BX 9190 .P7372 1839 c.2 ^Th^II^''^^''^^'^ defended, and the arguments of modern PRESBYTEEIANISM DEFENDED, AND THE ARGUMENTS OF MODERN ADVOCATES OF PRELACY EXAMINED AND REFUTED, IN FOUR DISCOURSES, MINISTERS OF THE SYNOD OF ULSTER. NEC TAMEN CONSUMEBATUR. " Stand fast, therefore, in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage." GLASGOW: WILLIAM COLLINS, 7, SOUTH FREDERICK ST. LONDONDERRY : WM. CAMPBELL AND R. HAMILTON. BELFAST : WM. M'COMB. DUBLIN : WM. CURRY, JUN., & CO. EDINBURGH : OLIVER & BOYD, AND WM. WHYTE & CO. LONDON: HAMILTON, ADAMS, & CO., AND WHITTAKER & CO. 1839. TO THE REV. DB. HANNA, PASTOR OF THE PBESBTTERIAN CHURCH, ROSEMARY STREET, AND PROFESSOR OF DIVINITY IN THE ROYAL COLLEGE, BELFAST, FOR THE GENERAL SYNOD OF ULSTER, THESE DISCOURSES, PREACHED BY MINISTERS WHO FORMERLY ENJOYED THE BENEFIT OF HIS THEOLOGICAL PKELECTION8, ARE MOST AFFECTIONATELY AND RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED. ■^ -^^r ,z^/A-^^ £--' CONTENTS. INTRODUCTORY ESSAY, BY THE REV. HENRY WALLACE, LONDONDERRY, DISCOURSE I. BY THE REV. W. D. KILLEN, RAPHOE. The Presbyterian Church a Church of Christ — validity of Presbyterian Ordination — Claims of Apostolical Succession — Testimonies in favour of Presbyterianism. ' The churchet of Christ salute you."— Rom. xvi, 16. 25 DISCOURSE II. BY THE REV. WILLIAM MtLUEE, LONDONDERRY. The Pastors of the Christian Church, of one Order, and of equal Authority — The Decision of our Lord on the Subject — The names Presbyter and Bishop applied to the same persons in Scripture — Plurality of Rulers in the Churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Philippi, and Thessalonica — Testi- monies of Episcopalian Writers — Objections Answered. " Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them, Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them ; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you.' —Mark, x, 42, 43, . . 79 11 CONTENTS. DISCOURSE III. BY THE REV. JAMES DENHAM, LONDONDERRY. The Officers and Government of the Presbyterian Church — Her Spiritual Independence — Presbyterians not Disloyal — The Principle of Church Establishments Asserted Reasons wiry we cannot become Members of the English Church Advantages of Presbyterianisni. " For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the in- crease of his government and peace there shall be no end ; upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to order it and establish it with judgment and. Justice from henceforth even for ever." — Isaiah, ix, 6, 7, . . . 137 DISCOURSE IV. BY THE REV. ALEXANDER PORTER GOUDY, STRABANE. WORSHIP OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. Power of the Church to decree Rites and Ceremonies ex- amined — Forms of Prayer — Administration of the Sacra- ments. ' God is a Spirit, and they that worshiji him must worship him in spirit and in truth. "—John, iv, 24, . . , . 207 PREFACE. Were any apology necessary for the publication of the following discourses, it might be sufficient to say that it is right that the members of the Presbyterian Church should be instructed in their own distinguish- ing principles. And it is the especial design of the writers to contribute towards that object. They do not pretend to deny, however, that they have been determined by circumstances in engaging in the controversy at the present time, and in pub- lishing their views in the following form. They have been well aware that the ecclesiastical polity to which they are attached has been frequently assailed of late days with much severity and intolerance. But although often coming from high quarters, they have not felt called upon to notice such attacks, as it does not appear that hitherto such active measures as at present, were taken to have them circulated by the press. About twelve months' since, a course of ser- mons was published, which had been preached in the Cathedral of Derry, in which the leading points of difference between Presbyterians and Episcopalians were fully discussed. Some time after, another dis- course was preached in the same cathedral, before the primate and the assembled clergy of the united dio- ceses of Derry and Raphoe, boldly denying to the ministers of the Presbyterian Church any commission IV PREFACE. to administer the ordinances of the Gospel. Those discourses were printed and circulated; and, of course, challenged criticism and inquiry. The local position of the authors of the following discourses, in Derry and its immediate vicinity, seemed to require of them to notice the controversy, where it had been so publicly introduced. On four successive Sabbath evenings, those discourses were delivered to large and deeply attentive audiences, whose interest in the controversy had been especially excited by the late commemoration of the second centenary of the second Reformation in Scotland. The reasons which operated to call for the preaching of those discourses, seem also to warrant their pub- lication. The respective claims of prelacy and presby- terianism are canvassed freely; and while the un- scriptural character of prelacy itself, and the abuses of the Church of England are fully exposed, no attempt is made to denounce that portion of the Christian commonwealth as not being a church of Christ. We seek not her injury, but we earnestly desire her reformation, and until such reformation take place, we believe it to be a special duty to build up our people in the faith of those principles for which their fathers bled ; and which we still esteem to be of divine authority. THEOIiOGIC INTEODUCTORY ESSAY. BY THE REV. HENRY WALLACE, LONDONDBRRY, MODERATOR OF THE Sf NOD OF ULSTER. The Presbyterian Church has been less forward than perhaps any other denomination of professing Christians, to present before the world the credentials of her Divine commission. The nulpit for the most part has been silent upon the subject of the distin- guishing characteristics of her government and dis- cipline; and her people can testify, that so carefully have controversies upon those subjects been avoided in the public ministrations, that they might have been attentive hearers for years, without having been able to learn from the scope of the preaching, to what form of church polity their pastors were attached. Nor even upon the platform, where a greater liberty of dissertation is allowable, have our ministers indulged in descants upon the apostolicity of our church, the order and beauty of her arrangements, and the chaste and graceful simplicity of her venerable forms of worship. The press, too, has hitherto maintained an almost unbroken silence upon the subject, more ^ Vl INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. especially in Ireland. It is a matter of patient search and frequent inquiry, to discover books defen- sive or expository of Presbyterianism. Pamphlets and periodicals, so diligently and so extensively pressed into the service of other churches, ate in vain enquired after, if the order and discipline of the Presbyterian church be the required subjects. We have been reluctant to break in upon that harmony which for so long a period has been maintained between the churches of England and of Scotland, and their respective branches in this country. That harmony has been maintained by the silence and for- bearance of Presbyterians; and it is declared to be in danger if they presume to enter upon the field of controversy by presenting to the world an exposition of their principles, and an inquiry into the errors to which they are opposed. The same love of peace has induced us to suffer the history of our church to sink into general forget- fulness. We have been almost afraid to speak of the Scottish covenanters, and the tales of their suf- ferings which once hallowed the converse of Presby- terian firesides, and contributed to nurture the piety of the young, are now almost unknown to their un- grateful descendants. The caricatures of a Scott have tended to make their memory contemptible in the estimation of fashionable prejudice and ignorance; and the general consent with which Presbyterians have suffered the green damp moss to obliterate their names from their mouldering monuments, has tended to deepen the unfavourable impression so agreeably and facttiously imparted. The noble " Vindication " of Dr. M'Crie is perhaps little known in the circle INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Vll where its influence is most required. It is interesting, however, to think that still the 6ne arts maybe made available to rescue the names of the " Worthies " ot the Covenant from the reproach with which they have been so unjustly burdened. The general circulation among the ranks of taste and fashion, of the beautiful engravings of Harvey's paintings of the 'Covenan- ter's Baptism,' the ' Preaching,' and the ' Battle of Drumclog,' cannot fail to awaken an interest of tenderness and of sympathy, which will at least miti- gate the severity of the judgment which an ill- informed and prejudiced posterity has passed upon, them. That sect of Presbyterians alone which con- tinues to bear their name, has maintained a uniform advocacy of their character and regard for their names, while they have been honoured to bear no small share of their reproach. The late commemorations in Edinburgh, Glasgow, and Derry, celebrating Scotland's deliverance from the yoke of prelacy, have given no unequivocal signs of a reviving sympathy with the spirit, and admira- tion of the deeds of the Scottish Covenanters. They have demonstrated that the old spirit of witness- bearing is ready to stand forth the same stalwart form as when it bore the renowned standard of "Christ's Crown and Covenant" in the day of battle and of blood. Laud and Sharpe, the relent- less persecutors of our noble fathers, have found bio- graphers in our own day, who have masked them as saints and martyrs, for exhibition before a generation who have been sufiPered to remain in ignorance of their real characters. Let us not continue longer an unjust neglect of the memory of the righteous, while ^ Viii INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. it is daringly attempted to transfer the fair fame which is theirs, to their betrayers and murderers. Nor must we lonirer be ashamed to acknovvledcre that our con- victions of the unscriptural character of prelacy are as strong as were theirs. It is true there is not tlie same meas,ure of stern practical necessity for opposing that system as in the days of our Scottish forefathers. They did not contend and suffer in vain. The limitations of the royal prerogative, and the diminu- tion or destruction of the influence of the prelates in the national councils, arq among the fruits of their victories, which have happily descended to us, and which leave to us the less perilous duty of argumen- tative warfare. That duty, however, is laid upon us; and the circumstances of the present times are such as to demand that it be faithfully and resolutely fulfilled. We have always been aware that there existed a party in the Church of England who were at no pains to conceal their dislike of the Presbyterian church, and who haughtily repelled all our claims to sisterhood or ecclesiastical consanguinity. Nor was this feelincp directed against the more obscure deno- minations of Presbyterians in this country, even the Established Church of Scotland was not excepted. Still, however, those uncharitable feelings vvere not very extensively uttered; and, as we had the conso- lation to enjoy the good wishes of the most excellent among the inferior clergy, there was a general con- sent to suffer them to pass without censure or anim- adversion. Whether those feelings have become more general in the Church of England or not, we do not presume to determine; but certainly there is a much greater disposition to give them currency INTltODUCrORY ESSAY. IX from the episcopal throne, from the pulpit, and from the press, than for some years past. The claims which she advances to exclusive apostolicity are now put forth with an air of haughty superciliousness, and with an intolerant severity which we had been accustomed to persuade ourselves were the genuine exhalations of the Roman marshes alone. The Church seems apprehensive that of late years she has become too liberal; that she had abandoned too much of the dignified ascendancy which was her true and privileged position; and that there is a necessity that she should reinthrone herself in that becoming exclu- siveness from which a mistaken generosity had so far seduced her. It is bewailed by some within her that a coldness and indifference to the privilege of "belonging to the Apostolic Church" too much pre- vails. How is it to be accounted for? "I fear it must be owned," says one, "that much of the evil is owing to the comparatively low ground which we ourselves, the ministers of God, have chosen to occupy in defence of our commission. For many years we have been much in the habit of resting our claim on the general duties of submission to authority, of decency and order, of respecting precedents long established, instead of appealing to that warrant which marks us exclusioel^ ior God's Ambassadors. Why should we not seriously endeavour to impress our people with this plain truth; that by separating themselves from our communion, they separate them- selves not only from a decent, orderly, useful society, but from the only church in this realm which HAS A RIGHT TO BE QUITE SURE THAT SHE HAS THE lord's body TO GIVE TO HIS PEOPLE r* " a2 X INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Our claims to be esteemed a church of Christ are broadly denied in numerous publications, in visitation charges and sermons. Are we true to our own mi- nisteiial character and commission to suffer in silence that its validity be impugned, and our ministerial acts be pronounced unauthorised and presumptuous? Are we to be held up before the people who wait on our ministry as self-constituted teachers, from whom it should be their first duty to secede ? Shall such a degree of forbearance be exacted of us as that we should abstain from all measures of defence ? And above all, shall that most honourable commission which we hold from the Messiah, the Head of the church, suffer insult and indignity through us unrebuked and unrepelled ? We honestly and firmly believe that we possess the warrant of his Word for the office which we hold, and for the manner in which we hum- bly endeavour to exercise it. We hold (and we be- lieve the position to be successfully maintained in the following discourses) that the polity of the Pres- byterian Church is a part of the faith once delivered to the saints — that it involves the glory of Messiah's headship; and that the prosperity of the visible church is dependent upon the maintenance of it, in faithful- ness and purity, as the ordinance of God. We be- lieve the system of Presbytery to possess a superior adaptation for the promulgation of truth and the sup- pression of error, a belief abundantly justified by the most gratifying results. It is not a little amusing to see the perplexity of the Oxford school of theo- logy, while confessing the result, to account for its philosophy. " The doctrinal result of dispensing with episcopal succession," cannot be denied to be INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XI favourable in the case of Scotland. " Allowing the many good parts of her system (which, be it observed, are all in a primitive spirit) full credit for this, yet one may be permitted to observe, that something naturally must be ascribed to the vicinity of our own church diffusing a kind of wholesome contagion, the benefit of which has been acknowledged by some of the great lights of the Scottish establishment." It is strange that this beneficial " contagion" should be of such a peculiar character, so eccentric in its opera- tions as to diffuse a salubrity over Scotland, while within her own geographical limits heresy thrives so rankly. Alas ! even within her own pale, her sana- tory influence is incapable of preserving even her own children from the plague of multifarious errors. When the Presbyterian writers of the seventeenth century insisted that there existed a native tendency in Prelacy to introduce Popery, we do not think that the opinion was more truly justified by the circumstances of the times in which they wrote, than by results developed long before, as well as by events which arc occurring now. It is not uncommon to hear Presbyterianisra charged with a tendency to generate errors in doc- trine, as well as a democratic licentiousness in polity. Arianism and Socinianisra have been charged upon Presbytery as its lawful offspring ; and more espe- cially as chargeable upon the want of a liturgy. Now it might be expected that prelacy, with its liturgy, would have rendered the introduction of errors very nearly impossible ; or, if introduced by the covert expedients of insincere professors, that it would speedily be detected and dislodged. Is this expec- Xll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. tatiou justified by the facts ? Very far from it. It is under the form of prelacy that the most extensive system of error which has ever defiled the profesang Chris- tian churchj has appeared. The systen? of Prelacy has hitherto been much more productive of the errors of Popery than of the saving truths of the Gospel, and still continues to be so. From century to century the dogmas of Popery grew up with petnicious luxuri- ance under its shade, until the heavenly plant of Divine truth was hidden from the sisht. Nor was the liturgy able to maintain a pure doctrine*, or a pure worship ; superstition and idolatry were fostered by its use. Even in later times, since the Reformation in England up till the present day, it is well known that even prelates themselves have been chargeable with various doctrinal errors ; and at no period was there ever a greater variety of doctrine maintained by