t " ' ■' '■■-.■

•

... ,. , •■ .. ^_ ' , . .

• .>

m ' *" - . " ■ . .

' " * *. • . ^ . • ■ ■ • .

a t "

^ ■ r ' W^ -

'^-^1. - • ".■.■■-■.: . ■ . •

«(

'■ ^ ' • , -. ■ ■

.. ■ - . ' • ;.v.

' • . ' • * ' * ,

Ih' - . - •

■.'•'■/ . • -^ / .,, _ ' 'fr' -

• * " ' .■ ' , p

r*- . o ,

fV ' °

«^

•

' * • ^

*"'' . , • ■ #■

' - " • '

■ ' ,

• . ' - '*'■-. "^'

L "

* „ " ' , '^ -1

« ■•!'■■

(, , . . „ ■ „ • . .

*r ^

t ■ " ■ "• ,

■» * -

■ , « ■ - . • ■'

, ^ • r

o » *

*■ , " " • ' ' ' ■

"»

... ' ■ ■ ;" ^ .. ■ .. . ' : '

■ 'l - ** ■

.-■^ I. ■ ' .

■ , ' <i

. ■ *

■ . J • «■

( ■ • , ■ •

»■ H- " - ■

- ■ ' . .' )

8 , ■

. «» • ■ ■ .

' '" ■ ■ .." . •■■ ■ - "■ *

V ■# '" . . " . \ ■■ .

V, . ;■ .'

■■■.'.'?.' ^ . ' . «s< '■■ •

% '. . _, ,

" ' ■■ -» ♦■■ ' J

,■-•''.,. ■ - <

*, ' * ' Ji

■■ ^ • ■ ,., ," ' . V , m .

" fli

... , • s'

•

«*

• * ,-- ^ " ■

■ '

•

»* .- , ..^

.'f

I - ' ■ »

.. ' ' ■ ■ "

J-

ClHM
Microficfie
Series
(iMlonQgraphs)

<-'l

•r*

^^^:

i-'frr^ "2.

Collection de

(mdnographies)

. M'

■ •&><>'

Canadian Inttitut* for Hiatorical MicroraprbducUbna / Inititut Canadian da microraproductiona hiatoHquaa

r^,

,"' . ■■',

C«

■>.lfc

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)

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

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%)/

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

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.'.'." '' '■■;"?■• ■■■

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

MKROCOpr MSOUrriON tfST CHART

(ANSI and ISO tEST CHART Mo. 2)

%*'

J^^

/APPLIED IN/HGE Ind

BT t653.<Cast Main Street
'.S Rochester,

-(716)
(716)

New York 14609 USA
4«2 - 0300 - Phone
2|B8 - »989 - Fax

) ■

*^.,

. ■*■

i...>'

.;.s-.,v-' ^-

•^^nK ^

'- ■ '"M

' ■- ■, ' ■ •

»■,

,♦»

-.i.--

-'■'.

. •'

. 1 '

.'■"-.■■> . '■

*,,"'■■■

" \

•

SS^

-.'

t-'~

-.'y>~ . '

w-?^ 4;

9^^"

: )

CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY

THE CHURCH POLITY

V ^" - ■ . ■ ■ '. ■■ " -

OF TOE

■ '-■-■■ ■ ■ ' V ■ .'. ' ' ''■'■'

NEW TESTAMENT.

■ ■ ' '■ '
. ■ ■ ■ . *\ '

■'"*'.■ ■ .7

.■■■'■ - ■■!-.
" ■ ■ - . .■>■,'

■■■.■ ■ " ■%' ■■. - ■

■.■■ ■" ■ :• \- " •' / '::i-.

f^:...„:.l::^:-.i,:-..

■ , i

^'^^.*.*^ c

■^.

■4V <

'>' .'.

CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY

IN 0ONTRADl8TINCtI0N tO

EPISCOPACY AND PRESBYTERUNISM :

THE CHURea POLITY

OP TUC

NEW TESTAMENT.

■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... ■>■ ■.,:•■/".■■

TORONTO

t r. I N

TED AT THE OLOBE

STEAM JgB PUESS..

25 K

ING STREET WEST.

'9S'^

£.;

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- . ■■ '■:.-'■■ ■ -' ■ ■■■"■' ' "'. -'■ ■

'♦*» *

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

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-

-.■s,.

DEDIGATOBY PREFACE.

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

--■;— ^rf*- -'^

-i"?5C™w

DEDICATORY PREFACE.

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*

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.

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-

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.

>• ■■ ^

J-

• : ^ I

. ■ 1 ■

.:.,-. -■,•■■

■ '• ' ■

• ■■ ■ 1

'■' . ■ ^- ■ ^'■' ■■■■^

< ■

• ■ ' \. -fi ■ •_''■■

■ ■ , ■ »

• %■

■ "-^:

■'■■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

■'-■S^:!/" -.v-*«:rk- '^■f

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

CONTENTS.

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

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

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-«>« ,

■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^<iught to be, always in harnion
they been s6 in the present instance,, tlie following
attempt at a condensed view of the ^ew Ti6stf^,ment
constitiiticni of churches of Christ would not tiave
beejti so long delayed. I havg for many years Iteen
ur^ed to the task by my brethren ; have all the irhile
/been strongly impressed myself with the impbrtance
of such a desideratum being supplied ; and havAmade,
I fear, not a few promises, which have lain unfuMlled.
Ever, as something else has come in my way, ha^tlio
work been deferred. And now that I set aboutit, it
is still more from a sense of duty, seconded by\lhe
urgency of others, than from any change of inclma-
tion, which would decidedly lead me in another
direction. — ^Let not the reader mistake me, as if this
disinclination arose from any misgiving in my mind
as to the vali^ty of my g r ound on the subjecta I

INTRODUCTORY 0B8ERVATI0N«.

am about to discuss. Without entering into any
egotistical statement of the causes, I shall satisfy
myself with saying that this is far from being one of
them. I am conscious of no such misgiving. There
may not be — ^it is not to be expected that there
sh6uld be— the same amount and the same clearness
of evidence on every \Himt ; — but, with regard to all
that is essential in the constitution, offices, and dis-
cipline of the churches, 1 am. satisfied that in the New
Testament alone there is quit^ Jjlflifficiency of proof,
in facts and precepts combineil^*ior the conviction of
any understanding, actuate(J"'by aif ordinary measure
of simplicity and candour.

In what I have thus stated, there are two things 1
wish to be noticefl. — 1. I have said there is a suffi-
ciency of proof " in fhe New Testament alone." I
ai^quite aware, to what an extent appeal has been
inme by the abettors of different systems to the
history of the church in the period iinmediately sj '
sequent to the apostolic : — n(|L am I dispose
undervalue this line of argum^It, in support
Qwn views, when regarded simply as corroborat
iSe deductions from the sacred record itself. I waive
&ver, for two reasons -.—First, because my
ll^revij^y and condensation; and secondly,
l^Wi^^^ tc|.maintain the impression on
thaitjthere is wo «€crf for going
Iw Test^plut ;— an impression which
is, inv^^ftbl^perhaps, in V)me degree or other, en-
feebled, and a suspicion introduced of our being
ourselves somewhat doubtful on the point, when we
do betake ourselves to the_ corroboration^ of <<feccle8i-
astical history. — At all ev^ts, it iJl'my determination

ri,

.»

not to go, for any of my arguments, out of the 3ible.

'*%*^ r*™*^''

i~T'.

)DUCTOIlY OBHEKVATIONM.

Hnd there ; and what I ciiunot
there 4 Hhall seek nowhere else. Were I ever bo
earned* in <intiquity, I shall reniHt every inducement
to make U8e of hucIi materialH in the preHent treatine ;
of which the one and only purpoHc in, to find and to
hIiow, in regard to the Hubject of it—" what Haith the
fccripture." — SubHecjuontly to tlie latest date of the
inspired canon of tlie New Testament, \thcre is little
or nothing sure. The tide of innovation, from the
many tainted fountains of " the Ihkip of this present
world" and the self-coneeit of human wistlom, set in
so very early, that, were we left to gather our know-
ledge of the constitution and observances of the
apostolic churches £i"om the existing documents of
any period after thci close of the apostolic age, it
would be a fruitless attempt to make out any thing
certain, any thing consistent. My motto, therefore
is,— and,I shall keep myself stenily to it, — The bdjle,

THE BIBLE ALONE.* .

p]t^r|^thing in abort pertaining to tbjs appeal '' (tho appeal to
ancient fiithers) " is obscure, uncertain, drsputublo, and actually
disputed,— to sucb a degree, tbateven those who are not able to reati
the original authors, maj yet be perfectly competent to perceive how.,
unstable a fouudation they furnish. They can perceive that the nuw •
of Christians arc called on to believe and to do what is essential tp
Christianity , in implicit reliance on the reports of their respective
pastors, as to what certain d«ep theological antiquarians have reporUnl
to Vmn, respecting the reports given by certain ancient fathers of tjiif
reports current in their times, concerning apostolical usages and insti-
tutions !" Archbishop Whately, " Kingdom of Christ delineated," Ac.,
p. 137.—'* When Haller was done, (Ecolampadius entered the lists,
and pfesseil Dr. Esk so closely, that he whs reduced to the necessity
of appealing to the mere usage of the church. " Usage,'' replied
(Ecolampadius, " depends entirely for its force, in our Switzerland, on
its consistency with the constitution. NoW, in matters of faith, tuk
Bini,R IS TUB coxafrruTiON."— Dr. Merle D'Aubignd's Hist of the

Reform , Book XL, Sec. XIII. Account o{^ Disputation at Baden, 152(>.

-#i.

■=■•£

■m^f

\ > V " ( >

' ♦

'""•-^^

•^ 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,<? fajthful as Moses :
— " who was faithful to Him that appointed him, as
also Moses was faithful in all his house :"—" Moses

verily was faithful in all his house^ as a servant, -

but Christ as a Son over his own house." Heb.
iii. 2, 5, 6.— In this mode of reasoning, it is, I
think, forgotten, that faithfulness beai-s direct relation
to a commissim ; so that, if the commission be exe-

"«~

INTRODtJCTOBY 03SEBVATI0NS.

- M-

■ ■#■
- ■ f!

■ w

■ I

u, as

' i

[oses

"§

Heb.
is, I

nfinn

t'*

exe-

ciited to the full extent of its different charges,
.according l;o the intention of Him from whose
authority it emanates, it is executed /with faithful-'
ness ; and there would be a violation of faithfulness,

, w#pe the agent intrusted with the commission to go
6eyo?irf its limits; as well as were he to fall short of
them. The <juestion, therefore, would evidently re-
main to be asked and answered^ — ^What, in this
department, was the extent of Christ's mediatbrial
commission? As the divinely appointed prophet
and king of his Church, wcui it a part of his commiti-
sion to frame and to reveal such a constitution ?— to
ordain, definitely j|i|d permanently, the offices and
the laws of his spiritual kingt^oitt^ We assume, as a
point beyond question, — ^which it would be blasphemy
to dispute, — that whatever was included in his com-
mission has been faithfully done. "We are thus,
therefore, brought at once to the question oi fcwt:
Does the New Testament actually contain what wo
ard^n quest of— a clearly defined model of church
government, — or does it not ? While I am far from
questioning the validity sSnd conclusiveness of many
of those arguments by which the improbability has
been maintained of the absence of all specific instruc-
tions on a subject so manifestly important, and which
it would be so hazardous to leave to the various and
ever-shifting dictates of human discretion ;— yet
nothing can be plainer, than that to this question of

fojd we must ultimately come. So that all sucli
arguments are, to a great extent, useless either way.
Let them be ever so specious, and apparently 'sottnd
and incontrovertible, — ^yet if they cannot be sustained
and borne out by an appeal to fact,— if, after having,
with the force of seeming demonstration, proved the

PTTR

iODUCTORY qiSERVATIONS.

probability, we fail in the attempt to «liow its reali-
zation,— our reasonings, liow plausible soever, .are
discovered to have involved a fa^al fallacy:— and if.
on the other hand, we can demonstrate the existence
6t the thing required ;— if we succeed m showing,
that in the New Testament there are really to be
found sufficiently clear aiid definite intimations, by
precept and example, of the character and consti-
tution of christian churches ;— such demonstration
supersedes of course the entire argument of previous
probability. Thus the proof of probabiUty is of no
avail, if Ave cannot make good the fact ; and when wd
have made good the fact, such proof ceases to be of
any material use —I prefer, therefore, coming at once
to the inquiry, wJiether the Neic Tesfament does or does
not contain such explicit statements as ive require.

It is of great consequence, however, that we should
bear in mind the necessity and the duty of taking
divine instructions in the fonn and manner in which
it has pleased God to give them.— It is a character-
istic of the divine word in general, that neither tiiiths
nor precepts come before us'there in systematic order.
There is norformal digest or classification, of either
doctrines or duties. For the wisest reasons, his
people are left to gather both from a carefi\l perfisal
of the entire document, and comparison of its several
parts. It belongs to us, not to dispute the propriety
of the method of instruetion ; but, humbly and confi-
dently assuming it, to " seek, that we may 4ind."
Had 'there been a formally arranged system, we
^ should all have been in danger of using it in the
spirit of favouritism ; of having our pet portions of
it, and neglecting the rest. When we have to gather
truth and duty from a comparison of historical inci-

*■ r<

. I-

*-.^

■;>'

.i'j.

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

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,

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

■f

:1f

.4--^.—
M''^

;■*>

INTRODUCTORY Od»ERVATION8.

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

■*^

^ 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...

'"','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'

. \-

nmiODUCTOBY OBSERVATIONS.

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

.■ ^-

INTRODUCTORY OBSERYATIOMS.

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. '

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

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.

INTHODUCTOUY OlWEBVATIONB.

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.

>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

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 <j(xnh,i\\*i Mm of chavitij
— and the wmhiufj (/ the diHcipfVff' feet. — On no one of
these will it be necessary to dwell long; -

1. The jtf/'»/, — the vommmity o/' t/mxl^, — may be
admitted to have most in it of plausibility. But it',,
will not bear examination. Its existence, even in the
first church at Jerusalem, we more than doubt ; and
its obligation on other churches, and in after times, -
we distinctly deny. By a community of goods is to
be understood — a universal renunciation of personal
property, and the throwing of all that belonged to
individuals into a common stock. Now, respecting
this supposed state of things, observe — FtrMf :—T!he
phrase in Acts ii. 44, "and had all things common,"
may fairly be considered as of equivalent meaning^
with that in chap, iv., 32, "Neither said any <f them
that mi^ht of the things lie possessed was his own, hut
they had aU things common." In the latter, indeed,
of the two passages, V)oth the phrases occur together,
and the one is explanatory of the other. The import
will thus be, that, in the 'pecoliar circumstances in
wh i ch t h e bel i evers were t h en placed, such was the — -

INTRODUCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

" ^

■■%.;X.

prevaloucti of mutual love and generous sympathy,
that all, instead of selfish approprfation of what be-
longed to them, held their properly aff/t^comtnon (jood —
"ready to distribute, willing to couknunicate,"— each
considering it as "non sibi sed'toti."* — Secondly : As

T to the sale of " lands and houses" by their proprie-
tots, converting them into i^noney for the purposes of
charitabk distiibution ; in whatever extent the words

,. -^" as many as were possessors of lands or houses sold
them, and brought the prices of the things that were
sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet"— are
to be understood as intimating the practice to have
prevailed,— we have the clearest evidence that it was
an entirely volimtary and spontaneous act, free to all,
but obligatory on none. The proof of this is as deci-
sive as proofcan be, in the words of the apostle Peter
to the deceitful Ananias — chap. v. 4, " Whiles it re-
mained, was it not thine own ? and after it was sold,
was it not in thine owm power?" It necessarily follows,
that, even had there been such a community of goods
as is generally imagined, it was the result, not of any
divine precept or binding institute, but a free-will
agraement, dictated by the warm and generous emo-
tions and iij^pulses of Ohristitm aftection.— But that
there really was no such thing, we appeal lor further
evidence— r/(m% To the statement of chap. vi. 1,
" And in those days, when the number of the disciples
was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the
Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows
tvere neglected in the daily minietration" — It is manifest,
that^ 9^ the hypothesis of an absbliite community of

* "Not for himself bjit ft* the cotnmHnity f'-^ncdominodating Uiis
portion of the poofs liny. , ■ ' - ;- :

■ft*.

^4-

♦<5

) sympatliy,
of what be-
tmwn fjixxi—
5ate,"— each
Secondly : Ah
leir proprie-
purposeH of
at the words
' houses sold
^ that were
j' feet"— are
bice to have
) that it was
t, free to all,
is is as deci-
postle Peter
Vliiles it re-
it was sold,
irily follows,
ity of goods
;,not of any

a free-will
lerous emo-
i.— But that
I lor further

chap. vi. 1,
;he disciples
ring of the
heir widows
is manifest,
mmunity of

ininpdating this

INTRODUCTOBY 0BSERTATI0N8. 88

goods, the " daily ministration" must have l)con a;
distribution, day by day, not to the needy iiiuoiigst
the thousands of converts composing the church, but
to all those thousands together, as rendered, by the
universal cession of their property to the common
fund, alike needy ! — a distribution to the whole mul-
titude of the members of their daily pittance of money,
or their daily ration of provision !— Now such a thing
is in itself inconceivable,— we tuight almost say
impracticable ; and the mention thus made of the
neglect of the Grecian widows, shows with sufficient
clearness, to what descriptions of persons the dis-
tribution did, in point of fact, extend.— ^A large fund
was then required, oh account ol the circumstances
of loss and destitution to which the believers were
exposed by their profession of the gospel. — Foftrthhf :
All the exhortations subsequently addressed, in the
apostolic Epistles, to the churches of Christ, make it
manifest that, if siuch a state of things did exist in the
mother church at Jerusalem, it was not intended as a
permanent divine institute ; for in point of fact, it did
not exist elsewhere, br in churches subsequently
formed-'-^The distinction between the rich and the
po6r pervades these inspired documents ; appropriate
exhortations being addressed to each : a distinction,
which the supposition of a community of goods at
once destroys. Quotations on such a point would be
superfluous. The distinction is not merely assumed,
but in many instances strongly marked. And this is
true of Jerusalem,, as well as of other places. "We
find Paul receiving contributions from the Gentilei
churches for " the pow saints'' who wiere there, as a
Conciliatory expression of tlieir*ympathy in a period
of prevailing destitution :— and on the Hehrew

■'&^

•A.

INtBODUCTORY OB8EKVATI0N8.

christiftiis as well as others he lays the injunction—
" To do good and to communicate forget not, for with
such sacrifices God is well pleased." Rom. Xv. 26.
Heb. xiii. 16.— Fifthly :— Such a ^tate of things as a
proper community of goods supposes, would have laid
the gospel«open to objections of no fanciful or trivial
kind. Jiiid snch** cessio boiwt' urn" been obligatory
on all who embraced the profession of the faith and
joined the community of the faithful, it would infalli-
bly, and to an incalculable extent, have been produc-
tive, not only oi difficulties and obstacles in the way
of such profession and such union, but of perplexities
the most embaiTassing in regard to the use and
•disposal of property, and the rights and obligations,
domestic, civil, and mercantile, which the laws sLnd
usages of different countries had associated with it :
an mterfereuce with these, put of all harmony with
the general character of evangelical institutes.—
SixtJdy : It may be remarked, that such a commjmily
of goods, by reducing all the members of the church
to equality, would have, annihilated one of thee tests
of principle. It would have thrown the whole trial
of its sincerity and force upon the /j'.s« professions^
upon the transition of the sinner from tlie w^rld tp
the church. But the continued existence of difierent
se($ular conditions amongst the members of christian
churches, is no less manifest in point of fact on the
very face of the record, than it is beneficial in its
operation ; as at once giving scope for the exercise of
mutual love, and affording a touchstone of its sincerity,
a gauge of its amount, and a means of its promotion.
There is no sufficient evidence, then, of a com-
munity of goods having existed even in the church of
Jerusalem, but probabilities amounting almost to

r
J-

^:y

)IJtJCTORY OBSERVATIONS.

certainty against it ; and there is more than sufficient
evidence that it was not obligatory, t^nd th9.t it had
place nowhere else. ^^

2. The Kiss of Charity. — With no man of ordinary
powers of thought, and of any candour at all, will it
be necessary to spend much time or argument on this
point.— It ia quite truGj that the Apostle Paul says to
the believers at Borne — Bom. xvi. 16, " Salute one
another with alioly kiss ;'■ and that he uses the same
terms to the church of Corinth— 1 Cor. xvi. 20 j 2
Cor. xiii. 12, and to the Thessalonians— 1 Thes. v. 26.
It is true too, that Peter gives a Simil^ir injunction, in
different terms — 1 Pet. v. 14, " Greet ye one another
with a kiss of charity ;" that is, of love.

Such is the foundation pf what some have been
pleased to dignify with the title of ihe ordinance (^
sahdatioUy and have insisted on its being obligatory
wngregationaUy — in the public assemblies of th6
church. — Observe, the'nj concerning it, — the very
connexion in which the words occur, in the first,
for example, of the passages cited, should have been
enough to preclude the possibility of so strange a
conclusion. The idea of an ordinance involves that of
contimtance or permanence. But the injunction stands
in the midst of a number of salutations which he
desires to be offered to different individuals, whom he
names. Did he mean by these, then, thdt the church
were to continue, statedly and permanently, in the
practice of saluting Aquilas and Priscilla, Epenetus,
Mary, Antlronicus and Junias, Tryphena and Try-
phosa, and all the rest of them ? I need not answer
the question. Every person of common sense
instantly sees and feels the sheer absurdity of such a
supposition. And yet, there is just the same amount

INTRODUCTORY OBSERTATIONS.

of reason for assigning permanence to these, q,nd
exalting them into stated obse^jsrances during the lives
of the individuals, as there is for doing this in regard
to the mutual Sanitation of one another conjoined, in
general terms, upon the brethren.— Supposp I were to
allege the apostle's meaning to be, that on their
receiving his letter, and reading the assurances of his
love for them, they should, in the way mentioned,
express their mutual affection to each other, and
their united attachmejit to himself; cpuld any one
prove that he meant more ? Would not such inter-
pretation make this injunction^of a piece with the
others?— But-- ' . "*

2. There is no sufficient evidence of even so much
as this being intended,— this mutual salutation when
the epistle Was read in public :— for there is no
evidence oi puUidty being infemled at all— The pre-
vaffing mode of friendly salutation varies in different
countries, an^ at different times. There and then, it
was a kiss on the cheek. The christians would have
occasion to use it to one another in their daily inter-
course, and at specif times of meeting; as, in all
cases in which there is jftothing inconsistent with pro-
priety, or of injuridus^iendency, it is custom that
must regulate such^ matters among christians as
amdftg others, Ought the apostles, then, to be un-
derstood as meaning more,— or can any proof be
adduced that they did mean more, than that chris*
tians, in their salutations of each other, should bear
in mind their character and profession ;»that their
reciprocal salutation should be " a hdyMss" and a
" kiss of lave" Th^ i^, that it should not be the
expression of mere ordinary courtesy or even of mere
ordinary friendship, but that, " as becometh saints"

INTRODUCTOBY OBSERVATIONS.

ese, q,tid
the lives

n regard

• V

oined, in

]

[were to .

on their

;es of his

mtioned,

her, and

any one
ch inter-

with the

so much

ion when

.■^X

re is no

The pre-
different

''m

[I then, it
nld have

ily inter-
is, in all

withpro-
tom that

■

)tians as

1
i,

o be un-

proof be
lat chris'

^«

>uld bear

bat their

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 .

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

INTRODUCTOBY OBSERVATIONS.

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' .

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

1 -'4

^ w]
lo

' is

81!

'■ " , <

:Ch

:-:7

* CO

■■.:/:

. th

,w«

i CO

' "' ■

■ \ca

„,-.,.: .^,.

'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

' • . ' 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

INTBODtJCTOR^ OBSERVATIONS.

-i

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

- *■

'.^ '. ■ ■

■•

sv^

.■w,

\\ "^~

-^.

"^v.

-•"

i'.#

;;>

■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 servi<fe.in which the " inner man had
. no part. But still, under ihe former dispensation
there was a vastly larger amount of extemahty than
thbre is under the latter. It was a typical ^d pre-

■ paratery dispensation ; and the observ^e of it^
^ , typical institutes constituted its jrescnbed worship.
-U^wm thus characteristica%,<^ough bf no means

eichisively or essentially, carnal. The outward t^e
had a spiritual meaning ; and to the really acceptable
observance of the insU l ution in which it was wr a pped

■ ' ■' ' ' *

GENERAL CHARACTEMSTIC8,

that a
under
>mi(!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

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

■^:

■ ■ '■

^is

THE^EW TESTAMENT CHURCH.

1 ial But tlie fewneiw

.„„e», both f ""■;"' ^,tt™ a Btriking coatra-*

.. worldly sananMJ-' j,^;^ diBtinetivo

2. tJNivm.«ALm.-I 'l<v not ly ^ ^^^^^^j

poiufof contrast "'"■'"^ ""S^* eto, «''clurive, ao
that none *«'« f^°'f '''^'t j^l Jt waa »ot ao.

