npt a little upon its connexion. That in the present instance, in its impersonal form— (I, saj inqjersonol, althongb, strictly speaking, all the remainder of the^ sentence is the tme nonilnative to Vke verb :— " To lay upon you bo other burden|^i))^r-8eemed good to" the Holy Ghost and to iis,") — ^it has the sense I hare given it, is very evident. For iSo^e, it h suffi- ciently manifeflt,/4put have ihe same signification in its relaUon to dywityMV/tcirifMiniH relation to ijli^/iv. If,^then^in the latter relation it means merely " it was ocx OFDnotr," in any^indeterminate or unauthoritative sense, it will follow that in its former relation It most mean that it 'was "thk oranON of the Holt Ghost ;"--n6t, observe, tAeir opinion with regard to the mind Of tl^ Holy Ghost, but the Hdly Ghost's oten opinion, in the same indetdnninate aud imaa-, th<»itative sente in which it was theirs. We cannot iiuiflne than qteaking in imysach terms of the Holy Spirit >-^^o4e r^ nrevMari muBt.be understood as thdr . declaraUon of the mind of the Spirit ; — ; not of what ikejf wert cised a description of past&tai care,-;^e suggestion will not suit the present case ; for thjBy liere sttod «»^ in distinction from " the Mers'" as well -; *r- i , * ^ / 1 '1 FROM FOtEENJift CHAP^fEB OF AOTS. 266 the " brethren -."r-nor was it .at all ai case pertaming to the church «.t Jerusalem alone, that was th«|i to come before tlieja, but one of which the decision was to determine ijhe privilege, the |wth, and th6 duty of "all the chur'chela of the Gentiles." "Indeed,. when we look for one moment at the occamon of this^con- vention, the suppopitioh of their being then divested of their infepiration appearo to me absolutely mon- , strous. One shoulcl have thought, if ever there was a juiicture in the history of the infant and nsmg church, when inspired' authority was more than ordinaril>" required, ,it was now. What are we to think or say of. the, hypothesis, which would divest the-vice-gerents of the exalted Son of God of what constituted their sole claim to be regarded as speaK- ing with divine authority, at a time, and on «sk emergency, when the very foundations of gospel truth were assailed;— wh«n «kU that renders the gospel saving toiiaii was brought into questii&n;-- and when the ,spiritnal privileges and liberties of the enture Gentile wdrid were su6p6nded\upon Jh^ result of the appeal made to them? "When wafe there a necessitysfor an. authpritative,--a divinely authoritative, settlement of a question, if not now? Surely, in no view that pan l?e taken of the argument before us, can there, be any cpmparisop between having a divine sentence on what . involved the spiritual rights of the Gentile world Atad the very salvation of the human race, and ha^g a piere exemplar for tha government of th^ chmcpll I On such grounds as the6e, the snpposi^On of .the suspension of apostolic inspiration, on the oceasiow under review, appears to me pregnant wftti all l^^t is unreasonable. . And if I have succeeded in makmjg. ft •* t -% ' -m '*5.* i '■[ .y ''" . --^'i . "/ ■ j*^ *r- , ,!''■■ i. .1 '/.'• ■^ , • ARGUMENT FOB PHESBTTERIANISM good this point, any faffchor qufestion respecting the finding of a niodel in the recorded proceedings, for the imitation of the chtirch in after ages, may be considered as superseded. If thi^ decision was the •' result of apostolic inspiratidn, then it was not the decision of an ecclesiastical council, or a synod of oflRcial representatives, such aswatf to be the pattern of councils and synods when the period of inspira- tion and miraculous agepcy should have passed away. The proof of tTM^tVofton drives from under the argument of both our episcopalian and presby- teridn brethren, in favour of their respective systems, the very basis on which it rests; there being, con- fessedly, nothing to their piJtrpose in the example, if there was inspired authority at all in the delibera- tions and decision.— But; although on this ground . ve might, we do not, stop here. W have still another positioft to occupy. We liave stiU to demonstrate, on other ground, the untenableness of "^that assumed by both episcopalian^ and presby- " terians, respecting the contents of this celebrated chapter.— Before proceeding to thi^, however,"! must . be permitted to press a little more strongly the observation— how strange, how "passing strange," has ever appeared to me the solicitude to prove that, ia*the case in question, the d^,#sion given was not giv^ by inspjAon. We oft»n"hear a great deal Hboiit *€«se» # i;„_ ^■m: t: \ ■ '-MW- fSom fifteenth chatter op acts. 267 * li wlule to obey, or tobe much concerned whether they obeyed or not)— yet, beyond a doubt, there ure mftttera of greater and matters of infenor impor- tance. Now, ^ how stands the fact in the present instatce? It happens, that, on the one «««» ^® have, 09 just observed, the very essence of 'the glorious gospel of the blessed God,"-the great doctr^e of grace,-the very " truth as it 18 in Jesus, ^al^ with the most precious privileges and liber- ties, requiring to be secured by a vaUd tenura to us Gentiles;— while, on the other, we have a p6mt of ecxaesiastical order, of the government anddiscipbne - ,of the ciiurch.^Now, the latter. I am far^ from undervaluing. It is important. I contend for its iiuportance. I am not one of those who" plume themselves on their exemplary liberaUty, when they . treat as quite beneath them, unworthy of a thought - from enlarged minds like theirs, whatever relates*© the constitution and forms of the church. Bujtiie^ j letter is not to be placed on a level with "the foMer; ^ th^' former,— the truth— bein^ the sacred depoafcof *^ which the church is .the deputed guardian, a^^for the due and efficiSt guardianslup of which it iil its constitution that specially fits it. ^Jid^Jj^s appear, L. confess, "marvellous in ^7 ^J^^^aKJF^ a^y of *my fellow-bfelievers exerting their slHlW dialectics , to' set aside inspiration, when the o^ect to bB gained^is ^ warrant "for their form of ecclesiastic^-. »govemmeiit> while the admission of inspiration sets • the i^al bf -Heaven to all oul- privileges and immuni- ties as Gentiles, and to all our blessings, aiid hopes as sinners^! * I, >J ' •• fi, f> SjMli \' *^ ti^ ■• 268 f ABGUMENT FOB PRESBYTERIANI8M . SECTION II. '\ ■1?. .l*' /A1*« ' E^il^INAtlON OF THE CONTRAKY HTPOTHEBlS^ In proceeding ta this remaining branch of my Bubject, f BhaU not spend much time with EPiscopAof . iLThe principled ol that system must find their basis, .if a basis is to be found for them at all, somewhere else than here. It is, with episcopalians, a f avoimte . - Aode of talking to caU this assembly at Jerusalem . me first christihi courunV' But m fact, there axe no points of resemblance whatever between it and the Jounctte-whether provincial or oecumenical_of after aces. With the origin of such councils in the early h^tory of the church I have nothing to do. I adhere pertinaciously to my avowed resolution, not to go beyond the Umits of the sacred record.-The question .before us at present is-To i^^om. on this occasion was the appeal from Antioch made? And on this ^ point the terms of the naxrative.are clear and re- peated We have them in verse 2,— in vfse^,-^ ^d in chap. xvi. 4.-"It was detejiidned ^^^ and Barnabas, and certain others of tt«mjhould^gQ HP to JeTUBolem ufUotIm aposUes ft«d efcs about . ms question:"-" aiid the ajpostki and^ dikrs came together, to consider of this question: -and as Pa^ and Suis "went through the cihes, they dehvei^ ' them the decrees to keep, which were ordamed o/^ apostles and dders who were »* /^rusalem.^ ^e aCai; then, was made to the apostles <^^.f^''J^ have formerly discussed the meanmg of the d^ifj- ' nation" ^'Em-ar and. do not resume ^. >* ^ ^ ' necessary to oxir present argument, and would only :^ :■: A,-. : \ .■'\ \\ ,-iV FROM FDFTEENTH CHAF|?^ OF Af3X8. 269 therefore^ encumber it. Whftt we bavespeeiaUyto notice at present h—the abselnce of aUr evidence toliat- sdever of any such convocation of dem from 'ons,or many, or all, qf tM reyims into icldch chnstianity , had by this time penetrated, mid in loJiich it had' made \ disciples and found a 'setdement,—a8,in after ages, was recite to constime a^eouwnl. The appeal was made "to the apostles b.xA eUem loho loere at Jermiikm" They were^t Jerusalem at the time when the appeal was determined[upon,as well as when it was actually made. The language in chap. iv. 2, and chap. xn. 4, is utterly inconsistent with the idea of & convocation to be convened at Jerusalem for the purpose from otl^r quarters. Those to whom the reference was mtme were there already. They had not to go there.— That any were added to their numj»er, between the adoption of the determination to 'appeal and fhe carrying of the determination into effect, is as per- fectly gratuitous asiipplemet^^ to the history as it, is possible to conceive. That tjie appellants sent to . Jerusalem a notice of their pu^ose, and then waited till tl^p propriety of that purpose was examined, and till the supposed convocation could be summoned and assembled,— is fancy, noj fact. It has an exceedingly delusive effect, when men get into the habit of using terms regarding thi^ssembly, taken from subsequent practice-, which then had no ■ existence. By calling it a council md the first christian coMnci?,— and representing one apostle as "opening the debate," and another m "giving his opimon," ' aiid the couneil as eveiitually coming, either uUam- mouslyor by a majority, to an .agreement,--many minds are greatly.inisled. Having in their thoughts the cotlncils of subsequent times^and inconsiderately "H . 'S' \ . i At {\ ' I ■'. ' « r,\ v.. "•V 'U, 270 ABOUMENTFOHPPBESBYTERIANISM npK their resemblance to this, which they have Customed to read, and hear, and speak of o^ P in the series, and the pattern of the re«ty5 Sve formed totally mistaken conceptions of _ -feiicying it tike them, instead of taking tMmin ''%rUiMmthit. / ^ (MIb subject of/this " council at Jerusalem, . may be allowed to strengthen my opinion of it^B_ that of a man whom all will admit to be a |udge as impartial as he is able :— '^The pretended first council - at Jeiiisalem," says Archbishop WhaJteley, "does ^&Wj to me a most ej^traordinary chimera, without any wan-Mit whatever from sacred'History* We find in the narrative.that certain persons, coming from Jerusalem to Antioch, endeavoured to impose on t^e (gentile coiiverts the yoke of the Mosaic law,— pre'tending, as appears plainly from the context, (Acts xv. 2i) t»Gh; burden ought to be imposed, and that their pretcud^^ sanctioii had not been given. The church >o|^; Je^jusalem, even inde- pendently o| the apostles, ,ha^> of Bourse, -jjower to decide this last * point,— iie- tt) declare the fact,- whether they had or ha^i'nbt given the pretended sanction: and tli0^ j(|)6!*fle'8, confespedly,^had plenary power to declare'the-^ll ol the. Lord Jesus. And the deputation, accordingly^ retired satisfietl Thj^re is no hint throughout,, o! any, summons tolh^ ^veral churches in Jttdea,an4, Galilee, in Samaija, Cyprus, vV I 'T m *, ■: FBOif nFTEENTB CftUTEB OF AOTB. CjT(S)ne, &o., to send deputations as to a general council; nor any assumption of Aright in the church of J^rtlsaIem, as such, to govern the rest, or to decide on points of faith."* Let me now come to what, in the Northern part of olir Island, we have hibst immediately to do with,^ — the ^heme of presbytertanisnif sa supposed to be ^e Essential principle of the presbyteria|i system 18 — repi^€^tatirinci[)le of presbyteriaiHsm, and the base must be admitted to be on6 in pointy— if there was not, the essence of the ,\]pr€rsbyteria& form v^aswantmg, and thb case proves i Ik . ^ " The' Kingdom of ChHst delineated, in tWp ^^79, on our Lord's own accpunt o(ia& person^ and of' tfie^nature of bis kingdonf;, and on the. constitution, powei^,. and minis^i'y of the christian church, ag appointed by hiUtself."— By Jlichard Wbateley, D.D.'; Arcbttishop of DnbHn. 2d Ed. images 105; lOC. •, ,' ' .v ' * r*f iii JS K * ' t K* i' > •A" 272 ARQUMEOT FOB PRESBVTERIAiaSM nothing. There is no need here for long, learned^ ^d laboured argument. The inquiry comes into tias very narrow ^«»t-^^««^^' ^^f'^^^^.tive ^^ We have aheadyseen to wHOM.m the narrative. ^^^PI^ 18 BEPRE8ENTED AS HAmO BEBK «^E; n^^ ^a synod TO BE CONVENED at Jerusalem but to the TpoBiles aaa elders who were at Jerusalem, -who ;^1^»:;Sed, indeed, ^^^ ^re tlien at Jerusalem -Aor, for t^e oVject<^ Ippeal. was the presence of eveijj or^oi ihemji Xindispensable. That the apostles^had. fl'm t^ it. their J^ad^uarter, in JeW^;^ not be questioned by any reader ^^ ^^f ^^^^ ^y are excepted from^e «tatemen^^^ej^ perion of the church there^ at ^f^.^.^' t^rsecution which arose abouli Stephen,— tney ^^ttered abroad throughout the .regions o^ SL and Gamee, and Samaria, 6ace^U/»eiii>o.^^ i!and aHhough they might multiply and extend their occSjoLeysafteUrds, there is every reason loSve Lt,wLthe exceptionof s^ J--^, , they were usually at Jerusalem, and ^J^^*^ ^^«^ Ible number of ttiem were always to l^e^?>^^^^^>^ ;_ That this was the case now,the naxi^ve,t^nm : : ite simpUcity, without^tiie ^^P"^^^^^; ^ tions of conjecture and fancy, plainly-^ wiU nots^ ' impUes, but affirms.-The apostles-all or most o ^ wU at Jerusalem-^hen the appeal waama^ ^and v^hen the object of their assembhpg with the elders and brethren was effected, and the assemb^ • itself was dissolved, Hiere is not tlie least ?PP«a««^ I of their having immediately set out ajam on tiie^ respective tours into the adjacent countnes. On the raOM. FIPTEeJITII CHAPT^ OF\tCT 273 ■,■•;'■ ' ' v- ■- /■■"' ' ■ ■ ' ■ ,' ■ ■' ■ ■ ' ■ ' ?• ■ ' contraiy, afteV Judas and Bilas hiid gpne to'Antiocii ° with Paul and Barnabas,— and had "continued there a space," (how long does noiii^ar) *'they:were let go in peace from the brethren 'm/o/Mti apostles.'* Indeed Jcnmdem and the apostles are, throughout the history, associated.^TJiere is ^n absolute negation of all evidence that any othe^-s besides those th^n. understood: to be at Jenisalein were included in the authority appealed to. yf'o them the matter was refened:— % them it-Vas settled. The convocation and presence of others, as membeflcs of the^supposed court, are not at {aD in the naiTqJtive. They Hrei entirely a human acldition— introdueed (may I say ?) by the exigency of, ^system. The supposition made by the late eminenV and -able Dr. Mason, o^New Yorkj of the, apostles, on the pesent occasiorij^r^r. , tumintf to Jervfialemfrom. their excursims in pre^^ig ^Jhe gospel yOccompaiikd vMh ehlers or preshyt^ifjfrom ^ ^. the churches which' fhey h(t(l liontcO, and meeting to- gether in eeclesiasti^l couiieil to consult about their common interests,'^is. a;! preftlimptuous apocryphal interpdlatioii :— it is not only unsupported l^, any t^iii^V^hatever in the narrative, and 8UpjplieA|&*om \ ^ -T imdigination alone ; 'e Ven that were saying too little : — ' the /o>^/««>' part of it is contradicted by the.t)bviously imfnedmte sequence .of the mission of the deputMion • 1 from Ajitioph to the resoliition of appeal. It is GTe'wf, that no sooner was the resolution come to, than tt^ deptitation was dispatched. There is no, question luBked, or difficulty hinted, about getting the scattered * apostles recaUed from their missionarniMiai. some • • Dioce<*an Episcopacy refute*!,' Ac. By tho tat*' Rev . D.D..ofNew Yorfe. Chfip, ▼. Lond. Ea l^S^-pafe •'^ \ _^ ^J8 _ J ••^- 1 ■4 ■ -ii^r. .'