the clergy of the established church than at this mo- ment. We might consider ourselves almost justified in affirming that the Oxford ' Tracts for the Times ' were developing at m-esent the native tendency of Prelacy to introduce Popery. For more than six years have those tracts been issuing from the press, and extensively circulating some of the worst dogmas of Popery, and as yet no authority in the Church has attempted any interference. Now the Church of England has been asserting herself to be the very fortress and bulwark of Christianity in these lands; yet is her state at this very moment such as to shake our confidence in her powers of defence. Popery is undermining her own strength ; she is surrendering her strongholds to the enemy. There is a goodly number, we bless God, of noble spirit^ within her INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XIU who arc crying aloud, who are proclaiming the dan- ger ; but the authority of the Church, wherever it is lodf^ed, is silent and ineffective. It is notorious that the poisonous influence of Oxford doctrines is spread- ing rapidly in England, and that even the digni- taries of the Church have not escaped unaffected. Does not all this serve to warrant the old accusa- tion, that Prelacy has a native tendency to introduce Popery ? Now, while the gross darkness of Popery covered the great mass of the people of Europe, the Presby- terian Waldcnses maintained the simplicity of Gospel truth. And that truth shone so purely bright as to attract the attention and awaken the vengeance of Rome. Many a martyr of Jesus was found in the deep valleys of the Alps before Prelacy appeared on the theatre of Europe, unassociated with the raosc criminal and persecuting superstition. And when at last Prelacy stood forth, stripped of the most ob- noxious parts of the drapery of Rome, casting away the accumulated errors of many a century, and ap- pearing among the marshalled hosts of the Protes- tant churches, bearing high the standard of Christ's testimony, she speedily discovered a determination to assert claims to a domineering ascendancy. The Act of Supremacy and the Act of Uniformity in England secured that ascendancy for a time, until the tyrannical enforcement of those acts awakened those convulsions by which the church and the crown were both overthrown. Still Prelacy continued to cherish its lust for ascendancy; and scrupled not to resort to the most cruel measures to maintain it. The Puri- tans, the assertors of British liberty, were forced into XIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. a state of separation from the national church by the intolerant and bigoted measures of the prelates and adherents. The supremacy of the crown in all matters and over all persons civil and ecclesiastical, and the declaration that the administration of the sacraments, according to the Book of Common Prayer and the Queen's injunctions, was agreeable to the word of God and the practice of the primitive church, were the tests by which all ecclesiastics were tried in the time of Elizabeth. Some declined the declaration and were deposed from their office as far as civil tyranny could reach it. When, by a division oi fifty-nine against fifify-eight, it was determined by the Convocation that no change should be made in the Book of Common Prayer, the separation between the Puritans and the churchmen within the establish- ment was distinctly and broadly marked. The very best ministers left the church rather than submit to the arbitrary proceedings of the court and the bishops, in enforcing superstitious observances and the wearing of popish habits. For the sake of the enforcement of these things, churches were left vacant and the people uninstructed ; but the loved ascendancy of the prelates enjoyed its triumph. The deprived ministers were left no alternative but to assume the position and order of a separate church ; and who shall question the duty of their resolving, that " since they could not have the word of God preached nor the sacraments administered without idolatrous gear ; and since there had been a separate congregation in London and another at Geneva in Queen Mary's time, which used a book and order of preaching, administration of sacraments v:A discipline that the INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XV great Mr. Calvin had approved of, and which was free from the superstitions of the English service ; that therefore it was their duty, in their present cir- cumstances to hreak off from the public churches, and to assemble, as they had opportunity, in private houses or elsewhere, to worship God in a manner that might not offend against the light of their con- sciences " ? The most rigid means were employed to prevent their meetings ; and the prisons were as full of the victims of religious intolerance in the days of EHza- beth, as in the days of Mary ; and during the whole course of a reign so applauded for the prosperity of Protestantism, the persecution of the non-conformists was maintained with persevering rigour. The suc- ceeding reigns still exhibit Prelacy in the same un- araiable aspect, the same unwearied aspirant after ascendancy, and courting that idol with offerings of cruelty and blood. Turn we to Scotland, the scene of unequalled contests and of unrivalled victories. Here the same thirst for spiritual despotism distinguished the abettors of Prelacy; and here the horrors of persecution in- flicted upon our presbyterian fathers, by professed Protestants, outmeasured all that had disgraced the tyranny of Rome. And what was their crime ? Their attachment to presbyterianisra as the ordinance of God, and their firm and faithful determination to assert the prerogatives of the Messiah, as the King and Head of his own church. The Prelatists were satisfied that the reigning sovereign should assume unlimited authority over all persons, and in all causes civil and ecclesiastical, — that he should mould the XVI INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. Church into any form he pleased, that he should reigu as its visible iiead, and, by his supreme will, direct its discipline and order. The Presbyterians held all such claims as the blasphemous assumptions of Antichrist; and maintaining the rip-ht of Jesus alone to rule by his own laws in his own church, they re- fused to submit their necks to the yoke of ecclesias- tical tyranny, or to comply with a system so dishon- ouring to the rightful supremacy of their Lord. From the period of the first General Assembly in 1560 until the year 1688, the history of Scotland presents as its mostdistinguishingfeature the struggle of Prelacy after an oppressive ascendancy, and the resistance of Presbytery to its unrighteous usurpations. The respective characters of the two parties during this protracted contest are well known. The profanity, the irreligion, and the reckless cruelty of the perse- cutors, could never in any age or in any country have been met by a contrast more broadly marked, than in the fervent piety, the burning zeal, and the firm endurance of the Scottish Presbyterians. In Ireland the same intolerant spirit on the part of Prelacy distinguished its days of power. When Laud undertook to manage the affairs of the Church in Ireland, he determined that in all points it should be strictly conformable to the English Church, which he had modelled and adorned after his own heart. Presbyterian ministers from Scotland, encouraged to settle in Ireland, were for a time sanctioned by the authorities civil and ecclesiastical. A general tolera- tion prevailed, so that they exercised their ministry freely and successfully, enjoying like privileges with those who entertained prelatical views. "Though INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. like the English puritans," says Dr. Reid, "in the early part of the reign of Elizabeth, they were com- prehended within the pale of the established episcopal church, enjoying its endowments and sharing its dig- nities; yet, notwithstanding this singular position which they occupied, they introduced and maintained the several peculiarities both of discipline and worship by which the Scottish church was distinguished." This state of peace however was not of long duration : the influence of Laud armed the ready zeal of a bishop of Down and Connor against the most devoted and distinguished ministers within his diocese, by whom they were deposed from their office. " And thus," says the same authority " for not yielding a conformity, from which they had been exempted when they entered on the ministry in Ireland, were these faithful men violently excluded from their offices, and thrown destitute on the world." It seemed to be a matter of minor consideration that the population of whole districts should be left uninstructed, or that the light of the Gospel should be quenched, where the great object was the establishment of the Prelacy in its exclusiveness and grandeur. Happily the same ever-memorable era which brought liberty and happiness to Scotland, gave rest to the presbyterian church in Ireland, but at the expense of many privileges which it had a right to consider as guaranteed to it by the State. It is but an indifferent compensation which it enjoys in the amount of endowment annually voted by the legisla- ture, on the motion of the chancellor of the exchequer, who includes it among the items of his miscellaneous estimates. It is thus placed in a most unsatisfactory XVIU INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. condition ; every necessary increase to its amount being entirely subject to the convenience or the caprice of every new chancellor of the exchequer, or secretary for Ireland; and every paltry addition be- stowed as a most especial favour. We believe that were faith kept with the presbyterian church in Ire- land, according to the circumstances of its first plan- tation, we possess an undoubted right to endowments commensurate with its increasing extension ; and did our successive governments take a just and enlightened view of the matter they should hail every new claim presented to them as an additional pledge of peace and prosperity to the land. Why, it may be asked, do we rake up the cruel histories of by-gone and intolerant ages; do we mean to chai'ge upon the Church of England in the present day, the deeds of persecution perpetrated in other generations? We might ask, in reply, has the Church of England at any after period disavowed the deeds which we condemn ? This is the reply which Protestants justly make, when the more liberal of their brethren arraign them for charging upon the Romish Church of the present day, the crimes of former persecutions. Has the Romish Church dis- avowed them ? Has she abandoned the profession of the principles that led to them ? We ask, has the Church of England abandoned the profession of that exclusiveness and ascendancy which fomented the cruelties and intolerance of other days ? VVe are answered by the fifth Canon of the Irish Church. We are answered by the modern canonization of Laud and Sharpe. We are answered by the most contemptuous abjuration of all sisterhood with the INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XIX Presbyterian Church, by those who occupy the chief seats in the synagogues. These are manifestations of the same spirit under which our renowned fore- fathers suffered such persecutions; and it is right that on our part they be exposed and condemned. It is not a Uttle to be wondered at, that beset as the Church of England has been and continues to be by enemies of every name and variety of opinion, she should adopt a Hne of conduct calculated to de- stroy all the remaining sympathies that lingered around her devoted fabric. Does any one ask by whom were those sympathies cherished ? We answer, by Presbyterians, and by Presbyterians alone. And for this there were two causes, whose combined operation in later days seemed to promise fair to secure our unaffected good-will towards the Church of England. In the first place the great leading sections of Presbyterians in Scotland and Ireland contend for the same great principles which the Church of England advocates. Their protest against Popery is as strong and consistent as hers. We hold equally with her the duty of the state to provide for the religious instruction of the people : in other words, we hold the same views of the doc- trine of religious establishments. We do not occupy a position of political hostility to the Church of England. We cannot therefore unite with those who would overturn her because she is protestant — for we are Protestants. Nor with those who would overthrow her because she is established — for we believe a church establishment to be according to the word of God. Nor do we object to her because she olds property — for we believe that property may be XX INTRODUCTORY ^SSAY. lawfully allocated for the maintenance of the chureh, and should be guaranteed for the church's use while faithfully engaged in promoting the instruction of the people. Our objections to the Church of Eng- land are not political ; and pohtics, therefore, have not interposed to injure those sympathies which com- mon principles have always a tendency to excite and to maintain. In the next place there has been growing up in the Church of England, for some years past, a party distinguished by the epithet, 'evangelical,' whose views of scripture doctrine, whose personal piety and ministerial faithfulness, have been such as to secure the most unfeigned respect and brotherly affection of the Presbyterian Church. It has been a cherished hope that the growing influence of those right- hearted men would at length lead to some ameliora- tion at least, of the state of the church, or happily bring about a reformation which would better adapt her to the work in which she is professedly engaged, in a country in which she has hitherto been at so little pains to render her ministrations acceptable. The evangelical ministers in her communion have been attempting to supply her lack of service ; and many of them her lack of charity towards other evan- gelical denominations. Yet these very men are ac- cused by the dominant party in the Church as dan- gerous to her peace, and as hostile to her interests as the most violent dissenters who have assailed her reputation or denounced her being. These men have felt the impracticable character of the Church's constitution, and have frequently manifested a desire to effect important changes ; but, alas ! they have no INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXI power to contribute to the furtherance of their desires, the seat of power and of authority, wherever it is, being inaccessible by men of such a spirit. These are the men for whose sakes evangehcal Presbyterians have been reluctant to be forced into a state of col- lision with the Church of England, and for whose sakes they have borne with the haughty contempt and the lofty scorn of those whose personal preten- sions to be ministers of the New Testament are at least as little founded in right and truth as the official pretensions of those whom they affect to despise as self-called intruders into the ministry. These two causes have combined to restrain Pres- byterians from engaging in measures of political ho- stility to the Church of England, and still continue to operate notwithstanding many provocations. And we trust the time will never come under any provoca- tions, when they will be found leagued in associations with the enemies of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, in order to overturn any form of Protestantism holding that gospel. Although we cannot give the Church of England credit for being, as she assumes to be, the single champion, with the success of whose arms Protestantism is to stand or fall ; we acknowledge that such is the position in which she is placed, that it may be that the contest which rages around her walls, may be the contest whose issue shall decide for Ireland at least, whether Protestantism or Popery shall possess the ascendancy. If such be the case, we can only lament that Protestantism is so unhappy in her champion. The known opinions of many of her assailants may warrant her in saying, that it is the truth that is in her which is the point of assault : XXll INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. while she is chargeable with abuses and corruptions enough, constitutional and administrative, to warrant much of the hostility which has been directed against her from others. This latter circumstance makes the assumed championship of the Church of England disastrous in its effects upon Protestantism ; for whole sections of Protestants must either stand aloof from the conflict, or be under very strong tempta- tions to array themselves amongst the adverse legions. The former is the delicate position of the Presbyterian Church. She cannot stand forth to defend Prelacy, believing it to be unscriptural ; and it is not the truth which is in the English Church which i?, professedly assailed, although we doubt not that by many it is really ; knowing that, by the majority of her ene- mies, her truth is as much abhorred as her abuses. While the Church of England is attacked'professedly because of corruptions which Presbyterians deplore and condemn, they cannot stand by her side and fight her battle : and they have hitherto been happily pre- served from falling under the force of the temptation under which so many evangelical dissenters have fallen, of ranking themselves among the hosts of the adversaries. It is with little reason of self-gratula- tion that the Church of England esteems herself as oc- cupying a singular and a solitary championship for the integrity and the honours of protestant truth. The abuses by which she is encumbered have at the same time unnerved her own arm, and rendered it impos- sible for the other evangelical denominations to rally around her standard. In her present