Ood'a Honae *a» » '''"'"f "' Lrroonding idolaters

Proaelytea from """"f *^ ^'" ^„, the.Di'rine
were more than welcome on tt,e pa ^^^^

Lawgiver, to « Plff ^"^wn I ^itoosaes for the ,:
and ha<l that people, so^'l"^," ',. , acted in con-

>"- ^-^ ^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

(;'

:%■

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.

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 <jharacter of its worship fits
it for such universality. Its temple is not on earth,
but in Heaven; and Heaven bears the same rela-
tion to all the earth alike. Over tli^ whole earth, by
the spiritual subjects of the new clispensation, "all
one in Christ Jesus," the God of salvation may be
worshipped "in spirit and in truth,"— all turning
their eyes and their hearts to the temple above,
Where "Christ sitteth at the right hand of God."
—And while the spirituality of the new economy
fits it for being universal, there is another of its

■ ^

■;<

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHtJBCH.

- ■ "

attributes which enters also into this adaptation :--

I niean— . . . •

3. SiMPUCiTY-This is so appropnate *? a spir-
itual system, that whenever we hear of spmtuality,
we are prepared to find simpHcity. And his quahty
accordingly, strikingly pervades the constitution and
worship of the church of Christ, as these are brought
before us in the New Testament scriptures ; and in
proportion as, in after times, there has been a depar-
iiire; in any section of the christian church, from their
original simpUcity. there wUl be found to have been
a corresponding departure fiom spirituality. ^ iliere
is a beautifuUy consistent harmony between the sim-
plicity of the Saviour's personal appearance on earth,
together with the whole manner of his " finishmg the
work given him to do," and the simphcity of the
constitution and ordinances of his spiritual kingdom.
In his assumption of our nature, and in his character
and doings while in our/worid, all ^va^'divme sublimity ;
but all, at tiie same ti|pe, was ^inii^e^-fend lowly :—

^ ■'*';■■ V ■■ ■ ' ■t-^
;. «'IsoeavthIs;,b(pauty shonelnhlmr* ^y^
• To tlruw riie carnal eye."

There was every tiling to disappoint the cherished
anticipations of the worldly mind; everj' thing to
"stain the pride of human glory," and to show the
difference, in the estimate of real grandeur, between
the mind of man and the mind of God. The stable
of Bethlehem was the place really befitting tiie incar-
nati6n of Deity ; not only as being appropriate to the
particular purpose for which onr nature was assumed,
but also as impressing tiie lesson of the nothingness
of all the distinctions of earthly condition, when,
measured by the infinitude of tKe Godhead:' From

WHAT 18 A CHUBCH OF CHRIST?

on :—

. spir-
iiality,
iiality,
>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^^

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,^^ <fcc.— p. 78. Note.

fin the preceding verse— verse 40— it is called a dvdrpotptfi or
concourse ; while the word iKx\rt6ia, which, in the 4lBt verse, is

WHAT 18 A CHURCH OP CHBIST?

'^'.

■%

The only inquiry of any real consequeiice oi
, present subject, iBy—4nwhat sense, <w senses, the,,
j^is lised in the Neto Testament scriptures. It ill
a '\is|aste and superfluity of critical eruditioi
d^ not bear upon this point. It is of littl(
learnedly to show what the word ma^ mean, wl
haw it in our power, from the usage of the wri j
demonstrate, . wj^_all simplicity and conclusijireness,
what it does V^^H/k.

The word, t|||H|p the New Testament,/
used (as on all occasions it is,^and they are
qiient, except the one noticed above) with riffetence
to social Christianity,— hfiBttvo signification^,4"a more
comprehensive and a more limited :—

1. In its more comprehensive acceptatlc
notes the whole body o/thefaithfid,--the entin
" Israel of God.^^^Oi this sense of it, we hfve exam-
ples in— Heb. xii. 23; " Ye are come-
churchqftJie^first-born^hich. are written (oi
in heaven:"* — on which passage it may b^ noticed
that, as distinguished from the "spirits of just men
made perfect " subsequently mentioned, the designa-
tion propably means the aggregate body of beUevers

applied to it, is used -also in the 39th for the duly convened and
constituted public court, at which causes between plaintiff and
defendant were tried,— ij' rj7 evvojuo) iuHXt/dia—" not,^' sayaDr.
Bloomfield, " a lawful assembly," but " tte regular assembly." By
Tp xvpici it is intimated that the present assembly was not such."

* I have not, witl» our Snglish translators, taken the itavriyvpet and
iKx\rj6ia together — "the general ashemMy anct church of ihe flrst-
born;" because by some critics of eminence a different punctuation
is preferred, according to which the former of the two words is made
to belong to the preceding clause, and connected with the "angels."
The discussion of the claims of each arrangement to the preference is
irrelevant to my present object.

;62 , THE miEW ^tJ^D&rr chdbch. . ^

%n earth ; who. are *' enrolled m heaven," but are not
yet themselves, settled tl^ere j^Eph. ui. 21. "IJntp
riim, be glory , in the 'Church, by^ Chrj^t. Jesiis,
tjiroiighout all ages, .world without end:"'— Eph. v..
23 and 25. ■ "The husbjmd is the head pf- the wife,
even as Christis the Heffd^of tke Church :"^**'thnat
loved the Church, and gave hiMself for jt, that he
qiight sanctify and cleanse it b;^ the washinig of
waitfer, througM the word ; that he might present it to
himself a glormis Church, liot having spot X)r wriidde,
01* any such thing, 'but tiiat it shoul^ be h^ly and
without blemish :"— and, in^ similar connection, Eph.
i. 22,^3, "A^dgave him' to be Head, over all thingSj^
to the Qi,urclk^%^ich is his body, th^l fuhiess of Him
who fiUefh an, in 'aU :"-^CoL i. 18,' "And He is the
idiead of the ' -body, the Church."— In these*^ latter
.passages,- the 0/wrc^ evidently signifies ther, entire^
community of the redeemed, in heaven as well as on
earth; corresponding to another designation,^ else-
where applied to it by the same Writer, — " the whole,
family in heayen and earth" — fiph. 'iii. IS.*" This
fimuly, this community, though for the time divided
in locality, is oab in spirit, and is destined'toa union,
in "the better countigreven the heave^y,!.' perfect,
blessed, and etemah

* Although it ig-;ar-bt61e truth, that angels are to be united with
redeenjed men, forming one holy and happy community under Christ
common Head ; yet t see not the propriety of interpretiag
this passage'^ if the fomily in Heaved meant the angels, and the
ffunily on' earth God's people amongst m$n ; seeing that, from the
time when "righteous Abel " left the earthy the hiiman family of Grod,
consisting of all "washed and sanctifi6d^ and justiiedV sinners of
mankind, has been part in hea,ven and pai^t oa earth. By the advo-
cates of an intermediate Hades, this of coune will be questioned : —
but ttie present is not the place to discuss the point witlt.them.

■^■-

WHAT IS A CHURCH OF CHRIST ?•

2. The more limit^5^ aqcep^ thck Wbrd is, ai

the sajfie "time,.by' much the more frequent in itp
oeciirr6nce. lii this acceptation j it denotes a society -
of bdievers in anijf jt^fctce,' acknowledging one another
in that character, state?41y meeting- together on his
own day, ih the name'of Je^tis, for the worship of
God, and for the .obselrance of his ordinances; in
6rder to their own spiritual edification, atn^l the pro-
> 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<jh at Sardis, '
the churct at Philadelphia, and the church at Laodi-
cea, as the seven churches of the lesser Asia, -Rev. i. .
4 anfdll: — -and, still more generally, T^e .read of

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. ,

"the churches," and "all the churdies," and "all
churches of the saints ;" where, evidently, societies of
the same description, plj^nted and constituted on the
same principles, wherever the gospel 'came and
made converts, are intended,— Acts xvi. 4, 5;^dm.
xvi. 4 ; 1 Gor. vii. 17 ; 1 Cor. xiy. 32 ; 1 Gor. xi. le^a
Cor. XL 28. J

So far as I am aware, no phta,seology can be prb-
-duced from the New Testament, corresponding to
that in common. use with us, (so common, indeed,
that, from the power of habit, we are in danger of
.forgetting its unsGriptural character)— the church of
' England, the church of Ireland, the church of Scot-
land, the Dutch church, the Oallican church. Had
matters gone on as they began, we should have
had, in conformity with the unvarying phTaseplogy
of the New Testament, the churches of England, the
churches of Ireland, the churches of Scotland, the
> 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, <feci

All this is plain. * To the simplest reader of the
nairatives and epistles of .the New Testameflt, there
could be Qo diflSculty iii answering eitker the question,
"What is tlie church ? or .the question, .What is a
church ?— but for the influence of prepossession and
habit. — ^When ihe c/i««r/i is there spoken of, inde-
finitely, it means the collective aggregate of believers
on earth, or of the saved both on earth and in heaven ;

¥''

■

r V

■■'■-■■'■:/<

' i

* .' '

■ a .

■ ■ *■■'■

■ t

;. ■ , ■ ,vv

;

'; .

' •>

\ ^'

'^/

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.

SECTION in:

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

^ \

V:^■

;. »•»

THE NJBW TESTAMENT CHURCH.

ceased at the fulij^ss of time, and all succession in*
nationality having been precluded by the uen c<j>n8ti-
fytion then given <io the church ; there, may be room
for qjiestioning th^ propriety of the distinctive desi^^-
nations-oow;— anji.the more so from the unsettled
indefihiteness witli which they are employed :— the
vmWcc/it^rcA, according to some, meaning " the com-
pany of the baptised," and that/company, after the'
pattern of the Jewish chiu-ch, consisting of " baptized
nations;" — according to others, with a similar com^
preherisiveness, only^t so directly nationtd, all who
profess to hold the qivine authority of the Holy
Scriptures, an4 who, pass under-^e^ommon desig-
nation -pf christians ;t^while according to others still,
in -no ^mall variety, it is interpreted more or less
largely or restrictedly, in: correspondence! with the-
laxity or. the rigi^es^ of their respective j views of -
christian doptrine a^cl christian communion.

In her; nineteenth article,7-how far consistently
with her own ci-ctual constitution khd practice 1 need
^t stop to inquire,— -the Episcopal church of'ilng-
Jand gives the lollowiwg definition :—" The visible
.church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, m
*^'"^ch the pure wor4 of XJod is preached, and the '
rbe duly administered according to Christ's
in a|J those things that of necessity are •
i thb^ same:"— Jf this is' to be understood,
ig, that' whereter there is '^a.congregatioja
of faithful men in which the pure ^oi-d of Gocl is
preached and the ordinances are d^ly administered,"
.—there is a portion of the visible chiirch J there does
noUseem to be much in tlie deiflnition'that is objec-
lionable,— how many soevet of the " congregations ' ■;
ftf the Angl i can Episcopacy, th e t o st, wh e n strictl y

ice

■a

^ ' tJNAUTHORISED USES OF THE WORD CHURCH, '57

"applied, Woiild cut off fifOm the connection with the
. visible church. Had iJie language been— " (7/iMrc/<te»

of Christ are congregdfiom oliaithM men," ^c, it
V would have been more in harmony with New Testa-
^ ment phraseology ; for such, substantially, is ttie

description given by the apostles of those churches

to which any of their epistles are addressed.* Had

-^ .■ " 'i ■■■ ■■■■■' -.'A ■'\'°- ■■■ ' •■.•■:;'■'-■.■■-;.- ■■■■■■

, ■ '• Since this was written^l hti^ve observed the following note by
Archbishop Whately— "Kingdom of Chris^,-' ^c, p'. 116:— "The
visible church is,-' &e. ; but there cab be i(o doubt, I think, that the
more correct version from the Latjn j( the bhtin articles appear to have
been the original, and^.English a translation— in somtffewinstances
a careless Iranslation-rfrom the Litin) would have been "Xvisible
church," &c. The Latin, " Ecclesia Christi visibHis ■'- would indeed

• answer to either phrase, the want of an aWicfe, dfflnite oir indefinite, in
that language, rendering it liable to such ambiguity. But the context
pluinlv shqwa thatthe \vitcr ts jiot Speaking of the universal church,
but-jdrpartlculaiviffiircbcs, such aa " the churches of Jerusalem, Alex-
andria, and Rome.?' ithe %glish translator probably either erred ,
from momentary inattention, or (more likely) underetood by '• Eecle-^'
sia," and by " the church,^', the particular ch-urch whose articles if er6
before hini-the " Church of England.''— So far well. Only his Grace
dipuid have recollected that, upon his own showing, "tte C/t«rdl o
Ein^land " is a species of church for which no prototype is to be fouWL
in the New Testament.. " Generally speaking," says he, " the apostles
appear to have established a distinct church ineaph considerable city,.

' 80 that thepe were several even in a single province, as, lor instance,
in Macedonia, those of Philippi, Thessalonica/Serea, Amphipolis, &c. ;
and the lik6 in the Province of Achaia, awl elsewhere." Ibid., page
105. He elsewhere (page 131) states his/dodviction that " over each
separate church there was appointed fty the apostles a single individual
as a chief governor, underthetitleof"^ii5r«J"(fce.'»j€ssen3W,orie»7ate
from the apostles), or "Bishop," I e: ^pirintendent or overseer:"—'
and he adds—" A church and a DiotiESE s'eem to have been for a con-
siderable tim^ co-extensivo and identical. And each church or
diocese (and -consequently each superintendent) though donnected
A with the rest hy ties of faith' and hope and cha^rity, seems to hate
been perfectly independent as far as regards anV po^er of control."
—The hist observation, tM reader wilt pjerceiveli bears directly on a

future part of our discussion.

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH.

^A^ used the designation the visible churchy I can
imagine ^nly two senses, one or other of which must
have been attached. to it. Here is one pf them. The
visible church might have meant— the aggregate of
these spiritual fellowships, — these "churches of the
saints."— The only other sense in which, in any eonr
sistency with the tenor of their writings, I can suppose
thcvphrase to have been used by them,-— is, as com-
prehending all those whose Christianity was visible
in their character. The visible church yvoxAdi thus be
the universal community of visible christians:— not,
observe, of merely nomiiwl christians, but of christians
whose character accords with their professi(in,— who
♦♦show their faith by their works." When Paul
speaks (^ "all thatj in every place, call upon the
name of Jesus Phiist our Lord, both theirs and ours,"
—and when he prays— " Grace be with all tWn that
love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity !"— heaves'
us his idea of the visible church. And,, accordi^slo
this sense of the designation, there is no such thing^s
in any strict propriety, as an invisible chui-ch ; inas-
much as, of every genuine believer the faith cannot
fail to make itself apparent; so that every one who
belongs to the spiritual church must belong also
to the visible church,— what is spiritual, iu the '*imier
man" making itself :\dsible in the outer man. True
it is, however, that a man may belong to the visible
church who does, not belong to the spiritual. A pro-
fession may be made, and appearances may be
assumed, by which the judgment of man- may "be
deceived; the eye of hiiman perspicacity failing to
detect either the hypocrisy or the self-deception.
And were the designations of visible and invisible,
external a nd mystical, alw a ys und e rstood with a

restriction' to* the differei^ce* between wan'« discern-
ment and Oodls ; — as meaning no mtjro than tl^at'
" the Lord knoweth them that are his," and that of
those ^hom men may pronounce visibly his, there
may be not a few xvhom he sees to he " none of his,*
-they would' express a distincticm which can be
qnestibned by none, and which pervades the bible.
But, seeing the designations have not bible authority,
' and {Mre liable to mischievous abuse, we are safer to
' keep "by the two senses of the word church pointed
/ out in the preceding section ; — a Church of Christ
N signifying '^ a congregation 6f faithful men,"— and
■ ' the Chmx;h of Christ, the. collective body of his
spiritual people^

^11. Is the word c/mrc/<,--— wjiile admitted to mean,

. ii^ many of . its occurren6es, a single congregation,—

ever ^sed to denote an amociationof such congrega-

' tionfty— a number (^ them, in the same locality, con-

.' neded hy a common j/oyer/iwiejjf ?— Our episcopalian

and presbyterian brethren hold the affirmative. Let

us briefly eiamine the question.

It is not with the government, oir system of
official authority in^ the church,^ that we have at
present to- do. An episcopalian, when he coi^tends
for the meaning of tlie word now in question, thinks
of a'number of cbiigregktions in a place as united
ider a diocesan bislioi) ;— while a presbyterian
il^b^ of the* same congregations as under the
supe^iW:endence of a presbj^ery. Our simple in-
quiry; nbw is, whether the sense affixed by botth" to
the vfoxii church — ^namely, of a nmnhcr of congrega-^

tions, in wie oo^, and under\ a common government,
is borne - out by* satisfactory iiistances.^The only

argument, so far ad 1 am aware, by which the affir-

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHUKCH.

mative is maintained, is an indirect one. It is
alleged, that in regard to 86me locaUties, respecting
which the word church is used in the singular, the
number of the disciples was by much too groat to
__admit the supposition of theii* constituting one con-^
gregation only. This has been alleged of difierent
places. We shall take the strongest case. It is that
of Jerusalem. There the pubHeatiofn of the gospel
began. The success was delightfully ^eat. The
terms in wliich the progressive increase of the
church is recorded are very strong. To the hundred
wid twenty disciples before the day of pentecost, there
were added on that day three thousand :— -afterwards
"the Lord added to them daily of the saved :"*-^
even so many as "five thousand men" (evidently
exclusive of the other sex, of whom the number is
not stated) were converted on one occasion :t — subse-
quently still, " the number of the disciples multiplied
in Jerusalem greatly :"~and at a lajer period occurs
the lauguage of James and the elders to Paul—
"Thou seest, brother, how many myriads of JeWS
there are who believe !"--The question ia,—hoivcof^
such multitudes form only a single congregation .^— The
question is a natural and a fair one. In meeting it,
I would not be such a recreant to the claims of can-
dour, as to deny aU difficulty. I am far from thinking

•: AQts ii. 47, " The Lord added to the Churcli daily rcjK daZoMe .
yoov." .

t lam aware that by some the Jiassage here referred to Acts iv,
4,— is interpreted as meaning that, \by the number of converts then
added, the previous aggregate catiie to amount to five thousand.
Candour, however, will not allow me to lessen the diflScuUy of my
case by adopting an interpretation which has always appeared to mi^
unn a tural, and which, to any one wl^o p^j ^ ticipat e s in the joy of hea v en

UNAUTHORISED USES OF THE WORD CHURCH. . 61

the case froc of it :— Hor, at the'same time, dot con-
ceive it indispensable, in sncli a.case, tifoT^ be able
so to explain, as that no difficulty wlm|^verl^all be
left. We shall s<!>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 ?

*.. - ,

-that each of the churches in Judea means a single

,««

. 9'

• .1 ..\ A

^l^" -_ ;'

*■

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

. 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 _%*<__ ■

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<B outset, and, since no iii'timation is given, even to
the close of the narrative, of any change in the mean-
ing of the word, important |,s that change would have
been, we must deny the right to suppose ^xich. a
change,— and thfe more so, that this use of the word
^tjEurch is in agreemeht witlf its meaning in all other
places.— The fact, then, standing thus, how stands
the argument ? We have the fact on inspired record,

that "the multitudae of the disciples" met together :

we have, in opposition to this, the affirmation of our
presbyterian brethren that their so meeting was im-
possible." Our brethren s&j, the j could not: —the
inspired historian says they did. Here, then, is a
balance of difficulties. , Suppose we grant that to' us
there is*difficulty in the supposition of numbers so
large coniing together in one stated assembly ;— the >
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 >_- '^ ■■ .

- ■

f .

" tf

■» t

-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;.>»>"-

-. ■ %:

► 1

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-

l.\ I

*'f.

'Fir*

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^^^

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<som!es; a diocesan* 6««Aop. And then it ^

* • fVUoWs, tl^ftt^c^' thelre i? a^^gel 'to each of the ' •

* other 6ix chlfrfches in Asia, each of these, churches '
JTj mu^t neegl^Mye heen q^, diocese too, with a.dioceaan

■ J bishop ov^ the * jnlerior clergy of its more- or less

*' ' njliHiero;us congregatjions. So that there is nothing

^ ^" wd)jQtiti^ t<? complete thef system of episcopracy> 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, ^

.» 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'

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

/ .v-

j>:

UNAUTHORISED USES »P THE WORD CHURCH.

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 •-

'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***?® ^'''** <i«rc* means, i»«l^ of its o4ir-
rences, the congregation of believed indeiiendS "4^
ofite officers, ii clear. When it 1& said,^ct8 xiV4rf^
"They ordained them elders in everv chiiA.*'^ 7^^
thmg call be more evident than that the cHHeiin ^
^hich these elder^w^l^rdained #er©chitfSes 1^.

-v.

vioiidy to theiE^dinatioh. There was ^'8<^et^

wantang m tpii, which was thus "set in ord^^

but in each «ftse thfi bod/6f beHevers constituted

^^ ttie chinrch ; tie « elders", (whatever was the office

^^^ deiignated by the term^ a^int to be afterwards dis-

Ur ^**>^^<t^ The arUcre ia rejected by the principal criUcs.
t»H8 at all necessary to the sense in which we under-

Not that even
»nd it

)ij0f-\. ■ ^

,■**

thi

th(

di£

noi

uni

tto

«lfini

]

" aU,

cisi

use

8tr<

oth

sen

Ne)

tioi

sho

in t

Itfl

thai

atl

and

pre!

lish

r- -. ■:':/-'■■ .

• I ■ ..'

■■■ • ■*■ ■'•.■■'

''".•

-W ■ ■ ■

>*'-'• ■ ■ ■.•■■■, ■

%.m:.

P--

• ' ■ .

J«'- ■"-■■'. .

" ■ ;

..•,'. ■

-: -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

■

-■ i

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHUBOH.

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(/<er can
any necessity whatever he ahaivn/or so understanding it
here, / Is there anything whatever contradictory, im-
practicable, or even involving the smallest difficulty,
in^the idea of telling the matter to the parfictdar
christian society, with which the parties— the offended
and the offender— stand connected? Certainly, no-
thing. It is done amongst independents, when they
act up to their principles, every time such cases occur.
There is not the remotest pretence of difficulty, in
practically following out the direction according to
Dr. Campbell's candid rendering of the worda—
" acauaint the congregation with it." And it is
remarkable, that he prefers the vrord congregation
here to churchy ior the very reason of its rendering
what he conceives the proper meaning the more ex-
plicit. Dr. M'Kerrow, too> 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

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<in^ independency
This leads me to mentidn-— "
, 2. That in the passage a rule of duty \^ prescribed.
' Now, the very first a nd mo s t e ss e ntial requisite Hp—
such a rule, is expLi^itrwss and preoi8%(m.^Qo\M any-

' \

«!J

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH.

• thmg, then, have been easier, had such been our
Lord's meaning, tljan to have mentioned the presby-
tery, or the rulers of the congregation, as the court
of final appeal ? Why use the siirgle word church —
exxXtfdta — ^in a sense that was even ambiguous, when
all ambiguity might have been at once, and so easily
avoided? — The first and the second steps of the
process are stated with aU imaginable explicitness.
On the supposition of the word church being used
in its ordinary acceptatio!n, so is the last :— but nqt

-■ otherwise.. ;,.■■■_/■ .:■ .'".■■.■,■.,•'-:'.,•"' ".J--;

3. lam aware, l^at a good deal has been made of
a supposed allusio^ to the Jetoish synagogues, and to

^ the constitution and'practice of discipline in them.—
As to tiiisi I would observe— - »

^irst, th&t the allusion is at best little more than
conjectural,— dpctors in theology of high repute,
istrenuously denying it, whilst others as strenuously
maintain it ;— and that it is hazardous, and can never
be satisfactory, especikUy in a matter of authority
and of duty, to build much upon conjectures, and
points of "doubtful disputati6n." Whatever proba-
bility rthere may be supposed in the conjecture, there
is no Gert£»iity: and the obligation pf what rests

» dpon it cannot be distinctly aind imperatively felt.
No ground pf probability can be previously estab-
lis|ied, that tho constitution of christian churches
Would be modelled after th&,t ot Jewish synagogues.
Yet unless such previous probability caJAe made

> gopd,i<i is very .obvious th/it the argumen^om the
alleged allusion halts. * For observe :—io determine
whether there be such allusion at allVa^iiJt^how far
it reaches, we must first, in our ov^ minds, have
a8cert%ined the point of fact respecting the iMituaL'

» /

■■ .*

» 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^

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 |/<e congre(fat{on, ^

yheQ'Ihe idea intended to bo conveyed Was, Tell it to
Jh^, session ? y: ■'' - ... r ■ • 'v **

.^f

Qanii)b9tl on tiSe F'^ur Gospels i-sNote on Matt. xvUi. 17

-^■■.