* liLs« li:.-V ^%. i ••■•■■ -^ , ■ . ■ ■ . . . .*-■ . ■ .. .■.■•..■ ABOUMENT FOR FRESBYTEWANIMI of them possibly cli8taut,-or the remotest appeat- ance'of delay; to aUow time for this being eflfected: -and as to the U^v part of it, abowt their bringing representatives from aU tlie churches along with them,— have the supporters of presbytenamsm any riKht to blame us for declining to own ourse yes bound by such apocryphal matter, or for marveUmg at tl*e presumption of foisting it into the text ? But j)f this more immediately. _ ; . ) 2. Even ^HE c REPRESE^ED IN "Paul and that went ^ t! the * im/isengei^ AT Antioch n'SEi* mr S0T7 BLY AT JeBUSALEM. and the "certain others" Jerusalem, were no more than w« >n..o.ny..^ ^^ Jat church to the apostles and elders, who were the /T/eree«. They were not them- - :se\yesrepr€8€ntativ€8,iii any sense that imphed their having a voice at aU in the decision.. They were, simply and excliisively, «i>i>eW««^«,-or, in thertenni- •nology of modern presbyteria^ church courts, am^ «iis*io)ie>'8, who set forth the cljttms of parties in^a contested case, and are then witMrawu, leavmg th^ case to the discussion vand decision of the, court. This be it obsei-ved, does iiot at all affect the ques- tion ' (akeady discussed) of the mspiration or^non- inspiration of the apostles on the occasion. There had been ^t Antioch two parties, Paul and Barnabas ' on the one side, and the judaizing teachers-^the "certain men who came down from Judea^^on the ither/ It was to have the point of imputation ^be^ tween these two parties settled, iSr the satisfaction and peace of the church, ajid for the gmdance of aU Gentile /belieTer8,^t|af the reference^ was ma^. c^Paul and Bamabl,'! ^d the " «e'*«^«*l^!^f V , were only the bearers of the reference. They had '/, ./ I f*^--^.- YBOM FIFTEENTH CHAPTEB OF no more to do with the final settlement of tion, than the parties in any suit have a sel banch or a place among the jiury; or than thi ^^ gtfiita in any reference are them8elve84o be reckoned among the referees on whom they devolve the settle- ment of their difference. Paul and Barnabas were admitted ^o state facts in evident ; hnt no more. What they said in " declaring how great things God iiad' wrought among the Gentiles by them, was i# o! ibis description. It was illustrative and confirma- tory of what Peter had said of the mind of the Spirit res|iiocting the calling of the Gentiles. They took no part in the'dccision. On the contrary, those who (by divine authority as we conceive) settled the controversy on their side, only expressed their affed-* lioQate approbation of their i>rinciples anid labours, when, along with their own "chosen messengers" the bearers and expounders of the "decree," they sent them back to the church at Antioch, derignating them " their beloved Barnabas and Paul," and com- mending them afresh to their regard, as "men th^it liad hazarded their live^ for the name of the Iiord Jesus CJhrist," , 3. There is, as we hijve*^ already said, NO EVl- BKNCE WHATSOEVER OP ANY REPRESENTATIVES OF OTHER cHUBCHEs/wHETHER Jewish or Gentile, HAyiNo been -.^■pBESENT. - :■')'".■ -:'-'^^\ Tp take it lor granted, because Paul mentions hid having at that time " taken Titus with him" to Jeru- salem, tiiat Titus was, in technical phras^ a member of court, is fitted only to provoke a smile at the power of habit, in accommodating itself with proofs in the mere easy, use Of customary terms. f«i>r any thing like evidence it n^ver «au pass, with pe^ons capable ii MMSROCOTY HSOIUTION TBT CHART ■-J^^ (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART.No. 2) 1.0 IttlZ^r IM u 1^ «u£ Ikb U |L6' /. A >1PPUED IN/MGE he 16U Eq«t Mgin Street '^' ^ ^ Rochmttr, Hvm York (4609 USA (716) 482 - 0300 - PtiOfn (>IC) 288 -5989 -Foil 276 • ABOUltENT K>» PBE»BirrEBlANI8M ot patting two links (T proof togeth^. "^e »'»J« owsbTterian theologians. Let me again refer to St one well-knf™ and heldu. »^ des^effl^ eminent reputation,-the late Bey. 1>. »"*-^" Zmg «dl the case under conmderataon as cw^ toinini no support ot independency, he says: How Sthe members of one ehurch issue a decree that shoSd be binding on all christian churches? -On tUaqn-^oTwe Lu say afew words imme^te»?- We grant its conctasiveness. BuWwe mtrod«c6 t now, only for the sake of the connection in which rt !tld«. "The fact, however,': he contmues, "prt^ l^eno diOtcdty to m:---^« ^ » bold statement. ; ^therefore eipectttto *« sustained bypioofscleM^ •and uKexceptionaWy decisive, in propdrtiou to^ boldness. What, then, are fliey? ™«f, "^^ !^-sent on the occasion,, not oriy the dders of TMUSalem, but probably deputies from the other cCche" hat were interested in the contooverqr :- *d *me suppose them ^^'^y^^^^ mentioned in the superscription of the decree. And is this all?-"Prflta«a'"-"«'>r supsmeJ This, sorely, is i-ath* » feeble following-up of fte aver^ient. io unquaUfied-" the fact pre^nts no ^- culty to us!" Is the toain support of presbytery, then, a prol>May only? ^^ \^'^'^^ "W^,'. and kat supposition the supposition o"!? »*'.«^«?, If we are Stowed the free use of probabilitaes and suppositions for getting over difficulties, they can seldom be long in oiu' way. _ 'rhe acute writer, axscordingly, does -not seem sat- isfied with •^liis ground. How was it possible he ■> L*.ctuios on Thoology . . T . fc . xrix., vol- iv- pp. 361. 3C2. \ ^ iFBOM FUTEENTH CHAPTER OF AQTB. 277 I have 3t able (fer to srvedly ik. In 18 COtt- "How ee that cUately. duc6 it irhioh it , **pre- .tement. )fe clear ' D to its •e were Idlers of le other versy : — brethren ' lecree."* UJ)p08€f* ip of the I no diffi- esbjtery, fKmtion, some?" ities and they can 3eem sat- )gsible he (T* should? He immeda&toly, without any attempt at pzoof, or, At anything beyond the probabiHty and the «tg»p(m7MW», subjoins another:-—" As this point is doubtful,"- (we shaH see immediately how far even this is true) "I shall not insist upon tt; nor is it neeess^]^ to the argument. Besides the elders, the apostles were members, of the council, ^nd their pre- sence was sufficient tp constitute it an oectimenical one, and to render its decrees universally binding. We have indeed said, that they did not act by inspi' ration in pronouncing the sentence: but they did not therefore sink down to a level with the other members. Although they reasbniBd in concert with them, and on other occasions assumed the designa- tion of presbyters or elders, and joined with the ordinary pastors and inilers in administering the Affiedrs of^tiie church, they never did, nor could, clivest theijQselves of their apostolical character. They had at all times * the care of all thCv^urches,' apd on every public occasion acted on be^pl of'thep alL 'In this council, they were consideilili as iapos- tles ; and consequentjiy, if deputies from other churches were not present, the apostles supplied their place, being the representative of the Catholic Ol^urch. Thus the meeting in Jenis^c^ became a general council, which had a right to giveiaw to the disciples of Christ in every region of the earth. With all deference ,.to this justly respected au-" thority, there appears to me, in this representation of the case, to be no little confusion of ideas. From A variety of observations suggested by it, I select the following:— 1. It is her^ said, and said truly, that the apostlels '■ii il, 3C2. Ibid, page 362. . ii I ! 27g; ^GtrMEST IDR rKESBtTERIAHISJT "had at aU timfs the care of aU the f^^;J?2 ihat, on aU pnbUd occasionB, they acted on behidf rf them aU.'*-3ut my query i^-Can^any instance^ produced of their thus acting on behaJI of ^^ churches, independently of their impirai^? ™« (his ca^ be sh(>wn,-and shown of ^ourse^fr^^^f ^ cases than the re the tJidritQr- 5er,oiie n what ity, and ' S aU the iivested - ■ right to kand. I ' ok dtiwik m- ■eason of m'-' r having m- gislathre ■ ; ' Sfereiitial 1 ' ' ich Uioy ,r 1 ►utlihiiik ' 1 wheti he 1 \"V 1 g(yv<6m> ^ ■ ppeariiig siicatiotis »d iiheir ^ aparl^ rem their . . ■■■*■■ inspiration, I do not see how they could. But in divesting thdffl of their inspiration, I conceive both > of them to be in the wrong.* ■ 2. Dr. >Diek here srpeaks of the assembly having, by the presence of the apostles, been conVerted into. " o general council, which, had a right to -give Uws to the dkeipies of CJiriat in every region of the eart?i"— I protest against this. I have no idea of any " general council," even ^der the high title of oecumenicaly having "a right to give laws to the disciples of Christ in every"— no, nor in any " region of the earth." A law which binds the disciples of Christ, must be a dtviw€ law,^,» law of their divine Mastery and, in order to its bemg divine,— in order to its having the authority of Christ,— it mu^t be "given by inspira- tion Of God." If m this assembly there was wo inspiraiim, then, |w we had occasion before to notice, the law enacted had in it no direct divine authority. It w|W an uninspired enaonnent ;. aud, as such, could not, by possibility, have in it the authority by which alone the conscience can be bound. "V^Te hold,— and our diss^ing presbyterian breihren at least are in this of/One mind with uSj thftt, as subjects of Christ, we Mte bound, in religious matters, by no hutnan authmitj. But to affirm that any uninspired council " has m right of giving law to Christ's disciples,"— is at once to set asidO this great • Dr. Maeon adds :— " Without stich a distinction as we have now Btated, their history is a tiJWue of inconsistencies, and their conduct in the synod of Jerusalem must be given up as a riddle which bafflta solution." Let the reader say, when he looks at the case as rept»- sented in the preceding section, or in the brief statement of Dr. , Whatelywlth which it closes, whether he can find out wherein tl» "riddle" lies, which it defies the perspicacity of an (Edipus to solve. And the absence of any such insolvable mystery will be still more apparent ere we close our strictures, ~ AIMJUMENT FOK I'itESBYTERIANWM „ ' ■ ■"■ ."^ - , - - ' ' Protestaiit and Bible jmuciple. If the council at Jerusalem, although uninspired, possessed this right, —on what principle can the same right be denied to other uninspired councils?— It is vain to say, in ^answer to such ft question— iew of it, the church of Christ is subjected to human authority,— to the au- thority of uninspued few;*, because the authority of uninspired /««r(/ire*v<. The truth is, that the ascrip- tiSn of sufeji an effect to the presence of the apostles in this assembly, is only an exemplification of the difficulty T- the impossibility— of dispossessing our | minds of the sentiment of reverential deference an^ submission Avith which we have become habituated to regard the accredited ambassadoi-s and authoritative vice-gerents of Chiist. Dr. Dick could not do in his mind what he did^iii his Argument. His argument divested 'the apostles of their inspiration ; but his '- mind, in spite of himself, retained it, and retained the impressions of their authority arising from it; and under these mipressions, he drew conclusions, such as nothing but their inspiiation could justify, at the very moment that his argument require.d that inspiration to be set aside, r 3. If the apostles, m being the official representatives of all the c/u/rt/ic.-?, gave this asisembly, though wmn- spired, its authority to^ decide, it will evidently iiSg^»^aSij^e^^L^^bi^ FROM FIFTEENTH CHAPTER OF ACTS.' 281 ■ 'J follow, that, had the accredited- representatives of .ihd churches in Antioch, and Sjrria, and Gilicia, or, ii^ you will, of all the then existing churches, been tB^selv^^^ in person convened without the apos- tles, TflEY WOUU) HAVE POSSESSED THE SAME LEOIStA-; TIVE AUTHORITY. ' This is a plain and necessary sequence. The supposition is, tliuat of the apostles, in their official but uninspired character, concentrating in themselves the representation of all the churches,^— that repre- sentation, of course, consisting of the office-bearers of those churches,, or delegates from among them. The presence of these representatives, therefore, 4dthout . the apostleSj would have been the same thing as the presence of the apostles without them. It is an equation : — the apostles, in absence of the immediate representatives Of the churches, equal i^ose representatives ;— therefore^ — the immediate representatives of the churches, in absence of tiie apostles, equal those apostles.— In either case, there is no inspiration; and the presence of the represeilta-^ tives themselves of the different churches would have been, one should think, even a more perfect pattern of an ecclesiastical court, than when it consisted only of the representatives of representatives, making up ioT the lack of their own presence.