state she is the chief source of protestant weakness in these lands ; although wo gratefully acknowledge that she INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. XXIU has afforded many distinguished and successful com- batants who have done noble service in exposing and refutiniT the errors and abominations of Romanism. We think that it is not without reason that in these times of faction and contest, we complain that we are forced to occupy a false position, and seem equally to be arrayed against the Church of England and the evangelical dissenters, while we have many inte- rests in common with both, and yet cannot fully sympathise with the position of either. It appears to us also that this delicate position occupied by the Presbyterian Church, and into which the abuses of the English Church have forced her, have mainly contributed to make Presbyterian political influence a mere negation, in a country where an unceasing contest for political importance is strenuously main- tained. And although Presbyterians constitute one half of the Protestant population, until this day the interests of the great mass of them are unrepre- sented in the imperial legislature. Still it may be doubted whether we ought to re- gret this state of matters. There are many advan- tages in the position of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, and more especially for carrying forward missionary operations, which may well reconcile her to the humble place she holds among the more stirring communities by which she is surrounded. Aided without being encum,bered by the state, allied to no political party and pledged to none, she is happily little affected by political influences. From her pe- culiar position, and the advantages which she enjoys from her scriptural constitution, she can take a calm survey of events as they pass, and, with the light of XXIV INTRODUCTORY ESSAY. the Divine word, she can scan the whole horizon of society, marking the character of prevaihng principles and of popular measures, expressing her judgment upon each, and promptly acting according to her con- victions of duty, under little temptation to consider how her political relations may he aifected. Long may she continue to prosecute her humhle and, blessed be God, her successful endeavours in advancing her Lord's cause, unaffected by the blighting and para- lysing influence of factious polities. We believe the Divine warrant of the Presby- terian Church to exercise the functions of a New Testament Church, will be found to be ably asserted and defended in the following discourses. That they are called for generally and locally no Presbyterian who values his principles can pretend to deny; and we hope that they may have the effect of leading Presby- terians to assert for their scriptural church a higher station than she has hitherto been esteemed entitled to occupy. They go forth committed to the blessing of the Head of the Church. They are presented as a seasonable gift to the Presbyterian people; and they are appropriately inscribed to the venerable professor under whom the authors have studied theology ; and who has ever been distinguished by his steady and enlightened attachment to sound Presbyterianism as the best adapted, as well as most scriptural vehicle for the promulgation of sound theology. DISCOURSE I. BY THE REV W. D. KILLEN, RAPHOE. The Presbyterian Church a Church of Christ — vali- dity of Presbyterian Ordination — Claims of Apos- tolical Succession — Testimonies in favour of Presby- terianism. " The churches of Christ salute you." — Rom. xvi, 16. It would appear that Paul was at Corinth when he dictated the Epistle to the Romans. In Achaia, the province of which Corinth was the chief city, there were then a nun^ber of Christian churches. In our text the apostle communicates to the church of Rome the expressions of their regard : The churches of Christ salute you. It is obvious from these words that in the apos- tolic acre such a designation as " The church of Christ" was not exclusively appropriated by 2iny par- ticular section of the professing disciples of Jesus. The church of Rome did not then claim to be the only true church of Christ. She did not conceive herself insulted when other Christian churches, over which she had no control, were introduced to her. Then the various communities of believers scattered abroad over the earth regarded themselves but as portions of the church catholic or universal, and by B 26 rRESBVTERIANISM DEFENDED. such salutations as that conveyed in our text inter- changed tokens of Christian recognition and of Christian charity. And would it not be most de- sirable that all the evangelical churches of the Re- formation should now maintain the same brotherly intercourse ? Would not the communion of saints be greatly promoted by the mutual recognition of their ministry and ordinances? Though they may differ in circumstantials, may they not at least salute each other as churches of Ciirist? Presbyterians conceive, however, that the United Church of England and Ireland has evinced a very decided disposition to deviate from this course. They conceive that on several recent occasions she has assumed a most unwarrantable and offensive atti- tude. At a late public discussion held in the metro- polis of this island, her champion indirectly stigma- tized all the other Protestant churches in the empire, and maintained that "the United Church of Eng- land and Ireland is the true church of Christ; holy, catholic, and apostolic in these kingdoms."^ We know indeed, that on the whole, his cause was infi- nitely better than that of his antagonist; and we re- joice, for the sake of our common Protestantism, that he foiled and confounded the advocate of Popery; but we regret, for the sake of our common Chris- tianity, that he supported a position so groundless, so sectarian, and so uncharitable. Nor has this been the only instance in which Presbyterians have felt themselves aggrieved. It is said that the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge is the most ' Authenticated Report of the Discussion between the Rev. T. D. Gregg and the Rev. T. Maguire. DISCOURSE I. 27 influential of the religious associations in the sister island. It is alleged that it comprises amongst its members, in the parent and affiliated branches, all the bishops, and upwards of eleven thousand of the clergy. At a late meeting of this society, held in London, several of the members publicly declared that "the board ought not to recognise the Presby- terian covimunity as vs church," and a motion virtu- ally refusing to acknowledge the Church of Scot- land wao carried by a majority.^ We have still more recently been presented in this city with an axample of this spirit of exclusion. In a published discourse preached " before the Lord Primate and the assembled clergy of the dioceses of Derry and Raphoe, on the occasion of the triennial visitation,"" it is broadly insinuated' that Presbyterian ministers are but "humanly-appointed professors of the art of persuasion," and that they have no "title" to tlie ministry. Are we to be blamed if we refuse to sit silent under such imputations ? Are we not bound either to admit their truth, or expose their weak- ness ? It would, doubtless, be a severe blow to the general cause of Protestantism, if it could indeed be proved that Presbyterian churches are not to be con- sidered churches of Christ. There are large bodies of Presbyterians not only in this country and in Scotland, but also in America and in several parts of the continent of Europe. Presbyterian authors are to be found in the very first ranks of theological ' See Presbyterian Review for February, 1838. ^ By Charles, Boyton, D.D., ex F.T.C.D., M.R.I.A., Rector of TuUyaghnish, September 14., 1838. •^ See note A. 28 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. literature. Witsius and Vitringa, and Turretine and Campbell, and others, have produced works which in point of talent and of learning have never been surpassed. The writings of Matthew Henry and of Jonathan Edwards (of Boston) and of Haly- burton have long been valued by the spiritually- minded as full of most precious truth and most savoury consolation. For piety, the praise of some Presby- terians is in all the churches, for who has not heard of the prayerfulness of Welsh, and of the devoted- ness of Brainerd ? It will, we presume, scarcely be alleged that Presbyterians are visibly inferior to the members of other churches, as moral, as industrious, and as intelligent citizens. The First Epistle of Paul to the Corinthians is thus addressed: "Unto the church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus called to be saints, with all that in every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours." (1 Cor. i, 2.) The church of God is here described, not by her ecclesiastical order, but by the profession and the character of her members. They are sanc- fijied in Christ Jesus — called to he saints — and they call upon the name of Jesus Christ the Lord. There are at least some Presbyterians who exhibit scriptural evidences that they are sanctified in Christ Jesus and that they are called to be saints. May we not therefore conclude that they belong to the church of God? The Presbyterian church, in her accredited standards, acknowledges Jesus as her divine Lord, and proclaims all the great doctrines of Christianity. If, by a church of Christ we understand a collection of his professing people who worship him accoriling DISCOURSE I. 29 to his word, surely Presbyterians may have some claim to the designation. There are some Presby- terians who desire to walk in all the statutes and ordinances of the Lord blameless ; and in times past, Presbyterians have often suffered unto death that they might maintain the honour of Christ's crown and covenant. Jesus said — " Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." (Mat. xviii, PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. ordination save that which is attempted to bo drawn from the epistles to Timothy and Titus. We shall not at present enter into the case of Titus, as it may be disposed of in precisely the same manner as that of Timothy.^ It has been alleged that Timothy was bishop of Ephesus, and that there he was invested with the sole power of ordination and government. But the epistles to Timothy contain internal evidence that he was not the bishop of Ephesus. Paul says to him, (I Tim. i, 3,) "I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus when 1 went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine." If Timothy were bishop of Ephesus, is it not remarkable that he evinced such a disposition to non-residence? Is it not singular that the apostle felt it necessary to beseech him to abide in his dio- cese ? This is not all. We read in the second epistle, (2 Tim. iv, 9,) "Do thy diligence to come shortly unto me" — verse 1 i, " Take Mark and bring him with thee " — verse 13, " The cloak that I left at Troas with Carpus, when thou comest bring with thee, and the books, but especially the parchments " — verse 21, "Do thy diligence to come before winter." It is admitted that Paul was in imprisonment at Rome when he dictated this second epistle, (2 Tim. ii, 9,) and if you take a glance at the map you may have some idea of the extent of the journey which Timothy was expected to undertake. In an age when navi- gation was in its infancy, it would occupy a much longer time than is now spent in a voyage to America. And had Timothy been bishop of Ephesus, would the apostle have encouraged him to desert his charge ' See Note F. DISCOURSE I. 35 and to spend the winter at Rome ? It is abundantly- manifest from the whole tenor of these epistles that his stay at Ephesus was but temporary, and that he was related to the church there by no special bond of ecclesiastical connexion. The arguments which have been adduced to prove that at Ephesus he exercised exclusively the powers of ordination and government, are equally unsatisfactory as those which have been urged to show that he was promoted to the bishopric- He was directed to "charge some that they teach no other doctrine." Is it not obvious from this, say Episcopalians, that he ruled over the clergy ? He was instructed to " lay hands suddenly on no man." Is it not hence evident, say they, that he alone had power to ordain ? He was required " not to receive an accusation against an elder but before two or three witnesses." Is it not clear from this, they exclaim, that he sat in the chair of episcopal judgment ? We reply that, according to this system of interpretation, we may establish almost any absurdity. Paul says to Timothy, (2 Tim. iv, 2,) " Preach the word." Does it therefore follow that none others were per- mitted to preach at Ephesus ? He says again, ( 1 Tim. vi, ]7,) "Charge them that are rich in this world that they be not high-minded." Are we to conclude from this that no other minister in the place had a right to address a word of exhortation to the wealthy ? He says also, (1 Tim. iv, 13,) " Give attendance to reading." Are we to deduce from this that no other preacher at Ephesus might venture to be studious .■' In fact, all the advices contained in these epistles may be appropriately addressed to any minister of the Pres- byterian church, for every minister is warranted to 36 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. exercise all the functions of the ministry, including preaching, ordination, and discipline. Paul, accord- ingly, instructs Timothy respecting the various depart- ments of the pastoral care. It appears, indeed to be intimated in these epistles that the same ministerial commission which the evangelist himself possessed, was to be given to those whom he ordained presbyters at Ephesus. " The things," saith Paul, "that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2 Tim. ii, 2.) If, by the things which he had heard among many witnesses, we un- derstand the charges which had been publicly delivered to him by Paul at the period of his ordination, it must follow that he was to give the same charges to others, or that he was to introduce those whom he ordained to an official position the same as that which he himself occupied. He is, indeed, desired to lay hands suddenly on no man ; but there is not the slightest shadow of evidence that none others were to be consulted or concerned when individuals were to be set apart to the work of the ministry. Timothy was himself ordained by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery, and we have every reason to be- lieve that he would adhere to the same rule in the ordination of others. After all, indeed, it would seem as if those who are most interested in its support, have still some doubts and misgivings as to the propriety of a purely prelatical ordination; for the bishops of the English church, when about to ordain, usually invite some of their clergy to join with them in the imposition of hands. The validity of Presby- DISCOURSE I. 37 terian ordination has often been acknowledged by some of the most distinguished dignitaries of the episcopal establishment. It is recognised in the articles drawn up in the year 1615, for the use of the Irish church, by Ussher, the learned and godly arch- bishop of Armagh. That celebrated prelate went still farther. When asked by king Charles I, on an important occasion, " Whether he found in all anti- quity that presbyters alone ordained any?" he replied, Yes; and that " he could show his majesty more than that — even that presbyters alone had successively or- dained bishops."^ But the ministers of the Presbyterian church will be told, You have no title to the ministry if you can- not prove your apostolical succession. On a late occasion, to which I have already adverted, a minister of the United Church of England and Ireland publicly advanced the following statement : " TTie universal history of the church concurs with the Scriptures in representing that this apostolic authority was trans- mitted uniformly through its officers downward. This authority has been transmitted by an unbroken succes- sion to the bishops of our church, and tliuswe derive the title to our ministry.''^ ^ We may here be per- mitted to observe, that we believe the ministers of the English church hold their commission by a far better tenure than that which is here described. We con- fess, indeed, that we entertain no high veneration for this doctrine of apostolical descent. And to show that we are not singular in this respect, we shall quote to you the sentiments of one of the greatest of the English bishops. We refer to Hooper, the cele- ' Neal's History of the Puritans. London, 1837. Vol. ii, pages 526, 327. ^ Dr. Boyton's Sermon, page 16. 