■-.»*•

^•

•>v

tot
no
tio
'mil
ii8e
suf
the
his

wai

do\

the

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 <jannot be admitted,— namely, thdt
the instructions which were given by our Lord, during
^his lif^-tinie on earthy niust all have been clistine|ly
ap|)rehen4ed by his disciples wt the time. Now, this
was ndt, by any^means,, the case, with regard to his "
do^mes ;^arid why must we conceive it to have been
the-caseAvith respect to ^ho future constkutmi of his
khiffdomrror ihekuvs q| the churches of which that .
kingdom, was to con^si ? Why not regard our divine"
.Master as tlien^peakifig/o)- Ihif^itim, and in this as in a
-some other matters, reserving i\h elear^diuH-nn^^ ■
•.derst^nding of , his "words till the tiiiie when the- HolvL
»Spu:it^as to ^'l^ad them, into all truth?" Tliat oi^
-Lord ought to i)e.r^gftrde(^«^thu8^peaking for the^
future,v^that is, ^. layipg, dqwir a , iiile foy^his ow&^
kingdom,— the previous context; clearly shpws :— the
elntire disqourse and^, convej-satioh I'icordaijl^the
chj^ter bdvirig ai^sen. out of theSqiJlsti^BHff theV^ ^
first vei-se o'f it, ^t to' him by his discipS^^Whoi i
is the greatest in the kimjdom rof heaven ?'\ W^ are -A/
sufficiently awar©5 that, when they asked this qftes-'JJ *
tion, tjiey were,,vefy far from attaching right concep- ^■
,tions.to theii-uwii words,-^frdm hajdng any just.no- ,
tions about the trlj^ nature of t^ kingdom. Why,

thei/,i§ittobe8tipposed,thiat^atthattimetheYTnust£ > '
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 °

I -

•'-(

,% 4r.

'< r

»"»»

Ijfci^'

'<^.

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" ^ . > ', "■■ -. ■-■-■■■■■ .

1'^

_v_

•\f::

• 'I I ...

^»

^:-.\

I-

■ 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<Sh
Wq,s at Jerusalem ; arid they were all scattered abroad
thrqughout the regions of Judea and Samaria, except
the apostles. And devout men eaiTied Stephen to
ps biirial, and;mude great lamentation over %him.
AsforSanl, he made havock of ^the church,, enteriiig
into every house, and haling men and women, coin-'
mitted them to prison."
■ An o?i/>/ 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.

.yy,:i

,*-

.--'■'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;

^4.

^'^.'

^f ^i**-"f%i ■i^^-ys'^f^^ '*^fi'^

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^

■ , .«

> * *

(

», -

>>.

■ " ■ ■

.==..■ ■- r- -.

'■ ■ ■-. . • ■"-

, ,./■ ■

' .' ^ ■ ■■< ^ ': ■

[ '•- .

■, ,1«

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

\<f

*».

>^ >

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

' ' ' ■ ■■•*■•"*■■ ^

' k -■.'■'*"

■. • • *■. *■■.■

» . ■ " * . .

r . - . _»

; ■.•V'

.. ■ -. ■■ i

; . \

'■■■■{

':'■'■ t

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

*•

;'r

-.-.

. ■'

^■,

o T

' »

■ '' -r. ■

'. •

,■ ■

'■'?.

. ' ■

• II

...••■•

1 . .

.-. .'.

.":''

:'■;•. .

r'.

• ■■/"/■'

., 'v-- ■

_ ■ A '

■■.■ : "■ : • '' '.

''':"' ■'-:■''

. :■■■' ^ : ■•'

■ •,

^fel^ '

T a

■r .■

■ 1 -

■

■j

■■

■

■■'■■■'•■■ i

■

H^l

■

. ' I

-■*

■-■"'' " " "

■

^^^^^^r

•

i' '■

•"

■

W^-

•

■•■k--' ' '■

. ■ - ■ ■ .

?!£:!■- ■ ■ ■■

.-, .

..r .H

^ /

•t»

- (

# • ■ *

■^

S-

•.1 "

.'■->■'

«l'

• •'

.J. »• ^

■d •.•-'

1 -•

,y* , «

'v-

■■w

■«• «" ■ ■ *

■ , ■ «. .

*• Mlf'

"i-

. «

'C, *

, * -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<

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 //<ey should have
been, not only tkaJitHt but the sole deserters!—
they alone fleeing,r^and all of them, without excep-
. tion, floeihg !— " §a'viug the sheep, and fleeing," and
letting^'*'ihe wolf catch and scatter them f' There
is too much in this of the character of the " hireling
shepherd," to allow me to admil the tjupposition.

4. It is alleged, that the particular exception made,
in the phrase " except the apostles;" favours the idea
of '* the church *' from which the exception is made
meaning only the ministers ; and thjit this idea is
further countenanced by its being said of thbse who
were scattered, that they " went everywhere preaching
the word."— To this we amwev^First : If the minis-
ters, or pastors, alone were meiint, nottiing'could have
been easier than to say sq in plain terms ;— why sup-
pose the historian to have made a, solitary departure
from what must be universally admitted tp be the
established meaning of the word . in the entire mus
hquendi of the New Testament, when it was so easy '
for him to have said, if he meant it, that its Elders ^
were all scattered from Jerusalem 'i^Secondly : Even
if it had been proved from other places that the word r
church is at times used for the church's officers exclu-
sively, the present is not an occasion on which it vas
at all likely to be so used, there being in the <;ase no-

i » '

UNAUTHOniSia) USES OF TrtE WORD CHURCH. 89

i t '

thing of ajmftridf chamcter to render the reptr/umta-
five acceptation of it (on the 8uppo«ition of a govern-
ment by rcprest>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

■"■-■■ ■ *■ ■ .

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 <li.spersion men-
tioned ui (|;ho first was of '• the rhmrh" w^jjtre from
the fonrth wan'autedio concludQ^ that thoaBkmbers
of the church who were scattered cmbrd^pHnaiiy of
them, the opportunities which prondei^e furnished
them, of publishing the glad tidings of siilvation ; and
that this was not confined to officially ordainetl minis-
ters of the word", but included atl to whom the Lord
had been pleased to impart ability, and especially
those "spiritual gifts" which were so plenteously
bestowed in the bf^nning of the gospel. — ^But to
follow out the line of discussion to which this obser-"
vation leadsV^ould <;lraw me at once into the whole
controversy on the subject of la if preach inrf ; which
would be quite astray from our present drift.

On the whole, I am satisfied that tlie church rejne-
aentativc, alleged as ona of the senses of the word
church in the New Testament is as unauthorised as
either of the two preceding. Nor should I have con-
sidered the plain passage in the beginning of the
' eighth chapter of the Acts as at all requiring so inany

T •

r '

UNAUTHORISED U8E8 OF THE WORD CHURCH. 91

words, but for tho circumHtAnco of its being the only
instance Adduced in support of this meaning of the
tenn, and thert^fore donmnding to bo .fully and
fairly met. For it is plain, that such texts as Iklatt.
xviii. 17, "Tell it unto the church," cannot, •without
the most glaring ;Wj//o principii, l)c cited as exam-
ples of this meaning of the word, till its having this
meaning at niU lias been otherwise made good.

I shall clos*? this discussion with the following very
decided judgment 6f the same eminent and impartial
critic to whom I have before made reference — Princi-
pal Campbell :— •* I now intend to point out another
still more remarkable donatio^, a de\'iation not from
the latter, as thi/reo now mentioned were, but from the
former of the two primitive senses,?^ wjiereby the
word is applied to the christian commonwealth.
Then it means, as is pretended, either tho church
collective, that is the 1\'hole community of christians,
orHhe church representative ; — that is, say some, the
whole clerical orders, say others, tho cliurch judica-
tories, especially tho supremo. And this, I acknow-
ledge, is a distinction that is favoured not only by
those of the Romish eoinnmniou, but by most sects
of protestants also. To many, however, and I
acknowledge myself one of the number, ii4s mani-
fest, that it is no less a novelty than the f?)¥mer,
having no foundation in the scriptural usage." — -
" In the itse ucithcr of the Greek worcl in the New
Testament, nor of the coiTespondent Hebrew word in
tlie^^ld, do we find a vestige of an application of the
term to a smaller part of the community, their gover-

* * Namoly, of the \rovi\ chuieh—euH\t^6ta; those two priiuni\*c
senses being -" tbe whole ehristlan community, or nil those of a par-
ticular congvegationundor the giiidarice of ^thcir own pastors."

'^■

•r

THE NEW TEStAMENT CRTTRCn.

now, postora, or prioHtti, for iniitanco, 08 reprcsoiiiing
<ilio whole." — — " I havo not diHcovercd one pamage
in which, either ennXtiaia or hXtjpoi \n n[)plie<I to the
pastors excUiHively of the pof)plo. The notion, there-
ioife, of a church representative, how commonly soever
it h(^8 been received, is a mere usurper of later date.
And it has fared hei-e as sometimes happens in cases
of UHurjiation, the original proprietor comes, though
gradually, to be at length totally dispossessed."*

• Lett, on Ecclwi. IlUt., vol. I, pp. 320, 323, 327.

•r

ho
•e-
©r

ie.
«s

. CHAPTEU III.

THE MATERIAIi* OP A CHUBCII OJ^TDWItWT.

This in evidt'utly a. point of firttt-rato importance ;
and on tluH aceoiuft, iiUhough, in Htrict propriety,
it Hhould havo formed the Hubjoct of a third »t?ction of
tlie preceding chapter, I have asHigned it a chapter
to itself. It iH a point respecting whicli it ought not
to bo necessary to say much. And yet it is one,
aboat whiclf so iimch has buen said, that I have boon
almost afraid t<> 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

■\

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 Nico<lemns and his
countr^'mcn had formed conceptions so sadly mis-
taken ; — and that kingdom, in its successive stages,
of imperfection below, and perfection above. In
other words,' the kingdom is the New Testament
church, on earth and in heaven : — and the sentiment
is, that, instead of mere natural descent from Abra-
ham, in wliieh the Jews weVc accustomed to tnist
and to glory, a • new Spiritual birth was necessary

* Juliii iii. 3. I am awan*, tUat by mmc ciulacat expoaltoni, to-
•• s(;t' " in, ill tlilH vorse, umlerstootl n« moaning to Lave a true spiritual
(lisccrnnu'nt of it^ ttcavonly nature ; nad tliat tliey found upon it tho
gfiintinicat that there i.s a "seeing," or diHcerning, of tho klDgdom of
God, that, io tho order of nature, precedes " entering Into " It, or
enjoying its bleasings.— I will not deny that such may bo the mean-
ing. But in this Gospel by Jolm^ to ste is used so decidedly for to
tnjoy, — or rather, I should even say more generally, (o experience, {tor
it ia applied tQ evil as well as ^ofx^)— -that I am more than doubtful of
H. Thus in the last verse of the same chapter—John ill.' 3G, Jolm
Baptist says — "he that belfevcth not the Sop, shall not (ee2{/e;"—
and in chapter viii. 51, Jesus himself says—" If a man keep my say*
ings, he hhaW ncvet see dealli.'' I am disposed to interpret " seefm;
the kingdom ol God " in a similar sense ; as meaning tho samie with
the corresponding phrasd in the eighth verse—" he cannot enter into
the kingdom ot God,'^— cannot be its genuine subject, and participate
in its privileges and blessings,— whether in earth or in heaven. '

7-..

^h^.

lUTBBULB OF A CBTBCB Of CHROrr.

)

dU*

^rf

lo anj one'g being a true mihjeot of that kingdom, —
A legitimate member of that chiuroh. I do not deny
that in hiu wordH our 8avicmr had reference to heaven ;
but I do deny that lie hatl thia reference cxchisivoly.
The kingdom in one. It in not one kingdom in
heayen, and another upon earth : — and nothing,
sorely, can be more natural and reaHonable, than that
the two portionH of the kingdom, of which the one
is the prelude to the other, should, as far as iK)HHible,
resemble each other in character, ho that there sliould
just bo a successive transference of its subjects from
earth to heaven. Tliosc whom wo have no reason to
regard as haWng been " bom again," it seems very
strange that we should acknowledge as its subjects
here, by admitting them to an outward participation
of its privilogos, when we know that they can Uavo
no place among its Hubjects theiKv- And I haVcj^jyw,
though with neccMsary brevity, to show, thiiTwio
whole tenor, and the most explicit statements, of the
New Testament, bear out this couclusiiwi.

I might avail mysofi', indeed, -evpn of the intima-
tions of the prophetic jscriptures, in reference to tho
peculiar spirituality •* and jmrity of the church in
gospel times. 'But it will bo better to come at once
to the New Testament itself. — And hero, I shall pass
entirely over the sentiment of those advocates of
established churches, who, taking tho Jewish church
as their prototype, hold that national churches should
be co-extensive, in regard to membership, with the
nations in wHich they exist, all the subjects of the
government, by birth o\ naturalization, being mem-
bers of the church ; the civil and the ecclesiastical
constitution having tbe same comprehensiveness. It
may be admitted, that of all who plead, the Jewish

MATnULII OP A CHURCH OP CBRUT.

naiioiiiU eHUhlinhtiiotil an th« divin« wftirunt tor ebrU-
tian iiaiional o«tftl»Kj«limciiti», thou© nUme nro iMUf-coQ-
BwUuit, who IhiiH oftrry out tho pattern tt) itn full
exUsni of corroHiMUiiUHicu. But with the mou who
can iiuaKtHO that ho KihIh Huch a coni»titution of th«
ohmtian church iii tho Now TfHtameiit, it would bo
a hoiMslo«H thing to rca^n :— and witli him who,
whether from the felt deficiency of HupjK)rt from tho
New ho IH conHtraiuod to go back to the Old, or
whether he ii^ content, apart from HcripturiU authority
altogether, to rest on tho ground of theory and expo-
diof^sy, it would obviouMly bo ueceimary to diHcuHH the
I^ViouH ipitieitiou UH to the authority by which such
|K)intH are lo bo Hcttled,— tl»e lt?gitimate standard of
appeal aiul decinion. Oil that I have already touched,
in tho introtluctory chapt**;". And indeed tho i)roofs
of purity of commuuiou being required by Hcripturo
in the churchoH^ will theniHclves bo more than HufH-
Oiont for tho vefut^ion of Kueh a theory. — To these I
now, proceed.

X Hhall, in tho firHt place, adduce a few other pass-
ages, additional to thoone already referred to, — the
words of our Lord to Nicodemus — John iii. 3, C :
— an<l then, secondly, repel objections.

I. I am, tirst, to adduce passages from tho Scrip-
tures of tho Now ToHtanient.

1. I begin with the tiiX'ounl (jiven us of the very
first church thcA ivas formed nnd constituted, under
the eye, and by the aulhorUy, of the Ajxjstles. — I
refer, of courso, to tho Church of Joi-usalem, Pre-
Tiousiy to the day of pentecost, there were a hundred
and twenty disciples of Jesus, who, though subso-
quenlly to his death they had been thrown into great
darkness and perplexity, had had their faith re-estab-

MATERIAIJI or A CiH'RCR Of crURVT.

Itthod hy liU nwurn^etioji ami iMt<*i»nNion, and -were
waiiin^ for tlio Vfrirtcatiim of tlu'ir MaHt«>r'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> <d(*iimt>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,

^..-

MATnuu Of A cmmca o9 cmovr.

ftU proco«<l on the aiwiuiniHtoii of their heing Miemrt,
Let the reader look at Col. iii. 1-4, 9 ; Col. ii 5^7 ;
Epb. iv. 1—6 ; Eph. ii. 19—21 ; 1 Thewi. I, 5—7 ;
Heb. X. %i — 25. How tlo mich pniwAf^oir tumnc),
when applied to comiiiunitie«eotii|KJun(Uul of htiten>-
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

•

, " /

*■■■-'•

• . .

■ ^ ■ > ' IS

i'^M ; ' ^ '-■. '

•

* <i

1 „

fr ,-

■tn

*• , * -

■ .' i ■ ,

.y ''<■,:■ •■ _

1 ' ■

•

t - . '■*'

• "^^

()< 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

MATERIALS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST.

101

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, <frc.

6. I might multiply passages. I shall content my-
self with other /?w.~The first of them is 2 Gor. vi.
jl4— 18. I refrain from all remarks on the legitimacy
of the application of this passage to the marriage
relation, and to the intimacies of Christians with
worldly men. On tlie supposition that the words
may with propriety be thus applied, on the ground
of their containing a general principle, w hich it is un-
necessary to restrict to any one mode of intercourse
with the world ; — the Obvious question is—Are they
to b^ applied to these subjects, and not to tlie com-
muiiim of the church of God?—^The\v primary and
4|rect reference is, it may be admitted, to the evil of
believers in Christ having fellowship with idolaters
in any part of the service of their false gods. This
was a glaring and monstrous incongruity; like the
" communion of light with darkness." But-, suppose
an inversion of this kind of communion. Suppose
the Corinthian believers to have admitted hioion
idolaters, the w^orshippers of these same false gods,
to fellowship tmth them in the social ordinances of
the church of Christ,— would there, in that case, have

MATEBIALS OF A CHURCH OP 0«BI8T.

103

been no violation of the precept, — ^no unseemly and
incongruous association, — no compromise of the
glory of the "one God even the Father, and the one
liord Jesus Christ?" If there was evil in the junc-
tion of Christ with Behal, was there less evil in the
junction of BeHal with Christ?— Let it be observed,^
that'tlio passage does not speak of idolaters merely.
The command is, not to be" unequally yoked together ,
vnth tmhdievcrs,"— that is, such as make it manifest
that this is their character. Is the indiscriminate
mixture, then-, of believers and unbelievers, of saints
and men of the world, in a church of Christ, an un-
equal yoking,— or is it not ? If itis not, we may well
ask, what is ? Is it not a " defiling of the temple of
God ?" is it not a. " touchijig of the unclean thing ?"
Is the di£ference7in this respect, material, whether we
^o to the unclean thing, or take th^ unclean thing to
us ? Can Christians be said, with any truth, to "comd^
out from among " unbelievers, and " to be separate,*'
if they are admitting them to the most sacred and
intimate christian communion with themselves ?—fQF
such, surely, is the joint participation in the symbols
of the body and blood of the common Saviour and
Lord of Christians. It seems, in the highest de^ee,
inconsistent, to apply the passage to other modes of
fellowship, and not to this. 1- j .

The second of the two passages is— 1 Cor. iii. 11—
17.^_Tlie main question relative to this very interest^
ing portion of Scripture, of whose contents it is im-
possible for me to •*■ speak particularly," — ^is, whether
it relates to the system of Christianity itself, as con-
sisting of various doctfines and precepts,^— ox to the
christian chnrchy.ss composed of ^^ersoft-s.-^That the
Ifttt^ view is the true one seems to me so clear, that

104

MATERIALS OF A CI

jRCH OF cuiiig^\.

I can hardly fancy
doubt of its beinc s<

but prejiidice to induce a
Phe nnifi/ of the fiijm'c requires
a structip-e of doctrines the
3ut of one of persons. The
entire context bears ine out in this. " Ye are God's
husbandry ; ye are GotVs building "—verse 9. «! Know
ye not that ijc are the temple of GodT—\Gvm 16.
"The temple of God is holy ; lehich temple yecire"—^
verse 17. These terms represent the building, with
an expUcitness which ought to preclude mistake, as
one of persons.— A building of doctrines, indeed, is a
figure of very rare occurrence in Scripture ; wjiereas
the other figure is frequent and familial- with the
sacred writers.— It ought, besides, to be observed,
that there are ttco figures,— the figure of a husbandry
as well as that of a building. They have both the
same application ; and they who are not prepared to
maintain that the " husbandry ^' means a husbandry
of doctrines, cannot, with a|iy consistency, contend
for the building being a building of doctrines.— To
maintain anything like harujony in the latter figure,
we must undei-statfd the *' gold, silver, and precious
stones" as representing the true spiritual people of
Godji— sineere genuine converts, "precious in the
sight of the Lord ;"— arid the " wood, hay, an^ stub-
ble " as empty professors, ignorant and unrenewed,
having " a ijame to live while they are dead,"— "a
form of godliness, without its power."

ShOTild any object, that such persons cannot be
builf upon Christ the Hying and sure foundation ;—
that none but " living stones " can ever form any part
of that "spiritual house "of which He is the divinely
laid foundation :-- oui- reply is two-fold.— 1, It is not

ITATEBIALS OF A CHURCH OF CHRIST.

105

of tiie tnie, spiritual, universal church that Paujlia.
here speaking, — but of the particular church, or
christian society, at Corinth; of which he hii|iself
had, in the providence and by the grace of God,
"laid tlie foundation," by his having been thie first
to preach the gospel there— verse 10.~And 2, The
very same objection would apply, with equal at least,
if not even with .greater conclusiveness, to the inter-
pretation which applies the passage to the system of
divine doctrines^nasmuch as, "the doctrines arid
commandments of men," of what kind soever, unsup-
ported by dirine authority, can never form any part
of that system,— can never have any real connexion
or incorporation with " the truth as it is in Jesus,"— r
any real and divinely acknowledged relation to Christ,
— 1 might add~3. That the system of divine truths
does not admit of additions, of any kind ;— and the
passage, so understood, could have no application
beyond the period of the completing of divine revela-
tion by those " holy men of God who spoke "—and
wLo wrote — "as they were moved by the Holy
Spirit." Such application of it, from its want of all
explicitness, has been Tpvodiictixe of effects the most
mischievous. For, in regard to doctrines and insti-
tutions, who is to be the authoritative judge to
distinguish between what may be incorporated with
God's truths and GcTd's ordinances," as " gold, silver^
and precious stones," and what must be refused, such
incorporatioB, as " wood, and hay, and .stubble ?''—
Fvdly aware of tke delusive tgndencies of the human
mind, when allowed any such Ucense, the divine
Author of revelation has ever laid an express and
solemn interdict on the presumption that would dare

'"N

• '

106

MATERIALS OP A CHURCIJ OF CHRIST,

to make any such additions. His unequivocal com-
mand, respecting his word, has ever been — ** Thou
shalt not add to it, nor diminish from it."*

The solemn admonition, from vei:se IQ^ to verse
17th, clearly relates to the huihling vp of the church,
and to the materials of which the sacred structure
ought to be composed. ' The apostle encourages the
builders to attention, and faithfulness in this matter,
by setting forth the reimrrf which the divine proprie-
tor of the temple had in reseiTe for such as fulfilled
their charge with due fidelity ; — the toss which the
careless builder should suffer ;— and the destruction
that shoidd come upon the workman who, knowingly
and presumptuously, " defiled," by the introduction
of unworthy materials, " the temple of God." Such
appears to be the threefold distinction among the
builders. The careful and faithful should " receive a
reward," — the special reward, it ie presumed, of those -
who "turn many to righteousness :"— the careless,
inconsiderate, and hasty, should "suffer loss/'-— the
loss of this special reward, their wOrk proving super-
ficial and unsatisfactory, not abiding the test ; —
although they thenvselves should be saved,— and yet
even that with diflSeulty and hazard : — and the pre-
sumptuous pdliMr oi God's Jioly housev his spiritual
sanctuary, should be " destroyed,"— becoming the
victim of his ayenging jealousy :—'■ If any man defile
the temple of God, him shall God destroy ; for the
temple of God is holy ; which temple ye are :" — ^words
which should make the ear of every one to tingle, to
whom, in any way, it pertains to admit members to
the churches of Christ ;--*:and, let me add, the ear,

Comp.Dettt. iv. 2

xii.32

with Rer. xxii. 18, 19.

■>' : ^^^■>-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'^/<e case (/ JuDAS.
There was a traitor, it is alleged, even among the
little company that attended the Saviour during his

.'^

.."s .

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

' *^-

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*><f/ them to h^ anch. — It is
quite obvious, that this is the only infe^i'ence that can
serve any purpose to the defender^ of mixed or
impure communion : .for, with regf^rd to characters
which we do not hioto, — which reiiain concealed, —
an inference would have no beari^ itpon their object.
To speak of retaining liy}X)cntesi» an absurdity. We
cannot, with propriety, he said /to%e tain such charac-
ters ; the very idea of a hypocrite implying that the
real character is successfully covered. And so long
as it is so covered, there cannot, in the nature of the
thing, be either criminali^ in retention, or warrant
for exclusion. The inference must be to known char-
acters ; and if to known characters, it must farther
be to characters known to he as had as Jjnias. Nay,

On the supposition that Judas were 9i,gQ.vs:;''iW propria
persona, to o£fer himself to communion,— the exam-

MATERIALS OF A CHURCH 0' CHRUT.

pie, if it warrants anything, would warrant our
receiving him,— our giving him the right hand of
fellowHhi{>,< — 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\/<tt/(M / for this is evidently
no more than its legitimate application. If he sngj^rs •
at it a9 extravagant, let him prove that it is so*-

I might pross^jtho legitimate conclusion from the "^
ciase to a still greater length of absurdity. Jesus, it
id granted on both sides, "know fronj the beginning,
who should betray him." He knew Judas as well
when he vho.se him to be annpjsfh, as he did afterward.
The inferonco,-:— if there bo any example in the case '
at all for our imitation, is irresistible :■ — that we are
warranted by the example /o choose such men to the
mkiistry^of tlie gospel, ami tJte pastoral care ofthejlock
of Ohrist 1 — The truth is that the mystery (for such
we may allow it to have been) in the conduct of our'*
liord, in .choosing Judas, and retaining him in the '
number of the twelve, without disclosing his charac-
ter till it disclosed itself in the end by his diabolical
treachery,— knowing him all the while to be " a devil "
at heart,Y-can never be an example!) such as we are
either obliged or warranted to follow, in opposition
to the plain and palpable rules for the direction of
our conduct, laid down by himself through the minis-
try of his apostles, and of which we h&ve the autho-
ritative exemplification in the churches. constituted
under their superintendence.

MATBRIALR OF A CBlTItdH OF CHRIST.