— How, then, would this do ? Would the inspu'ed apostle of the Gentiles — ^^(who again, in such a representation, ap- pears to be quite forgotten, and his inspiration put in abeyance)— would he, think you, have consented to submit the dictates of ■ that inspiration to an assembly of the pastors or elders of those verj- churches which he himself had planted and set in order, giving them, authoritaUvely, their constitu- f: /- "■M»*v-;.N' 282 ABOUMENT FOR PBEBBTTEMANISM tion :— pastors, who had been chosen according to his direction, and of whom he had himseH set apwt so many to their office? The thing is out of the question. The theory throws everything into con- fasion; "turning"— the church if not the world-^ "upside down," by constituting the uninspired judges ^ of the inspired, and so subjecting *he counsels of ) God to the authority of men. In the precedmg quotation. Dr. Dick represents the presence of deputies from the different churche^, or presbyteries, as "not necessary to his argument: This is very sui^rising. It is founded, no doubt, upon the consideration of the presence of the apostles, as concentrating in their persons- the re- presentation of oil the churches. We have seen, however, how unavailing such a resource is to the purpose of presbyterianism. The apostles were the representatives of Christ. It was as such alone that they could be regarded as concentrating in them- selves the representative authority of all the churches. But in what capacity were they the representatives of Christ ? It could not possibly be otherwise than as inspiredmen. If theit inspiration is set aside, they cease to be the representatives of Clmst; and, ceasing to be the representatives of Christ, tih^ inevitably cease to be the representatives of jUl official power. Their own official power, being tiiat ol Christ, and above appeal, lay in their inspiration. Take away the inspiration, and you take .away that Which constituted the speciaUty and supremacy of their official power. And if that be taken away, the power itself is taken away:— and then the grecrfer being removed, there ift nothmg remainmg TT^p — — — — in w hich the less can b e inclnded . ^T h e truth ift,^ lit FBOM FIFTEENTH CHAPTER OF ACTS. d88 the proof of the presence of representatives of the churches 18 necessary, indispensably necessary; and, moreover, it is aU that is necessary. If our presby- terian brethren could make out this, they woidd do something satisfactorily to their purpose. But it cannot be done. We have seen how one eminent writer, very coolly and very conveniently, inserts into the narrative & clause that is not to be found in it; and we have seen how another, more modestly, sat^ isfies himself with a " jjroftoWy."— But 1 have now to go^a little further ; and, in addition to questioning the probability, and aflSrming the absence of the very slightest evidence in its support,— to observe — 4. There is direct evidence of tee contrary. ; It is very simple ; but it appears no less conclusive. The " decree" tiijat was parsed was a very^|prt one, —being stdbstantially contained in a singnHkiitence. vHad there been representatives sent to Jenisalem from the different churches, they T^ould have brought bfM5k to those churches respectively the report of the decision. The matter was of essential importance,:^ one that admitted not of delay. The churches must have expected, wjth impatience, the return of their deptlties, to determine the principles on which they were to act, and so to settle both their minds and their pracldce. How, then, stands the fact ? In the beginning of the following chapter-^(chap. ivi, 4,)-^ we read, respecting the travete of Patd and SOas^ after their quitting Antioch— "And as they went through the cities, th^ delivered them the decteea to keep, which were ordained of the apostles and elders who were at Jerusalem." Now, had tiier6- been reprei^entatives there from these churches, thift ^" would have been rendered uimecessary; each of thos6 984 AROUMENT FOR PRE8BVTERIANI8M m - 1 i'- representatives bearing with him, on his return, a <5opy of the brief but precious document. The <5hur<5he8 would then, like that in Antioch, have "rejoiced for the consolation :"-- and the effect stated in the subsequent verse (verse 5,) as ha\'ing immediately arisen from the reception of the docu- ment--" And so were the churches established in the foith, and increased in number dailyJi— would have begun to appear still earlier,— even froin the moment of the returi of their deputed representaUves,— The very fact, moreover, of the document bemg thus committed to the churches, marks still more impres- * sively the importance attached to it, and senes to confirm the conclusion that it was of inspired, or divine, didafion,—Vi part of the to6vd of the Lord. In one word, then, I desiderate, in the whole nar- rative of the ease before us, the slightest evidence of that which couiatitutes the essential element of pres- byteriani8m--re/>re«en/aerfect acquiescence, to the conclnsiveness of the question of one of the writers on whom I have been commenting — " How should the members of one church issue a decr^<$ which should be binding on aU christian churches?"' They could not. Nay, I must go further. No one church could pass such a decree^ — or could pass any decree— even /or Uself', — far less, on independent principles, for othei-s. The appeal, in this case, was not made to the church :^ — the authority appealed to resided not in the church. The decree was binding on all :— it must, therefore, have had the sanction of an authority thy^^as-icompetent to impotse obli- gation on aU. ^^m> authority !(;«? hold to l^ve been the authority of IKe inspii*ed " apostles of the Lamb." Our system does not rest on this passage. We can spare it. It does not rest on any solitary passage in the New Testament. But on thia proof already ad- duced I cannot now go back. And should the question be again put— If it was by apostolic and inspired authority that the decree was passed, how came the elders and brethren to be joined with them in the letter conveying it?— I first refer to the evidence already adduced of the consist- ency of this with the inspiration of the a,postles, and the non-inspiration of the elders and brethren :— and I now further observe, what seems, after all, to oon^ stitute the true key to the whole case,— that there were evidently, in the appeal, two points Ui he aader- 286 ABOUMENT FOR PftfiSBrTEBUNISK iLli tained :— a point of doctritie, and a point of /act.^ The point of doetrine, as before observed, was one of the very first nragnitude, involving the freedom of the Gentiles from the yoke of the Mosaic law, and the justificatian of both Jews and Gentiles " by faith inthout the deeds of the law ;" the latter being the very first principle of the gospel. Th^ point of fact was, whether those men, who had "come down from Jerusalem," pretending that they had d commission thence to teach the doclrinfe of the necessity of sub- jection to the law for justification, reaXy had auch a comrmsmon.— When this twofold object of the mes- sage to Jerusalem is kept in view, it throws a clear light on the whole transaction, rendering all easily consistent. The point of doctrine, we repeat, waft- far too important to admit of being settled by any authority but that of inspiration. And, as it was ' the preaching of one apostle that Was brought into question by the Judaizers, it cbidd only be a refer- ence to other jMOJiority of the same kind, that the question^ihe identity of the doctrine taught by theime^d by the rest 'bould by possibility^ be satis- ^feSorily settled. Paul delivered his doctrine as an inspired man,— one fho " had the mind of Christ." ^ If he really was thus inspired, his doctrine would be found in harmony with that of the other apostles; and this could be determined only by an appeal to th€«n in the same capacity, — as inspired men.*— Bni • It Is remarkable how both Dr. Dick and Dr. Mason seem to over- look the point to be thiiS determined. They argue, that there was no need for an appeal to inspired anthority, seeing there was inspired authority already at Antioch ift the person of the apostle Paul. "If," ^ya the former, " it had been the wish of the church at Antioch, that ihe^pute should b e t e rminat e d by.tbe » ut h ority of in s piraUnn, there \;' FROM flTTEEMTH CHAPTER OF ACTS. ^7 \ with the point of fad it was otherwise. It could be settled at once by the elders of the ch^Hrch, or bj the church itself. In these circumstance^, die union of the two, or of the three, in the superscription of the reply, is readily and naturally accounted for. It was A reply on both points. And while " the elders and brethren" attested what they were competent to attest, they at the same time united,, with hearty acquiescence, in the apostolic decision on the point.. wM no reason for sending to Jerusalem, as Paul was among them, who was not behind the cbler of the apostids; and Barnabas, who Was endowed with supernatural gifts ; and there were also prophets, as we are informed in the fourteenth cht4^ter, wb^o enjoyed the miraculous assistance of the Spirit." (Lect. on Theol., vol. iv., page 3G0.)— " Had ibe question been to be determined," says the latter, "by special " revtktiion or apoatolipal authority, cm inspired man, or onr. apostle would have answered as well as a dozen. The dispute . might Jiave been settled on the spot, and by I'aul himself. Ilad there arisen any doubt of his poweri or distrust of bis intej^rity, a hundred mlriikcles, if necessary, would instantly have removed the obstacle. In every 4^iew, the embassy to Jerusalem would have been a useless parade." (Diocesan Episcobacy refuted, pages $4,. 85.) The answer to this is surely not far to seek, nor hard to find. It is true that Paul n^as at Antioch ; - it is true that he was " not a whit behind the chief of the i4>0Btles ;"— nay even more, we feel confident,^ is true, than is \)y eiUier aflSrmed,— namely, that the apostolical ^ nuthority of Paul was accredited at Antioch, as it was elsewhere, by miracul9us attestations. These he calls to thq Corinthians (2 Gor. xiL 12,) "the signs of an apostle ;" and, although no m«ntion is made of them in the brief notice of bis visit to C^^inth in the Acts of the Aposties, he says respecting them—" Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought apiong you, in all patience^ in signs, and wonders, and ^ . mighty deeds." These, then, he wrought at Corinth ; these he wrought at Ephesus, Acts xix. 11, 12 ; at Philippi, Acts xvL 16—18 ; and.from .Us own words to the christians at Rome, there is reason to believe, wherever he carried his testimony,— "For I will not dare to speak of . those things which God hath not wrought by me, to make the Gentiles obedient, by word and deed, Uirongh mighty signs ;»nd wonders,, j^y the power of the Spirit of God } so fltat ttom Jerusalem, and round 49 .^i I I - .-.■■Il 288 ABGUMEMT FOB PBESBYTERIANISII of doctrine,— rejoicing that "through the grace of *, ' the Lord Jesus Christ they should be saved, even as? the Gentiles, and the Gentiles even as they." ' One observation only remains to be made :— That the union, t)n this occasion, of '\ the brethren'' as *^ well a? " the elders" with the apostles, was rendered specially appropriate by Ihe very nature and circum- ^ stances of the occasion itself. The subject involved al^out unto Illy rlcwni, I have fully preached the gospel of Christ," Rom. XV. 18, 19 ;^iheBe words cleariy implying that wherever he " preached the goflpel of Christ," ho " confirmed the word " by " mighty Bigns and woiiderB,"— And yet in spite of all this, the dispute which caused flie " appealo»-o«eatAntioch; and not only arose, but was maintained with Pawl himself by th« " men who had come down from JVidea," with all the keenness of a false and fiery zeal. How vain, then, to allege that thete was no need for any reference to other inspired authority ^hen Paul was there ! If the inspirtsd authority of Paul did not pttvent the dispute, how was it to be expected that it should settle it? Nay, does not ttie narrative expressly tell us that it did not settle it? These - men "taught the brethren " that the apostles at Jerusalem preached adifferentdoctrinefirom that which Paul was teaching in Antioch; and, consequently, that the church at Jemsalein held a different < doctrine from that which they were receiving at Antioch. The men were vehement and pertinacious in their afsertions. It may seem ktrange to us, that Paul's divinely accredited inspiration suffice, if not to sUence them, at least tp satisfy and secure against besitanpy ^d dowbt^e minds of the brethren. And yet there is little room for wonder. It was Uie accredited inspiration of the whole college ot apostles, which, on the point in question, was by these men affirmed to be,in opi^tion to tlie acore^ted inspiration of one ; and that one not one of Ae original number. It became necessary, for ' * the full satisfiiction of the brethren's minds, and the establishment of their IWth,— that this^ question— a question of inspiration against inspiration, and miracle against miracle— should be promptly, autho- .S" ritatfvely, finally settled. And it could be settied in no other way ^ dian by an appeal to the inspired apostles whether they taught the * ^^^^Q impnted to tiiem, and to the elders, in their own behalf and in behalf .of aH" the brethren, whether they fteW it.— Where is the "riddle'^^ere ^e mystery, here? FROM FEETEENTH .CHAPTER OF kOIB. 289 11^ it the prindplea, or terms, of communion between the Jewish and the Gentile bdievers :—a,Ji6i. the Jewish brethren thus delighted to certify to .their brethren ot the Gentiles the cordiality with Which they em- braced them, and with which they were ready to give them the right hand of fellowship, as joint debtors with themsSves to th|^ame grace fop the same sal- yation; expressing, at We same time, their expeota- tion, that, acqtiiescing as tbey did in the decision which asserted the freedom of their Qentile brethren ^pm any obligation to conform to the Mosaic law, tliose brethren would be tender of the consciences of the Jewish converts, and avoid whatever was fitted to offend them, and to impede the freedom of ttfeir^ fellowship with the believing Gentiles. — i*" While we contend, therefore, that this case, in the 16th chapter of the Acts, was a case quite special and peculiar, and deny the authority in it of either the church at Jerusalem or the assembled repre- seutatives of other churches, — we may take the liberty of observing in regard to "the brethren" that they are not here treated with unceremonious exclu- sion, or supercilious oblivion. They are present :^ — they heat : — ^they acquiesce in the decision ;— they are united with the apostles and elders in the com- munication of the result to the churches of the Gentiles. For to interpret "the brethren" of the supposed deputies from other churches, — and even to give "aU tJie tnyUitude" the same explanation, I cannot but regard as such an outrage on all candour as to deserve no serious refutation: — ^the intro- ductory designations of the letter— " The apostles and elders and brethren" — so directly corresponding with the designations of the parties by whom it was^ 19 • * .r"l:) •^ 290 AHOUMENT FOB jJlESBTniiaANlSM. determined that the letter should be sent— "Then pleased it the apostles and elders toUh tJw wJuXe church, to send chosen men of their own company to Antioch, with Patd and Barnabas." If any one shall say, "the whole church" may mean the whole a«fiCM%, we ask'hiin whether he believes it rfo«. That the word is here used in its almost universal acceptation in the New Testament, is clear from the previous use of it in this very chapter, when it is said, in verse fourth, of the deputies from Antio(A, that " when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received o^Vi/tc churchy foA of the apostles and elders ;" and that before the assembly in