88 PRESBYTERTANISM DEFENDED. brated martyr, the bishop of Gloucester : " As con- cerning the ministers of the church," says he, in his Confession of Faith, (section xx,) "I believe that the church is bound to no sort of people, or any ordinary succession of bishops, cardinals, or such like, but unto the word of God only. * * * I am sorry, therefore, with all my heart, to see the church of Christ degenerated into a civil policy; for even as kings of the world must naturally follow by descent from their parents in civil regimen, rule, and law, as by right they ought, even so must such as succeed in the place of bishops and priests that die, possess all gifts and earning of the Holy Ghost, to rule the church of Christ as his godly predecessor had ; but the Holy Ghost must not be captive and bondman to bishops' sees and palaces." We believe, indeed, that the true church can never perish, and we believe that Christ has always had in this world a living succes- sion of faithful ministers of his word ; but we believe too that this succession has not been preserved in any one unbroken line, for we do not find that the Re- deemer has bequeathed to any particular section of the church the promise of perpetual purity. At one time we have Augustine in Africa — again we have Claude in Italy — again we have Waldo in France — and again we have WicklifFe in England, proclaiming the message of salvation. We do not see any one church where the lamp of truth has ever continued to burn brilliantly; but yet we do not find any one period when the light has been utterly ex- tinguished throughout all Christendom. Amidst the darkness of surrounding superstitions we may always find here or there some faithful witnesses to the doc- trines of the cross. DISCOURSE I. 39 The clergy of the established church assembled in this city on the occasion of the late triennial visi- tation have been addressed in the following languawe : *' When the bishop declared to each of us at our ordination, ' Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a priest in the church of God, now committed to thee by the imposition of our hands,' he committed to us a treasure to keep, and an office to fill, not of his own authority, but by an authority he received from another, commissioned to communi- cate that authority to him ; which other himself received that power from one who preceded him ; and so on, this authority is traceable in our church to the apostles, and through the apostles to Christ."^ Notwithstanding this tone of confident assertion, we do not hesitate to deny altogether the position which it sets forth. We believe that either the bishop of Rome, or the archbishop of Canterbury would find it totally impossible to prove his spiritual genealogy to the satisfaction of any inquirer of common candour and of common discernment. In order to make out his case, he must be prepared to produce the accredited registries not only of the ordinations but of the bap- tisms of his predecessors — he must show liow his succession could be transmitted through a female pope — he must prove that there' were none irregularly ordained in the line of his forerunners — and he must demonstrate how in times when pontiff' excom- municated pontiff^ his commission was conveyed through a pure stream of descent. And yet, if upon examination a single breach can be established, it follows, according to this doctrine, that the church ' Dr. Boyton's Sermon, p. 14!— See Note G. 40 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. has no authority, that her ministers are but laymen, and that her ordinances are invalid ! How absurd to peril the cause of Christianity upon the issue of such an investigation. And here we shall adduce for your consideration the sensible observations of bishop Hoadly : " I am fully satisfied," says that prelate, " that till a consummate stupidity can he hap- pily established and universally spread over the land, there is nothing that tends so much to destroy all due respect to the clergy, as the demand of more than can be due to them ; and nothing has so effectually thrown contempt upon a regular succession of the ministry, as the calling no succession regular but what was uninterrupted; and the making the eternal salvation of Christians to depend upon that uninter- rupted succession, of which the most learned must have the least assurance^ and the unlearned can have no notion but through ignorance and credulity."^ When we look at what are supposed to be the scriptural grounds upon which the doctrine of apos- tolical succession is supported, we may see that they are almost too frivolous to deserve any serious con- sideration. There is not a single text in the sacred volume from which the principle is fairly deducible. Its advocates ^ are wont to adduce in its behalf such passages as the following : " As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you." (John xx, 21.) — "How shall they preach, except they be sent." (Rom. x, 15.) — "No man taketh this honour unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron." (Heb. ' This quotation from Hoadly is taken from Buck's Theolo- gical Dictionary, by Henderson, London, 1833, Art. Succession. ~ See Dr. Boytoii's Sermon, pp. 13, 17. DISCOURSE I. 41 V, 4.) — "The things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." (2. Tim. ii, 2.) Would any unsophisticated reader, who had never heard of such an application, ever discover the doctrine of apostolical succession in such passages? Aaron was the first of the Jewish high priests, and, therefore, it cannot be said that he had succession. To allege that the sending mentioned in the other passages refers to apostolical descent, is a mere begging of the question. When the apostle enjoined Timothy to commit the pastoral charge to faithful men who ivere qualified for the work of in- struction, it did not follow that they had authority to give a commission to successors who were faithless and incompetent. When the condition connected with the investiture of the trust was not observed, is it not clear that the title could not be established? We proceed now to observe that they who seek a title to the ministry in the doctrine of apostolical succession, completely mistake the quarter where the title is to be found. When our Saviour said unto Peter, (Matt, xvi, 19,) "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven," it is generally ad- mitted that he here announced his determination to commit to the apostle the ministry of the word, and ordinances. We do not stop to advert to the cir- cumstances which led our Lord on this occasion to address himself to Peter, neither do we now design to point out the manner in which the keys were ori- ginally distributed. We would simply remind you that the possession of these keys is at present the subject of controversy. The Church of Rome 42 PRESBYTERIAN ISM DEFENDED. alleges that she alone has the keys of the kingdom of heaven. The Church of England seems partly to admit the claims of the papacy, for she acknow- ledges the validity of her ordination, but she affirms that she also has the keys in her custody. As a Presbyterian I admit that the Church of England has the keys,^ but I maintain that the Presbyterian church has them also in possession, and that she keeps them in better order. I deny, however, that the Church of Rome has the keys. I say to her ministers, in the language of the Son of God — " Ye have taken away the key of knowledge : ye enter not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered " (Luke, xi, 52.) How, my friends, are you to settle this dispute ? Suppose that every one of a group of individuals alleged that he had the keys of a rich treasure-house, and suppose that every one displayed keys, some of which differed from those of the others both in size and conformation, how would you arbitrate amongst the claimants ? Would you investigate the history of the keys, and would you carefully try to discover how each happened to get them into his possession ? Would you not at once desire tlie claimants to apply t!iem to the doors, that you might ascertain whether they were fitted to the locks, and whether they could open and close the apartments ? And would you not declare in favour of every candidate whose keys cor- responded to the wards and commanded the bolts and admitted you to the rooms of the building? In the case before us, we regard the ministry of the word and ordinances as the keys and the ' See Note H. DISCOURSE 1. 43 blessings of the new covenant as the riches of the treasure-house. And if you would know the churches which have the keys of the kingdom of heaven, should you not make the trial of the gifts of their ministers — should you not observe who can open the Scriptures — who can commend them- selves to your consciences by the manifestation of the truth — who, by the blessing of God resting upon their expositions of the book of inspiration, can enable you to enter into the mind of the Spirit and can make you wise unto salvation, and can inspire you with that peace which passeth all understanding ? As the disciples journeyed to Emmaus they felt that their unknown fellow-traveller had the keys of the kingdom of heaven : " They said one to another, Did not our heart burn within us while he talked with us by the way, and while he opened to us the Scriptures?" (Luke, xxiv, 32.) Weaver then that the Church of Rome has not the keys, for she has never shown any anxiety either to preserve the purity or to promote the circulation of the Scriptures ; she kept them long shut up in a dead language, and when compelled to publish them by the necessity of circum- stances, she uttered them in a corrupt and barbarous translation ; she has perverted their meaning by erroneous comments ; she has not made the reading and the exposition of the word an essential portion of her stated ministrations ; and in her acknowledged standards she has buried the glorious doctrines of the Gospel beneath the rubbish of innumerable super- stitions. But we maintain that the Church of Eng- land has the keys, for to her we are indebted for that noble version of the Scriptures in which we all rejoice; ^ ' See Note I. 44 PRESBYTERIANIS3f DEFENDED. in her Articles she bears faithful testimony to the great truths of evangelical religion : in point of talent and piety and learning she has ministers who would do honour to any church in Christendom — for who would dare to say that the church which has sent forth such champions as a Bedell or an Ussher is not a part of the body of Christ. As Presbyterians we object chiefly to her forms and to her framework; for we believe that she is, like David in the armour of Saul, miserably crippled by the cumbrous weight of her ec- clesiastical accoutrements. Again, we affirm that the Presbyterian church has the keys of the kingdom of heaven ; for her Confession is one of the best testi- monies to the truth that has ever been composed ; and her ministers, from Sabbath to Sabbath, exhibit to the people the treasures of the written word ; and the blessing of the Lord has descended abundantly on her ordinances ; and in days of rebuke and blas- phemy, when she was disowned by sister churches for bearing the reproach of the Redeemer, she has gone forth to Him without the camp dripping with the blood of many thousand martyrs. If the ministers of the Presbyterian church be asked. Where is your title to the ministry ? we answer, It is not to be found amongst the traditions of the fathers — it is registered in the records of the word of God. We believe that every true preacher derives his title immediately from Him who holds the seven stars in his right hand, and who walks in the midst of the seven golden candlesticks. *' He gave some apostles and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the mi- DISCOURSE I. 45 nistry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." (Eph. iv, 11,12.) In his good providence he raises up men whom he furnishes with suitable endowments that he may send them forth with his commission. We believe that every one has a title to the pastoral office who leads an exemplary life, and who is supplied with appropriate gifts, and who is sound in the faith, and who, inspired with zeal for Christ and with love to souls, has a desire to enter into the ministry. And we believe too that every one who has these qualifications, and who receives a call from a Christian congreffation to minister amonffst them, has a title to preach the word and to exercise discipline, and to dispense sealing ordinances in that congregation. But some perhaps will say — Is not this a very latitudinarian doctrine ? May not every one who pleases thus assume the character of a preacher? We answer — No. The possession o£ a title is one thing — the recognition of that title is an- other. A man may have a valid title to an estate, and yet it will avail him nothing if it be not recog- nised. It is his dutv in such circumstances to apply to the proper court that he may establish his title, and that he may obtain legal possession of the pro- perty. He would only prejudice his claim were he to set the laws of his country at defiance, and to attempt to enter upon the inheritance by force. It is the business of the civil court to try his title, and to decide accordingly. And thus, too, every one who conceives he has a title to the ministry is bound to submit his claims to the ecclesiastical judicatory. In a matter of such consequence they are not to proceed without due deliberation — they are to lay hands 46 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. suddenly on no man — they are to observe his lii'e — to test his knowledge — and to prove his gifts by a course of judicial trials. And if his title be sustained, and if he receive a call from a Christian congregation, they are then publicly to recognise his title, and regularly to invest him with the pastoral authority. But so long as the church is scripturally constituted, the man who takes upon himself the office of a public instructor without the sanction of her courts is charge- able with gross disorder, and with intolerable pre- sumption. He declares by his conduct either that the ecclesiastical judicatories cannot, because of their corruption, be trusted with an examination of his claims, or he betrays a consciousness that his title is unsound, and that it cannot pass through the ordeal of an impartial scrutiny. You may see, my brethren, from these statements, that an evangelical pastor does not derive his title to the ministry from the church, but from the Saviour. His qualifications are his title — the description of these qualifications contained in the word of God is the counterpart of his title. The church court does not bestow on him authority — it merely gives hira formal possession of that authority to which he has made out a scriptural title. But how are we to act when there is no court to which we can appeal, for we have seen that any section of the visible church may completely apostatise ? Under such circumstances an individual may have a good title to the ministry, and yet he may have access to no existing tribunal from which he can obtain its recognition. The ecclesiastical authorities may frown upon him just because he is a herald from the Son of God, and DISCOURSE I. 47 because he testifies against them. Such was the case at the period of the Reformation. Then " all the world wondered after the beast." (Rev. xiii, 3.) Then, except in some secluded places, such as in the valleys of Piedmont, of which the rest of Christendom knew little, there was no scriptural court from which an individual could obtain a recognition of his ministerial title. What then was to be done? Was the church to remain without a ministry ? Were the people to be per- mitted to go down in their ignorance into the pit of perdition ? Surely not. Where there is no law there is no transgression. Where there is no court to which the title can be submitted, the church is not to suffer, neither is the title invalidated, because its formal recognition cannot be obtained. As Jesus does not cease to be King of Zion because the Man of Sin assumes his titles, and seeks to occupy his throne; so the true preachers of his gospel are not left without authority, because the agents of anti- christ may refuse to acknowledge their commission. The Spirit of the Lord, providing them with befitting endowments, has supplied them with a warrant which cannot be cancelled by the want of human ordination. And here we cannot quote with too much approba- tion, a position maintained at a public discussion, held about the beginning of the Reformation, by Zuinglius, Bucer, and other eminent Protestants at Berne. "The true church," said they, "whereof Christ is the head, 7'ises out of God's word, and con- tinues in the same, and hears the voice of no other." ^ The word of God contains the model according to which the church should be constructed, and the ' Foxe's Martyrs, by Seymour, p. 441. 48 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. word of God is the charter from which all ecclesi- astical authority is derivable. The word of God is the seed out of which the church rises up into exist- ence. The visible church in any particular locality may sink into decay, but so long as the Scriptures remain, neither the form of God's house, nor the light of its doctrines, nor the authority ofits ordinances, can be lost for ever. When the ministry has become essentially corrupt — when they teach the doctrines of devils instead of the doctrines of the cross — then those of the people who may be enlightened by the Spirit, and who may be taught by God out of his word, may meet together, and throw off the yoke of their false guides, and proceed to reestablish the courts and the ministrations of Christ according to the scrip- tural model. When the visible church has completely apostatised — when they who should supply sinners with refreshment from the waters of life have poisoned the wells of salvation — then, those who fear the Lord, and who alone really constitute the church, may act according to the dictates of necessity, and may themselves recognise the ministry of those who are evidently qualified by knowledge and piety and gifts. In such a case, where the sanction of the visible ministry cannot be obtained, and where it would indeed be worthless, we hold that an individual is warranted by the call of the people united with befitting gifts to enter immediately upon the exercise of all the functions of the pastoral office. And here we would remind you of the words of our Saviour : " Have ye never read what David did, when he had need and was an hungered, he and they that were with him : how he went into the house of God in DISCOURSE 1. 49 the daj^s of Abiathar the high priest, and did eat the shew-bread, which is not lawful to eat but for the priests, and gave also to them which were with him." (Mark, ii, 25, 26.) Under other circumstances, the conduct of David would have been exceedingly im- proper; under other circumstances, he had no right to enter into the holy place and to eat of the shew- bread. But his conduct was justified by necessity. And when the church was involved in deepest dark- ness, and when the people were perishing for lack of knowledge, we hold that the pious Peter Waldo was warranted to enter into the house of God, and to engage in the office of the ministry, and to deal out the bread of life to himself and his perishing coun- trymen. And the same necessity which authorised him to undertake the pastoral vocation, also authorised him to continue in it, and to introduce others to the ministry.