Ill

Ji% '

2. Beforonco is sonvetimeB, — nay, I might aay inva-

(riably, mode by anti-Htrict-commuuionistH, to certain

*»* of onr Lord'fi parabloH, which, they idlogo, teach a

different Iuhhou. ThcHo are, chiefly, the parable of

the marriagi'-ftiiMt, and tlie parable of the tares of

. the fettl.— Aa extended exposition of these parables
would occupy much more room than can be spared.
There is no need for it. It will bo enougli, to expose
the falluciousnoHH of the conclusions drawn fi'oni theni
on the subject before us. ,' '\^-

Tho former of the two parables the reader will find
in Matt. xxii. 1— 13» The entire plausibility of the
argument arises from the secontl of the commissions

■ given to the servants, and the maniMir in which they
are said to have fulfilled it. The commiHsioii wa» —
" As many as ye shall find bid to the wedding :" —
the fulfilment qI it—" So those servants went out
into the highways, and gathered together all, as many
as they found, bofh bcul and (jood ; and the wedding
was furnished with guests." — Now I gi'ant, that ** bad
and good " is a phrase intended to coUiprehend aU
varieties of charade r. The servants executed their
message. They addressed the King's invitation to
tJl indiscriminately ; and persons of every descrip-

V tion complied with it; so that "the wedding was
furnished with guests." Now, the sole question of
any consequence in our present discussion, — the very
turning point of the argument,— is this :— were they
" both bad and good " subaequently to their compli-
ance, and to their admission as guests at the table of
'the maYriage-feast ?— rdid they, when there, continue
to presenir all varieties of ■ character, the worst as well
as the best? The question, obviously, is-/not what
they had been before the invitation, but^rhat they

■fw^r

f%'

MATEMAW OF A CHURCH OP CHIlWT,

^oro ftftcr.— And in ftnHWor to thin (lutmtion, wo have
only to look at tho repreH«iitation «ivcm in the para-
ble itHfllf. What in it? Why, that of «ill thoHo vfkSi
had been gtithered from the hi^h-wayH there jvtts
only one whom tlio king, on " coming in to Hc^ftho
gUestH," ftmnc^ ujVAo"^ n urifJimj (jutmenf ! What-
ever wo con<3oTvo to hi) repri'Hontod by the •' wtHlding
garment,"— whether the juntifying righteouHnoHH of
ChriHt, or perHonal Bjuictiticution, or (wliich I take to
bo the tmth) the ituiouittf i)oth,— it apiwarH that the
roquiroul <iuaUticationJlfr a phice at the feant (that ifl,
for a participation^! goH|»el bU^Hnings) was wanting
in only (mo. instance. The answer to our in«iniry,
then, is given in ^o negative. The variety of charac-
ter, bad as well as good, did not continue. Sinners Of
every character and condition wdVo invited ; siamors
of every character and condition accepted the invita-
tion :— but the sincere acceptance of the invitation
implied the faith of the message, and of the authority
with which it came,— tl»e belief of tho4((|ljgtt>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;

•* 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<uiquot-hall without it,
had no right to be there A^^ond that tho sorvapts, if

. they knomngly admitted him without tho required
oostumo, — a ooHtumo provided by tho master of the
feast for all the guests, — wore to blamo^ as well a§[.
the unworthy intruder himself? — The pattern and*"
warrant for mixed communion must bo sought else-
where than here.

Let us look at the other parable — that of the
" tares of theJi(M " — tho tares ami the wIteaJ. — It is to
be found in Matt. xiii. 24—30,,.. and 36 — 43.— This
parable is rather a favourite resort of those who do
not feel their consciences bound by the principles of
strict or pure communion. Here, it is alleged, as in

■ the former case, there is mixture. Listead of an
injunction of separation, there is an explicit com-
mand to the contrary. Tho inquiry of the servants,

- Whether they ^.should attempt such separation, is

"answered in the negative, and the positive order
issued— " Le^ both groio tx)ge*her until the harvest f*
— and acdprding to the authoritative interpreta-
tion of the parable, that means until *Hhe end cf
the world" — When the separation is to be n^ade bj
"the Son of man' himself. "

This looks plausible. I hope to show the reader,
that Uplausibihty is its only attribute, and that the
plaudbilityl^ itself is but superficial. — The parable,
8 _ *

„^

nC,-'

( I

,, ■' '■■ ■■ ^ ■,

' i

. \

( \

tf ^Pjt

■ ^•T'* 1^""^ ^

114

MATERIALS OF A CHUBCH 0F0HBI8T.

^•■■^^

were we to expoTmd it in all its particulars, would
adpiit of great enlargement (Of illustration. I must
confine myself to those views of it which immediately
'relate to our present argument ; and even these
must be very succinctly disposed of.

1. My/r«<»remark,then,is — that the tares and the
wheat being significant (as they are explained to be)
> 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.

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

?,■»

■ 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

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

"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
<zgainst persecution ; — a lesson fi'om Christ himself
against the use of carnal weapons in his spiritual Mng-
cfom.— The adoption of this principle has! three con-
siderations to recommend it. — In ihe^rst place, we
thereby avoid the manifest incongruity of the parable,
when otherwise explained, with the general tenor
and explicit statements of scripture on the subject

, . ^^■y^ .r yr^T ' 7 .

12a MATEBIAM OP A CHUBCH OF CHBI8T. ,

to which it is supposed to refer.-In ^Ujemid place ;
the lesfion which our interpretation of the parable
teaches is oW for the inculcation of which there ww
imperative heed, both existing at the time, and pros-
pective. There was need for it even at the time,
ionong his own disciples Jesus had abeady seen the
symptoms of a persecutmg spint discovering them-
Ses. A comparison, ol the^ Pf — M K^a^
passages as Luke ix. 54-56 ; Matt, xlvi 51, 62, and
others, may serve sufficiently to . evmce the^e^stmg
occasion for the lesson. The indignant prohibition
from the Saviour's lips, of the proposal, m the one
case, of " (Jailing down fire from heaven, and, in the
other, of " smiting with the sword," is in perfect
accordanpe with the answer of the householdei^^to
the inquiry-" Wilt thou, then, that w^ go a^d gather
them up ?''-the prohibitory answer, " JVa^, fe«<,t«^];te

ye gather up the tm-es, ye root vp ^'^f^^^^^!^^' '
tj^nr-^AMd this leads me to notice m the third place,
that the statements of the parable agree well thei»-
selves with our pi-inciple «« ^^P^^^*'^;. ? ^?f^
before observed tliat there was no ^«^*yf. ^
tinguishing the tares from the t^heaV ; and it is not
^^on tMs very account, to see liow this co^^dera.
tion should Wly to the exercise, or rather the
cImSd no^eLrcise, of disciplme in th^
Where there was difficulty in distmguishmg betwee^
a nominal and a genuine profession, there might
have been a hazaxd -of o^^casion^y exchiding, by
mistake, from the feUowship of ^e church a teue
Sd of God. But in the parable, the difference
between the wheat ^d the tares is a;>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<n ftese terms :-" The Son of man shaH send
Sh his angels, and they Shan ,««*ero.^o/ to i.^-
XnaU that offend, and them that do miquity._ The
STctasion drawn from tSis is-that those who ar?
■ ^^ttered <M ?^ "^ M^gdom " must have been »
hS kingdom, and externally have formed a pa^ »' >»•
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

JV#.

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-

II.'.!

\.\

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 ■■ ■

■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

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!.

)

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 " *• >

« '»'

■>

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

. ■ . • ■ -

■ ♦ .

. " • .

. ■ ■ '. ■ '

1 ^B

-«.

■•'

' "• ',■

"'i ■■

.»

'■'

■^^' ■

•".,".■;

■\

-^ ■* 1

.'■■-.

* " . ■

, y

'■♦" ''

*V ■.'

*"■- ."

■*,■

•

*i^H

■■.■■ -

"*, ■

..■■ \.

■ ,

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 : . .

/■

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

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

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— <Ae mcUeriala of which a church should he com-
posed. If this is neglected, rt matters comparatively
little what else is minded. If this be wrong, nothing
can be right. O let it beremembered, that it is not
numbers, that it is not wealth, that it is not worldly
respectability, that constitutes the attraction of ^a.
church in t^e eyes of the Lord. On a temple of
" liviag stones,"— on an assembtjf of true spiritual
believers^ how few soever, how poor soever, and how

, despised soever b^ the surrounding world; they may
be,— he will look with 'complacency and "lift up the
light of his countenance :"— he mil cheer them with
his smile,* guide them by his counsel, qihd enrich
them with his blessing : — he will " come unto them,

.*!

138 MATERIALS OF A OHUBGH OF 0HItI8T.

and mak0 his abode with them," saying, " here will
I dwell, for I have desired it -."—while, in holy indig-
nation, he will frown on masses of corruption, and
turn away from them with loathing, though associ-
ated with the largest amount, and with every possible
variety, of worldly grandeurl "What is the chaflf to
the wheat ? saith the Lord."

• ■?.

. /

I .^

-^z-

■ ^

CHAPTER IV.

OF THE OFFICERS OF CHBISTIAN CHUBCHES.

On this ij^ortant subject, I- confine myself wfthin
the limits oi protestantism. And the method which I
prefer is the following : —

I. I shall state what appears to me to be the truth, ,
' • V^th the scriptural evidence on which my conviction ,
of it rests ^--Then— r^

' II. I shaU endeavour to show what is not the truth, ' «. . '
with the scriptural evidence against it -.—First, in t)ie - "^
scheme of Episcopacy : — and secondly, in the scheme
of Presbyterianism. -/

In other words, I shall try to prove the threfe fol- ,
lowing positions :r— • / ^

j- 1. .That there are only two orders of\officers recog- *
nized in the New Testament, as having existed., icl
the churches constituted by>,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 <?hosen from among themselves
by thep' multitude o^the disciples," and formally set
apart by the apostles. In whatever other capacity
some of them, in the history, may be found acting,
it is sufficiently fi^ainifest that such was the sphere of
their occupation in\that of deaxMm. I must be par-
doned for declining to swell my treatise by entering
into any farth e r discus s ion of the ep isco p ali a B dea -

"^F^ ,

..y.

'■■-'M--

''^^i!'."-' ■ *'■

<--'

142

07FIGEBS OF CHBISTIAN CHUBOHES.

, ■ !

con&dnp,-:— aad asatuning the proper ephere of tiie
diaconal office to be the snpermtendeiice of what
may appropriately be termed the temporal ot secular
hene^(xmevf' the church. -

While I thus ^peak, however, it may be proper
here to cautioii my reader against a mistake, 8u£|-
ciently naturalj and) as I believe, very prevalent. I
would not have it uu^erstood, because th^ secular is
the department or ]^vi|icei with which the latter of
the two offices, that of the deacon, is specially con-
versant, that therefore the office it§elf, in the due
discharge of its functionsj has in it nothing spiritual.
It would be incorrect, on the one hand, to say, that
tlie spiritual office has nothing to do with what is
secular; inasmuch as it . pertains to "the pastor and
teacher" to expound and inculcate the principles on
which whatever is connected with the secularities of
the churches ought to be conducted. And.it would
be more incorrect still to say, on thip other, that ther
secular has nothing to do with what is spiritual. It
is very far from being an entirely^a|eMZa»« «ecMianYy
that pertains to the office of the aeacon. Under
such a view of matters, there lurks a fallacy. The
fallacy is, that because the immediate ministrations
of an office relate to what is secular, the encZs to be
Miswered by those ministrations, and the manner in
which they should be executed, must aU be secular
too. But the church of Christ, it must not bo forgot-
ten, is a spiHttioiK community. And it should be laid
down as a maxim, that in such a community, there is
'nothing whatever of , which the end, or design, is
ptirely or exclusively secular, — ^nothing, that is, which
has answered the entire purpose of its itppointment,
when it has secured an object solely temporal,-^

BISHOPS AND DEACONS.

143

oonnecied o^j with this world and its interests.
There are apiritnal ends connei^ted with secular
duties ; endaintimately associated with the glory of
Christ, the prosperity of bis church, and the conse-
quent promotion of the principles of his gospel. So
that the right fulfilment of a trust, which, in its
immediate and palpable functions^ bears the aspecF
of secularity, may be of very essential use, in- the
adyancement of spiritual character, both personal
Mid social/ The liberal and efficient provision, for
example, for the tables of the poor,yand for their
individual and domestic comfort, afTords a beautiful
exemplifi4p>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::.

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 . - ^

i"'

' — : 1 -T-^.

'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-".

•irA-

'i^K

A-»

148

OtFICEBS OF GHBISTIAN CHURCHES.

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

' 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, t<f Wlarrani it,^who will And
fbnlt f Bnt the foct of the original institution suficiently shows, that
- the miun point is "Vieqffiee, and the adeqtiate fulfilment of Its benevo-
lent elids. If, hi the applicatidtt of this principle of aocommodatiofi
. to customs, churches' go no'fiirther than recorded example warra|nts,—
■ all will be- safe enough. V :;, ,; ■

I Iiad forgotten : There is yet another passage whiclt has been sup-
posed to refigr to deaconesses, or^ at any rate, to some description or
. . other of fpmale office-bearer :— I mean I Tim.^i.ll, rendered by our
^iranslatdrs— " Evott so must their toives be grave," Ac. \,.It is trans-
lated by Dr. MaAnlghtr^" The loomen, in like manQOf , musf b6 grave,"
&c.— and paraphrased ** the women who are employed in teqdiing We
young/^ And in a note he refers to^ 'early authorities for its being
nndeqll^l/'such, as well as of female vi$U(irs qjf the affiUstei ; which
•oomes neSr^ to the idea of deaconesses. But, since .th^ apostle had
just spoken 6t bishops being '< the husbands pf one wifp," and inilie
very next sentence repeats the requisition as to deacons, it is greatly
more probable that the word— ^ vvatxas'— is tO' b^auderstood in tl^e
same sense, and with reference to &e wiv^ of both. I say, of boA,
Doddridge and Scott understand if of the d@acod^s wives, and infer the
same thing Sis behig, a /ortfori — "much more"— necessary in those of
bishops. But t&ere seems nothing to hinder its' meaning both dire^y,
—the one already mentioned, the other in his mind, and about to"i^
mentioned too.— Nor woidd it be' at all difficult to assign just and
weighty reasons for this requisition, bdth as to bishops a,&d deacons;
although, si^wnge to say, this commentator is At a loss to discover
any.— According to the somewhat crotphetty anthPrity of Dr. Mao-.. ^
^ight, indeed, (for which too, however, be adduces siihilar support,)
— ^we sJionld have Mderetaea as well as Deaconesses : — for thus he in-
terprets the leped/Svrtdsi of Titus ii. 3, 4,— "/emote dders," assigning
th e m the sa m e offici a l ooonpation a s aboT p , of t e ach e rs of th e young -

Hi-

\f'

■■r

.■-')

■If

160

. ^i » ■ ■ ■ • ■

OFEIGEBS OF CHBISl^N OHUBCHES.

course, depends 6ii our being able to show that in r
the psBsent instance, there is sif ch accordance,-^
Observe, then— ll

■ 2. We Jiiui these two dosses 6/ officers mentioned
exdusivdy^ on occasions when, ^.ad there' been any
others, they too coidd not possibly fail M have been ^
introdvced.-^l refer now especiaUj to two passages.
T!ke first oi them is, Phil. i. 1. '"Paul and Tim-,
othens, the servants of Jesus Ohris^ to all liCe saints

. in Cdirisl Jesus who are at Philippi, ivith the Bishops
anc? Z?eaQaB»." This one passageN^hould go far to
settle the \[uestion. That all the i^aints in Christ
Jesus who Were at Philippi ^fornaed one church,*^
there i)i the clearest proot In th€/ conclusion of the
epistle, the apostle says :—" Now, ye Philippiahs,

f kxiow also that, in the beginning of the gospel, when
i dep%rte4 from Macedonia, iio^hurch codimunicated
.With*me,.>a8 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;

»■

•*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 <that we are right in the inter-'
pretation of each. Xn omission is unlikely in either ;>
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. —

• 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

.o .

"-■ ft

• •■/^ fl

< •

* 1,

/■.

■■■ I

' . ^.

'• .

' -^

' • 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
V--1 —

"i^fe:

■m

■ji-W

.m^

-%P^:-

■■.

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

-#•-

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,

-'-<<?'.

166 . OFEIOEBSp^ CHRISTIAN CH17BOH3£».

the^^esurrection and ekaltation of Jesus ; inasmuch as
it was not till he had '^'ascended on high;' and had
"received gifts for men," that his kingdom was esta-
blished, that lus church was formed ;*-and till' it was
actually formed, it could not have its constitutidn fixed
and exemplified.— With the exception, therefore,, of
* any autfioritative hints which our Lord may be con-
V sidered as having thrown out prospectively, in anti-
cipation of the establishment of his church, (as, for
' example, in Matt, xviii. 15—17,) we must look for
the constitution of tiiat church in the history com-
mencing with the day of Pentecost, find in the apos-
tolic epistles.— I make this observation, to set aside
another " vai^jjaoagination," by which a gradation of
ranks in the christian church has been inferred from
' the appointment, during Christ's lifetime, of the ttvdve
apostks and the other seventy ; the former being con-
ceived to correspond with the bishops, and the latter
with the presbyters /--It is enough, in reply to such a
fancy, to say, that for men to talk of successors to
the apostles— " the twelve apostles of the Lamb,"—
is the most presumptuous and arrpgant aspiration of
"the vanity of their minds ;" that the apostles, on
their " twelve thrones," si|; alone, "judging the twelve
tribes of Israel," retaining their full authority, as the
inspired vice-gerents of the Bang of Zion, over the spi-
ritual /"Israel of God ;" that on the^ir divinely accre-
dited testimony the church was founded, that by their
sole authority all its laws were fixed, and that their
' names will be inscribed on its twelve foundations, after
it has reached its consummation in glory : — and that,
^ withreg^d to the seventy, there is no e^dence what-
ever that their commission was more than temporary,
•-—no evidence of its having even continued beyond the

i..' ■

■ "J

•;■■. P-
1 ''"'''■

, ' •

■ ■ . " ' •-,' '

. ■ ^

•

■ ■' '■ --••-

■^..■.■.; ;.- :.

.*•- ■ -■'-<

■ ■;■;

■■■'■». '^y ' •'

■: ■ ^:..: :

. . NO ETIDEITCE FOB DIOCESAN EFISOOPACT. 157

time when, having « gone two and two before his face
into every city and place whither he himself would
come," they returned, and gave an account of the^an-
ner in which they had fulfilled their charge ; and that
the terms of their commission, for the time it lasted,
were yery much the same with those of the apostolic
commission during Christ's own ministry, and their
miraculous credentials too the same. Those who seek
support from such sources as these, may be safely left
to their own vain imaginings. Argument here would
be quite out of place. •

3. While ye do not go back to the period preqeding
Pentecosti neither do we com6 down beyond the
•eriod of the apostles, or to any fecords Of after
liipes,— but keep exclusively to their age and to their
writings. — Whatever can be shown to have been the
state of things in these after times, and even however
early, it can have nothing in it \o bind the con-
science. It- may, to a certain extent, be admitted as
evidential-; hni not at all as authoritative. And even
when regarded as e^denlial, it can only possess the
quality of evidence in cases where apostolic precept or
apostolic example is matter Of dispute. ' Existing facts
in eaily antiquity, when tl^ey canbe clearly ascer-
tained, may then have their weight in bringing such
questions to a settlement. But where the apostles say
nothing, no subsequent records or writings can bind
us :— and where the apostles tto decide, whether by
direct preceptor by recorded example, no such records
or writings can release us fronj obligation, or even in
one iota modify their decision, or justify deviation
from it. It was to them that Jesus said^"He that
heareth you heareth me." If we would hear him,
then, we must hear them. If we have them on our

'■ife-i

■sr

:■"*■

168

07FICEB8 OF OHBISTIAN CHXJBCHES.

side, we may keep our minds very easy, whosoever
else can be mustered against ns. The Fathers, and
even the early Fathers, have been shown to differ from
one another, and not seldon; to be barely consistent
with themselves.i Let others, then, be their expound-
ers and reconcilers, and carry on their interminable
warfare, for the jfurpose of settling what, after all, has
no authority in^'it, when the settlement has been
effected :— be it olirs to^eep to the apostjes ;— to make
our sole appeal ^to them ; to feel. ourselves bound
where they decide, and free where they are silent.

4. When, in the present controversy^ I speak of
episcopacy, let me not be understood as meanihg the
existing*Enghsh Hierarchy, or any other ecclesip|ical
constitution of a national character passing ^i^p^he
same designation.— The three essejatial ordelM in
Episcopacy, are bishops, priests, (or presbyters) and
deacons. But in the existing Hierarchy of England,
we have arch-bishops over the bishops ; in both of
whom — the supreme, and the subordinate — are vested
the entire spiritual jurisdiction of the church, and at
the same time, a »hare in the secular jurisdiction of
the state : and under these we have, in regular
gradation, deans, arch-deacons, prebendaries, canons,
chancellors, commissaries, vicars, rectors, curates,
and deacons. To which array of spiritual offices may
'be added the more secular otaes of surrogates, proc-
tors, lay-rectors, and church-wardens.* No one is so
■ foolish as to think of pleading bible authority for
such a complicated system as this. It has no proto-
type there. It is as unlike the constitution of ^0

. * We are BO little accustomed in Uie North to the steps of this long
ladder, that I must crave pardon if I have chanced to misarrange
them.

tv_

v.; »-•■■• '

•\^

it/^T-:

■i/

NO EVIDENCE FOB DIOCESAN EPISCOPACY. 169

"kingdom which is not of this world" as that con-
stitution appears in. the Nd|w Testament, as it is
possible for any one thing to be unlike another. It
has sprang from worldly ambition ; from the principle
which began to work even in the bosoms of the
twelve themselves, when "there was a strife among
them which shOnld be the greatest." That principle
feared by degrees the magnificent Ecclesiastico-
political estabUshmei^ of the man of sinT— and of
the worldliness of that establishment — of its secular
pomp and policy— no small amount was retained,
when the papal domination was disdwned.^-I have to
do at present only v^dth the leading principle of
episcopacy, as stated at the head of this section ; —

• with the question, namely, whether, in the constitu-
tion of the apostolic churches, there were any bishops
in the diocesan sense of the designation^ — ^bishops exer-
cising ecclesiastical authoiit/^dyer the. ministers and
congregations of a district oi' diocese.

Confining ourselves, as w© determinately do, to
scripture, our argument here needs be but short. —
Observe, then — ,

1. If we have suceeedeii in the proof that Bishop
and Presbyter are, in the New Testament, designations
of the same office, ^e question is already seti^ed.
The proof of this we do not resume ; but witir^onfi-

^ dence refer to it. ."If the reasoning there b^ admitted
to be sound an<||^onclusive, tiff whole system of epis-
copacy falls- at once to the ground. If, in the New
Testament, a bishop is the .same with a presbyter,
and a presbyter the same with a bishop,--then, of

* course, the bishopB were not an order of officers
superior to presbyters and ov^' them in authority : —
and if not, where is episcopacy f — ^But —

«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

<\.

. \

./■

■y

-v»/

t]
tl
ii

k
b
b
oi
J<
ai
tl
tl
w

"T
is
tv
Pi
se
ai
in
Is
pi

lOJ

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</les theinselve^, it was understood
that' Janref was to; remain more statedly resident
there than ^ rest ?— providing thus for a case
whichwas.p<!i(ssible;S,lthough there is Uttle or no rea-
son "to suppose that it: often, if eyen ever, occurred.-^
That ttotSing more thanjjijs, or something like this

X is meant, is sdSciently lli&r from the connexion of
two of thd- cited passages themselves. In tho one/

. Paul splfi^s ajike of **. James, Ceohas, and John, who
seemed to be pillars." They we^^ three "ofnote
among the -apostles;." but thtere is not the sl^|[^st
indl,cation of anyi^cicd distinction ampngst tnem.
In the other, how do we fiaid the elders, who wer^
present with James speaking to Paul ?- They do not
leave it to their sijpposed bishop to dictate to him
^hat seemed the . p^th of ^duty. It .is an easy,
friendly, brotherly interview.' James and the elders
hear together his interesting narrative ; they unitedly
magnify the God of grace for its details ; and then'

: r^ll : *—

v»/

' t'

» 1

/• '

• .♦

' \

'-1\.

t /

I J
••i.

'■& xii- 25;

^'■' 2. Ana

osaic yoKd^ 7v^!^*''
t^bo presided <«;0at
_. , oritative sentencetmsA
pe it imposed iipon thm ?'
fd: niSfeir language is— « Ad i^ "^ '
jvljp believe,' t/;e have' 'vnditteii^lib'd
that Ibeji^ observe no, such* thi^g/'

^ 8 naforally Mads, me to the othpr' , , _,
evdir£fc| proof of the pitelatic auth<^ity of ^am^^s,
laipely, hi» condilct in i(vihli]li. «{Mseopalians are ftai^
le^o]^inating thle firsSie^lesiastlcal oouncil— Actia
S'l^^As aw^ole chapter Will^ ^e , devoted to the full
; \ , ' '. d^ussion of tbe refill cHiirafefiBf b£ that assembly, — •'
'^*^, ^ and its beaying, drf^o bearing, on our present $ub-
\^ iect»I shall say but, little- ons it at present. It ^nll
' ■ , -', tixfix^ I trtist^ be ma^e to appear, that the c«i,se is <h][I^*
V "^'^ ■ ^^"l^?^* *^ •*'^® wa^^ apprppriate example, no p^% -
',. ' ,^' cm, claim. Foi^ tho present it must sufl^co to observe :
\ — 1- That the id,ea;of James; in his capacity (^bishop
^^f J&rusaleni; hating authoritative prfesidency over
*^e othei^ .apostles' themselves, is' an outrage o njfe^
•that can ''be ^eemed " decencj and\ drder.'*—
Jerusalem was his diocese, Antioch> 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

.*'

'4-^-

•

J
e

"b
a
n

. 9i

g
,a

■ "n

. 'ai

bi
w

,^tc

' . , '--i-a.!