question . wais convened. The lesson that is really taught us by the whole teansaction— and it is one of first-rate importance, —IB the lesson of appealing, on all subjects, whether 6f doctrine or of duty,» to inspired authority. The apostles of Christ, " though dead, yet speak." If we differ from one another respecting any point of what ^ we should believe or of what we should practice, our proper and only resource is— to "go up to them ^ ABOUT THIS MATTER." If we caunot agree,— Cannot see their recorded decision in the same light,— then /must we, each for ourselves, follow what in our con- sciences we believe to be in conformity with their teaching. And, while with all humility of mind we do so, we must never forget the further lesson of ** JORBEABING ONfi ANOTHER IN IX)VE." h- l':'^ • CHAPTER Vn. > ■ ■ • ■ / . ' . , ■ OR CERTAIN OBJEOMONa U8UALL1 URQKD AOAJN8T COK-^ OKEOATIOHAL WDEPENDBNOTf. . It must be obvione, that, if we have at all succeeded in, making out the position, in point of fact, that Independency, or Congregationalism, was the form of olmrch government in apostolic times, and that it has the sanction of New Testament anthority,— we have done enongh,— all that onght to be reqmred of OB, as the ground of dnr practice,— Theoretical ob- • jectioiis, founded on coipfiideralaonfl of expediency, oan have no legitimate force in opposition to the &cts of apostolic ministry, and the directions of apostolic inspiration. StUI, it may be worth onr while, to take a tittle notice of soine of th«se ^' popular objections, which are capable of being placed in very plansible lights, and which, when so placed, are apt to induce a doubt whethejf onr representation of the facets, and our interpretation of the directions, can be correct and well-founded; All that is properly incumbent upon us, is to find an answer to the qu^tion— " What saith the scripture?" To ask a single question beyond that, when the an- swer to it has l^en found, must be considered as indicating want of faith. It should be assumed, as a settled principle from which there must be no exception,' that whatever oan be shown to have the sanction of the word of Ood—to have the seal of his 3} •/: 292 6BJECP0N8 URGED AGAINST authority— must b« ei|^edient in the view of tho highest of all judgmepts; aud that, when our own notions oif expedienoy^are introduced, in opposition to what has "seemed good" to the wisdom of (>od, we are chargeable with most unseemly presumption. ■ What has "seemed good to the Holy -t&ost" should ^^ seem good also " to us." The language of Paul has its full force of application in such a case,—" If any man among you seemeth to be wise in this world, let him become a fool, that he may be wise."— Still, for the reason mentioned,— that proo& are apt to hate their power impaired in minds that have been pre- possessed by the objections alluded to.^it maybe well to noUce them. I, The Fffist of them I mention is one which might naturally be anticipated, because it is founded in all the ordinary systems of human rule, and is apt, on that account, readily to suggest itself :— and, as it involves general principles, and is at once the most plausible and the most important, we must discuss it the more largely.— It is alleged that independency is inconsistent altogether with the very idea of govern- ment; and the objection is generally thrown into the form of a question, which gives it, in not a few minds, an imposing plausibility— " If all are rulers, who AMD WHERE ARE THE RULED?" • Our reply to this question is, at once, that all are NOT RUi^BS. We disown the hypothetical premise, from which the inconsiBtency and absurdity are thus, somewhat tatmtingly, inferred. That the elders, bishops, or pastors, are ordained in the churches of Christ to " have the rule over them,"— to be " ov* them in the Lord and admonish them,"— to "feed the floot of God, taking the oversigfat thereof,"— we GOHdBieaATIONAL INDEPENDENCY. 298 mamtaiii as distinctly, and insist upon as firmly, as our brethren who diflfer trom us.* Both, therefore, asserting the eceistence of rule, the question resolves itself into another— namely, What is tU mtitre and extent of the authority mth which the Lord hw invested the qgHoe-bearers in his church ? • I am Bonry to b^ under the necessity here of ontering my pioU'st agidnst the representation invariably given by Dr. MKerrow (in his recent Prize Etoay on the Office of Ruling Blder> of the views and 'practice of Independenta in this pwrticular. His mode of sUting these is fitted to lead his readers to conceive, not only th%t we conrider the rule as lodged with tiie people, but even with U»e people apart from the officers. He joakes the question between independent* and pres- byterians, regarding church-pOwer-^*;!!? it in the community of the fldthful— the body of the people? Or.'Is it in a class.of offlce-bearerB im>pointed by Christ for the purpose of bearing rule \h his church? "If in each congregatioiii." he says, "all the members have the power of luling, then the question presents itself, whom are they io obey? According to the doctrine which I am combatting, all rale, and yet they are commanded to obey. Obey whom? The only answer that can be given to tiiis question, on the supposition that all rule, is, that they are to obey themselves. If this be not a contradiction in terms, it sounds very like one:— to speak of allralingand all obeying— ruling themselves and obeying them- selves. I do not see how sueh a conclusion as this, (absurd though it be) can be avoided, if we are to receive the doctrine that all the mem- bers ol the church are invested equally with the power of government. They would, according to this supposWon, have the double character of rulers and subjects." - My good Wend " does not see hovr the con^ elusion can be avoided :"— and no more can I.' But then, bis premises Me false. He ascribes to independents what no independent holds— that "all the members of the chorch are invested"— and invested "equally"— with "the power of government." Ww Dr. McK. not awaie that we had pastors over our churdies, and that we r^^A th^ »B, in scripture phrase, " having the rule over them !"— and conr sequently, that the true and only question between us is, not whether or not there are rulers in the churches distinct flrom the members, — bat what is the nature and extent of the power locfged in them ; and wbetker It is to be exerdsed, in its judicial and executive functions, independently of the people, or, with tiie people's presence and con^ current voice. : _: ^_ ^ / '•^ > ■l^'''^!?^^*'^ 5^'«^ (^"^ • ^ * 294 OBJECmONB UBOBD kdhJOm 1. And in answer to this inqniiy, our^rii* opeer- vation, although of a negative character i$ rif no small amount of positive value— It is one whibh ia not peculiar to independents, but is held, in coDlmon with them, by most, if not even all, of their prdsby- terian brethren.r*-It is, that the power, whatevbr it^, be, IS NOT leoislativb;— it is not a power to ksSK xAvs.— We must insist upon it, that all power erf this description ceased wrra, the apo&tles. The ku- thority to frame the constitution, of the churchy to enact its laws, and to institute its ordinances, was theirs, as the inspired vice-gerehts of their exalted Lord,— himself the church's supreme and only Hes^. But with them the power expired. They had no successors. The result of their inspired authority we now have in their writings. It is by these, that they, " being dead, yet speak." Be the directions complete or defective, explicit or doubtful, they com- prise all we have that possesses authority; arid beyond them we have no right to go. In following the word, weobey theapostlea; and in obeying the apostles, we obey Christ. It appears to have been to the per- petual rule ^ which they were thus tp maintain in his new spiritual kingdom— the era of "the regenera- tion"— that he had reference, when he said to them — "In the regeneration, when the Son of man shall sit on the throne of his glory, ye also shall sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel." Matt. xix. 28. This commenced in their persons, and coutinues in their writiags. In these their authority is now lodged:— and to the^ apostles, as spealdng in them, wq ought, agreeably to the in- ference in the close of last section, to make all out — appeals r e sp e cting tlie laws of t h e k in gd om , whet h er ■,*} A." OOMOBEaA,tIONia< tNDEPENDENOT. 295 ■€ * ihev'^elate to bur personal or to our social and j5ol- leotive duties.— If any man, or any body of men, by how lofty a name soever distinguished, shall presume^ to venture on framing a statute-book of ^e^^wn, ot ieven on introducing additions to the existing Statute- book, for which we search it in vain,— let them answer for it. They expose themselves to the charge of " teaching for doctrines the ^command- . ments of men," and should remember what is said of such, in regard to aU which they thus presump- tuously mtroduce— **in vain do they worship me.' l?he divine injunction is— "Add thou not unto his words, lest >]^e reprove thee, and thou be found a liar."-lWe c6nsider ourselves as having enough, for the direction of the churches, in th^ New Testament •, —and regard everything of the nature of legislation in tUfe church as involving the assumption of a power which died with the last of "the twelve apostles of ^theLamb." We have akeady applied these principles to the only ecclesiastical court which is even pretended to have a place in the New Testament Records; and have concluded, that such a court, if uninspired, whether cohsistmg of the apostles, or of delegates irom all the churches, or of both, could have had no authority to legislate for the kingdom of Christ, or to issue any mandate that should bind the con- sdenees of his subjects, CkurcJi-potocr, then, whether ^vested in the office-bearers of the churches alone, or in them and the people conjointly, is aolelj jvdimal and executive; that is, it is the power of judging of the application of existing lawsto particular cases, «nd of earrying into eflfect the law's punitive and - isorreotive sentences.— It is. an. extraordinary senti- 296 OBJECTIONS UBOEP AOAINCrr ment ennnouited by an eminent clergyman of the church of England in our own day, — the Bev. Dr. Hugh M'Neiie,— "The apostle enjoins upon the brethren to submit themselves to the rulers; which would be worse than useless, if the rulers had no authority to command any thing beyond the letter of scrip^re."^ Indeed! Is the injunction, then, " to> be subject to principalities and powers, to obey, magistrates," an injunction "worse than useless/* unless the authority of these rulers be absolute, — Iheir will law ? Has the Queen of England no power^ because she is the impersonation and representative of law, and by eating law the exercise of her power must be regulated? The constitutional le^s- lature may alter the laws, and enact new ones ; bat according to the laws so enacted the sovereign must rule. And because she has no power in her^wn person to go beyond the laws, does this render obedience, on the part of her subjects a thing of nai]^ht, and the divine command to yield it " worse than useless?" — ^With regard to the churches of Christ, then, the question is, — where lies their con- stitntibnal le^slature ? Is it not with Christ and his apostles? And where are the laws which they have enacted? Are they not in the inspired statute* book of the spiritual Idngdom? tf they are thefe, is there any ecclesiastical legislature on eartib, thaii has i^y authority to alter^ to cancel, or to add? t» it not the duty of the rulers to rule accordiidg to these laws,— and the duty of the people to ^' obey '* and " submit themselves '* tb tibiose rulers— so ruling. * The ohorob and the eharches ; or fhe ehitrch of (Iktd in *Ch|ttf^ and th e c hnrch c B of Chriirt militant h e r e on e arth ! ptg t 628. ^— — CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY. 397 and only when so ruling ? I am aware that when Dr. M'Neile uses the words quoted, he is speaking "as regards institutions and ceremonial order." He j»y8:— "The scriptures contain no detailed descrip- tion of how things were ' set in order/ by Paul at Gorinth, or by Titus in tJrete. And the omission was designed, that other churches, in different cir- cumstances, and ages, and climates, might enjoys christian„ liberty, while with wisdom and discretion, they set things in order for themselyes." Alas 1 for the liberty! .JS¥hat a latitude of allowance is embraced in the words " institutions and cremonial order 1" The Church of Borne, "with wisdom and discretion " no doubt, " set things in order for itself :■ * —the Church of England, with its share of the same "wisdom and discretion," set things in order for itself ! And, without at all meaning to bring int^ comparison what is antichristian in the former wittl what is christian in the latter, I need not siirely say;^^ to any one acquainted with the " institutions and cei%monial order." of the one and of the other, how far— how very far— both have gone, not only beyond, but aside from, and in contrariety to, the divine simplicity of the New Testament; and that, under covert of the very principle for which Dr. M'Neile pleads,—* principle noticed and exposed in out *' introductory observations," and on which we do noi again dwell. It is introduced here, from its imme- diate conneiion with the subject of church-power^ and for the purpose of impressing on the reader's miiid the conviction, that such power, whenever it ventured to tegidatey becomes impious and miylMeyotiB ustur-^ patioiii, having in it the essential splMKof antichrist^ —"who atteth in the temple of God, showihg hito- ^ i**'^¥ *, ' •^"f ''*1' ? 298 OBJBCnOMB OBOID kOUJin self that he id Ood." I say nothing of the difference between " the letter of soripture " when Paul wrote his. epistles to the Corinthians and to Titns, and "the letter of soiipture" now that the revelation of the ^▼ine will a completed. Wh»t we contend for ie, that the churches then were subject, in regard to all their " institutions and ceremonial order,'* to apodtolio authority in what way soever its dictates were made known to them ; and that to the same authority they still continue 8ubjeo^,M its dictates are on perma- nent record. ^^ il 2. In regard to the exercise of this power, I^haVe formerly ^deavoured to show what part the churches of Christ, when met in their collective capacity, are actually represented as taking in the most important function of judicial and executive administration,— the aesparation of an qffende,t from the communion of the c&t.■ 'T'" OONOBEQATIONAL INDEPENDENCT. 