^ And infinitely would we prefer ordi- nation from such hands as those of that venerable witness-bearer, than from those of the Pope and all his cardinals. When the public magistrate proves faithless, and when he is determined to betray the interests of the commonwealth, then the citizens may take measures for their own safety, and may assume that power which he so ruinously prostitutes. When this classic city was invested, and when the chief magistrate had resolved upon a base surrender, was he not forced to flee when his projects were dis- covered, and were not the citizens warranted to occupy his place with braver and more trusty governors? And when the monarch himself evinced a disposition to sacrifice the good cause, was not he too obliged to I See Note K. C 50 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. give way to the righteous indignation of an injured people, and to abdicate the sovereignty ? And had not they a right to appoint as his successor that illustrious Presbyterian, who was raised up by Pro- vidence to vindicate their principles, and to serve as the bulwark of Protestantism ? And when they who were appointed to watch over the spiritual common- weakh had proved traitors to their King Messiah, and when, as at the period of the Reformation, instead of giving light to the church, they were leagued to uphold the kingdom of the prince of darkness, we hold that the Christian people had a right to act ac- cording to exigencies, and to erect the standard of the truth, and to nominate other and more faithful pastors. And if, in confirmation of these views, you attach any importance to the authority of distinguished names, we may here quote the declaration of the great and godly Cranmer: "In the New Testament," saith he, "he that is appohited a bishop or a priest, needeth not consecration by the Scripture, for election or ap- pointment thereto is sufficient." ^ After all, however, should these statements prove unsatisfactory to the abettors of apostolical succession, we can meet them on their own grounds. We can say — if you will not admit that we are true ministers of the Churchy unless we can show that we are de- scended from the " Mother of Harlots" — if you will not confess that we hold a commissionyrom Christ, un- less we can prove that we have derived this commission from Antichrist, then we must confess with shame that we have, even thus, as good a title as others. John Knox, the restorer of Scottish Presbyterianism, was ' M'Crie's Life of Knox. First edition,— pp. 427, 428. DISCOURSE t. 51 ordained a priest in the Church of Rome.^ If he had apostolical descent, so have we his successors ; for we have seen that presbyters can ordain. Be- sides, history records that the bishops of the English church were concerned in the ordination of the^rea^er number of the Presbyterian ministers who settled originally in Ireland.^ Thus, did we attach any worth to such a title, we can show that we, at least as well as others, can trace our descent either imme- diately through the Church of Rome, or mediately through the Church of England. We may here take occasion to observe that the Church of England has, in several cases of impor- tance, admitted the validity of Presbyterian ordina- tion. Thus,in the year 1618, the bishop of LlandafF, and several others of her dignitaries, appeared as her representatives in the Presbyterian Synod of Dort.'^ They there held ministerial communion with the Dutch divines, sitting in the Assembly as other presbyters, and acknowledging the government of a Presbyterian moderator. And in the earlier times of Irish Presbyterianism, when ordained ministers of the Church of Scotland came over to this country they were at once admitted to parishes, and acknow- ledged by the bishops as authorised pastors. It may perhaps be expected that, on an occasion like this, we should support the views we have ad- vanced by testimonies from the fathers. We do not, however, admit that such proofs are by any means necessary. The Bible, and the Bible alone, is our ' M'Crie's Life of Knox. First Edition,— page 11. 2 See Note L. ^ Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. i, page 4C5. 52 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. statute book. If we can show that Presbyterianism is the ecclesiastical system sanctioned in the New Testa- ment, it matters not though all the uninspired writings of antiquity were arrayed against us. A single text of the Word of God should come home with greater power to the Christian than the united affirmations of all the councils and all the fathers. It is apparent from Scripture that corruptions were very early intro- duced into the church; and if we would know the truth, we should go to the pure fountainhead of our religion. We enjoy many advantages which the fathers wanted ; and it would not be difficult to de- monstrate that Christians of the present day are placed in as favourable circumstances for discovering the mind of the Spirit, as the fathers of even the second century. The fathers were persons of various cha- racters and of various degrees of information. Some of them were individuals of very weak intellect; their works are exceedingly voluminous, and it would require an ordinary life-time to examine them all with any great degree of accuracy. The fathers frequently differ amongst themselves, insomuch that there is almost no truth or no heresy which may not be recommended bv quotations from some of them. Besides, the works of the fathers are extremely rare — they are only to be found in the libraries of the learned ; so that the mass of the people have not an opportunity of judging for themselves as to the original bearing of those extracts which may be produced from them. You are not, my brethren, to infer from these remarks that the evidence of the early Christian fathers is hostile to Presbyterianism. We believe that the contrary is the case. We can show, for instance, DISCOURSE 1. 53 that the testimony of Clemens Romanus, who stands at the head of the apostoHc fathers, is decidedly in our favour. Thus Clemens writes of the apostles : " Preaching through countries and cities, they ap- pointed the first fruits of their conversions to be bishops and deacons over such as should afterwards believe, having first proved them by the Spirit. Nor was this any new thing, seeing that long before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saith the Scriptures in a certain place, (Isa. Ix, 17,) ' I will appoint their bishops in righteous- ness and their deacons in faith.' And what wonder if they, to whom such a work was committed by God in Christ, established such officers as we before mentioned, when even that blessed and faithful servant in all his house, Moses, set down in the Holy Scrip- tures all things that were commanded him." ^ Here Clemens expressly limits the office-bearers of the church to two orders, bishops and deacons. What a decisive statement from one whom the Church of Rome considers one of her pontifis ! He thus fairly disclaims all pretensions to the chair of the papacy, and acknowledges, like Peter before him, that he also was but one of the presbyters.^ In a volume of " Sermons on the Church," ' which has lately issued from the press, several state- ments are produced in behalf of episcopacy, as if from the pen of Ignatius, another of the apostolic fathers. The respected author of these discourses has not, however, informed the public that very serious doubts ' Epistle to the Corinthians, sections 42, 43. ~ See 1 Pet. v, 1. — See also Note M. 3 By tlie Rev. A. Boyd, A.M. 54 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. hang over the claims of these Ignatian epistles. If they be not altogether forgeries, it is at least beyond all controversy that they have been shamefully inter- polated. And we cannot conceive what could have tempted a pious Protestant minister in a Protestant cathedral to bring forward in aid of his cause such an admonition as the following : " Let all reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ, and the bishop as the Father, and the presbyters as the Sanhedrim of God and college of the apostles" ! Of such a testimony it is difficult to say whether it deserves to be rejected more for its absurdity or for its impiety. Can any one seriously believe that a well-instructed individual, who had conversed with the apostles, ever penned such outrageous profanity? Is it not rather to be viewed as the production of a period when the Man of Sin was exalting himself above all that is called God or that is worshipped, and when it was deemed needful to frame such blasphemies in order to prop up his un- hallowed pretensions ? How different such drivelling from the sturdy theology of Paul : " Though we" said he, " or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." ^ It is a fact well worthy of consideration, that a num- ber of most remarkable characters who have appeared in the Christian church at different times, and who must have pursued separate courses of investigation, and who, from peculiar circumstances, must have been most intimately acquainted with the Sacred writings, have testified in favour of Presbyterianism. Thus Jerome, who lived towards the conclusion of the ' See Note N. XJISCOURSE I. 55 fourth century, and who was the first to translate the Scriptures out of the original languages into Latin, and who is regarded as one of the most learned, per- haps the most learned of all the fathers, has asserted its scripturality. He declares " A bishop and a pres- byter are the same, and before there were, through the devil's instinct, divisions in religion, and the people began to say, 1 am of Paul and I of Apollos and I of Cephas, the churches were governed by the com- mon council of the presbyters." And again, " As, therefore, the presbyters know, that by the custom of the cliurch, they are subject to him who is set over them ; so let the bishops know that they are greater than the presbyters rather by custom^ than the truth of the Lord^s disposition or ordering. ^^ ^ Wickliffe is another extraordinary character who supported Presbyterian principles. He lived about a thousand years after Jerome, and has been called the morning star of the reformation. He was, if not the first, at least one of the first who translated the Scriptures into English. In his own day he was held in high reputation for his learning, being Pro- fessor of Divinity in the University of Oxford. His declaration for only two orders of ofiice-bearers in the church is very decided: "One thing I boldly assert," said Wickliffe, " that in the primitive church, or in the time of the apostle Paul, two orders of clergy were thought sufficient, viz., priest and deacon ; and I do also say that, in the time of Paul, a priest and a bishop were one and the same ; for in those times, the distinct orders of pope, cardinals, patriarchs, arch- bishops, bishops, archdeacons, officials, and deans, were not invented." ^ ' Jerome in Tit. 2 jjeal, i, 3, — note. 56 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. As another distinguished advocate of Presbyter- ianism, we would refer to the celebrated Calvin. There are some, indeed, who are wont to speak with disrespect of the views and the character of th;it Re- former ; but his gainsayers are either prejudiced against his sentiments or unacquainted with his history. It has been admitted by the highest authorities that Calvin was the most learned of all the Reformers. Though an humble presbyter, he exerted in his generation a preponderating influence throughout Protestant Christendom, and the reformed princes of Europe, in matters pertaining to the church, were wont to seek his advice and approbation. And indeed, when we consider the depth of his piety, and the sublimity of his genius, and the vigour of his judgment, and his immense acquisitions as a theolo- gian of profound and varied scholarship, we must re- gard him as the brightest star in that bright constel- lation of divines v/hich shone at the era of the Reformation. The deliberate decision of such a man as Calvin is entitled to no common consideration. It is said in the " Sermons on the Church,*' (pp. 70, 71,) " Calvin himself was compelled to acknow- ledge, that for the first fourteen hundred years after Christ no Christian church could be found without its presiding bishop ;'* but, if a bishop in the prelatic sense be understood, we deny fearlessly and flatly that Calvin ever made a statement so much at variance with his well known principles.^ We may here add that some of the most eminent fathers of the English church have been decidedly partial to Presbyterianism. It has been said " The ' See Note O. DISCOURSE I. 57 object" of the British Reformers " was to bring back the British church to its former purity, by removing the rubbish and additions which defaced the spiritual building.'* ^ It may be added, " If the first Eng- lish Reformers, including the Protestant bishops, had been left to their own choice, — if they had not been held back by the dead weight of a large mass of popishly-affected clergy in the reign of Edward, and restrained by the supreme civil authority on the ac- cession of Elizabeth, they would have brought the government and worship of the Church of England nearly to the pattern of the other Reformed churches."^ You have heard of Latimer, and Hooper, and Cran- raer, and it can be shown that all these men were in- clined to Presbyterian principles. Cranraer has re- corded his opinion that " bishops and priests were at one time, and were no two things, but both one office in the beginning of Christ's religion."* In the days of Edward VI, thirteen bishops, with a great number of other ecclesiastics, subscribed this proposition — " In the New Testament there is no mention made of any degrees or distinctions in orders but only of deacons or ministers, and of priests or bishops."* In drawing these observations to a close, we would say to Presbyterians, let it be your care to vindicate the claims of your church by a practical exhibition of the power of godliness. Let your light so shine before men that others may recognise you as the followers of Jesus. It is recorded for our instruc- ' Sermons on the Church, p. 145. - M'Crie's Life of Knox, 1st ed. pp. 84-, 85. ^ Idem. p. 427. * Idem. p. 427. c2 58 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. tion that he said — " Ye are my friends if ye do whatsoever I command you." (John, xv, 14.) It is by walking in the way of his testimonies that you can best estabUsh your title to the character of a church of Christ. Be then humble and watchful — walk by faith — be instant in prayer — be ready to every good word and work — be zealous in the ad- vancement of religion at home — be willino; to contri- bute to its propagation abroad. And we would say to persons of all denominations, remember that, under God, your spiritual prosperity must depend greatly upon the ministrations you enjoy. It has indeed been intimated that to be placed within the sphere of a minister of the Established church is a sufficient indication of God's will — "a sufficient proof that it is thus God intends to convey the appointed means of salvation."