% ,

=■*!!#*,

Ef>"

'-"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<M%. The deteitoination at Antioch was " that

^ Paul and P^mabj^s* andc^rtain other of them should
go up"— not to the bishop of Jerusalem, but " to the

.apostles and elders^'who were there. It was they

psider of the matter:— it

)i;amed :— and by them,

^^- pj .-.■^"^^0™>> 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 '*"^ ^'

•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
<Ace;V&c.(Titus, i. 5.)— Here is the o5^dination o^
presbyters;— here is the charge of the soundness of
their doctrine;— here is authority to investigate accu-
sations against them, and to rebuke them when they
fell into sin. Is ndt this^ superiority,— and authori-
tative superiority? Undoubtedly it is.— Are not
these, then, the powers of a diocesan bishop ? Be it\
so. It does not from that follow that either Timothy
or Titus was such a. bishop. The powers of a dioce-
san bishop might be possessed, and yet the office of a
diocesan bishop have no existehce. They were
possessed by the apostles themselves; yet Timothy tp
and Titus were not apostles. The truth appears to l*
be, that they were what may appropriately be termed ] J* ''^
apostolic delegates, or pHenipotmtiaries. They accom- "#
panied the apo&stle, as his assistants in his arduous "
ministry, and were commissioned by him, doubtless
with the Bimctioii of his divine Master's authority,

.i/:

• if,

.i/:

fct.lVt. ■

, tlO EVropOE FOB DIOCESAN EPISCOPACY. 465

as special occasion required, to occupy particular
stations for a season, as his delegates or vice-ger^nts;
to act forhim inhisabsence,^and supply his unavoid-
able lack of service. Were it not that the designa-
Jaou savours of antiolirist, we might call them Paul's
tegcUes^ latere, in the places occupied by them in his
absence. They A^ere above bishops. They acted
by delegation of apostolic powers. Timothy is called
an evangdtst; but ^either the one nor the other is
0ver designated ai^^^/tfxoa^o? or bishop.— And alj that
remains to be proved concerning them is, that neither
at Ephesus, nor at Crete, nor anywh^ else, had
either the one or the other a settled offfice,— .a perma-
nent official, connexion with the churches in "thos^
places. And the proof of this is on tW very surface
I^^requires no nwjre than the simple comparison of a ^ '
few passages in the apostle's letters tojeach of them.
—In Tit. i. 5, before quoted, Paul says to TStus--
"For this cai*8e left I thee in Crete, that thou*.'
shouldest set iii order the things that are wanting,
and ordain elders iii every city, as I h^d appomted
thee," That, this iw^as 'only a temporary commission,
or delegation/ of powers for a special iaccasion, and
ndt a permanent official charg0, is aa clear as possi^
ble from cha^. iii, 12 ; where he says— " when I shafl /
send Artema^ unto thee, or Tychicus, be diligent to
ie Jo Nicopolis : for i have determined
The apostle was desirous to' have
h;imself, and thus proposes to send '
ff. - ' *he two fellow^ministers named, to

exchaiigei^aces with him.--io 1 Tim. i. 3, the apostJe
writes :— -^^esought thee to abide still at Ephesus,
whep I ii^eWinto Macedonift,. that thou mightest^
charge some mat t|ie y te a ^ no oth|f doctrine," <feo.

.1 • ■» .

come unto
there to
Titus again]
me or otH

' i-

■^Wi

V '-'

r
f

..r .

.#"%

'%•;

J-"''^

♦■

166

OFTIOEBS OF OHBISTIAM

-from

ch it

j«aiL. 'Jjf

appears, not thai he. appointed
Timothj t</& permanent office there,1but that he left
him bdmpd, on his going to Macedonia, for the
special-ra&pose: of counteracting 0ie progress of cer-
tain wrerkUing heresies. — In 2 IRm. iy. 9-^12, he

- direcilferhim thus: — "Po thy diligence to come
shortii* unto me. For I>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

" '/.

;>/;.

«*

♦•

NO EVIDENCE FOB DIOCESAN

)%: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,"

' 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,'* <fec. *■ ■

The precise import of this designation blfts been a
much controverted point. — Without ent^ri1^- largely '
into ihe discussion, and frankly admitt^jg the diffi-
culty of determining the sense with precision i^fl
certainty^ I would remark upon it — ■ . ' >:''

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

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-"^-' "'

' .

..>

'.'■*■

J •

•

p^^

<M'

'"r'

^
^

NO EYIDENOE FOR DIOCESAN EPISOOPACT. l71

not usiial," as has justly been remarked, " to address
epistles to mere personifications ; wid had the parties
to whom these apocaljptic epistles were sent been
the body of elders in each congregation, the title
'presbytery,' or some analogous appellation, would
have been employed."* "

, 4. We must refer to what has formerly been ad-
duced in evidence that the word church is never, in
the New Testament, used to denote a number of con-
gregations under a common government,— as ^uffi-

>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," &<j. By W. L. Alexander,.
. '(ftoi«^D.D.) App., Note A. . *"

> V','..

1- ; ;

■ ■> :

'm:

-»

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

/ '.

V- V

.,-<■- 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 '

/'%.

•/»■

■if

■■<A,

■^f:.

■•18ir:

■^:

■XP>::

174

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 ■ '.•■,■

' " ■ *

' ■ ■■ i

■■.■ ■.'';" <

1
<

f ■■

' 1
c

•

.t
(

'• fl

'I '

•

. " / tl

, -^ ' ol

1 "«

..,;*■■

■:■■;-:■ • V ■'■•■■■ -
' ■, ■-■ • ■ V' • ■ 1 '

-• : .;•■;■■■.,;; /t^::.:,v'

"V,. " ■

.1' « \ .,''' •'. .' - . - .,

'.:..: -.^ikJ....^^

' ,^:.**' ;.-.

.■■■-, ■.-' ""^4 ; ::^ ■' :^

NO EVIDENCE FOB BUUNO I^LDEBS.

176

• \

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 ■ ■;•.■«.

■ r.

.,..-< ■ ■■

<\ » ■!

<■•

■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

. \"

., HOiTiDiKOK Mb BtiLraa eij>xbs. Vfj

JM «.« eiaach ot God, yUoh he hath purohitted

(«.^«K«,) signifies to/«J>S the/mctu^ <fa,hep-
*errfimd beats referemie to the word "flock," wh^
he had ,™t used. (Xir, translators seem to 1«to
^osen the word «to/eed," ™,der the impres^on of
stntable pro™ion for the flock constituting Zmo^
jmportant part of the shepherd's charge, ''^e S
W a spmtaal flock ; the provision, spiritaal pro^o?
-instruction in divine truth, the only nomS
provender of th6 flock of Christ. Such iS3
. therefore, formed a part, and the chief Srfff«
official duty of aU these elders; althoulT,;,^' *^
guidance, ^d general superintendence a^d cafe wm
«.other. They were to tend, or (could we S ^
te?4.? :?*»"'loa'« cases wl do, intoTve^
to »J^W the flock or "Church otthe Lord™'Z^
"reedtng the flock," says Dr. M'Kerrow, (p Ml v'"l^

potter, and an ^quaUy important part of it " Tto

ttt'^^'^f '"'"**'"* obo"* degrees of importanc?
f " '"""g^ '» ""y Poipose thatXh are aZS
to belong to the shepherd's office and tn^iT
included.- And thi sulbsequenStert^s ^w^^
confirmatory of those addressed hat^g be^^Si!

«';^;w t-T;- f '-'"' ttere is no Wct^^^w
much as hinted »t :-" For I know that after J^
departure grievous wolves shaU enter in 1,™? "^
not Sparing the flock- also ^,^T """"""« yo".

c.^ «/ter Mem.". Surely this language apoKesn,^^
naturally to public teocier,, !«rvertinf ^ft^tH
.Go< and becoming pestUentheresiarcL "'.

■ntus.i. 5-7. was also quoted in evideace-and"

'^. .'.♦>,,

. \ ■

-.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

« ■■

■ • •"

'■•*.

; ; 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»<ors" been one
office, and " ^eoc^rs " another, we should naturally
'withouihquestion, have had— "some, pastors; and
some, teacher^." \. / ,. -

£ieb. ziii. 7. " Bemember them who have had the
rule over you, {iiyovntvav) who have spoken unto you
the word vf God; whose faijh follow, considering •
ihe end of their conversation."— "Another of tha
-titles given to thei^ (elders)" says Dr. M'JBterrow, " is
that of governor X^yovMevoiy* A»d he proceeds to
show thafr^ihe, word expresses rwfe, whethtr ecclesias-
ticalVr civil. This we are not disposed to question.
But let the reader msl^k what is ^here too, under this
>n, obimectM w{th the exercise of rule-4

- Vl -

^, .

■V . .■

.%■.• ..: •

'■1 ■■

,' "i „■' . "

1 ■■■;'■■■''■

. ■''*\ .;

">■

■ ".'^'''' ■" .•

' .•

." ■'

._ ' ;-'''„ :

' "'.

i'.'V

ry,

I-'':

•0

\ ■'■ ^' ■"■ ■<

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<SratiEvovi^fioov iv
Hvpt<a^,xat Tovi vovOerovvrai •d^ai.

-U-

■■k>

t'%.

■f » '\

•-■■-^■-:;(:'-''-r-'^ v' ; "^■-:: '•■■:■- -L^-'.'.

UmM07M:

^^^^^^^^B^k, ' - '

■ .■/■ -1'. ■* ' ■ -.

''■ V-:

^^^^^

"/■■■;<.. ^

- .. ' ■ '■ ■' > ' . * '.■'■-

■*■..*■■ ■■ ■ .

.-■".' ■ ".' .^ - ■"'* ■ ■ r'*

, ■"' .■•''■.'■'■. ■. ' ■ ■ ■• ' * '■■■*■■ . - " . ■ ' ' '■ ■ ■ - '.■'.'.■■■■■■"■.: -,.'."'■'■ ™!:. ■■-.;' V ■.'' '

."■". "■■'.. ■■-'■.'■^■^- .

■'■;'V ••/•'■■■.; .."■ :->";■,,■; .. ■- ■■■\ _ • .-■■:": ■;~";~' '■.. -■''•:■'■ V --. 'V- V-''^^' ■■.'■.'' ''^^

■■■"■' ' ■ . .'• '■•.;,' ' ; ."

■■■■. .'■■' "*. '■', ■"'■:.■
■ "* -

■ » ■ ■ . . ■ .-.-.-■,' - ■ ■ . - -

-■--■.:♦;,■■ ■■«*,■',:

' . V ' ^ ► . ..- • ,; . • . M

.'" " -^ . ■■ "'.' °

■■ w ■

HKMUTION 1U1 Qi$M1

(ANSI ond ISO TEST CHAlIT No. 2) '

lU I

I3j2

1.23 ■ 1.4

ntita

2j
2.2

2.0
I.S

. *»,<«»■

^ /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-

■»

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." *

-«•-
*

/■-

f i^-'-

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

.i>f.

^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 <m Theology, Lee. C, v(d. iv.. p. 379.

t l^hia is a somewhat einguiar admisuoo, when taken in connexion

■::*"-

'f ,.

2^:

\"-- ^.' A-:

\^-

186

omcmas or ohaibtian ohttbohu.

warrant for nding tflden, beoaoM there are some
pasMgea in whioh%ihej seem to be disimoilj reoog-
niaed."— Now, before we enter on the consideration

'10

,. 5*-

wlUi Um almost iinirerMl practice heretofore, at leaat for « long period
pMt, of the different pretb;^rian bodies. They have hod niliiiff
•Idera, but no deacons. They h«Te had the oflice, that is, in behalf
of which, it is here admitted, least can be said ; while they hoe not
had the one Tes|)eoting which we^ve the " more explioit and ample
Inlbrmation," and for which the necessary qualifications are specially
described I This, it may bo said, is a mere inconsistency with them-
Mlres ; seeing their theoretical system of church order includes them
both. I grant it. The (kct, howerer, looks as If they had fonnd
fiso ^gUm mough ; and if, In selecting the two, they have preferred
the one which is 1«4« to' the one which is mon expressly enjoined, they
■boold not surely be over severe on us for adopting one which they
as well as W^p admit to be of dirine institution, and reftising the other,
for which we see no sufflclent authority.— But the principle on whieh
Um omission of the deacon by oar preebyterian friends is by tliia
eminent writer-^If not vindicated— at least excused and palliated, is
to me more surprising still than the omission Itself :— " In Bom« parti
of the church, the ottee of deacon Is retaine^,«bnt in others it is hot ;
and the want of it has been represented as a crimltial omission. Bat
the Instltutioti arose out of particular circumstances, and may, tiiere-
fore, be dispensed with, when these do not exist In some congreiga-
tions there are no poor ; In others, they are very few in number ; and
where they most abound, they can be attended to by the elden, whom
we acknowledge as offloe-bearfti in the church, as we shall afterwards
aee ; and who, on the principle that an inferior office Is comprehend^
in^the superior, possess the powers of deacons, as ministoqi posseu
the powers of elders. This is our apology for not having deacons la
all our congregations ; and it seems to be satlsfsctory. They are not
i4>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.

<^'^

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 .

«,»,

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

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 <kP«
passagcH to bo found on various tx^ints, from which
as grounds of primary appeal nothing can be deduced,
although, on the supposition of the particular points
having been proviou^y, and on other grounds, estab-
lished, they might reasonably enough be considered
as cpntainin'g on allusion to them. The present is
one of thoso ; though, even in the case supposed, the
\allusion could not be said to be very certain Or clear.
As it tftands in itself, it is obviously quite too general
and indeterminate, to prove any thing on the point
now in question.— The language of the whole pas^Qige
is of that indefinite character, and susccij^tibfo Hf
fiuch a variety of interpretation, that {. cannot \fai
egard it as a symptom of felt la«!»k of better proof,

at it should ever have been appealed to. It cannot
]b>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

m KfmmcB roa suumo iloiMi.

«i

^"or from the p«<niliAr work of Um {Msior, Um
doctor, and tho doacon,"— w« d«mur. Ther« is more
AMumod thau can b« grautod. Tliat panUrr and iiodor
(or teacher) woro distinct officfm, in, an ban jaitt b«en
remarked, rendered very unlikely by the pamage
cited from the epistle to the Ephoiiians. and is at the
best, a matter ef uncertainty :— and that '*ea^oriaiu>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

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<E.'8 principle of interpretation, it is not only not
to be found, but pointedly excluded ; the same prin-
ciple which divests "him that ruloth" of the official -
function of teaching, divesting "him that teachoth"

HO iriDlllOt fOB BUUMO iLDSlill.

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<ktre< and npoi6ra}teyoi ; — by. Ilodtfe, of ruling
presbyters. Those, though not precisely alike, are
closely akin to each other. Six)tt, with an episcopa-
lian loaning, interprets the designation of the "exer-
cise of authority in the church oT^r any description
of its ministers, or in any magistracy or presidency
, lin tho community;" — Mackniijld, of "a stated office,
perhai)s the Bishop's mm\Bity"—8chlemner,in like
manner, of "tho president of the church, him to
whose care the christian assembly is committed, and
who is elsewhore called bishop, presbyter, shepherd ;"
— Ouyge, of "him that is entrusted with the church
stock, and with a superintendenoy over it, to see that
it is applied to its proper uses '^'—Rooihroyd, of "him
13

•

■«s

C^-^

rr '

* ' " . • %" ■ 7 '^.

(

•l^

_.J^.

■V. '^,

^ *

•

-1.

•

-y '

' ■

^ ' .'■ ^- ' •• • ,

« >

e ,

•I'

' . t

—/

' ' ) . , -

" • . ' - -

"" 1

Xy/'^'v iM'

'■' v-...^' ■„,

■■■

f '^

,1.- .. ■■.■"-,'' i ■'■'

* -

- '

n .

'■ .* .

, t

l- ''■ ■

, , '■ ■

';"".

' /

..^' %

■ 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

■ if
r

'■^ .,

1.'

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 <Aw passage, it has a still stronger
application to the one which comes next in order—
1 Oor. xii. 28, " And God hath set some in the church,
first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers,
after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps,
governments, diversities of tongues."— I expressed
surprise in the former case : my surprise is still
greater here. It is beyond measure strange that
any stress should ever havie been laid on a ground
so insecure and feeble as this. "Helps " and " govem-
menia " are the two items in the list from which tiie
conclusion is drawn. The one is made to signify
deaemSf and the other riding ddera. And I think
this is just as likely to be the true interpretation as
any other,— perhaps the most likely ; understanding
ndtng dderSf however, not in the presbyterian sense
of elders whose office wais to rule apart from teach-
ing, but of bishops, whose office included both
instriiction and rulft But still, both the terms are
quite too generi^ in their import, and too completely
' unexplained by their occurrence and connexion any
where else in the New Testament, to allow of any
sure conclusion to be drawn from them. Here too
it may be worth while to show their indefiniteness
by a few references.— " iTe^p*," or Helpers, arehjDr.
Oiven, by Calvin, hy Bhomfidd, hj Dr. Henderson,
and by presbyterian writers in general, (as, in our
own day, by i?r. Dick, Dr. King, Dr. M'Kerrow,BXidL
others,) understood of the office of the cfeooow. But

■ . i^^fi'--

NO EVIDENCE FOR RUUNQ ELDEBS.

197

by Dr. Macknightf the word ia interpreted of "those
who, speaking by inspiration, to tiie edification of
the chnrch, were fitted to assist the superior teachers,
and help the faith and joy of others;"— by G^Myae, of
those who, "being of the lower clato of prophets^
foretold particular events, and were assistant to the
apostles Mid churches, in going to one place and
another on special occasions, for various purposes ;"
— by Horaley, in a, hke sense, of "such as Mark,
Tychicus, Onesimus," Ac.;— by Whitby, of " deacons,
and other officers, who ministered, not only to the
hick and poor, but in holy things also, as baptizing
and distributing the eucharist;" — hy Doddridge^ o!
"helpers in the management of charities ;"-^by
Boothroyd, ot "persons who assisted- the apostles in
administering baptism, praying with the sick," &o. ;
—by Scott, of persons " qufdified to attend, and be ^
assistants to, the apostles in their labours, as evan-
gelists ; or, as some explaiii it, to help th6 pastors in
tJie office of deacons, and in various other services."*

. •"HelpB." avTiXTfiffet?'. This word occurs nowbero else in the
New Testitment. It is derived firom ayrtXajufiayta^ and denotes,
properly, aid, assistattee, Aelp;— and then, those who render aid, assis-
tance, or helpi^helpers ; who they tBere,is not knouin. They might have
been those to whom was intrusted the care of the poor, and the isiolc,
and strangers, widows and orphans, &q.; i. e. those who performed th«
office of deacons. Or they may havebeeh those who attended on the
apostles, to idd them in their worlc ; such as Paul refers to in Bom.
xri. 3, " Greet Priscilla and Aquila, my hdpera in Christ Jesus :''— and
in Terse 9, " Salute Urbane, our hdper in Christ" It is not possible,
perhaps, to determine the precise meaning of the #ord, or the nature
of tiie office which they ^scharged :— but the word means in general,
(hose who, in any way, aided o]r rendered assistance in the church,
and may refer to the temporal affairs of the church, to the care of the
poorj the distribution of charity and alius, or to the instruction of the
ignorant, or to aid rendered directly to the apostles. There is no

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.

.-*

NO evidence: yOK RULINO ELDER8.

190

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.

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«t</A^ of teaching and of
ruling.— ^We' have formerly seen, that in other
passages, in which the same word occurs— as 1
Tim. iii. 4, 5;^cuid 1 Thes. v. 12, — it is associated
with the duty of teaching, as another function of the
same office. -Sven on the supposition, however^ of
its being, in the passage before us, correctly rendered
" rtife," and of its denoting such rule in the stricter
uid more definite fiiense, it does not at all follow that
the rule must be that of a distinct office— an office
from whose duties teaching is excluded. The evidence
of the various passages we formerly hind under our
review, exemplifying the different designations under
which elders are spoken of, is all to the contrary :—
and we may, perhaps, see reason immediately to
think, that, instead of such exclusion of teaching
being necessary in the passage before us, the neces-
sity, in order to a consistent^ exegesis, is on the other
side.— Observe, then, further,-—
'3. It is quite clear, that the word rendered "hon-
our" is here to be understood as meaning more than
mere re«p^ or c&^erence; and more especially, iliat
it includes at least, if it does not even expressly and

ao2

OFFIOEllS OF OiniliBTtAN OaUBOHKB.

•t

exoluBtvely signify, that partioular expressibn of
r^pect and due consideration, which consists in
the btatotoment of temporal attbimtence and ^omfort.
This is put beyond a doubt by the 1,8th verse, in
which' proverbial maxims are used, which, both by
onr Lord himself and by this apostle, ore appropri-
ated to this particular subject: — "For the scriptpe
aaith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth
out the com;" — and "the labourer is worthy of his
reward."* The word itself, indeed, rendeted honour,
(rtMff) is one which means also 'price, recompense,
remuneration ;\ and, as it is often so used, it probably
was intended to have this explicit sense here. At all
events, the subsequent verse, just cited, shows this
to have been included, if not alone meant.— But what
proof, it may be asked, arises hence that the refer-
ence is not to lay-ddera? The proof is this: — that
we have express authority in scripture for "those
who preach the gospel living of the gospel;" but we
have no precept, and no example, for the pecuniary
support of any otheir order. The fair and naturtd
conclusion is, that the "elders" who were to be
counted worthy of this "honour" were elders in
whose o£Bice teaching, or " the preaching of the word,*'
was included."^

* See M»tt. X. 9, 10 ; Luke x. 7 ; I Cor. iz. 9, Ac.

f Tbis original import is remarkably apparent in tlie Latin word
Aonomrium,— of which the etymology is manifest, and Which signifle*
rteompenae.-^the Greek word denotes fyeompense, in Uie twofold sense
of reteard and punishment, being thus used either in bonam or in maloM
partenk With some of its derivatives the ideas of value, preciousness,
Ac., are more exclusively associated. Price, in the strict sense, is its
meaning, Matt. xxviL 6 and 9 ; Acts iv. 34 ; v. 2, 3 ; vii. 16 ; six. 19 ;
lCor.!vl.20;^l. 23.

* And here welave an exemplification of the different light in whieli

NO KTIDfNOE FOB BUUNO BLDEBS.

203

4 It seemasttffioientlj erident that the distinotioQ
expressed iu tha verse is a distinotion, not between
officers of different dcftcrijitiona, but between officers of

tbo samd thing nppoani, in difTerenk clrciinuitanct'S, and according to
iti bearing upon diffbrcnt conolusiona. In hiH argument' against,
episcopacy, Dr. Dtck says,— speaking of the blaliopH of that syBtcm —
** To preach the gospel is not an essential duty of their offlco ; they
are appointed merely to rule :— and henco it appears, that, although
they receive " double honour." they are not worthy of it according to
the jiidgment of Paul, wbo aaaigned it only to those who both rule weU and
"labour in word and doctrine." If so, — then, since the apostle does
expressly assign it to " the elders that rulev>ell,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,

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.

'#•-

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.

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 vf<MRMa^tioc) so trans-
lated. According to what may, I think, be called
invariable usage, it must be understood as represent-
ing those who are described in the latter part of the
verse as comprehended undetr the more general description
in the former,— not as a distinct class of persons, but

* •

■^r

FOR RtnjKO EIJDtM.

207

>f 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.

. A

NO EVIDENCE POft BUMNO ELDEItS.

209

.: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,<a8 it is called, to be invariably
confounded under one common name^ When the character, of such aa
ai-c proper for the office of older is poinded out by Paul to Timothy (1
Tim. iil. 2.) " apt to teach," or fit for teaching StSanrtKo?, is men-
tioned as an essential qnality ; and though the, words be different in
the chargb to Titas (Tit. i. 9,) the same thing is implied— "that he
may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and to convince the
gainsay <*rs." This is spoken indiscriminately, of all who were proper
to be nominated bishops or elders ; which we cannot suppose would
have beea.donc, if part of them were to have no concern in teaching..
We find no .such quality among those mentioned as nccqssary in
deacons. And a dnbions,not to say a forced, exp* aition of a single
passage of scripture, is rather too small a circumstance, whereon to
found a distinction of so great consequence. If, therefore, it were only
from this passage that an argument conld be brought for the admisaioD
of those denominated lay-men to a share in the management of church
affairs, Ijlorrffy part, should most readily acknowledge that our warrant
for the practice would be extremely qneationable." Lectures on Eccl.
Hiat. volt pages 177—180. The Doctor adds— "But I ahall have
occasion to consider this afterw|rd8." I am not aware, however, of
. his ever aftc'rwurda resuming th# aubject as a acripture quration, and
adducing any other prooft in support of the distinction. In giving np
1 Tim. v, 17, he baa given up the only text that poaacBsea even
plauBlbilityi .. •

■^^

'.■■•(,

,-.