999 the pastorate or eldership, we take to be this :— To preside in the church;— to see that " aU things be done decentty and in order;"— to point out the law of Christ in its application to particular cases ;— to have these cases so matured for statement, as to make both their own nature and the bearing of the law of Christ upon them I as clear and simple as possible ;— to urge upon the brethren a faithful adher- ence, not to the letter of the law only, but also to the spirit in which aU the discipline of the House of God ought to be conducted, the spirit of humble self-diffidence and compassion, of love to the offen- der, blended with indignant zeal against the offence, and grief for the dishonour done by it to the Head of the church.— "The pastor rules," says my clear- headed friend Dr. Payne, "by making the Lord Jesus Christ rule. He has no authority independent of his Master, or separate from his. . . . A right- minded minister will not desire to see ^im«e^, but the /Sfaviowr, reign over the people. Jealous for his Master's honour, he wiU shrink from the thought of dividing the supremacy with him. He covets not the obedience of the church on his o^vn account, but for the honour of his Lord: and thus placing before his people not hiniself but Christ, as the actual ruler, he secures, when the conscience is in subjection to divine authority, the obedience he enforces."*— Thus, it is not properly a system of popuUir rule, hnt oi past&ral direction and p<^riUtr comurrence m the application and execution of the laws of Christ; his aaihority being, throughout, held and felt to be parainount. The submission enjoined is submission T he Church of ChriHt conBlde re d; pag e 6 1. '■^^^' r%- aoo OBJXOnONS UROBD AQAIIfST to the premding and directing pastor or pastors, tm the ditinely authorised organ, by whom, in eaciVu case, the law of Christ is to be pointed oni, «bd, with the concurrent judgment and voice pi ih^' ohuroh, to be carried into execution. A rule mat is^ exercised by office-bearers entirely apart from, and independently of, the brethren, can never be made *» " to harmonise '^ih those passages in which the disci- is represented as carried on by the assembled church: — ^whereas, ^yCple be understood in the sense we have put upon ilPol is harmonious and consistent. And that such ir the'(»rule intended, may be made farther apparent by observing — -• 3. The naJture of the jnotives, by which the sitbmis- aUm to U, on the part of the brethren^ is enforced. They are contained in such passages as Heb. xiii. 17. "Obey v them that have the rule over you, and submit your- selves; f(yr they watch for your sotds, as they that must give account; that they may do it wtj^joy and not toUh gri^: for thatM unprofitdbUfc/ff /jfjg^^ ^di 1 i Thes. V. 12, 13. "niow them whtfOflHUpmongillP'^ yoQ, and are over you in the LoraPHoMiaonlsh you ; aijid esteem them very highly in XonCyfor their ica^k'a sake: and be at peace among jioM,r«c?ve»."— Here, and , fwimTpyer in the New Testament such topics are cl^fidr^o appeal is made, invaoiably, not so muoh olain^ of avtluyrity as to those of affection. otive^i^ged is noi---Obey them)-— for they afid ted wim an authority which it must be at your peril that you resist Instead of any thing apprbaeh'- ing to such a tone of domination, demandiDg impU ' '^. ' , , '$' > » * H ■\i'. -"\ 802 OBJBCnOKS OTOBD AOAINfiir ^ v^ ^ch questions on iAi« point havoiiot actually be^ Ltated? As no one wUl contend for a power tiiat . to independent and absolute-there must be limite in the courts of assembled representatives, afl wen M with the eldership of individual churches.-^. The difficifiy, it may here be remarked, is, substanr tially, the^same in kind, with regard to to., as with ^ regard to c?od nne«,-in the department of r^ile,^m SI department of imlrv^tumr and the ajoalo^ between the two is deserving of notice, as lUuste^ - tive of m important principle on our present subjeoV T^ere is no powei to add either to the laws or toj^e doctrines of Christ. The pastors are bound to nde according to existing laws, just as they are bound to ■ S according to easting doctrines. In the one department, as in the other, they have no ^nthonty eithor to keep within, or to go beyond the revealea mind of Ghriat. And no church.^jan be under obh- eation to obey any laws but those of Christ, any Sore tiianit can be under obligation to receive any doctrines but those of Christ. Their setting a pastM over them bility and refraot(xriness of individuals, will be able to carry the aggregate of the church harmoniously along with him. "The difficulty referred to," says Dr. Payne again, " is rather speculative than practi- oalv When there exists fervent love between the partiesi when there is no tendency to an improper assumption of power on the one hand, and no prone- ness.to groundless and factious opposition on the < other, there will be no disputes On this delicate point" (the point of the limits of power and obedience* a point alxiut which there is much the same difficulty ■^- OBJECTIONS UROED AGAINST 304 ^ ^ about t^)" and with respect to wMch ♦re especiaJly to be deprecated and avoided. -i^He tenor of this particular leads me to notice— ^ 4 M obedience to Christ ought to be the obed^eMe cLroence-This is obvious. Whout this th^^ no real obedience rendered to Ghnst at all. \^ the power of intermediato i^^^^tigation, rnd^of^^ . judlnent and execution, Ues entire y with the ofi^^ ipaiTfrom the people, the ^^^^^^"^^f"^ ,^1^'}''^ ile people become incUfferent Th^ ^^ ^^^^f^*-; they camiot be supposed to feel,-the iiecess ty of th^k studying and knowmg^Jie laws of Chnst in regard to the discipUne of his House. That belongs to their rulers. Having nothmg themse ves to say in the matter, why need they put themselves to the trouble of inquiry? Communicants are admtted are tried, axe censured, axe excluded, without their being privy to the grounds of procedure, and in a -manner that leaves them in entire ignorance. They submit in the daxk. Their submission is not pro- perly aji act of enUghtened obedience toChr^t.-- Now, in his kingdom, there is no subjection of the cadence to a^y other than himself . It is, there- fore, desirable, and in congruity wi*^ ^^IP^^? f of eWghtened spiritual freedom by which his king- dom is distinguished, that whatever is done m the <,hurche; should be done as an act of obedience to the law of Christ, explained, ^d^rstood, and brought ^metoevery conscience.^ Thisisoneof ^e excel- lencies of the system of a^stolic church order, as it i^ears, in its simpli««7.i^ «^« New Testament.- • The Church of Christ considered : page 63. oongbsqational MDEPENDESCY. 805 I tt*t whatever is J^ is feU by aU to be sometkmg in which tbBf#^il^ind«ave8 concerned ;--mwiich they are ^foilig homage to Christ, actmg the part of enhghtened subjects pf his authority ;-^and not merely assenting in ignorance to whkt others are left to do for them. The spiritual interests of each individual of the brllihren become so far the commpn concern of the whole ; and the bringing of the rules of CJhrist's kingdom to bear upon them m cases when their souls are in JQopardy. is felt by each as a matter o^ personal re^onsibiUty. And thus, every act^of th/ihurch becomes an act in which each member bears a part; and has the satisfaction of knowmg and feeling that he is uniting with his brethren, not in yielding a careless and ignorant submission, but in rendering enhghtened and reverential obedience. —Hence I have to add— 5 The system by which all are thus invited and bound to take part m what is done.-whether m the admission of members or in ,the exercise of disciphne, —corUribtaes emmently to the purity of communion M the churches.— I am speaking, of course, of the theoretical tendencies of the system, when nghtly administered.— Tliat laxity and corruption may find their way into congregational churches, I am so far from wishing to deny, that I would ever anxiously Uft my warning voice to my brethren agamst the danger. Danger there is. I do not, however, resume the subject, formerly discussed, of the materials of which christian churches ought to be composed, and the misfchievous eflfeets of introducing materials of a djffiprent description. What I now say is this. Aflsttm%the dutyof preserving the churches pure, —and without affirming (what cannot be affirmed in 20 306 OBJECTIONS tmOED AOAlNBT 1^:.- ki the face of facts not in modem independent churches alone, but in some of the apostolic churches them- • selves) that any system whatever can present an insuperable barrier against the evil of impurity,^! can .hardly fancy any candid person making it » question, whether ihe hliderwy ijf. the system is not to secure the end of pure communion :— the thing is so very evident. When every appHcant for admis- sion, aft^r having conversed with the pastor, must be nameiUo the assembled chmch; a competent number of the members nominated for fui-ther conversation^ and, after every needful inquiry, by them and the pastor, into profession and character, a report of the case publicly made, and all called upon to judge of the propriety o% admission, and formally to give or withhold their assent, or, in case of doubt, to request delay for satisfaction on the doubtful point;— all seems to be done that can be done, for the attain- ment of the end. All are warned. And circumstances wi^ regard to character may frequently be known to individuals in a church, which are unknown to its bflice-bearers, by which mea?ts improper admissions 'maybe prevented;— the question of admission be- commg,inthe minds of all the members, a question of pei-sonal and conscientious responsibility. If improper characters are received, no one has it in his power to lay the blame off from himself upon the minister and the elders. AU become so fat responsible ; and in proportion to the number of the members, and the extent of the feeing of responsi- bility/is the unlikelihood augmented of unworthy- intruders making their way into the "fellowship of the saints." I freely admit, that a minister and his session, duly impressed with the importance of purity v:^ i-t" ik congregationXl indepenp?ncy. 307 in this fellowship^ and acting con^entiously, have a great deal in their power. It were most uncandid to deny, or to question, that, with due care, their success may be equal to that of-any independent church. I am speaking of adaptations and tendenciesi-and ^ that I say is, that an independent church affords ^facilities still more ample, and checks^ still more stringent, for the end desired. When I speat too of a mmi^ter and session having so much in their power, I speak of them simply as the representative agents pf a presbyterian congregation. I do not -^ now entet into the sources of corruption in nahoml churches. In these, corruption is m^genous The causes of it are in the nationaiity of the church-and- state system; and with these it would be very unfair indeed to charge either presbytenanism or episco- pacy. In forming a comparative estimate of the different schemes of ecclesiastical policy, we are boimd to take them as they are in themselves, unassociated with extrinsic and adventitious sources of evil ' In aU national estabUshments, there are sources of impurity which are inherent in the prin- ciple of the nationaUty of reUgion, and m every system founded on that principle:— but since both episcopacy and presbytery may exist without con- nexion with the state, the corruptions which spring from such connexion should be imputed ta their own proper cause. ^ . ., ,^ • II. It has often been said, thftt the scheme of independency makes a fine theory; but that it is only as a theory it has any claim to admii;ation; that IT WILL NOT DO IN PRACTICE.— When such things are said, there are generally, in the minds of those who say them, instances of abuse, or of cases that have 308 OBJECTIONS U^BD AOAINST been of a troublesdme character, and have even, it / mayhe^given rise to dissensions and divisions i^ partic^ar churche9.-Now, that abuses may 6cs8essed of little or no personal influence. The other may be a person of distinction; opulent; powerfully connected; ol superior iinderstanding; and of griat personal influ- ence, not only in the churcli, but also in the country at large As things are in this world, it is impossible that these persons should possess, in any controversy ■1 'r ♦ The Italics are the author's own ; the senlence being the Aeading of a p a r a gr a ph . — . — ^ — — .__ ^ — -^ — _ — --,/,. ^ — "—- — __ ■m'- 8U OBJECnONB UBOED A0AIN8T -|4 . " between tliernj equal advantageB. Beyotid all this, the church itself may be one party, and a poor and powerless member the other. In this case also, it is unnecessary-tp observe, the individual must labour under every supposable disadvantage to ^which a ^righteous cause can be subjected. To "^ bring the \ parties in these, or any simikr circumstances, as near to a state of equality as human affairs will permit, it seems absolutely necessary that every eccksimtiml Ixxhj nhoM have its frilmnal of appeals; a superior judicature, estabUshed by common con- sent, and vested with authority to issue finally aU those causes which, before a single church, are obviously liable to a partial decision."— He then goes on to mention different ways in which, among the congregationalists, in some of the States of^the Union, supplied this dmt/em^^«H,— condemning one ' and commending another. But, besides expressmg my deliberate and entire dissent from the statement that " there are many cases in which individuals ai'e dissatisfied on reasonoRe (jrounds ^Nii\x the judgment of the church,"— and avowing my firm beUef that such cases are very rare,— I have to remark, that, with regard to tlie various modes of supplying the alleged defect, our previous question presents itself —"What saith the scripture?" If such tribunals of appeal were indeed "absolutely necessary," might we not have expected to find them in the Bible?— and, if they are not to be found there, is there^not some Uttle presumption in pronouncing them thus indispensable? Our presbyterian brethren profess tofi^d them there, and they act consistently in having theW' ;— hut not so any congregationaUst.— It so hai/pens, however, that we have the very case des- I- ■'^'•■•:^■^• m CONOBEQATIONAl. INDEl'INBENCY. 816 Cribed by Dr. Dwigbt brought before us hypotbeti- oftUv by an inspired apostle, and counsel given how it should be dealt with. The apostle James thus states the case, and thus counsels :-" My brethren have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Chnst, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come into your assembly a man with a gold nng, m goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; and ye have respect to him that, weareth the gay clothing, and say unto him, sit thou here in a good place ; and say to the poor, stand thou there, or sit here under my footstool: are ye not^then partial in yourselves, and are become judges of evil thoughts ? Hearken, my beloved brethren, hath not .God chosen the poor of this world rich in faith, and ' heirs of the kingdom which he hath promised to them that love him? But je have despised the poor. Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you before I the judgment-seats? Do not they blaspheme that worthy name by the which ye are called? If ye fulfil the royal law accortling to the scripture. Thou ahalt love thy neighbour as thyself, ye do weU: but if ye have respect to persons, ye commit tin, and are convinced (convicted) of the law as transgiessors. James ii. 1—9. \^ I am aware that this passage is generaUy imder- stood of the ordinary or casual entrance of the rich and the poor into their places oi worship, and the marked difference shown in providing. the one and the other with accommodation. I cannot but agree, ^ however, and that unliesitatingly, with those who regard it as relating to the case of two parties in ^a cause,— the one rich and the other poor. The following a r e, in b r ief, my r e asons : - 1. We know •t...,--. •■j-.'hjSS.. / t u\ XSft 816 OBJECTION^ URGED AGAINST from other passages,— such as 1 Cor. vi. 1—7, already . more than once adverted to, that the churehes did take cognizance of differences, even as to secvlax matters, which arose amonpt their members; and that they were under a divine prohibition of carry- ing thett causes before heathen or worldly tribunals. —2. In all the other occurrences in the New Testa- ment of the word render§d^"mpetf of persona;' it has reference to judicia^distinction,— to the undue preference of one to another in judgment. See Rom. Lll; Eph.vi.9; Coliii.25; Act8«.34. The pro- bability-is, therefore, that it has the same reference here.— 3. The terms of verse fourth strongly confirm —I had almost said fully ascertain— this reference : -^'Are ye not the'n jsar/ioZ in yourselves, and are become judges oi (that is possessed and actuated by) evil' thoughts?" Is not the natural interpre- /tation of this that which* explains it of partiality iii judgment? "Judges" was not their appropriate designation, when they were only assembled for , ordinary worship.^-4. It is established farther by the association of judicial proceedings in the apostle's mind with the subject ofhis remonstrance and admonition: " Do not rich men oppress you, and draw you hefore the judgment-scafs r—Htrang^, then, that you should manifest fcuch a partiality to the riches of this world at yowr| judgment-seat 1—5. And farther still, by his pomted reference to " the law;' as "convicting them of trkusgressionj" when they thus acted partiaUy:— "Bikt if ye have respect of persons, ye commit sin, and^are convicted of the Uw as tran^gressorsr I grant that by tiie law may here be meant "the royal law" of\ love to our neighbour, to which, under this designation, he had just referred : GONQBEOATIOKAL INDEPEMPSNGY. 317 i —but from what immediately follows— "For whoso- ever shfijl keep the whole law, and yet oflfend in one point, he is guilty of all,"— with the proof of this somewhat startling inaxim subjoined,— it is evident that he had. the law in his mind distributively, as well as in its summary principle; and that when he speaks of their being " convicted of the law as _ transgressors," he had in his eye, alo^g with this principle, the many strong and perempiory prohibi- tions to be found in it of partiality in judgment, and the heavy denuiiciations against such as were guilty of it, See Lev. xix. 16; Deut. i. 17; Exod, xxiii. 2, 3; Deut. xvi. ,18, 19; xxvii. 19; Psalm Ixxxii. 2; Prov. xxvi. 23, 24. Supposing it, then," to be thus made out, that the case referred to in the passage is that of a matter in dispute between a rich brother and a poor, who "come into their assembly" for judgment, and the temptation to partiality in its administration; how does the apostle dispose of it? Does he speak of « the necessity of a " tribunal of appeal " to which the poor man, when the victim of such partiality, might have recourse, and threaten the evil-minded judges with the reversal of their sentence, and their own reprehension and punishment by that tribunal ? ]^<)thing of the kind, He simply warns the believers against the principle of partiality; 'remonstrates witii them on its strange inconsistency; reminds them of its extreme oflfensiveness in the eyes of that God who hath " chosen the poor of this world, rich in faith and heirs of his kingdom;" and of its exposing theun to the danger of condemnation and banishment from his presence, in the day of coming judgment, — in which he who is the Saviour of the poor will' be g^g OBJECTIONS UBQED AGAINSX ?. LtiStirTtbe time when a lugher_]udg^TOH . :triBg^rW« righteousness »s the light, «>d h«. vudcment as the noon-day I ^ . _. . ^^^ * T^whvshotadldweUonsuclitopics? "is®^ • '*":i'«ha4e;^oTdi«&vJt,ges. in favour of o« " ^ .SoX^tion to eaeh other's schemes; and, ?™jlt^Xthe one and the other, we may, on SthtsL-te bUsed and partial in our judgment, eitner sme w^ ^ avstem, accused and con- :S:et?;^Sc:?or a^'^^tt^o^d put.to iUght a Z^dof the most ingenious and specious objeo- • ? T One "Thus saith the Lord," or one example *';'?'Mv sSioned ordinance, would at once, • °/ it ^d^t Xhce, at lea«t refute. aU the reason- % oM putting the impress of sophistry upon alUhe^^^^^^^^. 3«ltwo ol^mtions rem^. ^W* I «»»' ??* °""* =" ^ ^mie form of goTemment for which we plead, •*S been aUeged, BBiNGS the membebs of cmmoBES ™o «J^ ™» co-irACr; and, since in every church ■ y^t be an aggregate of the weakness and ■;•:■:/■•/■ CpNOBEOAT^ONAL INDEPENDENCY. 319 corruption of its memberti, as well as an aggregate of their wisdom and grace, it is, £rom its nature, SPECIAZJLy apt to EN&ENDEB collisions, IRBITATIONSj ANDPEUDS. ..: '. M^'-:^'''' /:■: • ^Now, that such things may take place, has already been freely admitted. As they were found in apos^ tolicaUy constituted churches themselves, we need not hesitate to admit what, if it bears against oi^r system, bears equally against (AetVs, Thatnn certain circumstances such evils may arise more frequently under the congregational administration of church government, than under some others, might be granted, without at all aflfecting the validity of my groufid. Yet Xj'^am not sur6 if, when granted, it would be true. Variety of tempers, as well as'of judgments, is to be found everywhZ ' ' inWoiTol the popular element, thongh, in some ^2, it Way'bring with it its^I-. » J't. » otor respects, a salutary '«'*fg»'«^ .^ITJ]^ beginning, the propensity. "^*« I^'*4*^*it't™r oi the churches, discovered itself, to 1°™ » °T^ Gbd'B heritage;" and all are aware, how fataUyOns S^ciplehaf operated, both in the earUer and^p SC history of the church. Apd the same has w» ^e case L the history of states «s we^ as of .Whes mit friend of civil Uberty would divest trBrHiish constitution of its popular e]^nlent, S^re^tSuse tbit element gives rise to mo^' usurping iJ ~i,nn«, their own mmisters, bccaase •congregations to choose^thenr b,,„„tten4ed .'^b"i:e^y^-d division? mo.« ^^ •with unseemly »w ^ constitution of our , question, or *° £f j,^*"'^^ fopular form.of their ^>''" g^^he eltml^liic'^ independency has i^ CONGREGATIONAL IND^ENDENCY. 321 •fi- V.-, ^;, to eiiristian acceptance, to allow, that the churches formed upon its principles cannot possible prosper, -^can hardly Continue to exist,— without the prevail- "ing and dominant influence of liumilit;|r, ahd love, and self-denial, and meekness, and Jforbearance. They cannot thrive,— they cannot be held together, —without these. Is this an argument against them ? v^ No man who attenti*vely reads his; New Testament can think so. It cannot fail to strike every such reader, with what frequency and earnestness such virtues^as these are inculcated upon the churches. And are we not iiom this warranted to infer, YeLs and mercies, fiilfil ye my' joy, that ye be like-miiidecl, haying the mme lov©,;',. being of one accord, of one'mind.. Let.nothing be done through strife of vain-glory ; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other ^better than themselves. Look not every man on 'his oWn thiftgs, b^t' ev«ry man also on the things of' others. Let this mind be. in you, which was also in Christ Jesus;".' !^ph. iV. J. —6; Phil. ii. 1—5.— Such admonitions, all are aware, abound in the apostolic epistles :— and this comes among the proofe of the eonstitution of the church having been such as specially to reiiuire them. Tliis, ^ we not only griiiitbiif plead, the poiJularconsfitutiop of the congregational cUurches does, in a manner and measure peculiai' to itself. It is not the dia-. , honour, but the gloiry, of such c\iurphes, that they : cannot tlmve but in the ritmosphere of humihiy and -lovl;— that these arc the bonds by which /they are held together,— so that if the bonds fail, the diurches {$ill to pieces rtnd dissolve. - - . , , . I might add, that the^very consciousness of their ; necessity has the effect of inducing their cultivation, and the repression and cruci^xlon of thei* opposites. And the observation may be mode with still greater fdrce,-pr, ^.12—26. ■';>i/ ••'<-jo4'^'^ ,; ■ I. * - ''' I y ■ 4 ,»..--- , ■:■■ -^ r^ A^^: CHAPTER V^ ON THE UNION OP CHUIwte,* AND ^HEin WITH EACH OTHERA ■ ' ■ ' f '-. ■ ■ ■ '■ -'^\ ■.'■■-■•.', It has been often said to congregationalists,— " Yon have no visible imiont^your system is a rope^of sand- it has no cohesion. Be yonr real or pretended excellencies v«hat they may, as to superior punty of communion and strictness of discipline, here you fail Your chuiches are all insulated from one another,— each wilhin itself,— unassOciated by any recoemzed or visible bond. In sessions, and presby- teiies, jind syriods,^Ad g^al assembUes. we see palpable union; many congregations— one churcb.; The union is discernible in the system; which exhi- bits at once extension and concentration." _ Now were it truTthat our system is incompatible With union, I at once admit that the objection, would be a serious, an^ even a fatal one; fatal, because, showing it to be destitute of an essential feature of resemblance to the constitution of the churches m the. Kew Testament. .There, there is union. The churches axe distinct, y#;t one. And my object m this concluding chapter is, to explam the nature of that union, and the different way^ in which it mani- fested' itseUTaiid to show the reader that the same kind of union exists among congregationalists still. Of late years, we have been giving practical dembn^ Bfaation in S c otland, England, and Ireland, that in <» -- '--/^ .4-'^ -'N •,. -'< superior knowledge of the scriptures, by the mus- trious excellence of its eitample, by moral means ami ; not by force, there is nO objection. This is tUO;^ Independency which was undoubtedly mmmt,^ bo . ASierted by Robinson, and which is ^|Jaimed by coSgregatioiialists at the present day,-and no other: for no churches liiore unanimously and zeal- ously maintain that there is a heavenly bpn^ of ^ union, a golden chain, which binds together not onlj tiie churches of Christ, but the individual follow^s . 'of Christ. In particular is it necessaij-, that the | churches of the same communion, follo>nng-JtUe^ «ame discipline, and professing the same news ajfo ihe true doctrines of scripture, should hold inter- oouvse, should meet together for worship, for mutual instruction, and for consuUation. relative, ^ttie extension and peace of the city of Zion. i^R this IB a principle so very important, and it ^^om^^H-- wrr to avoid all mistake in relation .tor,it, that . W congregational Shttwhes, especially ikose of ; AmericarhSve/ ever decidedly reject^ the ^ame^ of indepetidentd imA liave^cotRenteOvto beJ^nown by , that only which is now commonly applwfd t^ theni. t This statement, as it respects the rejection ^ttke ': ' ■ •■••■■■-•■■■ ; ■ ■ ^ -r r :'''■■: ■ :;■::■ ■■■?■ i';-; -: -■-•■•■ ■- t^ ^- May it be ^sumed that by '■ 6^ml« "M^r». «s ai^tingd^^^^^^ the thre^ orhc/partlculars, arcto be ,indpto^.l. '"^"'^^'I'voly at l^aa^, «»thoritativc>n.l obligato.7 d^cU'^ons and «iaWmeu/., ? If not, some- thing equivjdBnt to these ought to bavo held a place. t Ratio 'Disciplina;,.^ the Coostitutlon of the ConKregaltonal Chutchea. ByJhooK^ C. Upham, Boxvdoin College. Mu.ne, U. S. L829. 328 UNION OF CHUBCHES^ - 1 :/ name <»f imlepcndeutH, i« too iHKimilifiecl ; nor aiiould I conceive the reason for such rejection anfficiont, when the import of the name in duly explain*!(^, And understood, as implying nimply the indepeudeiicyi of the churches, in ttxeit government, of each other» dnd - of all fort;ign authority. I give the quotation for the ^ purjKwe merely «l showing the vahie set upon union, and the extremely sentiitive jealousy of any imputa- tion of the want of it. > / 1 My present subject is, not the union in Christ of individual believers, a union comprehending all that are partakers of his giace on earth and of his glory in heaven; a union of all with one another; springing^ from the union of each with Christ ; a union, spirituttl," indissoluble, eternal;— but the itnian of chit rcheti,— car the relation in which they are to be considered as standing to each other, and the ways in which that relation should l>e maintained and ? manifested. — And, in tho tirst instance at least, it is the relation of such churchi^ to each other- as, fi'om sameness of views respecting doctrine, government, and disci- pline, acknowledge each other under the appropriate^ designation of sisteh churches. What is the nature of this relation? What does it in^ply between the kindred societies? What is thje reciprocal conduct to which it ought to load? If we mean any thing definite by the designation at ajjl, it must be that we regard ourselves as standing dn the same footing, relatively to each^ other, and maintaining the Stune id and degree of fellowship, as the churches of imitive or apostolical times. To every attentive reader of the New Testament there cannot fail to present itself in it a union more extensive thanHhai •wbsisting between the members of each separate ■'^^ ■ ^ I V UNION OF CHURCHE«. 329 ( ■•• % christian society; even a union among all thefle societies, in thoir coUectivo capacity ;— all of them being Unked together in t)nc wide and hanuomouB brotherhood,— independent societies, but recogniz- ing one another as sections of the same great family, ^ --or (to use another scripture metaphor) separate aocks, each with its appropriate pastor or pastors,— but air the joint property, and the conHt4int and equal care, of >' the good Shepherd who gave his life for the sheep." . .