^ Where the minister is regarded as being truly of God's appointment, says the same authority, " men would under such circumstances be better disposed to be satisfied with the pastors appointed to them." Ministers may, however, be appointed by men and yet may not be chosen of the Lord. Take heed then to the advice of the apostle John: "Beloved," says he, "believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they are of God, because many false prophets are gone out into the world." (1 John, iv, 1.) It belongs indeed to the ecclesias- tical governors to invest others with the pastoral office, but the people are not thereby divested of the privilege of thinking for themselves. They too are to " prove all things," and to " hold fast that which is good." (I Thess. v, 21.) And if it be asked — ' Dr. Boyton'.s Sermon, p. 20. DISCOURSE I. 59 How are we to come to a safe decision ? we reply, the marks of a faithful minister have been described by the Redeemer himself. We find him saying in the Sermon on the Mount — " Beware of false pro- phets, which come to you in sheeps' clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits — do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles;" and again he says — '^^ Wherefore by their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt, vii, 15, 16, 20.) Our Lord does not affirm — ye shall dis- cover them by their genealogy — ye shall know them by their apostolical succession. He was aware that the body of the people could not apply such a test. They have not time, neither are they fitted by edu- cation to search out the records and the monuments of antiquity, that they may decide on such a subject. And we are expressly enjoined not to " give heed to fables and endless genealogies, which minister questions rather than godly edifying." ( 1 Tim. i, 4.) Our Lord has supplied us with a far more simple and satisfactory criterion. You may know ministers by their fruits. Observe their conduct, that you may see whether they display any thing of the mind of Christ — mark their teaching, that you may ascertain whether they declare the whole counsel of God. " To the law and to the testimony, if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." (Isa. viii, 20.) And surely you may reasonably anticipate that your growth in grace will be better promoted by the pastoral instructions of a man of God who is mighty in the Scriptures than by the services of a prayerless, worldly-minded, igno- rant, and immoral minister. Again, my friends, we 60 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. would beseech you all to cultivate a catholic spirit. Think not that merely because you are Presbyterians you are therefore better than others. There are many members of the Independent and Episcopal churches whom the Son of God has delighted to honour, and who shall doubtless shine throughout all eternity, as pearls in his royal diadem. Our forms of government and discipline are but perishable bar- riers by which the various sections of the church are now separated, but at death these partitions fall asunder, and the faithful in the world above are all one in Christ Jesus for ever. The Saviour will certainly honour his own ordinances, and, other things being equal, we may expect to find the purest piety where the Redeemer is worshipped according to the purest forms; but still we are not to trust to our privileges — we are not to worship the temple, instead of the God of the temple. Love is the essence of Christianity, and a Presbyterian church, where the life of piety is wanting, is a temple from which the glory has departed. Again, whilst Presbyterians act towards others in a spirit of expansive charity, and whilst they acknowledge that their ecclesiastical arrangements are not of such importance as the more enduring treasures of the new covenant, let them not imagine that they may therefore disregard the pecu- liarities of their religious system. Every thing is precious which the Redeemer has ordained. As Presbyterians consider that their own church is more perfect than others in her constitution, let them bestow upon her more abundant honour. Let them cleave steadfastly to her ordinances ; let them not be seduced from her apostolic forms by the pageantry DISCOURSE I. 61 or the profits of a more gorgeous establishment. A good conscience is a constant feast; and let not Presbyterians sell, for any of the beggarly elements of this world, even the smallest portion of their birth- right as citizens of Zion. Lastly, my friends, let us all remember that the Gospel must be to every one of us, either the savour of life unto life or the savour of death unto death. " God so loved the world that he gave his only-begotten Son that whosoever believeth on him should not perish but have ever- lasting life. He that believeth on him is not con- demned, but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the name of the only-begotten Son of God ? Blessed are the people who know the joyful sound of the Gospel, and blessed are the pastors who can say to the people of their charge — " Need we, as some others, epistles of commendation to you or letters of commendation from you ? ye are our epistle, written in our hearts — known and read of all men, forasmuch as ye are manifestly declared to be the epistle of Christ minis- tered by us — written not with ink, but with the Spirit of the living God — not in tables of stone, but in the fleshly tables of the heart." (2 Cor. i, 1 — 3.) May the Lord make us all monuments of his grace, and fit us for his glory. And to him be all blessing and praise for ever. Amen. END OF DISCOURSE I. NOTES TO DISCOURSE L Note A. In the text the words, "broadly insinuated," are used advisedly, for though Dr. Boyton has not expressly named the Presbyterians in his attack, it is quite clear from the whole scope of his discourse that they are intended. Speaking of apostolic descent, he says, (page 16,) " IFe are living among one class of religionists who depreciate this view of the ministry, and another class of reli- gionists who, by their apostacy and corruption, bring it into dis- credit." The Presbyterians and Roman Catholics must of course be here understood. In this discourse Dr. Boyton speaks of nonconformists as "religionists,'" and as " dissenting bodies," but I do not find that he even once acknowledges any of them as a church. Referring in his notes to the minister of an English dis senting congregation, he styles him " the creature of their own election and ordination." Does he suppose that the dissenting laity of England are in the habit of ordaining their own minis- ters ? He adduces a single quotation from Dr. Chalmers; but almost all his arguments and illustrations in support of esta- blishments are taken without acknowledgment from the writings of that eminent divine. Our subject does not require us to enter upon a general exa- mination of the merits of Dr. Boyton's Sermon. We would here, however, take occasion to remark, that its doctrinal state- ments are throughout distinguished by an air of mysticism. He very fairly exposes the evils of a fastidious taste, as exhibited amongst the English Congregationalists ; but does he think that the censorious will not venture to criticise the sermons of a minis- ter who has episcopal ordination ? We have observed that in 64 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. his quotations from Scripture he has frequently mutilated and spoiled the authorised version. Note B. In Beza's New Testament the passage, Acts, xiv, 23, is thus rendered : " Cijm que ipsis per sutfragia creassent per singulas eeclesias Presbyteros " — i. e. And when they had by votes created to them presbyters in every church. Ill Cranmer's Bible, when divested of its antiquated orthography, it stands thus : " And when they had ordained them elders by election in every congre- gation." In ancient times some of the Athenian magistrates were called Xsi^oTovnroi, because elected by the people to their office by a show of hands — See Parkhurst's Lexicon. In the Ignatian Epistles, the verb Xil^oTona is repeatedly applied to cases of popular election. Thus, ngsTiJii Iitt/v v/ziv uc IxKXniTiif &tov, ^fi^orov^irai ^taKovtn, i. e.. It is fitting for you, as a church of God, to elect a deacon — Epistle to the Philadel- phians. In Eusebius the noun Xuiaroua, has a similar meaning. Thus, in reference to the appointment of Fabianus to the bishopric of Rome, we read, " all the brethren having been collected on ac- count of the election (;^;£/»0T(3v/a5 'inKiv) of a successor to the bishopric," &c. — Eusebius, Book vi, chapter 28. Note C. The following testimonies amply establish the fact stated in the text : Milner, of the Church of England, after observing that the apostles ordained successors, " without any consultation of the respective flocks over which they were about to preside " — a statement which we have already disproved, adds, " But as it was neither reasonable nor probable that any set of persons after them should be regarded as their equals, this method of appointing ecclesiastical rulers did not- continue, and undoubtedly the election of bishops devolved on the people- Tlieir appearance to vote on NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 65 these occasions ; their constraining of persons sometimes to ac- cept the office against their will ; and the determination of Pope Leo, long after, against forcing a bishop on a people against their consent, demonstrate this." — Milner's History of the Churcli of Christ, Cent, iii, chap. xx. Mosheim, speaking of the state of the Church in the second century, says, — " One inspector or bishop presided over each Christian assembly, to which ofjice he was elected by the voices of the whole people." — Eccles. Hist. Cent, ii. Part ii, chap. ii. Again, speaking of the state of matters in X.\\e fourth century, he says, " The people, therefore, continued as usual to choose freely their bishops and their tedchers." — Eccles. Hist. Cent, iv, Part ii, chap. ii. It is worthy of remark that Mosheim has been adopted as the text book in Trinity College, Dublin. Du Pin, a Roman Catholic historian, admits, that so late as the sirlh century, the rights of the people were in some degree respected even by the Roman pontiff. Sjjeaking of Pope Gre- gory, he says, " St. Gregory does not meddle with choosing the bishops of the churches depending upon his metropolis, but leaves the clergy and people the liberty of election." — Du Pin's History, folio, Dublin, 1723, vol. i, page 567. Note D. Inasmuch as it is intimated that Timothy was ordained " luith the laying on of the hands of the presbytery," some Episco- palians have alleged that the imposition of the bauds of the pres- byters was merely an accidental accompaniment of ordination. But that the preposition here employed {lara.) denotes the in- strument must be evident by a reference to other passages where it occurs in the New Testament. See Acis, xiv, 27 ; Acts, xiii 17, .^c. We may here observe, that the laying on of hands in ordina- tion is a very expressive ceremony. It denotes, 1st, Dedication to God. The priests of old laid their hands upon the head of the sacrifice when it was about to be offered. Exod. xxix, 10; Num. viii, 12. In ordination ministers are solemnly devoted to God ; set apart, or separated, to his service, that they m^y give themselves to prayer and the dispensation of the word. This form implies, 2dly, 66 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. Invocation of blessing. After this manner Jacob pronounced liis patriarchal benediction upon Ephrainri and Manasseh, Gen. xlviii, l^. Thus too the presbytery implore the divine blessing upon the minister ordained. Laying on of hands denotes, Srdly, In- vestiture ivith office. In this way Moses inaugurated Joshua. Num. xxvii, 18-23. Thus also the presbytery commit the pas- toral authority to those whom they ordain. Note E. Paul's call was extraordinary, and he had now for a considerable time been engaged in the work of the ministry ; but to put ho- nour upon the rite of ordination, God upon this occasion required that he should be solemnly set apart by the laying on of hands. This is the most circumstantial account of an ordination in the New Testament; and it has doubtless been recorded for the spe- cial instruction of the church. Though an apostle was ordained, every one must see that the service was conducted upon purely Presbyterian principles. Note F. It is said (Tit. i, 5,) "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city as I had appointed thee." The word (KaSi- arn/ii) here translated ordain, signifies merely to appoint, consti- tute, or establish. We are not to suppose that the elders of Crete were not elected by the people, for we have every reason to adopt a contrary opinion. The very same word is used when the apostles say respecting the deacons, (Acts, vi, 5,) "Brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom ive may appoint over this busi- ness." We may conclude, therefore, from the samenes? of the phraseology, that the same mode of notnination was observed in both cases. The following remarks of Stillingfleet show that the verb Ka^itrrnfti, according to ecclesiastical usage, denotes appoint- ment !>!/ suff'rage. Speaking of a Canon of the council of Nice, in which the word occurs, he says— " Because the signification of NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 67 the Greek word is ambiguous, we shall first see what sense Greek writers do put upon it. Balsamon interprets Viot,Sttrra(r6a.i, by '•Vnipi^iff^cii, which is choosing b^ svffrage; and he, in plain terms, siiith, by this cation the right of election was taken from the people, and given to the bishops of the province ; and it is not Balsamon alone, as some imagine, that was of that opinion, but Zonaras, Aristenus, Mattheus Blasteres, as any one may find." Stillingfleet's Origines Britanniese, chap. iii. Note G. It is extraordinary that Dr. Boyton, who has certainly some literary character to lose, should commit himself to statements such as those quoted in the text. Were it not that his Discourse was addressed to the lord primate and the assembled clergy, we might have been almost tempted to suspect that he had been cal- culating largely upon the ignorance and credulity of his auditors. How absurd for any one to say that he can trace the succession in any church to the apostles. We cannot prove from the New Testament that the twelve ordained any except the seven deacons. It has been candidly acknowledged by her ablest advocates, that the succession cannot be traced in the Church of England. Thus the learned Stillingfleet says — " By the loss of records of the British churches, we cannot draw down the succession of bishops from the apostle^ s time." And again — " We cannot deduce a lineal succession of bishops, as they could in other churches, where writings were preserved." — Origines Britannicae, chap. ii. We presume that this very cautious decision of the bishop of Wor- cester is entitled to quite as mucli respect as the assertion of the rector of Tullyaghnish. History seems to teach that English episcopacy must trace its parentage to Scottish Presbytery. In the Preface to Sir James Dalrympie's " Collections of Scottish History" we read as follows ; " The second head is concerning the mission by the abbot and monks of this monastery (Icolmkill,) to convert the Northumbrian Saxons to the Christian faith; and the appointing and ordaining bishops or doctors for these churches, from vi'hose disciples and bt/ whose ordinations more churches were planted and bishops and doctors were established in the other Saxon 68 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. kingdoms, which Saxon churches of the Scottish institution did drown the authority of the pope and bishop of Rome, and for a long time did maintain the differences betwixt these and the Roman Saxon churches, which at last prevailed over all the Saxon churches." We learn from the history of the venerable Bede, that bishop Aidan, or Aedan, who conducted the mission to the English, had notliinj^ more than presbyterian ordination. Bede states, that king Oswald, who had already embraced Chris- tianity, sent to the elders of the Scots (misit ad majores natu Scottorum) for a prelate to evangelize his subjects. The historian adds, that this prelate was sent from the island Hii or lona, and the monastery of Jcolmkill." (Ab hac ergo insula, ab horum collegio monachorum, ad provinciam Anglorum i:istituendam in Christo, missus est Aedan, accepto gradu Episcopatus.) At this time, about the year 633, Segeni or Segenius, the abbot of the mo- nastery, was on\yd presbyter. (Quo tempore eidem Monasterio Se- geni h.h\)a,& et Presbyter \iv;s{\nt.) We find, indeed, from Bede, that the abbot of this monastery was always only in priest's orders, though, according to this writer, bishops were subject to his jurisdiction. (Habere autem solet ipsa insula rectorem semper Abbatein presbyterum cujus juri et omnis provincia, et ipsi etiam Episcopi, ordine inuaitato, debeant esse subjecti, juxtaexemplum primi Doctoris illius, qui non ejn'scapus sed presbyter extitit et Monachus.) Bede further declares that Aedan was appointed missionary to the English in un assenihly of the elders, (in con- ventu Seniorum), and that he was ordained a bishop by the same assembly. (Ipsum esse dignum Episcopatu, ipsum ad erudieridos incredulos et indoctos mitti debere deccomnia, qui gratia discre- tionis, quas virtutum aiater est, ante omnia probatur imbutus ; sicquc ilium ordinantes, ad praedicandum miserunt.) Bsedse Historia Ecclesinstica. Cantabrigiae MDCCXXII, p. 105—108. We learn from these statements that Aedan was ordained or consecrated by an assembly of elders, in which a presbyter pre- sided. We know, that in former times it was not unusual for presbyters to consecrate bishops. Jerome states, that the pres- byters of Alexandria chose and made their own bishops from the days of Mark till those of Heracius and Dionysius. (Epist. ad Evagrium.) Thus, indeed, Prelacy must have originally emanated from Prtsbytery. It is manifest, from the history of Bede, that NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 69 tlie apostolical authority, which, according to Dr. Boyton, is traceable in his churcli to the apostles, has been derived froni a Scottish presbytery. It would be no difficult matter to point out many other breaches in the episcopal chain. Since the Reformation, the English bishops have consecrated not a few who before had re- ceived only presbyterian ordination. Such was tlie case with tlie Scottish bishops in 1610. We believe that the supporters of apostolical succession conceive that the Irish branch of the English church stands upon a very firm foundation, inasmuch as so many Romish bishops conformed in Ireland at the time of the Reformation. It is said, however, that Christianity was intro- duced into Ireland from England; and if, as stated by Stilling- fleet, the English succession cannot be traced, the Irish must of course labour under the same difficulty. In the dark ages we want many links of the chain. Sir James Ware, in his "Prelates of Ireland," makes the following statements respecting the see of Armagh : " St. Bernard, in the Life of St. Malachy, affirms, that ' Celsus being near his death, was solicitous that Malacliy Mor- gair, then bishop of Connor, should succeed him, and sent his staff to him as his successor.' Nor was he disappointed, for Malachy succeeded him, though not immediately, for ' one Maurice, son of Donald, a person of noble birth, for five years (says the same Bernard) by secular power held that church in possession, not as a bishop, but a tyrant; for the ambition of some in power had at that time introduced a diabolical custom of pretending to eccle- siastical sees by hereditary succession ; not suffering any bishops but the descendants of tlieir own family. Nor was this kind of execrable succession of short continuance: for fifteen generations (or successions of bishops, as Colgan has it) had succeeded in that man- Tier; and so far had that evil and adulterate generation confirmed the wicked course that sometimes, though clerks of their blood might fail, yet bsihojis never failed. In fine, eight married men, and without orders, though^scholars. were predecessors to Celsus, from whence proceeded that general dissolution of ecclesiastical discipline (whereof we have spoken largely before,) that contempt of cen- sures, and decay of religion, throughout Ireland.' Thus Bernard. Tlie names of those eiyht viarricd men unordained, Colgan delivers in the place above cited." — Bishops of -.Armagh, p. 9. 