■■ 1

■ I

;.':!,

■

;

■'

■ ■ 1

: . ■

.r-A

212

OFFICERS OF OH|U(&TIAN OHUBOHES.

(f eldera in eachclairch. Tliis is a subject regarding
wMch modem independents have been often twitted
with their alleged inconsistency, in pleading as they
do for universal adherence to the model of the
apostolical churches/and yet satisfying themselves
so generally, almost universally, with one 2i)a«/or. Our
presbyterian brethren have shown a good-humoured
disposition rather to "glory over us" on this point of
their order; alleging that, in having a plurality of
elders, they are more in conformity to the practice of
the first churches than we are. "Our independent
brethren," says Dr. King, ''allow of no elders but
teaching elders; and what is the consequence? With
very few exceptions, each of their churches has but,
one elder, where each of the pririiitive churches had
a council of them. A fact of tliis kind is very signifi-
cant, and deserves to be well pondered. Each of our
presbyterian churches has a number of elders; each
of the primitive churches had a number of elders:
but our independent friends, who plead BO earnestly
for scriptural institutions, have in this departed from
apostolic precedent, and, even in the case of their
largest churches, have substituted one elder for a
college of them. Why is it so? The r<Sason is, that
they think all elders must be teaching elders ; and,
since the pulpit can be supplied as well by one as by
a dozen, and the support of more than one minister
is burdensome, or impossible, they content themselves
with one such elder for a church, as eqiMil to its
necessity. But should they not doubt their interpre-
tation of scripture, when it brings them into collision
with scriptural facts? Should they not reason with
themselves:— one teaching elder suffices for a large
congregation; therefore they cannot have been all

■ \^ ■

Wr '

: '.!

tL- — .^

^O EYID]

TOR BTTLmO ELDER8.

^13

teaching elders, of whom the aposties assigned oer-
ttunly more than one, and likely a considerable num-
ber, to the most diminutive of christian assemblies?"*
We "suffer the word of exhortation." We make
no pretensions to infallibility; nor are we less liable
than our neighbours to fall into inconsistencies. If,
in this particular, our practice were admitted to be
inconsistent with our great general principle of adhe-
rence to the apostolic model of christiaii«hiirches,—
the admission would not materially affect the two
great general questions. What are the offices of such
churches, and what is tiieir government? We might
bear the charge, and be right in our main principles
after aU. A few remarks, however, require here to be
made:-^

1. The matter of fact, of the existence of such a
plurality, in some at least of the apostolic churches,
candour will not allow me to question. We find it in
the church at Philippi,— Phil. i. 1. We find it in the
church at Ephesus, — Adts xx. 17. We find it, (for,
though the words may possibly bear a different mean-
ing, such meaning is not, I frankly admit, their natural
one) in the churches at Lystra, Iconium, Antioch, and
other places, — ^Acts xiv. 23. * .,

2. Cm a principle formerly adverted to,— (namely,
that Elders does not express the office to which the
ordinatiit^n took place, but the previously existing
order of taien in the churches/rom amongst whom the
officers— r^iMops and c^eocon*— were chosen for ordina-
tion) soiliae have regarded these two offices — the bishop
and -the deacon — as included in, and accounting for^
the plurality admitted to have existed. But here

• On the Ruling Eldership, pages 22, 23.

.. /

rvfg!til-'y "T^rp

214

OFFiOBBS OF OHRISTtAN CHUK0HE8.

-"■ -\

again candour interposes her veto. Believing t&e >
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

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..___.__^

\ •

/ 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

( >

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- '

■" ' :*

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,

"»■.'

•\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

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.

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.

-♦*•

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<hnili) of tU

people. ■ '

The first of the passages which might have been
adduced on our pi'esent subject was, in thi& way,
discussed before. I refer to Matt xviii. 15^-17. I
must request the reader to go. back upon that '
discussion. If we have succeeded in showing that ,
there" is no evidence \^hatever of the word church,
in the last of the directions— "Tell it unto the
chunph"— signifying the officers of the church, or
the church in ^ts representatives; but that it ought
to be imderstood in the sense which (with the excep-
tion, of course, of the church itnit'crsal, which in this
occunrence of it, it caw*io< mean), it invariably bears
in the New Testament scriptui-es,— namely, any par-
ticular congregation, or regularly, constituted an^
regularly 'convening assembly, of believers ;— then
<lie charge— "Tell it unto the church,"— :will mean
—Mate it known, to ' the christian assembly with
which the offender and yourself are connected; lay
it bfefore the brethren :— and the deoision hi that
assembly i^ %nal, — without appeal, save to the
tribunal of Christ. . . ; . ; ^ '

But we have evidence morte conclusive. Ltet the

" reader look to the fifth chapter of the first epistle to the
GorinthicCtis; and having carefully read -it, obsefve:"

^'^^There j^ou haVe, 1. The statement of a case, as

,^v

^
'i

■l.'Vi:

GOVEIOQIENT OP THE OHUBOH.

227

reported to the apostle, and his reproof of the churob
• ai Corinth, for the light and negligent manner in
wMch t|iey had dealt with it : verses 1, 2. — ^2. His
authoritative directions how they should now deal
v^th it, — by the immediate exclusion of the o£fender
from their christian fellowship :— verses 3—5 ; and
•veises 12, 13.— And then 3. This should be eoDpi-^
pared mth a passage in ihe secmd epistle, in which
he enjoms the Restoration of the oflFender to their
fellowslup, as one whdfii the salutary discipline had
brought to repentance :~2 Cor. ii. 6— 10.— Now to
whom, in all this, is the apostle addressing himself?
—For an answer, we have only to look to the begin-
ning of the- episUe. ft is— (1 Qor. i. 2.)— " To the
church of Go<t which is at Corinth." For, although,
in the address of the leister, there are associated with
the el|urc!i*'all the saints which are in a^U Achaia,"
f (wl]^^^n«.turally enougl| accounts for his ispeaking
** elsewhere of 7Ae c/iwrc/ies^ and, it may be, for one or
two other ' incidental expressions) there are uono^
it is presumed, who will be so unreasonable as to
conclude, that a case belonging to the CorinfSiian
church -was to be brgught before an ^assembly of ojU
the christians in the province.— rOn the terms of ^he
bentence we may offer a remarlj or two immediately.
But the chief question evideptly is, by wham ihe
' sentehce was to be pronounced and executed,-^^^^^
whimiihe discipl|cie ^as to be exercised. And ta^g
. • the entire passage together, I.can har^y imagine any
. thing plainer t^an this. The CHUsdH is addressed.
^ The pronoun xf> 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

! 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

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

_±

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"

/■ ■

l> ;V ■■•■

.,, »

■J

1 L

I, j m

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/

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 «/<c diurclt collectively. ---Arid irom tho
same passage we further learn, that byMt^ samcasso-
. ciqJte ad he was to be restored,— re-instated in com-
munion with the church, in the privileges of his
former ^uembership, and th6 enjoyment of tho
«? brotherly love" ivhich- by his grievous trespass he
had for t he time forfeited. Tlie church had cut him

■ M

■'■■■m

■ <

\/ -

oflf, and the church wero to restore him. Paul enjoi|iB

^fll

V doubt
lohi^rch
igyour-
t:-

-and

e's own
mmuni-

church
id had a
)Ught to
esire to

And in
nthians,
ivi'dence
leafi to be
^"Suffi-
lich watt
e ought
perhaps
vermuch

would
we learn
thorn iho
) apostlo

;"— that
obvious
rom the
imc asso-
in corn-
's of his
of tho
spass he

1 Giithim

/ ^.;-^' :^ \\V :,:,;. ::-^;- v..-

■■ • ■ ■■;■ . ■ ■■ ■■•• /■..

OOYERNIIEMT OF THE OHUBOH.

238

il enjoi|iB

both; and the same kind of argument by which it is*
aile^ that the apostle, and not iho Corinthians,
excommunicated him, wiU equally prove that the
apostle, and not the Corinthians, j^ave him back his * ^ ^

church status. And on the very same principle might ": ';■•-•■;,: -
it be affirmed still, that a church/ when obeying apos-
tolic direction in any caeie,doeA nothing; that it is still ^
the apostle, and ncj^ the church, that both judges and * /

censures, that both pronounc^^ arid executes the sen- ' j^

teuce. ■'■,■■■ ■■'■•■/ ' ■'■■ ' " ■-' " '^•'

5. It has bo6n affirmed7^"the members of the "' ''^

church of Corinth bore nd farther part in the dis-.
cipline that is heriBr described, than is borne by the
members of any presbyterian congregation, when
they are assembled to ^yitness the administration of
a public rebuke to an Offending individual who hafe |

been previouslydealt with bythe session, and who
lias been suspended by them from the enjoyment of ; .^

his privileges, as a member, of the church. In the Jr;

one dase.as well as in the other, the sentence has *

been pronounced indepWdent of the people: and in - ; * i
the one case^ as well as ^n th*e othervj^tejpeople are , V
assembled to witjioss the sentence being carried;irito
effect, agreeably to the apostolic injunction<f*thenv.
that sin rebuke before all, that others maiy fear.*"— \ '
Di\ M'Kerroio—pip. 34, 35.r-It might as wdl have -. i^
been said at once, that they bore wo partatalliior .

mere wt^ncssingf is really nothing: — they had nothing .
to say or to do, in either the judgment or the execu-
tion. But waseyer affirmation more gratuitotis?
On the assumption of its havmg been previously ^^ ^^^^;^^^r^j^^^
■proved from other passages indgfiendently of this,
that the discipline of each cbngregation wa^ lodged
in the authority of a session, subject to the revision

r»

OOVBIINMXNT OF THE OHDBOB.

;^_

of higher coiii>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

'ti

'' M

^f the saints that they shall judge the world— and

-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

members generally, to a case of grievous delinquency

— - ^--

/•■"

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 ■:'/■■.•■■■•:

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

^ ■•

\;\V

li?

It'll

■■<>

.,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.

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

-^-— 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*

"♦!,

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 < ..

'■■.'<l^-:- .:■

v..^

OOVEBNIEENT OF THE CHUUCH.

is-

ill

of thedmne Master's will.— Aiid thus, when the two
passages, « in the two epistles, are; taken .together,
there seems to be no possibUity, on any principle of
fair and ci^ndid exegesis, of evading the conclusion,
that the exercise of the discipline was condmitted to
the vhurch «)W«t;f/re/y/ and that every act of it,
whether in exconunilnicating or in restoring, ^jifaaio
be performed "in Se name of the Lord Jesus Christ,
when they were gathered together," invested, when
thus assemBlted, "with the power of our Lord Jesus
Clhrist," andjhaving his warrant to act with his
authority-v-- There is an evident reference to the
same sad ease.—sad in its^, though happy in its.
igau^i^ 2 Cor. vii. 8—12 ; by which this conclusion
is fidly sustained, But enough h^s been said.

ilie jiassa]ge oh which we hajve thus somewhat
largely insisted, important and conclusive as it i^,
does not stand alone. We refer also, in evidence of
the same point, to the epistles to the .seven churches
of Asia, contained in the second and third chapters"
of the: Boot of the Revelation.— On t^iese epistles

let it be observed^-^'

■ 1, It is'clear; ^at each of them^ i^ addressed to"
v-^e of th6 churches,— and to that one exclusively of
iadl the regt; and that each church had immedifely.
lo do with the contents t)i its own epistle. Not that
there ^ere ho lessons to be learned by eUch of the
churches from the contents of all the othfer six letters
as well as from that to itself:— theriB Were lessons for
all then, and there are lessons for all still-:— but what
Xmean is, that ifeach epistle* relates to the affairs of
the one church to which it is directed to be sent.
Each is addressed by itself, and for itself. Corrup-

\ ■, - :-- ■ : s - *^ = a s n —m ■ ^ i-i^ •—

tions of different kinds had unhappily found their

1 -fi-oij^j^pi!;

r.-

.OOYERNICE

NT OP THE CinjRC;H.

245

way into most, of then|/ But, whateyer is commanded
for the rectifying of ^hose corroptions, each of the
churches, it evidently k>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<s^of all t^e seven epistleife is^^here the ,^
remotest hint to beioiind of a.nyp)efihyteryd/Ephe»iis, .
Qt sijnod of ^fi«,— to which thl^ir matters should, in
any case, be r^ferr^ed. Had thete been such a thing,
il-cpuld hardly ^hftve failed, in regard to points of sucH
paramount impOrtp-ncey to be^ in some way;or other^
aUuded to. ^Ve might reasonably, indeed^ have ^-
pected mote than an aUttsion. There would haye been
a deficiency in the directions given as to esisential
duty, had there not been some express injunct^)^^
see to it that all they did was done in confortnity
with the constitutional arrangements, and legiitimate
authority, of the church of Christ. Had such courts
existed, they must have been mentioned, as those to*,
which delinquents in each' congregation were "ulti-
mately amenable. Yet there is not even an allusion,
either to session uieach,or to presbytery or synod
for all.;.
3r*It may be alleged, th&t thi» at the utmost proves

i»no more thanowe ol the two points undertaken to be
establi^ed— naiQely the tn^^epencJencyof the churches ;
that it furnishes no i)rOof of their ciyn^regctiitiMlisray—^

seeing in each of the epistles "<7te angd of th e vhtrch

,, '»

■ \

00VEUNMEN7 OF THE CHUBOH.

is SO H^eeially and pointedly addi:es8ed. — Suppose this
were admitted, it is no small piatter to have so distinct
an additional evidence of their hidependeiwy. But it

^ cannot be admitted, that "tJie angel" (whomsoever w5*
understand by the designation) is addressed apart

from '4he chuMh, or as possessingj or warranted to
exercise, any independent authority. The epistles,
when dictated, were ordered (as before noticed) to
be sent to "the seven tAwrcAe* which were in Asia;"-^
they contain " what the Spirit saith untp the churches:"
--■the churches collectively are, in point of fact, ad-
dressed, the plural being used as ivell as the singula^.

^In each case, it is tho character, not of the .angel
personally, but of the church collectively, that is
actually given; and to the c^iurch collectively, there-
fore, the instructions and commands are addressed.
The proof that, while the singular number is used,
the plural is also meaut,is palpable. In the epistle
to the church at Smyrna, the opening is in the same
style of individual address with the rest : — ^yet, while
it Js said "1 know if //^ works, and tribulation, and thy
poverty (but thou art rich") <fcc.— it is immediately
added— "Behold the Lord shall cast sowie of youiato
prison/ that ye may be tiie^ljandi^e shall have tribu-
lation ten days: be 4hou faithful unto dcatli, and I
will give thve a crown of life."— In that to tlie church
at Pergamos, the same mixed style of address occurs:
—"I know thy works, and where thou dwelled, even
where Satan's- seat is : smdihou holdest-fast my name,
and hast npt denied my faith, even in those days
wherein Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was
slain among you, where Satan dwelleth," — And so iii
the epistle to Thyatira:— -"I know thy works, A'c:^-

bul unto yon I say, and unto the rest in Thyatira, as

i ! I

QOVEBNMENT OF THE CHUllCH.

mauy as have uot.tWs doctrine, and who have, uot
known the depths of Satan, as they speak,— I mil
pal ^jxm you no other burden. Rut that which ye
have already, hold fast till I come." And in that to
_ihe Laodiceans:— "I know /% works, &o.— As manjr
an I love I rebuke and chasten; be zealous, therefore,
and repent. Behold I stand at the door, and knock :
(^ any man hear my voice, and open ihe door, I
ynXi come in to him, and will sup with him, and he
"with me." All the promises which are subjoined to
the different^pistles— "Yo him tJuif overcometh^—hy
supposing "distinction q( one from anothei? assume
phiraKty.— Surely, then, on |he same .principle, the
admonitions to duty in purifying the churches from
their comiptions oijght to be interpreted as addressed
to the collective bodies:—**! have a few things against
Ithee, because thou hast there (in thy communion)
those who hold the doctrine of Balaam," &c.:—-" So
hast thoii also them that lipid the doctrine 6f the
Nicolaitans, which tiling I hate. Repent," &c.— "I
have a few things against thee, because thou suflfered -
that woman Jezebel^ who calleth herself a prophetess,
to teach and to seduce my servants to commit forni-
cation, and to eat things sacrificed to idols." It was
their incumbent duty,os c/j«n7(es, to see that these
evils were remedied,-^that these ** wicked persons"—
jnat as in the case of the church at Gorinth— "were
put away from among them."

I might add, still farther, to these specific instances,
y^e general fenorqfsuch otiier epistles dB are addressed
to christian churches. They are nil in the same strain.
It is certainly an extraordinary circumstance, if there
ymia really at the time a representative constitution in
the churches,— if their discipline, for example, was

'f:

-r

ooVernment of the CHtnCH.

^conducted by a session, from which there was a righl ^
of appeal to superior courts, — that when matters of
that nature are at any time referred to, there shcmld
not be found so much as an allusion to such a c<m-

"7- stitution, but every thing confined to the one cjiur«lr-^ —
addressed, and terminating within itself. The entire
and uniform strain of the language is to the churoheft ^
coHectivdy, and to the churches exdimvdy and Jinatty^
The intelligent reader may just look at such passages
as the following, and mark their accordance with the
specific examples we have been illustrating:— Bom.
xvi. 1, 2, and verses 17, 18; 2 Cor. xiii. 1 ; Gal. vi. 1 ; 2
Thes.iii. 6,14,15. "

We have already, in part, seen what is pleaded in
opposition to all thii^, when considering the question
about the meanings of the vioxH churvh; oqA more
especially th6 sense, affixed to it by presby terians, of
the church rfpicwntattve,- — the church ?m if ft o^iC'
bearers. On this we do not go back. But the grand
appeal, in support of presby tenon representative
eoiu'ts, and courts of review, is made to thc^/ewi/A ,
chapter of the Acta of the Apostleff. This, indeed, may
be regarded as the patladimn of prethiftery. It is by
much too important to be disposed of in the close oS.
a chapter. We shall appropriate one entirely to itself,
and bestow upon it a full and deliberate investigation.
I ffankly avow, it has long been a cause of astonish-
ment to me, that such a view should have berai
taken of it, and that so much stress should h»re
been laid upon it. The explanation of the paasagidf*'^
is abundantly simple upon other principles. But even
lengthened examination and argument sometimes
become requisite , when simplicity has been rendered

complex, and plainness difficult, by the application 6^
a mistaken principle of exposition.

\ ■■"

1 ■

■ -Iv

CHAPTtai VI. ^

ON TH£ ARGUMOT FOR rit£HDYTERIANI8M DEIUVEDr
F»OM THE nFTEENTH CHAPTER OF THE ACTS'
* OF THE AP08TLE8. .

I HAVE already said that this is the palladium of
presbytery, as a system of courts of appeal and
review. If it can be shown that this fortress is
one "daubed with untempered mortar," I know not
another that can afford the Supporters of thai; system
any safe protection. I have to entreat my ret
.then, to di8})osHess. himself, as much as possibll
previous impressions, and to attend with candour to
the following considerations. ■

There are <A>'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^

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>-

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
«7<w a case of appeal tq inspired authority y and that it

:.was by sitch authority the dedaion tca^ /famed, and the

decree issued. — I support this position by t^e following

considerations: — ^ ■ • . ; .

1. It was a case of such a nature, that no authobity

OTHER THAN THAT OF INSPIRATION WAS COMPETENT Tp

-T'sEiTLE IT..:'' ■ ■■ ..-'-'/■■,«,... "'■;7;-'

• Lectures on Theology, vol. Iv., page 3€0. ^
■t DioccBan Episcopttcy Refuted, pagefi 84. 85.

. .,i«■^.

FROM FIFTEENTH CHAPTER OF ACTS. 253

The grand point appealed, let tne reader remember^
was one of doctrine; and pf docflbie, too, not of a
trivial or unessential character, but *^ffecting the
very substance of the gospel, — ^the foundation of the
unner's acceptance and hope. It involved the great
fundamental question between grace and works. It
was evidently, therefore, a poiui which required to
be settled by the very higlTest authority ,-yby authority
from which there could be no appeal. When the
Gentiles were desirous to know, what reaUy #as the
foundation on which their hopes of salvation were to
be placed, is it to be imagined, that they woidd appeal,
for satisfaction on such a questioi), t&-any authonty
but thftt which could impart to them the "full assu-
rance of faith " that, in receiving it, they were receiving
what was divine?'—! assume- it^as an indisputable
maxim, that there is no authority short of divine com-
petent to settle a point of doctrine m a point of faUh.
I was about to use a qualifying term, and say an
important point of doctrine. But the maxim admits
of no qualification, of no exception. Whatever it be
that comes bcffore us as a point of faith,— a point to
which our assent and submission are required, mi^st
come before us with rfmne at(thoritjf.]^^a^/bAB .^
regard to the testimony of God; and must in no case
"stand in the* wisdom of man.' V Nothing but what i
is "given by inspiration of God" is entitled to demand 4
our belief, or bind oiur consciences.— This leads me
to observe-—^ - ■",.-.■ '" '.::'[''■■ \ ^•■^'•' /.-'^y'. * • ■
, 2. If the decision in question was ntl given by
inspired authority, rr could not Jse imperatively

.BINDINO. ■' ■ • ■-■. .-"^ /■ ■■'■■

(3all the authority by what eccleaiastical designa-
tion you will, it was still human.:— md, as has just

254

AltaVllENT FOB ntESBYTEBUNI^

i-! it

been observed, no merely human aujthority can ever
render faith imperative. — ^If my reader shall start and
saj — ^What! even when the ajjostles of Christ formed ^
a part of the council !-7-that. reader requires to be
reminded, that he is falling into an illusion; a wiffioi-
ently natm-al one, I admit— but one of which it is
needful that he divest himself, if he woidd form
a, lair judg^nt. ' If t^e meeting was that of an eccle-
siastical court, the" aposUes are not to be considered ^
4S A(^tuig, or judging, in tneir inspired capacity. And
if you divest them of theirinsj)iratibn, they become
"as oth^rmen." Then* judgment ceases to be dfvine;
and the faith that resM upon it rests entirely on

'hunm|i authority. When a 6hurch com-t, in pur owft
daysftrapi^s a deci^on,— if it proceeds on any coiTCct
principle at all, it frfi^mes it as being, according to
theii" judgnient) in harmony with the dictates of the
word of God:— -t)ut ev^ry christiaii man iS not only

rat liberty, but is under obligation; tp examine and
judge for himself whether it is so or not;— and if,
upon exaniirSion, he arrives at a conviction that it is
not, he is b<^d to <lecline gtibmissibn to it:— his
principle must be "we ought to ,pbey Gpd," rather
than men." . If the "d&crce" \mdev consideration was
only a human decision, the decision of an uninspired
tribunal,— it lollowsj that "the. brethren of the Gen-
tiles" were then, and that we are noV, iM:eci(8ely in
this predicament regarding it. . They were then, apd
we are now, under obligation to test it by the word of
(Qod:^or 4>bServe — 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 </<e decision
itself is not ins^tret^, and" therefore is not divine, nor
divinely oUigatory. God's word is infallible ; but in-

I''

m'.:\x:

•iSt^j,

A.
t

I^BOM FIFTE6<TH. chatter OF ACTS. 25^

' fallibility belongs to nothing human. And if this was
the judgnient and' decree of an uninspired council,
the Qentile chinches could have npNabsolute certainly
of its being riglit, or that in confo^rjoaing themselves to
it^they^were obeying GocllAi^d, had any churches

:, Orindivid^iaJs asserted the right of private judgment
as to any*one of tlie' particulars in that decree, and
taken up the gpround of non-conformity,— whatever
might be thought of their presump^on. In venturing
to bring to.4he bar of th'eir own wisdom even the

uninspired opinion of such m^n as^ihe apostles, yet
it would not be easy to convict them of rebellion
against God:— for, with a really conscientious desire
to know the di.vii^e \Hll, they might only, even although
mistaken, have j^ij appealing from man's authority
to his. ■,., ,■.■•;;'■■'.■-; - ~.>- '" ■ ' . -^

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!

.<i,

91^118

^^ tiW^.'apostie- aa^fter-

indtbj^eiident/iiispiita^f^

idveS !&l%an, tieit^^ was he(tai;igP^,
>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^'

:?«*

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!hom<l.^6n%dthl^^ hvfW
YOgwced to spe^k %}j^ th<^' hereMcal \ae\^l Ii(
c^d ip» Aiote mt evidence digai^t it $|^j^lc timer
.than ii was at other and^tdl°umed.dnaa.ttheM^^^^

•Y-'

,.»

■u "^A»-

zealots di^ en^
atvariance

views, on the poia^tL qu^ion,
lid and tiug^t l|^«^i|j||

■nll-

1 i'

i\r

ABOUHENT FOB PBESBTTEBIANISII

is A matter of fact which thereis no denying. Con-
sidering, then, the fierceness and forwardness of their
zeal, is there any thing incredible, or even wonder-
ful, in the fact of their having, on such an occasion,
avowed and insisted upon their favourite dogmas?
What is there m this fact to disprove the inspiration
of the other apostles at that time, more than there
was to disprove PavTs inspiration in the fact that fi>t
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

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-

■%

-<€

». _^

.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

v<\-

m f ...
ii .

'•■

¥\

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 " *^

ii.?h';.