^. To every mind that has been fiamed, under divino ^ ^ influence, on the principles of the gospel of peaw and love, smh a sceae cannot but appear unspeak- ably delightful :-while, on the contrary^notlung can be more r«voHlng, because nothing more unlike the bible, than tho idea of churches aU in a state of entird insulation from each other,-8uch an insulation, as - that, instead of the lovely harmony of i;ecipjjocal ooiifidcnce and friendly intercourse, each ^qM jmpear like a separate fortress, surrounded by its VSs and ramparts, with spies on the battlements, and sentinels at the gates, watching, with anxious iljalousy, to prevent the entrance of intraders from , the rest.— That would be a state of things as oppo- j., siteL> the condition of the apostolic churches a^a division is to unity, enmity to love, darkness to hght. 1. In pomtingottt the ways in which the cOiinexion of churches wflii one another may be maintained and manifested, in accordance with l^ew Testament^ principles and examples, I begm with tiiat^^irhieh iatoraUy first suggests itsdf, and which most tocti^ belongs to the essential idea of union. It is— that A MEMBER OP ONE OF THE NeW TESTAMENT CHTJRefflBfi WAS VIRTUALLY A MEMBER OF THEM AIXj, »nd that B UCh> « '^ • ■^ f^^ in- their removal, have been actuated by motives, triflmg, capricious, vindictive, or in other ways unchristian.— Withdrawing fiom a church of Christ is, like joming it, a serious and solemn act,— nfever t(te be done with lightness and precipitations and therefore no such encouragement should be held out to it as that w^ich arises fiom one church being the ready receptacle for tfee dissatisfied of another. ' ^t is true, no doubt, that a society as well as an individual may eiT ; and that there may, therefore, be cases, in which sentence of exclusion hi^.s been hastily and harshly passed, and in which one church may be more than justified in affectionately remon- stratmg with another. .Such cases, however, behove to be veiy strong ones; extraordmary exceptions to the general rule. And even in them, ret^son, justice, and brotherly confidence all require, that the first step taken should be a modest request for information from the church by which the sentence has been pronounced. The propriety of such precaution is obvious. It generally happens that such cases come :f 332 UmON OF CHUBGHfig. abroad in a misrepresented and partial form :— and it ulrould be equally foolish and culpable to lend an ope:i^«ar, in th6 first in'btance, to the varnished tale of the separated party and his friends.. The rule- must, in all reason, be, that the church, rather than-^ the individual, is to be presumed in the right. The case must be palpable and flagrant indited, that ^ warraats any departure from this rule; for, were a general dispo^tion shown to listen to the complaints of dissatisfied offenders, we should immediately have churches, and especially those in the same place or . neighbourhood, erected into a kind of eom-ts of appeal from one another's decisions ; which would betray a want of mutual confidence, utterly incompatible with ^* keeping the unity of the Spirit-in the bond of peace." It is very plain, that mutual confidence in each other's discipline is the only ground on which the union of churches can be. maintained. Thhyily. Every church ought immediately to re- ceive such as come to them recommended from a sister church, utdess they thermdves knotv of any thing against tlmrt, on tlve ground of which they Jiave reason to question their christian profession.— -It is obvious^ that to receive any applicant when this exception has place, would be to sacrifice substance to form, and to act in opposition to the very purpose for which the recommendation itself is jgiven and required. The exception proceeds on the supposition, that circum- stances may be known by th^ church to which application is made for admission, which were un- known to the church by which the attestation of character was given. Be it remembered, however, that those to whom it was known, must bear the blame (rio light one) of unchristian want of f aitli- UlnOM OF CHURCHES. 333 fulness in never having before divulged itj for . having thus "suffered sin upon a brother," and allowed a church of Christ to retain i^ communion and "without rebuke," one whom, had:proper inti- mation been given them, it would have been their duty to deal with as an bffendmg brother, and even, - perhaps, to have piit away from among tliem.. - one church, by want of cautidn in its admissions, . i neglect of discipline, has fallen into a state of bftn it can never, surely, be the dnty of other : ,JSch6^ to participate in such corruption by the , iidiscriminate ""reception of its members,— thn^s to defile themselvJBSi because others have becpme de- filed. For example: would one of the seven churches-^* of Asia have been justified in reejeivingfeom another, }iow formally soever recommended^ a member whoi|,.. they knew to "hold the doctrine of- the Nicolaitans," -^ in the face of the Kedeemer's feolemu declaration, , "which thing I hate?" Would it havjB been the duty ^ of, the church in Philadelphia, in the state and^char- acter of which Jesus expresses so much complacency, to hold unrestricted intercourse with the church in Sardis, where there were but "a few names which had not defiled their garments," and of which the general character was "tv name to live, while dead?" Surely, no. The generar rule, then, is not without exceptions. What general rule is ? ' For one ifthurch , tg^ admit to • communion i' the uncircumci^d and the unolean^ because they have %een admitted by aiTOther, would only be sanctioning and itugmenti|ig the evil." Glinrches. must not,* aijy_ jnore Jhan indi- viduala, "be partakes in othe^r men's ■8»is,"'"l}ut churches, like inaividualt^vmay be. highly censurab^,^ guilty at once bf unfaithfulness to their Lord and to" >»^ ....-■(' f I «^ * - ■ ■ » " f - f^ ■ 334. UNION OF -CeURCHES. "th^ir brethren, as well as to the souls of Such as,- iji pmi God, but as a specimen of that sympathy of mutual love bjr which the first churches were united,-and of the influeuce too of personal and social character-the character of ministfers of the gospel and of chutches- m^co^- tributmg to the multipUcation of the subject^ of the christian communityr-the extension of the kingdom of Christ. , . ;' a iiiio 'And why should not the same thiiigsb^ done stiU.' Why should not pastors of churches be the bearers from church to church of salutations aud assurances of love— of interest in each other's condition, and prayei-s for each other's prosperity? Andw^hy should notchurches> as such, feel, and be eager W express^ the same interest, in the same way, in the dtate and prospects of infant societies of the saints ; anim^tmg, by similar means, in its incipient stages, the. blessed cause of the Eedeemer? A society is a collection ot individuals, and coiltain^ an aggregate of mdmdual " feeling; so that the same thmg which giyes an im- pulse to the individual wiU give a simUar impulse to- the collective mind. When Paul, on his amval at Appii Forum, found the deputation of brethren from ■ the church in Rome awaiting him,-^a deputation ' sent by that church, in token of their affectionate esteem and bympathy, especially in the circum- stances of trial in which he then stood, as an^am- bassadir of Christ in bonds,-" he thanked God, and took courage." A^d what Paul individn^ felt the church at Antioch felt collectively. Why, then, shoiild not corresponding encouragement and \} UNION OF GHITBCBE8.' 987 impulBe be giyen 8tm to tbe afiteotioos and the active energiea both of the. servants of Christ and of his chnrches, by such weU-timed expressions of interest in their prosi^rity. and increase, whether in the form of con Aratnlatlon <>r of condolence? IV. Bttt farther still ' The tokens of love between rth§ early churoW was even more substantially praelicrf than in ^ either the sending of salutations, 'or the dispatehing-of special messengers. There ^as the feUowaMp f this are on recoid; tiie one relatihgfe? a singly church,-^^e ottier io the * chiu:clies of! tiie GentUes at Iwge. . For the firet of ' '4he two", see Acts xi.27--«0. This is a^^terebting case, when taken in c*■ \ T^ ■r>:( ^ .* M - 1-' • tTNION OF CHURpHES. - •H,' ■888,: :v'.. viii. and ix.: the whole of these two last-cited chap- ters having reference Ite the same collection.— The principal design of this eminent servant of Christ, in desiring this expression of -affection from the jGentUe churches to their Jewiphbretiuren, was, " not > "^oniy to supply the wants of the saints," but to -^-^ promote imion; to root out any remaining prejudice from the minds of the latter toWrfdrffie former^, to * do away every feeling, wTiether secret or avow-ed; >*f coolness, and je^ousy, and distance; to enliven Se reciprocal cordiality of both; and to quicks, tteoughout all the churches, the circulation of that •love, which is the life-blood of the body of <3hrist,-— supplying at once, to that body, its vital warmth, And itft healthful and growth-promoting nutriment. !. The Gentile churches, it Appears, appointed mes- . . iengers, to accompany the apostle, with the fruits of r ^ their bounty, to, Jerusalem. While this, agreeably to his owiv prudent suggesUon, was designed for the protection of his own iijtegrity from the malicious iijiputatioiis of his numerous and inveterate enemi^ it was calculated also to tender the expression of V tegatd from the Gentile to the Jewish christians .the more marked and -impressive.— And observe,— • although the apostle beautifully, and, not less justly than beautifully, represents the former as " debtors '* to the latter, because it was through the instrumen- tality of the jWwish believer that the Gentiles had teceived their spwitual blessmgs,— blessings, which, froiii their naturei^d theur inestimable precibusness, ^ could never be T^aid in money; yet he att^same^ tii5 afltens <^e obligation of affection and libetality to He equaUy upon botht'W'For I mean not that other men be eased and you bu r dened: but by on ^ • «• « »v' . UKION or CHUitCH^. 339 equirfity,-that now at this time your abundance' may be a supply for their want, that their abundance also may be a supply for your want ; that there may be equality." 2Cbr.viii. 13—15.- Thi8^ therefore, is another way, in which, now as- ^ then, the churched odght to manifest- their unity :-^, ' attending to, and mutually sujpplying one* another's temporal necessities ; necessitiesj- which may ^ various in their kind and degree, and in the ciroum- stances out of whiqh they originate^ HjBre is the' ▼auWTARY, PMWiPLE; the only principle, in such matters,* sancuoned by the statute-book of Christ's ^^itgdom/ It is the principl^of the otrono hixping THE WEAK. On churches, as well as on individuals,. the duty is incumbent of " considering one another to j»OYoke unto love and unto good. works:"— ant V ' 6y the' aids which, in the spirit of union, they are ithtia. enabled to afford to one another, the apostle . teaches us to regard them as at once manifesting the gwfcoe of God bestowed upon themselves, and caus- ; ing thanksgivings to abound unto. God from the gi^ateful recipients of their bounjff^ras well as, at, the V ' same time^ augmenting social l<|)ve and the c(ipmon ' {Prosperity. 2 Cor. viii. 1 ; ix; 12^14. Such are some of the ways in -which the Iffew Testament churches manifested their' imion;T-Jand in which the same union may and ought to be in%ni- fested still. And. there are others. Provided' tjiere be no usurpHtion of authority,— no framing of. yokes for the necks of the disciples,— and no departure ^m the principles and practices which the consti- ^ tntidn' of the churches^ as kid down H the ?^^ Testament, '^renders imperative.— fc^® is no such j yin g of the hands of either individuals, or ohnrches, • ¥•-' . X ■ ,' * -, ;' ^ 840; \f UNION OF CHOTCHB8. • • as that they miwtX notlil[g1()r wHich there ili not an ^explicit precept, or of which there is not a distinctly recorded example. There are two m three particniars which this observation«is intended to introduce, and with a few remarks on eJ^h of _ which it is my purpose to elope. . j 1. I plead, in the first place, for the freedom, between churches and their pastors, ot mutual cm- svUatim and advice.— Wlaie we acknowledge no authority of one church over another,— tfnd .no authority of any representative cotirt over chn«»» Within its jurisdiction ;-yet if in the proceedmgB rf any churqh, a case should occur which is felt to be one of great general interest, and, at the same tan©, from the peculiarity of its nature and circumstanei^ to be involved in some considerable measure^ rf " perplexing difficulty, so that .a desire should be felt to ask ihe prayers and the counsel of any sister church or churches respectmg it, or the advice «5» jy'M UNION OF CHUJtCHES. "846 Where all is voluntaty,— where there is nothing of. the nature of authori^,-— no.decreeinjggiand ordain- ing of what theiushurches, as such, must do, or • abstain from doing,— ^-ho interference with scriptural church-rule,r^there is full scope for combined zeaL In'.regard to such union and co-operation as this, thex^ is no occasion why the most rigid and unconvr protnising independent should startle, even at the, word delegation itseli' I am iware it is to si^ch an obnoxious ,wordr and pastors and others are not a whitthe^orsefor a little of this j^aloiisy- amongst the ihembers of ehnrches, to keep all right,--t6 preserve principle from violation/ "But the jealousy may become extreme and morbid. The evil to "which congifegatipnalism is opposed h,.ia^t dkegatimy but authoritative detega^oh. If the dfel6gation telatfeft to c^jects that are altogether unconnected with the gov&rnnikM of the iphurches,— inyplying no interfer- ence with their rei^pective admissions of members, exercise of discipline,, or in general the coniduct of tlipir own affairs, , Whether spiritual or temporal ;-r-if it regards only the prosecution of such cominon enAs as the local or the more extensive, the home or the • foreign, propagation of the gdspel)— the efficient aid . of churches that are weak in numbers and in sectilar resources> — and, in a country laden ;nvileges as . dissenters ; we are not sensible (of the slightest infringement, by such deldgated ^bnabination, of any 6ne principle of the strictest independency. District associftfipns, formed 6n i3iis principle* have^ in paany instances,- been instromental in the excitement of the churches to an augmented interest in the sljiritual condition of th^ surirounding \' «»l -& , ^ nj_i. x. 346 UNION OP 0HUBCHE8. . neighbourhood,— as weU as to a stronger feeling of their avm nnity, and\}f a common 8oliciti;ide for each, other's prosperty :— and niiions on a more extended . stfale, framed on the same principle, associating the chiurche^ in the joint expression of a cOmmbn. love, and the joint exercise of a common zeal, may.be proportionally beneficial in their results,— both to the churches .themselVes and to the world. Such' delegates might be regarded-i(to use an aposfolip designation, and to use it in &%enmxery closely analo- gous to that in which it was originally employed,) as "messengers of the churches"— i^ Oor. viii. 23. i^^at else are they? What were these messengers, nominated, in compliance with the ao^^e's desire, by their respeqtive churches, for the^^PtttiondJE a special commi88ion,-^what were they but ^elegateis? They were (the apostle says) ^'chosen of the ohnrchea to. travel" with us with this gr^ce (thjs gift ot bene- faction) wiach is administered by us, to the glory of the same Ldrd, alid declaralion of your rea^ mind." They vv'ere thus d'deqated on a spedal commission^ connected \vith the common good. Why, then, may not the s4ll%thing be done still, for objects of com- mon: interest, whether more occasional or more constant ?