.r.f ^.r ./.-

*\"

■*.

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 <f opinion was the mind of the Spirit,— bot
dirtctly of what Utat mind wu. ^

:'/]

irase " U

ABOUMENT FOIt rRESBYTEKIANIBM

(

''■|

. hearts, bear them witnens, giving them the Holj,
Ghost, even as he did unto us; and put no difference
between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith."
Mark the kind of proof thus adduced; for it furnishes

^ft beautiful commentary on the words — "/if «ce»ic<i— ^
good to the Holy Ghost" He declares what the lesson
was which the Lord designed to teach by the imme-

^fliate descent of the Spirit op the Gentiles who
believed. He had done the same previously, when
he wasbcalled to account at Jerusalem for his conduct
in the house of Cornelius. " As I began to ^eak,"
Bays he on that occasion, " the Holy Ghost fell on
them as on us at the beginning. Then remembered
I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John j
indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized
with the Holy Ghost. Forasmuch then as God gavB
them the like gift as he did unto us, who beUeved on
the Lord Jesus Christ, what was I, that I could
withstand God?" Acts xi. If we regard his inter-
pretation of his vision at Joppa, followed by the
descent of the Holy Ghost on Cornelius and his
household, as possessing divin/s" aidhority on ^e
former occasion, W9 are shut up ioihe same conolu-
sion on the latter. He points aneV to the same facts,
as the intimation of " the mind ofriihe Spirit.'* The
Lord took his o#n way of communicating'truth even
to his inspired servants. " He did not, as he might
have done, convey the lesson of the equal% pf the
. Gentile believers with the Jewish in regard ro admisr
sion to all the privileges of his own church, hy direct
intimation to the mind of Petdr, empowering him
to give miraculous attestation of it to others. He
tgok ft d jflppren t method. He taught him the lesson

..^f

■ ■'*; ■

FROM FIFTEENTH -CHAPTER OF ACTS.

263

animals mixed together in the great ^eet let down
from heaven, — giving secret intimation, at the same
time, to his mind (as the narrative cleifirly shows) of
the import of the vision: — and then, after having, on
4beJ»iithority of the divine lesson thus conveyed,
gone into the house of the uncircumcised, saying
"God hath showed me that I should not call any
man common or unclean," the direct descent from
heaven of the Holy Spirit, without the intervention
of any imposition of hands, or even of any prayer for
it on his part, was an immediate divine confirmation
of the import of the vision,— or a repetition of the
lesson conveyed by it. The fact of the mind of the
Spirit having been communicated in that particular
way implied not the remotest uncertainty as to lohat
that mind ivaa. Therc| was nothing of the kind. To
that fact Peter again pomia^m decimve.— The addition
of the words "and to iw" expresses no more than the
coincidence qf their »nim?,~that is, of the mind of all
who united in the letter,— with the mmd of the Spirit
iETirmbolically intimated, miraculously attested by his
own descent and agency, and both the symbol and the
attestation infallibly interprejb^.— And while Peter
points to this manifestafi^/iMwe mind of the Spirit,
James shows the harmflBjL^^the lesson with th©
predictions of the prophets^KifCh were just the
previous notices of the same truth given bjr-those
** holy men of God " who, in former ages, " sjpake as
ihey were moved by the Holy Ghost." He shows
ihat the S|^t's dictates then were the same as the
Spirit's diclHtes Ttou'. But if in quoting and inter-
preting prophecy, James was not himself inspired,
then are we to this hour uncertain, whether the

prediction cited by him was explained according to

t :

■:^---:^

264

ARGUMENT FOB PRESBTTERIANISM

its true and original meaning, and whether, there-
fore, it was appropriately applied!

6. I have only farther to add :-^had there been
anything in the narrative, or in the terms of the
decree, whiqh necessitated our leaving out inspira^
tion, we must, of course, have bowed to the necessity :

^but it ought surely, in all candour, to be admitted,

that NOTHING SHOBT OF NECESSiTy should drive us to
such a position. It is a strangely unhatural one.

First of all, it may fairly be questioned, ^^ether
the apostles, divested ot inspiration, we <itpo«<fes erf
(jHh In their apostolical capacity, they were the com-
missioned vice-gerents of the Lord. Their authority
was supreme. And being supreme, it was peculiar/
a&d without succession. It lay in their inspiratioi).
To speak oi the apostles acting in the church without .
their inspiration, is an anomaly, of which, for my own
part, I can form no conception. If they were not
Mspired now, thev might be uninspited also at other
times. And thetedoes sefem to me ^o little pre^ .
sumption, in admitting the supposition of their ever
acting (^fidaUy, without acting by inspiration,^-
whether in settling doctrine or in settling duty. Their
'very 6ffic'e was, in my apprehe^sion, an inspired
offikx; and to suppose thfem divested of inspiration,
ifl to suppoBi^ them stripped of their official stahu^
Let any man attempt to answer the question to
luniBe^f— "What was an apostle, in the Church of
Christ, without his inspired authority?— and he will
^d himself not a U^tle at a loss. Should it .b^
alleged,: thAt in the church a£ Jeinisalem. they exeat^>
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 •*

-% '

-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»<iwHuid nan-essentials:— asid, although
the distiiictioBrbetween them ha8 too frequently been
J)U8hed :tO an unscriptural extreme, (as when it has
led ^christians to regard any part of their diviAe
:ilaster's will<»as a matter of indifference,— to con-
sider apy thing which he has thought it worth his
-«^hileio ctiinmaAd as being hardly or at all worth their ;

■'■^s.

:r ■>

i;„_

^■m:

■ '-MW-

fSom fifteenth chatter op acts.

267

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<i

<, ^^*H

" ^

•>,

SjMli

ti^ ■•

268

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

' 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<X'
. have the authority of the apostles for this.; Kothmg
• cotddbe more natural than the step which was there-
upon taken,— to send a deputation to Jerusalem, t^
inquire whether these pret6nsiofts were well-ff)u^d^d-
The apostles, in the mid^ of an aas^tabl'y ^f the
elders (or clergy as they' would no\sr be-cMled) of-
Jerusalem; decided that no >»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,

*, ■:

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^€^tati<m.r-lt is based m this principle. It
is throughout, in its constitution, representative.—
Congregations are represente(3[ ink i^ssions :— Sessions
ai'ie represented in . pjresbyteries :— Presbyteries are
repr^iserited in synods i^—Synods are represented in
Geber^l Assemblies. It is^ an. understood principle
of the system, that, in order^ any act or d&^ee being
obligatory, those on whom it is binding shall have
heeix didy represen/eci in the , court that passes iU 3o
that, in tho suplposed case of a meeting . ol . i^od
being summoned^ and one 6i t)^e presbyteries within
its bounds heme: omitted in iiie suuimons, the minis'-
t^rs cmd congregation^' belonging- to that presbytery
woul^ not hold themselves legitimately bound ,by its
°deGisions.-^This being adiuittcd — ^the question «omes
iohe--^tVas, there ,8 Itch repr'esentaiionf in thfi instance
jbiefore us? If tliere^Was, ii)t)Ea*e was the4>rinci[)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

. ^ " 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

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 ••^-

■4 ■

-ii^r.

.'*

liLs«

li:.-V

^%.

••■•■■ -^ ,

■ . ■ ■ . . . .*-■ . ■ .. .■.■•..■

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

'/,

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

MMSROCOTY HSOIUTION TBT CHART

■-J^^ (ANSI and ISO TEST CHART.No. 2)

1.0

IttlZ^r IM

«u£

Ikb

|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 <me before us.-the assertion conriA-
ered as eTidencethat in this instance they did a^
Hven might act, with the authority of apostl^
* although without their inspiration,-amounts evi-
dently to nothing. As apostles, tiiey were tiie

<tt,e messenger :^st be an ^»f^,«^««^^^
whb "has the mind of Chri^t^and in what
sense the apostles couldretain. t^fcuthon^, Mtd
in the exerdse of it have «i«?»e of^att fte
churches," on the supposition o^l^ieirbemgdwest^i
of that inspiration from which alone their right to
dictate arises, lam qui^ at a loss to understend^

agree with Dr. Dick, thft^ they cotdd not « smk dttim
tf a level with the other membe^ ;" but ^^ y«^^^
tlus, I apprehend, i^ only to be found f *^^?f^
^LJmir in^Vato, and with it^f eir jegi^^e
or dictatorial atithority,-which was the «^re^

ouality" of their office, and one ^*^ ^^'f ,^

Sever pa^d. On this g^^^*^ ^ «^?* ^^* rJu^

Dr Mason more consistent than Dr. Dick, wheti he

gpeaks of the apostles as in "the ^^"l^^^

. xnent of the church, or any part of it, not m^^^

' to have enjoyed the extaraordinary ^ommmncafao^,

of the divine Spirit,--nor to have f^^^jTT

extraordinary powers,-nor to have dairnedu |)or«efc

~~~ • Dioceeaif Episcopacy reftited. page 85.

^ f ■

FROM FIPICTMTHf CHAPTgR OP ACT8»

279

)8, ftB4

/: - . ,

hall of

, ' ■ -

Qce be

all th^

. . ;

Unlesi

1 qthcir

consld-

-■-■-"--- — '-

lid act.

.postles

its evi-

' ■•

>re the

tJidritQr-

5er,oiie

n what

ity, and

' S

aU the

iivested

- ■

right to

kand. I

ok dtiwik

■eason of

m'-'

r having

gislathre

■ ; '

Sfereiitial

1 ' '

ich Uioy ,r

►utlihiiik '

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— </je aposttea were there.
The apostles, without their inspiration, (1^ reader *
must pardon the repetitiont^the point is dn^oi vital
consequence) were just the fishlrmen of Galilee ; pd
their judgment was the judgment of the fishermen of
Galilee. Call that judgment officilil ; and hold their
office, as such, as high as you please,— that does not
alter the case ; it was stiU /ti<»i<:««,— only human :—
and by those who hold this >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-

"■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

- 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/a<io«.— It does seem to me
surprising, that the entire system of subordin&to
courts of appeal and review should have been rested
upon a basis so narrow and insecure. For there is
not, that I am aware of, any other. And if , in freely
discussing the liierits of this bulwark of the system,
I have dealt unfairly by any part of the argument, I
ean only say,-^aM I say it in all 8incerity,~that I
am unc nscious <il\it, that I should be sorry for it,
and that I shall be iwppy to be corrected.
-^ut in wresting this case from my presbyterian
friends^it is not (and trom the remarks with which I
set out the reader must have anticipated^the obser-

• vation)— it is not because I am anxious to secure it
as an example in support of my own system.— I haye
no Buoh anxiety. I a^it, with all frankne s s, t ha t it

^■

FROM FIFTEENTH CHAPTEB OF ACTS.

285

no more fimUshes A pattern lor independency than
it does for presbyteiy. I mean, wi||;h regard to <A«
anthorittf by which tlie decision was passed. In this
respect, the essential element of independency ijs
wanting, as well as th,at of presbyterianism. I bow
(as I have before hinted,) with i>erfect 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.

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

.^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 <lid not
> 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."

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

•/:

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<rcA— the highest act of ecclesiastical discipline.
We have seen, that, as an assembled body, the church
at Corinth is described aS'baving ^' the power of our
liord Jesus Christ," and, io-the legitimate exercise' of
that power, is enjoined " t(^ put away " from its sacred
fellowship "the wicked t)er8on."-^Now, if I. have
succeeded in the demonstration of this,— then all
that is said on the subject of authority and rule on
the one hand, and of obedience and submission on
the other, will require t|0 be^ understood in conats-
tehcy with these r^resentationa. "the rule must, first
of all, be exclusively judicial and executive :— and
then, in the second place, it \dll not be in the hands
of the eldership apart from the brethren', but the
presence and concurrence of the brethren will be
necessary td the validity of every judicial decision,
and of every executive act.-^Tiie business, then, of

"«>.■

'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<sit
.fiubmisBion,— there is the earnest ^rsAasion of love*
^•P o not, however, lustake me. T am fat from ^_

meaning to say, that by its nature the motive of

:ft,.

OONOREOATIONAL IMDXPCND:

Ik • ■ " ■ •■

affeoiioQ ia exoluded from the obedience that in ren-
dered to authority such as is even legislatiye and
Absolute. But the frequent appeals to esteem and
love seem to point out the* principle, or genios, both
of the authority and of the submission. Asd this
beautifully accords with the language of Piter Ur
pastors :— " The elders which are amoBg foji I
exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness (rf the
sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory
that shall be revealed: feed the flock of God ^oh
is among you, taking the oversight tiiereof, not by
constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of
a ready mind; neither as being lords over Ood*s
heritage, but being ensamples to the flock." 1 Pet.

V.1— 3. . ■■:": -I:'

Let it not, then, be said to independents — Y<»r
pastors have no power. They have all the pow«r '
with which it has seemed good to the only Jetuthoritf^
to invest them. They have no wish for more:— n#
wish for either the power to make hxivs, or the pow#
to apply and execute the laws WioX eid&t independently
of the concurrence (/ their brethren* They have nof
wiRh for this; because the;f^ believe that mth such
authority Christ has not invested any man, or any
body of men. They desire to rule in the christian
affections of their people; and, under the humble
feeling of a common subjection to Christ, to carry
" the brethren " along witii them in the execution,
not of their laws, but of Ais.— That a difficulty may
at times be felt, respecting the precise boundaries of
legitimate power, may, witiliout hesitation, be granted.
But this is a ^fficulty which will be found to press,
upon all systems of ecclesiastical administration
whatev e r. And w he r e , i n c

f 1

' 1

€^

■

tl _,

«>

' '^.

, ,

'$'

■\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 <o teach, does not imply a surrender of tiie
rieht or a dereUction of tiie duty, to judge of hiB
dS<»4ie;-so neitiier does their setting a pastor over
ti^I .ufe, imply ^ surren^r of the ^^^ « »
dereUction of tiie duty, to judge erf ^^^^^
tion. It is tiieir right ^nd tii^ du^ ^ judg^
doctrine by the imtructum oi Chnst; and it i8
^uXth^ right and their duty to judge his
.Sstfation by^he to. of Christ. If it belong
JTZm to see tliat they are taught a^ording to
- Christ's doctaine, it must belong to them, on tiie veij
ftame prboiple, to see that they are governed accor^

OONOBEQATIONAl INDEFENDENCY.

8oa

ing to Ohriflt's laws.— This right wad duty of God's
people may serve as a salutary check to the abuse of
pover, to which the temptation in the human mind
Is even stronger than that to the perversion of liberty.
That a case is snpposable in which a church, taken
oollectively, may differ from its pastor or pastors
respecting the application of the law of Christ, who
will deny? It /idll be found, however, under the
administration of a well-instnBicted, discerning, and
prudent pastor, (and such all pastors ought to be,—
there is no proviraon f or the contrary) a very great
rarity. No pastor, more than the pope, is in^ble ;
and he who is humbly sensible of his fallibility will
IJi^phis ear^^up4 mind open to suggestions from even
the most dbsiore member of his flock, when they
are brought forward with becoming respect and
diffidence, and will be ready to mod% by them at
times his own previous judgment. But, generafly
BpeaMng, when a pastor has studied the nature and
bearings of any case, and the law of Christ under
whose operation it falls to be ranged, — although he
may lay his account with the occasional impenetra>
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

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^:.-

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 6c<?to
L the administration of auy system whatever, may
surely be admitted, without giving ground for*sti,ch
an inference as that the system itself is an imptaet;-
tjable and visionary one. What system is therd, ^
can there be, whether of man's construction, or of
God's, which when administered by human agency,
could stand for one moment before so absurd and
unreascw^Ble a test!-Of those who hjve j^fessed .
to have given independency a trial, arid whoni expe-
rience has induced to abandon it, it will, generally
speaking, be found, that they are p^sons , who^e
grounds of dissatisfaction, were they candidly and
Idly investigated, would turn -out more honour-
able to the churches they have forsaken, than to
themselves, if would, indeed, be a wpnderfi^^^ys-
tem which, under human administration, anjid aU
the ' varieties of judgment . and temper which, even
amongst fellow-christians, are still to be found,—
should go on without any difficulties or trials, or any
indications of the weakness or the depravity of its
administrators., When I considet the terms in which
Yaul expresses himself to the church of Corinth, in
anticipating his coming to visit them, and intimating
what he was apprehensive of finding amongst them,
I am led to cdnclude, that it would be wi'ong to
derive from everi a very coiisid^-ablc amount of oc-
sional' and temporary insttborcliuatioii and anarchy,
any conclusive argument, to prove the constitution
of afchurch unscriptural, whatever that constitution
might be. ffis language is affectingly strong :-^"For
I fear lost, when I come, I shall not find you such as

CONGREGATIONAL INDEPE!<tENCY.

309

I would, and that I shaU be found unto you such as
ye would not; lest there be debates, envyings, wraths,
strifes, backbitings, whisperings, sweUings, tumults:
and lest, when I come again, my God will humble me
among you, and that I shaU bewail many who have
sinned already, and have not repented of the unclean- ^
liness, and fornication, and laciviousness which they
have committed." 2 Cor. xii. 20, 21. If such was
the state of things in one of the churches constituted
by 'Paul h^self, and under apostolic supervision;
surely different parties of christians should beware
of hasty and harsh severity in their conclusions
respecting the systems held and practiced by each
other, from any outbursts of turbulence and passion
which may, on particular occasions, break fori^h in
their respective communities.— Such outbursts are
most inconsistent with the genuine influence of the
gospel : they give occasion for no little penitence and-
shame, when for a time they do deform the peaceful
and harmonious loveliness of christian communions
—but alas! while corruption continues to operate,*
nO system can be long perfectly free from them,
nor can any one be ever altogether secure against
them. We should n3l allOw ourselves to forget, that,
were we to proceed on such a principle of reason-
ing as that to which we have been referring, the
, constitution of the apostolic churches themselves
' would be the very first we should be constrained to
disown.— As every divine institution must be per-
fectly adapted tq its purpose, I am fully satisfied, on
this ground, as well as from long experience, that the
moro closely we adhere to the scheme of church
government which we have endeavoured to prove to
be that which existed imder apostolic sanction, the

310 OB^CnONS URGED AOAI^ST

more productiTe wiU it be «onnd of spiritual be^^^^ '
to the church, and of glory to Chnst Makmgdue
allowance for human frailty, the system doe* work
weU. It answers the various ends of chnstiwi asso-
ciation, better than any other. And^although. from
what has, sarcastically, and yet, in the good sense of
L desi^ation. truly, been caUed its d^wcra^
character, it may be conceived that we stand m need
of more of this allowance than others, we cap say,
with truth, we feel no anxiety to have more, not
being at all sensible of our requinng it.

ni It is alleged "that THE people— the bIembers

OF A CHURCH OENERALliY-ARE, IN MANY CASES, QUITE
INCOMPETENT TO JUDGE OF THE PROPER APPLICATION TO
THOSE CASES OF THE LAWS OF CHRIST.-ThlS may be SO

represer^ed, as to sound plausibly: but it is contra-
dicted by fact I speak the conviction of fwjy-five
years' pastoral experience, when 1 say, that there are
•cojBparatively few cases, in which a church of Chi'ist

inking its office-bearers, having the law of Chnst
i^^word before them, with simpUcity of heart to
understand and ob^r it, and united supphcation for
the direction of God's Spirit, wm find a^yjery great,
far less any insuperable, difficulijr. With their variety
of gifts, and with "the wisdom that is from above,
which is first pure,then peaceable, gentle and easy to
be entreated, full of mercy and of good fruits, with-
out partiaUty and without hypocrisy, ^they wiU be
, enabled to "judge righteous judgment; ^ they ^ill
find " darkness Ught before them, and crooked things

straight." . , , ■.»

They who object on such a ground, indeed, if we
iudge from what Paul says, must b^ considered as
"speaking to. their own shame :"-for even with

■itp

•X 1

CONQREOATIONAL INDEPENDENCY.

311

^ s

reaard to questions of oivU and secular difference,
that apostle aUowed no toleration to bretliren^in
ohurcli fellowship to carry those questions for judg-
ment out of the church with which t\jey stood
connected. The prohibition is peremptory; and the
-terns of it sufficiently show that he had no such
idea of the incompetency of the brethren as the
present objection assumes:— "Dare any of you,
having a matter against another, go to law before
the unjust, and not before tbe saints? Do ye not
Imow that the saints shaU judge the world? and if
the world shaU be judged by you. are ye unwor hy
to judge the smallest matters? Know ye not that
we shaU judge angels ? how much more things that
pertain to this life? If then ye have judgments of
Siigs pertaining to this Ufe, 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 amongp
you/ no,not one that shall be able to judge between
his brethren ? But brother goeth to law with brother,
an/that before the unbelievers;' 1 Cor. vi. 1—6. He
thi (as I formally had occasion to observe) charges
them, in going to law with one another before tlie
civil tribunals, with dispi«ing their brethren, as if
there was not a man amongst them of knowledge
and discretion sufficient to qualify him for arbitrat-
ing between the contending parties; and he enjoins
them to "set them to judge" whoin. in so passing
them ovex, and preferring the judgment-seats of the
iicathen, they were treating with unworthy scorn and
distrust. And when he says— "I speak to your
shame :-As it so that there is not a wise man amongp
yon?"— be uses language which should make our
opponents o-s/iamec? of their objection.

812

OBJECTIONS UROEP AOAINBT

• GeneraUy speaking, too, a church may be consid-
ered as best acquainted with its own members and
its own aflfairs;— and in many, if not eveiipmoBt
cases, better able to judge r|p8pecting t^% th jb
8tratiger8.-^And then,— even when differeiicp take
place that avo material and serious in their nature,
the evil, it may be observed, in churches constituted
on independent principles, is confined to the partica-
lar society in which they qc<ju*. Even if some,
whether conscientiously or factj^wsly* »^""1^^ »®P*^-
ate fi-om their brethren, the. miscipf does not spread.
Unless in very peculiar cases, it sto'ps tiiere. But
courts of appeal serve to -spread it. That which
divides a session and a ciongriDgation, may, .when
appealed, rend a presbytely, and throw the fire of .
strife into a synod ; the very a;pp0al which was meant
to terminate a diff'erence only diffusing it. Eve^
man's cause seems right in his own eyes. And if
cases be supposable in which a party may be wronged
by the judgment given, and in which, therefore, it
may be a happy thing that 'he has a higher appeal
in his power— (and such cases, we are far from
denying, there may be;)-'-yet, on the other hand, to
self-sufficient and litigiously disposed men, the veiy
knowledge that they have such an appeal in their
power is (apt to operate as an encouragement to
regard wflbh comparative lightness the decision of
the mferilrsQourt. Jf the session fail him, he has
the fto-esbyterytMind if the presbytery are against
him, he can brave them before the synod. And I
believe it will- be found, that there are j^st as many
cases of persons remaining dissatisfied with the final
judgment, when they have gone the full round of
appeal, as of persons who have been thus disstttiH-

CONOREOATIONAL INDEPENDENCT.

$13

fied with the first final decision of a congregational
church. And I am very doubtful if the cases be
numerous, or even if there be any, in which justice
ia ultimately done in tlie one way more effectively
than in the other. If a man is proud, unreasonable,
Ijnd obstinate, (and, unlike the christian character aa^
such tempers are, individuals o^ this description may
everywhere be found) his dispositions will find occa-
sion to manifest themselves, be the administration of
the church what it may.

There is onef species of wrong against which
the discipline of an independent church has been
conceived nbt sufficiently to provide, and for the
rectification ^of which courts of appelftl have been
held to be necessary,— the wrong which may arise
from pat'tiality in jmhjMmt.—'Dv. Dwightr— a high
authority, and unquestionably impartial, thus ex-
presses himself— (Theology, Serm. ^clxii.) " There
are many cases in ivhich hulividuabi are dtssatisjied
on reasonable ijrounds icith the judgment of the church.*
—It is perfectly obvious, that in a debate between
two members of-ihe same church, the parties may in
many respects stand on unequal ground. One of.
them may be ingorant; without family connexions r
in humble ^cumstancos; and jK>s8essed 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

♦ The Italics are the author's own ; the senlence being the Aeading
of a p a r a gr a ph . — . — ^ — — .__ ^ — -^ — _ — --,/,. ^ — "—- — __

■m'-

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

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

—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 everywh<Bre: and it would
be no pleasant, but rather a very invidious and
painful task, to set about -instituting a comparison
between the displays of temper in the controversies
o^f independent churches, and in those oi church
courts. Surveying the history of the latter, I should
have no great fear of harming my cause by such
comparison. I would much rather, however, avoid
it altogether. To lay hold of particidar instances
of "strife and division," and magnify them, and
exult in them, is as dishonourable to those who differ
from us, as it is unchristian and unlovely in the
spirit of our own minds. " There must be also here-
sies an^ng you," says the apostle Paul, "that they
that are approved may be made manifest among
you." Divisions and separations will at times occur
in all christian bodies. Jhey are greatly to be
deprecated;— yet" it may, perhaps, be laid down as a
sound geueral maxim, that an enlightened and con-

"#}'

1 '

■(/■

iii:

■' IP

"■ ■, '■-■■■<'.■ ■ . ■ • "

320 ' OBJECTIOHB UBQia) AGAINST

unprincipled «nion.-J^i^^, "'"'1*1,.^^V 'i« t>Z ' '
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

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, <Aa^
there was a deep-felt conviction in the minds of the
inspiral writers, that the system of govemment msti- ,
) tuted by them, under tlie dkeclion of (heir divine master,
^ioas one which cotdd not be so mdintaincd as effevlnqRy
to answer its ends, tvithout a general prevalence of such
' principles in the hearts of the brethren ? A system of
role by which the brethren are excluded from taking
any part in the administration of the affairs of the
church,— in' whiph all goes on without their know-
ledge, or independently of their concurrence,— may
certainly have the advantage of bringing thenj less
into immediate contact, arid so diminishing the con-
sequent hazard of collision. But then, does it not
demonstrate its unapostolic character, by the very
circumstance of its rendering comparatively useless
' -^limiting entirely to the intercourse of private life
. 4-the many and earnest injunctions and admonitions
|o the exercise of thOse affections of mind and heart
of which we now speak V It is, in my apprehension,
la presumption against the divine authority, of any ,
aystem of church government; that it can be carried ^
^ on with but little" comparative requisition of these

.* • .;:•

322.

OBJECTIONS URGED AGAINST

Wi--

-a-r-

<jbristian^aces,^Uttle, at any rate, among "tte
brethr^n/'lpwhom the epifitles are addressed. And,
on the othV hand, it is a presumption in favour of
any system, \that the exercise of them is indispens-
able. .One Of the obvious" reasons of the fervid and
frequent inc&cation of the dispositions in quea-
tion is, that-V their christian fellowship they were
continually coming in conta*ct,^ '"and requiring the
repression of ill that was selfish and irritable, and
the exercise oi all that was [gentle,, and generous,
and kind? AnVl, in accordance with this remark, is
t notnotorioui^that by the body ot the peopkin
ither christian communions, the passages of scrip-
,Aw^ which inculcate these tempers an^ graces are
seldom if ever felt as having mij oppH^f^ation to their
JelloivsJiip in the \church? They i^apply them, ^as
already hinted, to\the intercourse of private life.
"And so far they ai^ in the right. But wii^ what
spirit and force do tltey come home to tho-^urches,
when, besides their i^^rivate infercourse, they have a
joint concern in the discipline and government of the
house of. God!.— when\ they do not merely meet to
engage in .the exercise^ of worship, and to sit in
' silence as hearers of the word, or participants in the
• supper of the Lord,— but liate a part to act iit all
that pertains to the puiiisy aftd prosperity of jJie
' body ! To societies so constituted. Bow peci^liarly
.appropriate are such exhortations as these:— "I,
therefore, the prisoner of tii^e Lord, beseech ypii,
that ye walk worthy of the vocation wherewith ye
are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with,
.long-suffering, forbearing one another in love;
endeavoring to Jteep the unity of the Spirit in tlbe
bond of peace.v There' is' one body, and one Sftirit,

„ft.

CONGREGATIONAL INDEPENDENCY.

323

even as ye are cjJI^d in one hope pf your calling, one
Lord, one faith, She. baptism; one Gbtl and Father of
aU, wjio is above all, and through all, and in yoti
all!"— "If there be therefore any conaolation in
Christ, if any comfort of love, if any fellowship of
the Spirit, if any bo>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,-<with regard to the influence on their mainte- ,
na'nce and growth of the common'interest felt by the*'
brethren in the concerns oi the cKuroK and their •;
participi^on in all that relates to the admission, of
' members and 'the exercise of discipline, and thus jn •

( . .

.01

1 , i

•w.,. ..^.

A ■

324

OBJECTIONS UBOED AGAINST.

whatem- tends to the preservation and advancement
.of its purity/prosperity, and spiritual efficiency,
for aU the pui-poses of its institution. ^ H ?<5pa-
BionaUy there arise temptations to the 8lumbenn&
passions of the old man, the general tendency is ^
much stronger and more constant to cljensh and ,
strengthen, bj' exercise, the uniting afifections of the
new^^^or as the body is one, and hath many
members, and all the members of that one body,
being many, are one body; so also is Christ.-^ * or
by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body,
whether- wo be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be
bond or free; and have been aU made to dnnk into
one Spirit. For the body is not one member,^ but
many. If the. loot diaU say, because I am^ not ttie
dd I am not of the body; is it therefore not

of We body? And if the ear shaU ^^y.^^^ecause^^
ain not theiye, I am not of the bodyr IS It there^

not of th^^ body? If the whole body wero an eye,
^^ we^ the'hearing ? if the whole ^ere.^^^g'
•where were the smeUing? But now h'ath God se
the members every one of them u^ 4Je ))o^y, a^^
' hath pleased him. And if they were aU one member^
X^f were tiie body? But now are t^ey ma^
members, f et but one body. And^Je eye camiM
^nto \^ hand I have «io need of thee; nor again
tl^ head to the feet, 1 l^^ve no need of yoti. ,
*T* that there should be iio schism m the body ,
but tiiat the members should have the same care on^
• for another. And whether one member , suffer, aU
«L numbers suffer with ^l,^ ^^^J^
honoured, all the members rejoioo with it. 1 l>pr,

^.12—26.

■';>i/

••'<-jo4'^'^ ,;

■ I. *

'''

y ■ 4

,»..---

, ■:■■ -^

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

•,. -'<pftit:jii:e^^.

826

UNION OF CHUBCHEb.

the deBignalion of " cmfp'egational Miiimi" there are
no elements whatever of contradiction. It is, indeed,
rather hard, that our good brethren should first twit
us with our having no union, and then, when we show
in practice that we have union, twit us again as in
that union making an approach to themselves, and
consequently, as finding it necessary to do in prac-
tice what we disown in principle. , No well-informed
and candid episcopalian or presbyterian will allege
this, unless it be in the way of a good-humoured and
harmless joke. The yvhole mystery is, that ours ib a
union ol feUowsldp and co-operation, but not a imJon
oijurisdidion or authority. Such we believe to have
been the union subsisting among the. apostolic
churches; each independent of alj the rest in what-
ever related to its interiial government, but all
connoted with each other in one universal com-
munion, by the bond of common principles and
common interests. Of this kind of union we are
fondly tenacious. So tenacious of it, indeed, have
some congregationalists been, that they have even
rejected the designation of independents ^ solely on
the ground of its being apt to be misunderstood as
i! it disclaimed such union.— "When he (Bobinson)
asserts the independency of particular churches on
each f)ther, he is undoubtedly to be understood to
mean, that one' church cannot, be authoritatively
controlled by another, and this is precisely the
doctrine which has been firmly maintained ^by con-
gregationalists since his time, although it has often
been strangely misunderstcrbd, or misrepresented.—
The opinion which' Jiaslbeen heild to is, that particular
churclies ate independent of each other, so far as
this, that no other chjirch, or body of chiuches, can

.i ■

. li

mnoN OF CHuncHEs.

827

enforce its opinions upon it by mean* of bondn
penalties, imprisonments, or bodily inflictions. If
Sne churcU can control another by means of it><
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^^

880

UNION OF OHUBOHSS.

therefore, ought to be the case still with churches
professedly constituted after their model. When
any one, by direct recommehdation or otherwise,
was known to be a member of any particular^church,
he was freely admitted, on that knowledge, to the
fellowship of the saints in other churches, -Wherever
he came. We, have exemplifications of this,' to which
the reader is requested to turn, in Acts xviii. 27. 2
Oor. viii. 23. Rom. xvi. 1. 3 John 9, lO^In thp
last of these cases, " the brethren " whom Biotrephes
■"would not receive," had gone out frorti the church
where the apostle John then was:— and the fault
found with this "lover of pre-eminence" for Hot
receiving themv makes it evident that in the apostle's
jud^ent the reception of them was an incumbent
duty.

JLS this is a , subject of great geiieral importance,
we inay be allojved to lay doT\Ti the following rules
respecting it, as having the sanction of the word of-

■God. . ,"" :.}:":■:■;':■/:-,■■..

In the/?«rplace:— it is evidently-proper, and for
edification, that wheii members leave one church, to
join the stated communion of another, they should
be recommended. 6yf/ee church which they leave <o
the church Vflnoh they are intending to join.— I say,
by //<e"c7«Me/<;— not only because this direct mutual
recognition of each other in their collective capacity,
serves to maintain and to strengthen the feeling
of union among the churches; but also, because,
although a pastor may be fairly wananted, ^vhep no
evil has been reported of the character of a member,
to take it for granted tiiat there is nothing ^Tong,—
yet cases may *^ occur, in which particular circum-
stances have but mfeently happened, and, although

"»*%l

-'<X

UNION OF CHUBOHES.

known to some of the brethren, have not yet reached
his ear, which, instead of an nnqualified and ^ affec-
tionate recommendation, might demand the imme-
diate appUcation of the rules of salutary discipline.
/ScawM^y. Every church ought to be very cautious
in receiving any who 6ome to them «w7/*om< sudi
recommendation. In neglecting this needful caution,
they may be admitting unawares to their communion
persons whom another church has, on just grounds,
condemned, censured, and excluded; or persons who
have come away from merited discipline durmg its
progress, or, seeing it before them, have separated
themselves for the purpose of avoiding it; or per-
sons who> 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

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<iip\e or igf practice, are " departrng from the
faith," if,.:when t&y ai^ laware of the exisience and ■
tdlerance of Mch Christ-dishononring'trespasses, they
fail tP remonstrate, in the spirit of christiait love, with
the dmrcK or the churches that are chargeable with

,.,th:emv '■,..•' -^ . •■\;' :. ■" '■''■,"'■•'■,.'"■

Siioh,. then, is the grea€ principle of fellowship,
whichV with the manifest exceptions specified, w^&
acted upon by the New Testament churches, m t^e :
apostolic age. Individual believers, in every placej
were *iall one in Christ Jesus;" and the churches, as
consisting of individual bfelieveys, were also ;otte, so .
that the actual admission of any convert, on a credi-
ble profession 'of his faith, to the commumon of one
(A the churches, was his virtual admission to the
communion of all the rest.. It was making him. free
of the whole community of the faithful. And this is
the primary article in church-union.; It ought to be
so still, with, all- churches that profess to conform to
the New Testament model. ' ' .

^ II. Tbere were, at the same time, other ways in-
which their union arid -communion was, "in the be-
g^Stog of the gospel," maintained and manifested.
' We find them, for example, sending to one another,*
on suitable occasions, thefr salutations, ^iha.t is, their
aflfectioriate remembrances, and wishes of prosperity.
Bom. xvi 16; l^or. xvi. 19," The churches of CImst
salute you." "The churches'of Asia salute you:"—,
and in other places, under different forms. There*
can be no doubt that Ihe apostle Paul sent these

" salutations by the concurrent desire of tliose cburcher
in whose names they were expresse<i^' ^fh^y were
not words of course,— the mere fo|ms of empty

UNION 6F CHUBCmES.

336

oonrtesy md compliinent. -They were the sinoere * ^
tokens of bfoiherly^aflfection and christftui unity.^^
it ftpi)ear8 to have been Paul's practice, wh'eifever he -.
Wenti to impikrt to' the churches tidings of ftie suo^ -
cess of the gospel, and of the condition, bothr spmtu^ \
and teit^tal, of the ^sciples in the countries through •
which he had' been travelling. Thus he at once ex-
prfessed. the fulness of ' his own loving hearty and
cherished in the churches ji generous interest in .,
each other's concerns, as well as |n |he fitMe an^
progress of the cause of Chri0t at large. We tike to
lfcfe remembered.; ^e asi^urances of such reniem-
hrdxice and kind wishes between friends individuaUy,
are pleasing and anim|iting. .They knit heart, Jo,,
heart. They'draw forthj conferno^ and sttei^then. '
love.; And the ^me ii^ tli^ effect between cWdies. [
Paul^ew thisi ]^e.de^ghte^ in ey^ty Oppor£unity .*
of expanding and enlivenm]^ ehiistian affection ; of
binding saiSfcs, and bfeding- churches,' tbgethei; itf .
love. It wa^ for this purpose that he^sen^ ftnd
darried individual" ctod! soQiaV sahitAtioni^. ir In his
visits and in his correspondence ;^i&e, he was the
messenger of lovb.^ " . ".,, . , ,vj; ■ - - "';
.^JII. But tile churched of that^arly age went farther. ■
/mey were n<^ satisfied with embracing such oppor-
Ijunities 'of Sending the assurances of their affection
and best wishes as thiis kddenialjy pccfeyed. - In
|)articular instp,nces,° they, dispatched' messengers,
even to considerable disfjandes, for th^oxpre^s- pur-
pose <xf estabUshing new converts and newly-fprmed
churches^in their ohristian profession. Sow inter-
esting imcl ediJfyTuig the example pi this recorcted in |
Acts xi., on occasion of- the remark?lble ^nccess of the j
gospel in the Syrian AntipcH "coining to the ears of,

, r

836

tmiGK OF CHURCHES.

■■ '*■

.;i|#

the cliiiirch in Jerusalem!" See verses 1^—24. The
account in these verses is. m no ordinary degree
deUehtful; not pnly as an exemphficaiaon of the
power of the gospel in toning sinners k> 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 giving ^rtH rebeiving. Two
.. remarkable exemplifications >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<innerion wit^ circumstances
■ Lforo Adverted to. The church at Jerusalem, we
-have S)Ben,'had manifested an affectionate intepst m
the/Werts at Antiochr^and here, we have the
chtfrch at Antioch eagerly embracing the occasion
mesente'd to them, of testifying tiieii? gratitude by a
-^bstantial requital of tiie kin^ess., Jl^«^« ^f ?
: dumber of churches in Judea-Gal. i. 2?;. 1 Thes. u.
U. To the elders of these.. resjpectivel^, it .would
appear. <jertain proportions of tiie sum collected"
were sent;,tihat,.ih the coming seasoii of scarcity,
• [ -"distributioii might be inade to aU, ad evelry man
had need." It was a social act; the lict.^ a c^^urcA
' , to church^, as a token of uniiy and bro^erly love.
—The othet instance referred to is of a more exten-
sive description; the contribution jihich was collected
by Paul from the Gentile churches generaUy, for
tiie iJoor saints who were at Jerusalem.'; A fall
view of this case may be had, by comparing Eom.
XV. 25—27, with 1 Cor. xvi. 1—4, and 2 Cor. chapters
— -. '- ^-22t- -"- ^' ^

>*■

■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 <rf
pastors in those churches, of long-standing ana
experience, and of approved intelligence ftnd discre-
tion; there is nothing in the New Testamentr-
nothing in the constitution and order of the churches
there prescribed —thAt interdicts them from foUow-.
mg out that desire,— ho principle that would suffw
• violation, no law on which there would be the shght-
est encroachment. On the contrary, the great general
duty of rightly applying\the laws of Christ m evojy
case, involves the obUgation to use every accessible
means for enabling them clearly to apprehend both
' their generic import and their special relations, bo
as to maintain them in due exercise, and to avoid
possible misapplication of them. Beferenoe

. ^ • IX. — M«. *rx Inn mltAt*

im^

'TJSWH OF CHURCHES.

841

is mu entirely diflferent matter from appeal for autbo-
ritati^ interference and decision. We may» a$
individual^ or as associated bodies, solicit friendly
counsel, and yet retain, unimpaired, our m^\^
determine for ourselves. If any one allege that t^
imonnts to an admission of imperfection and msuffl^
Sioy in the laws of Christ, and that' a constitution
oumot be hiswhich involves any such reflection on
the infinite wisdom of the Lawgiver; the reply is
obvious, -namely, that the occurrence of such cases,
ai^d the having recourse to such means for their
^tisfactory settlement, no more bnpUes any imputa-
tidn agamSt the completeness of the rules gi^en by
Jesus lor the direction of his churches, than the
occurrence of cases in which one individual feels
hisnfied of counsel from another, implies an impu-
tation of the same kind against the completeness of
his rules lor the direction of personal behaviour. It
cannot surely T)e necessary to the appropriateness
and perfection ol a law, that there should exist no
possibiiity of the occurrence of any case in which the
^Hfldom of imperfect creatures can experience a doubt
about ife right and sanative appUcation. The imper-
fection, in such a case, is not in the law, but in its
aaministrators. And a church, in applymg for
advice, throws no reflection on the wisdom of the
Supreme Legislator, but humbly acknowledges the
impei:fection of its own. . . .

2. Allied to the free right of sohcitmg advice in
difficulty, is the nght of que dmch to renumstratemtk
amoihertm has embraced serious and soul-endangering
^rror. This, indeed; is not only a right, but a duty,
^not competent only, but hicumbent. Although
iatdopondents disown the right of any one church to

.St.,

^■^^^ ^ ^^

'IP".

♦

"T15

842 vmon of cHtjflCHM.

interfere authoritatively in the concerns of another,
—as well tt8 that of nay number of cburchcB, or any
court of the representatives of such churches, to take
upon them such authoritative interference; yet in th#
supposed predioament,,when among churches of Um»

same order, professing to walk in fellowship wi^
each otheir one is discovered to have "departed
from the Mtb," whether in regard to truths of wl^idill
the belief is essential to the soul's salvation, or tp
articles of doctrine akin to these, and by which their
divine integrity .is endangered,— other churches—
those inore especially in the same neighbourhood,
who ar« aware of the existing and spreading here^,
are called upon to deal, in faithfulness and love, with
their ernng brethren^ remonstrating with them, call-
ing them back from their heretical wanderings, and,
by reasoning and persuasion, endeavouring to effect
their restoration to the true faith; and, should they
faO of success, to "shake off the dust of their feet
against them," and renounce their fellowship, till the
Lord may himself be pleased to bring them to a
right mind.— To ^ecj^e the production of an express
precept or example for such dealing of church with
church/ is an unreasonable requisition. The neces-
sity and the duty of it are involved in every precept,
every example, and every principle, by which
the obligation to purity of communion is enforced
upon the ^hurches. For if the feUowship of sister
churches implies such universality of membership
as has before been stated to be essential to it,— then

" Tua ree agitur, parieB ciim pvoximus ardet ;'*•
—the members of that erring church are, by virtue

• " I^ook to 7Q«r own house, when your neighbour's burns.'-'

7 ..•

Vmok OP CHUIWHB8.

o! thia comprehensive principle, membetB of your

own; so that such d
described becomes
fwell OS for theirs,
such dealing is ide' ^
enjoined dealing with

with it as has just Tieen
y for your own sake as^
ideed, the principle ci
ith the principle of tOT
feng iiUMvidual. If "-

enioineu aeauug wiw* »«-«.— o — --'- ,

man that is heretical" is, " after the^rst and secon^
admonition," to be "rejected/'-surely, « Jor^^^'^
so ought a church that is heretical after similai^
repeated admonitions, to be thrown oflf. The right
and the duty are manifestly, in both cases, the same.
if there be any difference, it lies in this.V-that a
church has authority over its own individual m^-^
ber. while, on the principles of independency, it has
none over another church. It is true But the
difference, in such a case, in fegardio effect, is not
Kreat:-we excoinnmnkate the heretical jndmdual;
we imthdratv from the heretical clu^. But the
withdrawing chtu-ch, M «"^"^ tvitWvnient from
feUoiashw toith the other, bears its testimony as
Impressively and effectually agaiigt important error,
Km il u^a K^^r, Alnflifid with alfthe authonty of a

M IfThad been clothed with a#the authority of a
presbytery or %»ynod/

VBhouia the reader b?de«lrou9to^e a practical exemplificatioo
of bS dealing of churches with churchen, he may be referred to a

.S«l Tntitled " The entf re correspondence between the four Con-
J^Sritr'hJl Glasgow.and'the CongregaUonal ChurcheB at
S!SiZ Bellfthill. Bridgeton, Cambueiang, and Ardrossan; on the
SE'^^io^na the influence of the Holy Spirit in Cpdver-

'^ toLv^uable Work-" A comparative view," Ac, formerly referred
to Dr. Adam Thonwon tfipwjsentB this power of remonstrance with,
^nd^pawtion from, erring churches, as if it were altogether incon^
6toten7vriA the independency of the churches on each other :-" When
a^mC;.! churchSs ■' wya H "are ready to admit to th« solemn
OTdSe °the Lord's supp e r) th e member, of a ny parfcnlar church

~i^^^^.

344

UNION OF CHUBGBBB.

3. The third thing I have to mention^ i&— freedom of
comMned action for purposes (^common interest.— Bnoh"
purposes are far more than conceivable. They can
hardly fail to exist. There are concerns thftt a£Eect
the condition, or that engage the affections and
deeores, .of— not one church and another merely—
bnt all the chuiches alike* They may arise out of
causes that 9xe incidental and temporary, or out of
such as are indigenous land permanent. For the
more suc(iessful prosecution of them, tm union of
counsels, contributions, and active energies, may be
requisite.— Now for such cases, there is perfect free-
dom of voluntaiy combination" and voluntary effort.
Theire is noUiing — ^nothing whatever — in the princi-
ples of congregational independency, that is in the
least degree affected bjr the fullest use of this liberty.

;^'

I ■

in the district, do they not recognize it as a sister ch\irch? But if
tiiey should find at length that Jangerous heresy, or gross immorality,
had crept into it, would they not very properly refuse any longer to
hold fellowship with the members of that church? Would they not
thus implicitly pass sentence ot condemnation on it, and thus show
that ttfetdea of the Independepcy of churches on each other wa|, after
all, visionary andrabsurd?" pages 262, 263.— But would it not be a
fairer view of the casei to say, that while the general principle, and the
practice founded upon it, of receiving each other's jusembers to fellow-
ship, is tbe manifestation of the «mo» of the chulrches,— the right of
each to decline such free admission of the members of another into
which heresy or immorality has crept, and the following out of that
right in practice, is a manifestation of their independency? Exceptio
fimuitregulam. The general rule is union, and the admission of each
other's members. The exception is just in such a case as Dr. T. sup-
poses. But the very exception, in^ead of showing the Ladefeudency
of the churches of one another to be "visionary and absurd," is" no
more than the legitimate exercise, and practical exhibition, of the very
principle of that independency :— each church judging" for itself whom,
it should admit tO/its fellowship,— what churches, as well as whatindi-^
viduals. The union and the exception are perfecstly cQinpatible.i.

^ «>

«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 ;<nth the incubus
of anOBstabUshment,*tiie protection of <3ieir rights
and t>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.

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

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

848

UNION OP^CHUBCHES.

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;

UNION OF CHXTBCHES.

849

L
I
>

r
f

■;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

"'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 <Djf \thp,>(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

more.

JNION

to forward'^
the same
iwV?/te« is
possible
igthe
iother, — ^

fc
tl
h

c]
e|
tl
a
cl
ti

• b
c
n
o

' d
n

■"V'^V

uKion or oauftoHitiB,

351

B '

h ■,

y ..-

e ^;;
e

e'.:-'
I

• - - '■
In

I-

^-^

* 9',

•e,

le
is
le
le

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

- 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

■*■ ,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.

■' \

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/<yr«^ii'«wi#«'d'
each cliurch becomes, the inorel efficient wiD it be^ .
on the surrounding world, both by the influence offlMMi
example and %y the efforts of ze(|il. * * * * It
is not nMw&ei* that is strength, — it is ?««w«,— unio^ in
prinCiple,^ — uni^n in aflfection,^and consequent union
in prayer, in contribution, and in effort. And then,
i^iprODCB^ion as such churches, though denomina-
tion«™8teering, are in spirit one;— in proportion
as, wHirtensible of the clivellent forces that "would
keep them asunder, they feel' the superior and over-
powering force of the- 'one faith' that draws and
bindsjtoem toget}ier;--in proportion as they thus
exemj^ to the world this pn§ faith Mvoyking by
lov6;'— 'in proportion' as they^f^^e eomyion cause in

t ■•<■ -■, , ■ , ,7- . ; : I . ■ ' r.

'KK*%. >-

, ■*•*:'

• ^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^<i<» tfie sentunei* more coinjplhcns^ bjrthw
insertion of «2)j«eopafia« ahmmigm Di^sbj^erian. THj^ifl a dlffl-
cuUy, heweveBi in the ^L casffin iv^rd. to fellowsMi):*! the toblo
of the Lord, that doo|^B|pzM in th* other. According to epiaco-
palian pra<^^ce, there «Rt Aperly be said to be either /aW« 0/ the
Lord, or cKrisHnn j^oni'^tort^ch participant of the bread and the
wine recplying them ft^ertn the handaof the offldating iijinister, In a
kneeling posture, at the alter; thus, it may bo, having individual
dwpmunioii with bis Lord, but none, visibly at leasts with his brethren.
Now a conscientious presbyterlan or Independent might, without in-
curring the (jliarge of bigotry, scruple at himself confonnih^to practices
deemed by him so unscriptural, and so inconsistent witii some of the
leading designs of the ordinance, while yet, with open arms, he might
welcome to fellowship, at the joint communion table, any fellow-
believer holding episcopalian views, who felt hinj-^elf at liberty to
take his place there. [The omitted sentpnees in ^l^e extract contain a
aentltnent ami figure which have occumd belore.]

&''■*' '..^

tllOD,

omy,
aght
iinot, '
mng
idah,
id to

reaU
that
aud

Bhall
him

1 his

hned

JBELY
I THE

rt, pp
by"th«
a diffi-
le Ubl<>
episco-
Uof the
and Uitf
;er, in a
lirtdual
iretbren.
bout in-
►ractices"
iC of the
ic might
' fcUow-
iborty to
lontain a