-^Without doubt, in this, as in every tiling else, we Ought to be on our guard against the danger of perversion and abuse. But, at the' same time, the ' apprehension of 8ueh danger should not be permit- ted to xeach a crisis so morbidly nei^ous, as to lay an unqualified interdict on the introduction of a principle in itself legitimate and salutaryr 4. The last point on which I have^ a remark oi* two to, offer, is,— /reerfom offdlowafiip tvith other denomi- nations. — Welive— happily Uye— in an age of growing » X. K' r vmm ov cHjmm^. 347 ■ ■■■-. ■■"'■-■ "'■■-.''-:.:''\ ■ r ■ ~ ■ ' liberality of seniameQt and expansion Qislove among fi^ow-ehMBtians. iMo not add the seemin^y restric- tive clause — holding evangdical principle; heooxiae I regatd it as a mere tautology,— "hol^g evangelical prmciples" being the sam(?|hing with believing the gospdi and believing the gospel being essential to \| any man's being a christian. Fellowrchristians are ^ subdivided into various sections, or denominations. And when ibspeak of a growing liberality of views and feelings amongst them, I would be understood as ]^eferring to them, not individual^ in the intercourse and intimacies of private life,— but collectively, or . denominationally. I rejoice in this. My delight in it made me a member of the Evangelical Alliance; which, whatever diversity of opinion may exist re-^ specting its constitution and objects, none will denj* to be one of the great manifestations in our age of the gro^ng tendency to christian imion.— -Other striking exemplifications of the same tendency we • have. also in our day been privileged to witness. Different bodies of christians in Scotland have, at remoter and more recent dates,— "like kindred drops, been blended i^to one:" and the time has gone by, when, in one or moie of these bodies at least, it woidd have been looked upon as a species of practical heresy for any one so much as to hear a sermon, how sdund soever in doctrine, and how glorif^ng soever to Christ, if preached by a minister whose "uncir- cumcised lips" could not frame themselves to the I Shihbdeth or ^eStbbol^h of the dbnomination! God- speed to this spreading fraternization! A spirit of catholicity is perfectly compatible with a spirit of conscientiousness, ^e whole secret of the compati- bility lies in this,— that, while conscious of our own i\ M i 848 UNION OP^CHUBCHES. f oonsoidnHonsness, and regarding ourselves as en- titled to have it believed, we cherish such an amount of charity as to concede to others the claim which . we assert for ourselves,— simply giving then^ credit for the same cofascientiousness in differing froia us, of which we are sensible in differing from them» That is all. And is it any more than fair play? On this subject of th0 fellowship of churchesiJt-^ haa«(long been, a favourite sentiment with me/mat, so far as prtnc&>fe is concerned, the commm^ion of cfewrcAeff with each other wid the eoimnunion of indi- ^ vidudl christians with each other, are in the same •category,— that they rest on a common ground. The mutual convictioVi and acknowledgment of a common ^ Christianity; is the one and essential requisite to both, t An independent gives tiie right hand Of fe^diwi^hip to y an episcopalian or a presbyterian, because he believea , \ hha to-he a feUow-christidn. AH, then, that is want^ )ing to the same fellowship Between churches is neither ^siore nor lefil& than this,--4he presbyterian church . ^^; ' h^vi^ the conviction resipecting tiie independent ,^ cjii^K, and the uidependenC^churoh respecting the . I^esByterian" church, that each, respectivelyj is o Surch of /smh fdhw-chrisiians. And the same^ may ibe swd of an ejjiscopalian church, in relation to both (the presbyterian and independent. If the principles iofch^tian communion akd christian discipline are imderstodd, adopted, and acted upon in eachj=x (those who in each, according to their .respective constitutions, have the official charge being godly apd conscientious men,')— no independent, unless he / <'ib6 a thorough bigot, will question the possibilify of it congregation of episcopalians or presbyterians b^ing a congregation. of genuine fellow-beHevers; / V ^v UNION OF CHXTBCHES. 849 t ^^ L I > J r f 3 ■;i ^or will any e^coptdian, or any.presbyterian, bnt|^ one equally bigotted, dotibt this , possibility, as to either of the two systems of polity diflferent from his iOi^.^_There is but one case of exception. I am sdny ta make it. ^t make it I must. When I speak of episcopacy e^d presbyterianism, I speak of ' ' them joXnply as forms or church government,— not as mtionmy eatahiished. I make this exception,^ecause it does not appear to me io be within the limits of ike possible, that a n(dioncll church should be a pure • church. I can fancy, mdeed, a single congregation, onder a presbyterian e%tabliidmient, where the minis- ter and'the Session understand the nature of christian communion, and, lay the indifference of those whom thtiy decline to receive, are allowed to carry out con- ^ si^y^tly its principle's, in which a scriptural measure of separation from the world may be attainable:-^ built is, i fear,,the .result of sufferance alone,— and , , a state of things, on" this very account, necessarily rare; being one which imy man in a-'feaHsh, if a nominal chrifi^p tmd b^ere of what is ter^Htchxirch scanci^, thou^^'igiimig no satisfactory evidence of /^foB being "bom of tiie Spirit" and .a child of God, h naay, even by law, rowe into disturbance. In, the y - ' chapter on the mateiSfe of christi^ chiirches, we havei seen how Dr. M'Neile expressenftoiself respedr »^j|h ing the ^^ous established cliches DTthis and^Other ^K 5jpun^^^ and expresses himself, not with re^et and -^ ■Reprehension, but with approval and gloriation. If " that w^Jjiess be true,"— if it b6 even an approximaT tion to truth,— ^no one can b^ surprised that, holding vthe principles avbwed and defended in that chapter, ^ I should except from the description of intercommu% , nion of which I am at present speaking, all national L ' f 1 / ft "'1 '\r ^,- ^p? f .' "• ,«: ?• 8M»*iid from .all «fliii|mighLt give • im^BL syst^ia esgentiaMand neces- ^ ^^^^, V /»*^ ***^ exception^ I %e my way , . '%^^^^^'KepiiSacipl&o! churcJi4nter(Amuiiion is ^. ^ESe^^riain- I* is, as I h»ve jtot gaiO^ favourite « ^^SewitStti©.^ It wotUd delight jhj^ very !U^Tt *<> see Ibptcd an^ brought into fall pracltice ailong the ^^^•^es.ojt V(|i^oit$ denominations dn ejC^I^, ere I 1^: „ take - my ^fepftrtny^ for ^e church ol "91^^ I^omina- - • ; '' 'ICION in h^lnen^Jv J^ i» gaining grbund, ancl-Will gain ^; ' ^ it; Christians ^Ve Wre^and mpre feeling the happi- ^ ness of extiandii^g iilJiove' i^d ^nlavging< union, an^ "wl^ not loiJa^ be M to keep separate. ^ T^e elective attw^tion (Jon5i;uon faith, and ©J^l^e Name of ^,, the'commoii Saviour, will force ,themivW+8' sweet/ / /^, ; ',, . ^i&ijes«ity, together^— so that,.althotigh V tii0 govern- ^^ ^ ' ^^W ', inent and disKJipliue of , the . ohurcih may necessarily L^, / ^ xemaMi denominational,' there' will not only be the , , A f.-''/ Iri^knowledgmen't of a* oommon discipl^ship and the" ' bultivation of the christian afifections^ndAcatiiolict^^, spirit by private intercourse, l?ut this Mli^^^^g*- ment!an^ 1^ spirit ^ be carried o ' ' /^ ♦ % '« ppen and gjjW&Tinanifestation bj among thgHp/' iJid, wiriuflgi this tend^Bcy to luliqn, — ^placing time, 80 far as this intercommun! concerned, on its only legitimate-^i —basis, I may be allowed the li^rtj^ eonclusion of one work the concmsion l< ^ more. JNION to forward'^ the same iwV?/te« is possible igthe iother, — ^ tl ft fc tl h c] e| tl a cl ti • b c n o ' d n a (/ I: ■"V'^V uKion or oauftoHitiB, 351 B ' h ■, y ..- f e ^;; e e'.:-' I a • - - '■ In )f I- ^-^ * 9', •e, le is le le ^ ^ :h %\ the close of an Essaj the olofd of a volume.— "If it ;i>e80t<, that the more of the christian I see* in my v; telloW-professot of the trtith, considered individuaUy, tiiQ more pleasure must I feel in taking part witii hiipd in any or in all of the acts and exercises <4 christian fellowship, whether that indiTidnal be an episcopalian, a presbyterian, or an independent ;— then, upon the same principle, the gteater the amount oi true Christianity 1 we in any professedly christian society, the greater must be my satisfac- , 7 tion and eiijoyment in holding fellowship with that : T V. society coW^/twdfy,— whether it be episcopalian, pres- • byterian, or independent. As my freedom and comfort would be greater in the fellowship of the . more spiritual, devout^ and consistent episcopalian or presbyterian, than in that of the less spiritual, ■ devout, Snd consistent congregationalist,— so should ^ my freedom and comfort be the greatest in that ^ <^Mn8t^ istomunity where tiiere was the largest aggregate|pf ^e "©pirituality, the devotionv the eon- - sistency. >^ should take my place at the Lord's table with far more {^easure,— with feeUngs far more 7 in htunnony with the ' nature of the observance,— amc!nK»t a Ji^li^ril^^ of episcopaHans or presby- itianijiy genei-^y I had reason fi% 1^ church of indepei^dents, any '^msidieraUe i^pmber of whom 1 had r^asqiif to^^and i^doubt^As i-d6l%ntjjhen, iH th« conimwuj^n of chrifftig,n»-^vaiply„^ "wdM^-^individu- ally|.I Icttg fonthe collective comini^nioiii of chui'ches.' *" tf a difference as tjK churclia||oveimment "doetj not «*»^ prevcQ^ tjie ' fellowship oi the individuals^ there "^ sfiiUKVp reason why it i£!>i:^d pi^vent the fellow- '" r^ churches. TSfer^li i^l^in^g" ' ' ■-: ' : \ ' #•. w» ■^^ \ \ >;»- \ \ \. A"^ i r? ■*■ ,4 352 UmON OP CHUB0BE8. ^ necessairy to the .gratification of this longing (a longing in which I believe I have the sympathy of mnltitades of my fellow-christians of other denomi- nations) bnt the adoption and the redaction to practice of a common principle on the sul)ject of chnrch-fellowship. The principle is a very simple one. It is— that in order to any one's being received and retained as a member of a christian chnrch^ he, or she, should give satisfactory evidence of being a true bhristian,7-a believer in Christ,— a child vof God; or, more shortly, that Achriatian church shovld be, what its name imports, a church of christians. If it be bnt granted, in the bible sense of the terms, ' i^6,i Christianity is a necessary Qualification for com- munion,— and if this principle be so acted upoii by^^ the different denominationa of christian^as thM a certificate of membership may be held as'ft sufficient certificate of Christianity, or of a consistent christian profession,— the t -ing is done. There might then be a universaliiy of occadonal intercommimion,— the testimonial of an independent chiorch satisfy- ing the episcopalian or presbyterian, lu^d that of the episcopalian or presbytei<^an the iiidependent. There is no need for more; cmd less, it Is obvious, will not do.-^ for tiie time when, l^ all christian denominations, true Christianity wUl be refjuired as a term of communion,— and when too it jsi^ be the onl^ term that w required ! 1^ '•It will be obvious to the reader,— an|,^th the observation I must come to a close,— tn^; in this there is nothing in the remotest degree ixinynfiistent mth cmscientiousness, or involving the slightest com- promise of principle. I am not at all arguing for the breaking up of the distinctions between episcopalians. /- L% ■' \ UNION OF CHURCHES. 363 l(i presbyteriaais, and independents, or for their amalga* mation . into one body. It is quite manifest, that, retaining respectively their conscientiousness, this can never be. The systems cannot, from their v^y nature, be amalgamated. While there are .conscien- tious episcopalians and presbyterians, there must be an episcopalian and o, preshjterim iknomination; and while there are conscientious independents, there must be an independent denominaiibn ; it being impos- sible that the same church can be governed upon all the three models; Let them remain as they arej— though neither of them deaf to arg»ment, but each with an open ear and an open mind to the reasonings of ^e other. Let each manage their own chte;ches in their own way. But let them, at the same. tiine, so act .upon the principle of communion just laid down, as that, confiding in each pthes's practical attention to that principle, they may deceive one another, as Christ hath received them all, to th6 glory of God.' The more thoroughly c/- , ■*•*:' i • ^364 • * %■ *aU tU»t thoy hold in coiB^on attd value in common, ■^ and so present a united front to the common enemy, v?|ipt'— striving, by combined fexertion, in 'the good fight 1 of faith,'— or by such exertions as, althongh distinct, are yet all carried on in the same spirit, and bearing on the same end, 'Ephraim neither envj-ing Jndah, n(^ Judah vexing Ephraim,'— and the one end to bi%g an outcast world into subjection to Christ:^, in^ proportion as thesi desirable objects w» real- ized; may we anticipate the near arrivalS^^. that hagpy period in theworld's jiistorj-,— predicted and prolmsed^ in the divine word,— ^heii *m«*^ shall be bftsed in Jesus,, and all nations shall call him blessed,'— w^en tfeere shall be 'one Lord, %nd his name one.'^w^Sfethe divine assurance, con#med by the divine oatil shall be^Yerified— f As subely ■^9|.- ■w AS I OIXJBY ■ • N'ujin • 341—345 HE Bi^gra 8HAI4 BE ntLED Wif H THE viik. 21 ■ Y - ,■■■■■. % TiM^ 2fl. - • EBsays ^^ Ch"ritftjian"nion *'»-Ea»ay VL, pp. I havp iii^ episco- Uof the and Uitf ;er, in a lirtdual iretbren. bout in- ►ractices" iC of the ic might ' fcUow- iborty to lontain a 'V i ^-