70 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. If such irregularities occurred in the primate's see, we may con- clude that it would be somewhat difficult to trace the succession in other dioceses where Sir James Ware has not been able to as- certain even the names of the bishops for centuries together. — See his " Bishops of Rapho." We may infer, from these disclosures, that if Dr. Boyton have no other title to the ministry save that which is drawn from the unbroken line of apostolical succession, he may, as one of those " who do not hold the commission," forthwith divest himself of the clerical character. Note H. Some may imagine that the Church of England wants two of the keys of the kingdom, namely, the key of government and the key of discipline, but she can scarcely be said to have altogether lost these keys, though they are not certainly in the hands in which they ought to be deposited. The key of discipline is held by the bishops' courts, and the key of government is in the hand of the Queen. It is observed in the " Sermons on the Church," p. 136, that the " topic of discipline is adverted to in almost evert/ epistle, and strict and definite rules laid down for the church's guidance ;" and yet, in the " Essays on the Church," a work so highly commended by Mr. Boyd, it is acknowledged that " the Church has allowed her discipline to be entirely relaxed and dis- used." — Essays on the Church, p. 204. Note I. The translators of the Scriptures availed themselves of the help of several previous translations. Amongst others, they were in- structed to consult the Geneva Bible, in the translation of which John Knox was concerned. Whilst the general excellence of tlie present authorised version is admitted, Presbyterians have reason to complain that in the preparation of a work in which they were so deeply interested, they were not permitted to exercise a legi- timate influence. At the time when it was executed, there were many English and Irish Puritan divines, as well as many Scottish Presbyterian ministers, fully equal, in point of scholarship, to the NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 71 episcopal translators. As instances, we may mention Travers the Puritan, who was provost of Trinity College, Dublin, and tutor to Archbishop Ussher, and the celebrated Andrew Melville of Scot- land, wlio was one of the most accomplished linguists in Christen- dom. King James, however, not only committed the translation to episcopal hands, but also put those employed under certain definite restrictions as to the rendering of various ecclesiastical terms, in order to have the version more favourable to his own views of government and discipline. Note K. Speaking of the conviction which many probably felt in the time of Waldo, that the extraordinary circumstances of the case "justified his assumption of the pastoral character," Milner adds in a note — " If Waldo's friends reasoned right in this, as I am inclined to think ihey did, arguing from the necessity of the case, and the strength of that divine aphorism, ' I will have mercy and not sacrifice,' let not, however, such extraordinary cases give a sanction to many self-created teachers, who disturb rather than strengthen the hands of faithful pastors by their irregular proceedings," — Milner's Hist. Cent, xiii. Chap. i. We subjoin upon the same subject, the following plain and pithy observations, from the works of the Rev. Joseph Boyse, a Presbyterian minister of Dublin, who lived in the beginning of the last century. " What if all the present pastors in a nation should corrupt the Christian doctrine and worship, and impose those corruptions on the people as terms of Church cummunion? What if they refuse to ordain any that will not join with them herein ? The people dare not comply with those terms, and because they would not live without the advantages of the public ministry and worship, they invite such to take the pastoral care of their souls as are duly qualified ; that such qualified persons should not accept ordination on such wicked terms is past doubt ; but what if they live so remote from any other Christian kingdom that they can- not have ministerial ordination elsewhere? Will any say that in this case those qualified persons, for want of this ordination, ought not to take on them the pastoral charge of those people. 72 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. wliicli God has given them such abilities for, and such a call by his providence to? To say this were to set up the rule about the regular ordering of the ministry above the end of the ministry it- self, and oppose the circumstances of the duty to the substance of it. Whereas positive precepts must always yield to moral, and matters of mere ordination to the end of the duty ordered, and the former must never be pleaded against the latter. Ordi- nation by pastors is not, therefore, there necessary, where it can- not be had without sin, and yet without a ministry, the interests of the Gospel, and the salvation of souls are like to suffer the most visible prejudice and detriment. For these are matters infinitely more precious and valuable than any rules of external order, and the very end those rules aim at and are subservient to. And if this be not granted, it must be left to the pleasure of such corrupt pastors, whether the people who cannot join in commnnion with them shall enjoy the means of their salvation, or be obliged to live, like atheists, without any public worship of God. And he that asserts this may next assert that God has left it to their pleasure whether the people shall be saved or damned, and that 'tis better they should be canonically damned than uncanonically saved." — Inipartial Reflections, &c., By Joseph Boyse. KOTE L. In Dr. Reid's History of the Presbyterian Church in Ireland, a work with which every Irish Presbyterian should be acquainted, we have the following account of the ordination of Blair, given by himself; " Having been invited to preach, by the patron and by Mr. Gibson, the sick incumbent, (the first Protestant dean of Down, but resident at Bangor,) I yielded to their invitation and preached there three Sabbath days. After that, several of the aged and most respectful persons in the congregation came to me, by order of the whole, and informed me that they were edified by the doctrine delivered by me; intreated me not to leave them ; and promised, if the patron's offer of maintenance was not large enough, they would willingly add to the same. This promise, I slighted, being too careless of competent and comfortable provi- sion, for I had no thought of any greater family than a boy or NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 73 two to serve me. But on the former part of that speech, import- ing the congregation's call, I laid great weight; and it did contri- bute more to the removing of my unwillingness to settle there than anything else. Likewise the dying man (Gibson) did several ways encourage me. He professed great sorrow for his having been a dean. He condemned episcopacy more strongly than ever I durst do ; he charged me in the name of Christ, and as I expected his blessing on my ministry, not to leave that good way wherein I had begun to walk; and then drawing my head towards his bosom with both his arms, he laid his hands on my head and blessed me. Within a few days after he died ; and my admission was accomplished as quickly as might be, in the fol- lowing way. The viscount Claneboy, my noble patron, did, on my request, inform the bishop, how opposite I was to episco- pacy and their liturgy, and had the influence to procure my ad- mission on easy and honourable terms. Yet, lest his lordship had not been plain enough, I declared my opinion fully to the bishop at our first meeting, and found him yielding beyond my expectation. The bisljop said to me — 'I hear good of you, and will impose no conditions on you; I am old and can teach you ceremonies, and you can teach me substance, only I must ordain you, else neither I nor you can answer the law nor brook the land.' I answered him, tliat his sole ordination did utterly con- tradict my principles ; but he replied both wittily and submis- sively, ' whatever you account of episcopacy, yet I know you account a presbytery to have divine warrant : will you not re- ceive ordination from Mr. Cunningham and the adjacent brethren, and let me come in among them, in no other relation than a presbyter?' This I could not refuse, and so the matter was per- formed," on the 10th of July, 1623." — Reid's History, vol. I, p. 102—104.. Neal adds — " Thus was Mr. Blair ordained publicly, in the church of Bangor. The bishop of Raphoe did the same for Mr. Levingston, and all the Scots who were ordained in Ireland, from this time to the year 164'2, were ordained after the same manner. All of them enjoyed the churches and tithes^ though they remained Presbyterian and used not the liturgy ; nay, the bishops consulted them about affairs of common concernment to D 74 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. the church, and some of them were members of the Convocation in 1634.." — Hist, of Puritans, vol I, p. ^GO. Note M. In the Epistle to the Corinthians, Clemens speaks of those "who had the rule over them," (Sect, i,) and of "the elders" set over them, (Sect, liv,) but he does not even once refer to a person of higher dignity. Had there been a bishop, in the pre- latical i-ense, in the Church of Corinth, would he have been thus completely overlooked? It is, indeed, admitted by divines of the Church of England, who are, in no small degree, tinged with the prejudices of their party, that the testimony of Clemens is completely in favour of presbytery. Thus, Milner says — " At first, indeed, and for some time, church governors were only of two ranks, presbyters and deacons. At least, this appears to liave been the case in particular instances, as at Philippi, and at Epliesus, and the term bishop was confounded with that of pres- byter. The Church of Corinth continued long in this state as fur as one may judge by Clemens Epistle." — History of the Church of Christ, Cent, ii, chap. i. Note N. It is somewhat remarkable that Presbyterians as well as Pre- latists have been wont to appeal to the Ignatian Epistles in sup- port of their system. (See Miller on the Constitution of the Church, &c.) Presbyterians allege that the Ignatian bishop, in the extent of his diocese, corresponded to a parish minister. He had only one congregation under his care, for all his flock were expected to assemble in one place for worship, and for the cele- bration of the Lord's Supper. The bishop was to baptize— to be consulted respecting the marriages of all the individuals under his care— and to be acquainted with all the men-servants and maid- servants. It is rather extraordinary that Mr. Boyd should refer to these Epistles. In his Sermon on Episcopacy, he wishes to prove that the bishops are the successors of the apostles, but these letters directly contradict his favourite theory, for they uniformly recog- nise the presbyters as the successors of the apostles. It does not NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 75 appear that the bishop could act without the sanction of the pres- bytery, for the people are frequently exhorted to be subject to the bishop and to the jiresbytery, and the presbytery is styled " the San- hedrim of the bishop." (Epistle to the Philadelphians.) Be- sides, how can an Episcopalian be subject to the presbytery ? There is no such court invested with a peculiar jurisdiction con- nected witli the Established Church of this country. It is, however, absurd to found any argument upon these docu- ments. Many learned men, such as Calvin, Blonde), the Centu- liators, Salmasius, and Daille, maintain that they are completely spurious. At all events, they have been so much interpolated, that it is now perhaps impossible to separate the fictitious from the genuine. Mosheim declares — " So considerable a degree of obscurity hangs over the question respecting the authenticity of not only a part, but the whole of the epistles ascribed to Ignatius, as to render it altogether a case of much intricacy and doubt." (Commentary, by Vindal, i, 276.) Again, he observes — "The letters, come from what pen they may, are indisputably of very ancient date, and that they are not altogether forgeries, is in the highest degree credible. But to ascertain with precision the exact extent to which they may be considered as genuine, appears to me to be beyond the reach of all human penetration." (Com- mentary, by Vindal, i, 278.) Neander describes them as " inter- polated by some one who was prejudiced in favour of the hierar- chy." (Church History, by Rose, i, 199.) Archbishop Ussher, in his Preliminary Dissertation to his edition of these Epistles, published at Oxford in 1644, thus speaks of them, (page 138) — " Concludimus, earum sex nothas, totidem alias mixtas, nullas omni ex parte sinceras esse habendas et genuinas," that is, "we conlude that six of them are spurious, that as many others are interpolated, that none of them are to be considered in every part pure and genuine." He afterwards published at London, in 1647, what he called " Appendix Ignatiana, " in which he professed to give a genuine copy of these letters. "Ignatii Epistolae genuinse, a posterioris interpolatoris assumentis liberce, ex Graeco Mediceo exemplari expressse; et nova versions Latina explicatae." He complains, however, in his Preface, " to the Reader," that he had not found the Medicean manuscript most correct. "Id tan- tum de quo jam conqueramur, habemus; non reperisse nos Medi- 76 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. ceum codicem qualem eum nobis Turrianus commendaverat, emendatissimum." We find, too, that in doubtful passages, he has made use of the conjectures of Junius and Vossius. It so happens that Mr. Boyd, in the quotation which we have cited in the text, has unfortunately stumbled upon a passage which Arch- bishop Ussher himself acknowledges to be of doubtful authority. The literal rendering of Ussher's Greek text is as follows: — "In like manner, let all reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ, as also the bishop being Son of the Father, (/u; xai tov lir/irxocrov ovra vtov tov ■rarja;) and the presbyters as the Sanhedrim of God and college of the apostles." The archbishop does not venture to translate his own text, but betakes himself to a marginal reading, the same as that which Mr. Boyd has adopted. If the authority of this passage be tried by the evidence of manuscripts, and if it may be condemned because the witnesses agree not together, it must certainly be rejected as spurious. In the editions of Ussher, it is to be found, in at least four forms, all widely differing from one another. (See his Dissertation, page 129, and the text of 164.4. and 1647.) Upon the ground of internal evidence, it must at once be set aside, for who can believe that a pious pupil of any of the apostles ever dictated such disgusting trash? It is the extra- vagance of folly to rely upon these epistles as evidences either of the doctrine or of the government of the apostolic church, for, even as edited by Ussher, they still bear clear traces of an inter- polator, who was an abettor of Arianism, as well as a supporter of the hierarchy. They contain, indeed, some devout and noble sentiments worthy of a disciple of the apostles, but they abound also with turgid exhortations to ecclesiastical servility, quite dis- graceful to any riglit-minded Christian. We have observed that Ussher has recognised only six of the Ignatian Epistles. Vossius and Archbishop Wake here diifer from him, and acknowledge as a seventh the epistle to Polycarp. Eusebius intimates that Ignatius wrote seven epistles in his jour- ney to Rome— /owr from Smyrna, and three from Troas. Mr. Boyd, however, has the honour of starting a new theory upon this subject. Differing from all the learned men who have gone before him, he only acknowledges four epistles as written by Ignatius on his way to the imperial city. He has mentioned three of them in his Sermon on Episcopacy, but inasmuch as he says that these letters were written to different churches, we presume that he does not reckon the epistle to the virgin Mary as the fourth. NOTES TO DISCOURSE I. 77 Note O. Calvin, in his last will and testament, avers his adherence to the principles which he had professed throughout life, and declares that he had defended the truth with candour and sincerity. Every one knows that he maintained the apostolic institution of presby- tery, and, of course, that after the death of Christ, or in the apos- tolic age, there were no prelates in the church. But, if boldness of assertion could avail, Mr. Boyd would soon convince us that the reformer, before his death, had recanted his presbyterianism. He quotes a few lines from the Institutes, which, in their insulated slate, are of equivocal meaning, but he strangely suppresses the very next sentence, which completely upsets his argument, and vindicates the consistency of Calvin. For the passage itself, and for a more full exposure of the manner in which the great reformer has been tortured into a witness for prelacy, the reader is referred to the next discourse. It would be easy to show that many others of Mr. Boyd's witnesses marshalled in his notes, would also, upon cross-examination, overwhelm him with confusion. END OF NOXES TO DISCOURSE I. DISCOURSE 11. BY THE REV. WILLIAM M'CLURE, LONDONDERRY. The Pastors of the Christian Church, of one Order, and of equal Authority — The Decision of our Lord on the Subject — The names Presbyter and Bishop applied to the same persons in Scripture — Plurality of Riders in the Churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Philippi, and Thessalonica — Testimonies of Episco- palian Writers — Objections Ansivered. " Jesus called them to him, and saith unto them. Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them ; and their great ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not be among you." —Mark, x, 42, 43. The Gopsel was not, like the former disptiisation, intended to be local and temporary. It was to last till time shall be no more. The glad tidings of great joy were to be proclaimed throughout the world. Accordingly, our Lord made provision for the exten- sion and permanence of his church. He appointed officers to preach the word, to collect believers into worshipping communities, and make regulations for their future management and guidance. Of these officers, some were intended to be tem- porary and others to be permanent. The Gospel was to be preached amidst much opposition. It was to be established upon the ruins of heathenism. Great difficulties were to be overcome, and it was therefore necessary that the first heralds of the cross should be endued with great and unusual powers. 80 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. We find, accordingly, that Christ appointed persons having the power of working miracles to attest their divine mission — persons endowed with supernatural gifts and extraordinary authority, such as apostles, evangelists, and prophets. These were appointed not only to preach the word, but to settle the con- stitution of the church, and to commit the adminis- tration of it to the ordinary and permanent officers. The apostles often took the name, and acted in the character of ordinary ministers, but the apostolic office itself was temporary and extraordinary. The apostles must all have seen the Lord after his resur- rection, in order that they might bear witness to this fact, which lies at the foundation of the whole Chris- tian system. When the people were called upon to elect a successor to Judas, this qualification was ex- pressly stated. " Wherefore, of these men which have corapanied with us all the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that he was taken from us, must one be ordained to be a witness with us of his resurrection." (Acts, i, 21, 22.) It was necessary that the apostles should not only have the power of speaking in the languages of the people to whom they were seni, and of working miracles in confirmation of their divine commission, but that they should also have the power of communicating miracu- lous gifts to others. And, further, they possessed an authority not limited in its exercise to any parti- cular parish or diocese, but were commanded " to go into all the world," "to all nations," and to "the uttermost parts of the earth." To them was com- mitted the care of all ilve churches. It is evident DISCOURSE II. 81 that the apostolic office was extraordinary, and ceased with the hves of those who first held it. And when, therefore, any, at this present day, come to us as- suming the authority and demanding the respect due to the apostles of our Lord Jesus Christ, they must pardon us if we say to them, — " We cannot take your word for this; but show that you have the powers and qualifications of apostles, preach the same doctrines, and exhibit the same signs which they did among the people, and then, but not till ihen^ will we acknowledge you to be their successors."^ We read also, in the early primitive church, of prophets and evangelists. It belonged to the for- mer, under the guidance of the Divine Spirit, to expound the Scriptures, and to foretel the events of futurity. The latter, again, were the companions of the apostles, they were commissioned to travel among the infant churches, to ordain ministers and settle congregations according to all the parts of church order. The ordinary ministers of that time required their aid. The New Testament Scriptures had not then been committed to writing, and the evangelists in some degree supplied this deficiency. Their office, it is owned by all, was not fixed to any parti- cular settled place, demanding a special attendance, which is expressly required of every ordinary church officer. The canon of Scripture is complete, nothing more is wanted of doctrine or of precept to establish and to guide the church, extraordinary ambassadors are therefore no longer required. But while these passed away, the ordinary and permanent officers have continued. These are pres- ' See Note A. D 2 82 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. byters and deacons, and of the presbyters there are two kinds, teaching and ruling elders. " Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double ho- nour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." (1 Tim., v, 17.) To the former, those who labour in word and doctrine, we are at pre- sent to confine our attention. That you may the better understand the subject, let me briefly state the difference of opinion which exists regarding these officers. According to the system of prelacy, as exemplified in the Church of England, there is a distinction of ranks among the ministers of religion, and one of its fundamental articles is that a bishop is superior to a presbyter. In opposition to this, Presbyterians hold that the pastors of the Christian church are of one order and of equal authority, whatever differences may be among them in age and talents and learninff. The principle which I undertake to establish is this. That the pastors of the flock, who are to give themselves to the ministry of the word, and to con- duct the ordinances of religion, are of one order, have no earthly superiors, and are equal in rank and power. For proof of this statement, we appeal to the Scriptures alone. Whatever they have required or directed, is required and directed by God, and is in- vested with his authority. Man has no authority over the conscience, and can never bind his fellow- man in any religious concern whatever. If then, we find, at the present day, or in past ages, any thing said upon this subject, whether by divines or others, however learned or esteemed they may have been, and which, at the same time, is not said in the Scriptures, DISCOURSE II. 83 or clearly warranted by the practice of our Lord and his apostles, it is in no way binding upon us. It , may be said wisely, or it may not — the opinion may be good, or it may be bad, but it cannot in any degree have the nature of a law, and we are quite justified in rejecting it as the invention of fallible, uninspired men. All that they have written is a fallible testimony. To the Scriptures alone, we can appeal without danger of being led astray. In establishing the doctrine of ministerial pa- rity, we refer, in the first place, to the highest pos- sible authority, even to that of our Lord Jesus Christ. His decision is recorded in the words of our text. The disciples had vainly imagined that he was about to establish a kingdom in which some of its officers would exercise authority over the rest, and in prospect of this, their struggles for lordship and dominion already had commenced. But he warns them of their error. The words of our text plainly show that He never intended to establish a superior order among his ministers, but, on the other hand, that they should all stand upon an equal footing. He checks the proud contention of his disciples for superiority in these words : "Ye know that they which are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and their great ones exercise authority upon them." (Mark, iv, 42.) But what is the mandate of the great King and Head of the church, the supreme foun- tain of all authority ? " It shall not be so AMONG YOU." (Verse 43.) As if he had said, " There may be princes and potentates of the world, and there may be, for managing the temporal affairs. 84 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. of nations, officers of various orders, and different ranks, but among you, the rulers of my spiritual king- dom, it shall not he so, you are all of one order, and of equal power." Again let it be observed that, throughout the word of God, no distinction whatever is recognised among the ministers of the Gospel, but they are uniformly represented as being of the same rank. The pastors of Christian congregations are indeed called by dif- ferent names in the sacred volume. Thus, the term presbyter is applied to them to express the honour- able station which they hold. This term signifies, literally, an aged person or elder. It was employed among the Jews as a title of office, to indicate the dignity of persons holding such situations of high trust as required not only faithfulness, but wisdom, prudence, and experience. The term presbyter, as thus used by the Jews, was adopted by the apostles, and with great propriety applied to the pastors of the different congregations which they collected, in order to mark, not only the dignity of the ministerial office, but tne piety and wisdom with which it should be especially adorned. As the term presbyter has been applied to Chris- tian ministers in the sacred writings to indicate the dignity of their station, so the term overseer has been applied to them in the same writings to intimate the duties of their office. This term is the exact trans- lation of the Greek word, from which is derived the English word bishop. The word overseer and the word bishop, in the original, are the same. Now, if it can be demonstrated that the names presbyter and bishop are used interchangeably, that those in DISCOURSE II. 85 one place called presbyters or elders, are, in another, called bishops, and that those denominated bishops are again denominated presbyters or elders, you will surely admit that they mean the very same office, and are only different names, that may be apphed to any minister of a Christian congregation. For this purpose let me refer you, in the first place, to Acts, XX, 17, 28. 17. "And from Miletus, he sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church." 28. " Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the church of God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." The apostle being on his way to Jerusalem, was desirous of an interview with the ministers of the Ephesian church, and therefore we are told, " From Miletus he sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church." Observe the persons he sent for were the elders or preshijters of the church, and these are the persons who came, for it is added " when they," that is, the presbyters, were come to hira, he said unto them, "Ye know after what manner I have been with you at all seasons." And he goes on in a very affectionate manner, and addressing himself to the very same persons, a little before called elders or presbyters, he exhorts them to take heed to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers" (Bishops.) Now it is most evident that the very same persons who are presbyters or elders in the 17th verse, are bishops in the 28th, thus proving that a Scripture bishop and a presbyter or elder are the same. Again, I adduce Philippians, i, 1 : " Paul and 86 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. Tiraotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi with the bishops and deacons." Here it is to be observed, that all the officers in the church at Philippi are enumerated. Yet the term elder or presbyter is omitted. And why? Because it would have been superfluous, being the same in signification as the term bishop. Had the officers been different, we cannot think that presbyters would have been over- looked when deacons were mentioned. Had it been addressed to bishops, elders, and deacons, it would be thought, by an advocate for episcopacy, abso- lutely decisive in favour of these orders of ec- clesiastical officers. As it now stands, and as it is uncontradicted by any other passage of Scripture, it is equally decisive that there were but two, namely, bishops and deacons.^ A similar instance occurs in the epistle of Paul to Titus, i, 5 — 7 : " For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders," or presbyters, "in every city." He then proceeds to describe the qualifica- tions of those whom Titus should ordain elders or presbyters. " A bishop" says he, " must be blame- less." Here it is evident that by bishop he means the same person and the same officer as by elder or presbyter just before. The fact that I have stated is further demon- strated by a most clear and decisive passage in 1 Pet. v, 1,2: "The elders," or presbyters, "who are among you I exhort, who am also an elder," or as it should be rendered, " co-presbyter."' And then he pro^ ' See Note B. - Iv/icTr^nx^vTe^o;. DISCOURSE II. 87 ceeds in the next verse : " Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind." Here, as I said before, the original word may be rendered discharging the office of a bishop.^ As the apostle expressly calls those to whom he directs his exhortations, presbyters, it unavoidably follows, that the discharging the office of a Scripture-bishop belongs to presbyters or to the ministers of the Gospel in common, and consequently that both these terms, denote one and the same officer. And what the apostle adds in the third and fourth verses, is worthy of remark, just as if his, prophetic eye had foreseen the evils that would arise from the introduction of a system so adapted to the views of worldly ambition and earthly pride : " Neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock; and when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away."^ The next argument I adduce in support of ray position is, that we find several churches mentioned in the New Testament, in each of which there was a plurality of bishops or presbyters, equal in rank and authority. This was the case in Antioch. The power of ordination in this church, and consequently that of government, was in the hands of aplurality of prophets or teachers; for it is said, (Acts, xiii, 1 — 3,) "Now there were in the church that was at Antioch certain prophets and teachers ; as Barnabas, and Simeon that was called Niger, and Lucius of Cyrene, and Manaen which had been brought up with Herod ' 'E.TTiuKQ'xovurii;. - See Note C. 88 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. the tetrarch, and Saul. As they ministered to the Lord and fasted, the Holy Ghost said, Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away." This was the ordination of Barnabas and Saul, and was it not, I ask, decidedly presbyterian ? The divine command, made known by the Holy Ghost, was addressed, not to one individual, exalted above the rest, but to all in common — " Separate me Barnabas and Saul ;" and in obedience to this command, all of them concurred in this solemn act — and " they laid their hands on them and sent them away." From this, it is beyond all doubt there was a multiplicity of rulers in the church of Antioch, all uniting in the act of ordination. Examine this pas- sage for yourselves, and try if you can discover the slightest hint of this church having been under the sole government of a single person or bishop. Most assuredly you cannot; for it was a presbyterian church. The same was the case in the church of Ephesus. You will remember from the passage in the twentieth chapter in the Acts, which I have already quoted, that when Paul was on his way to Rome there were at Ephesus, not a number of priests and one bishop, not a number of pastors and one ruler, but several church officers, each of whom was a presbyter to rule, and a bishop to inspect. The duties to which the presbyters or bishopsof Ephesus were exhorted, clearly show that they were clothed with the power of juris- diction, no less than with that of dispensing the word and sacraments. They were to " take heed to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost had made thsm DISCOURSE II. 89 bishops, to feed the church of God."^ But to be bishops, and to feed the church of God, express in the strongest terms that they were to govern and to rule it. This authority they exercised in common, and without subjection to any ecclesiastical superior. The church at Philippi is no less a witness in favour of presbytery and against the modern system of dio- cesan episcopacy, than the churches already noticed. It is expressly asserted by the apostle Paul, in a passage to which I have already referred, (Phil, i, 1,) that there were several bishops at Philippi in his days, and he never intimates that one possessed any authority over the rest. A similar arrangement ap- pears to have existed in the church of Thessalonica. It was under the government of a number of pres- byters ; and its members are required to "know them which laboured among them and were over them in the Lord, and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake." (1 Thess. v, 12, 13.) Can there be any thing more plain than that the government of this church was not in the hands of a single prelate, but of a number of ministers who had equal authority and power, and who were entitled to equal submission and respect from all its members ? Thus it is plain that in the churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Philippi, and Thessalonica, the pastors of the flock were of one order and of equal authority ; and we have every reason to believe that other churches were similarly constituted.^ In maintaining the position which I have taken, I ' The Greek word •ro//(taiv£(v here translated "/eed," is rendered rule'' in Matt, ii, 6 ; Rev. ii, 27 ; xii, 8 ; xix, 15. 2 See Note D. 90 PRESBYTERIAN ISM DEFENDED. appeal, in the next place, to some of the highest authorities among EpiscopaHans themselves. The principal reformers of the Church of England held the same views that we now advocate. On this point, the accurate historian, M'Crie, has observed : " We would mistake exceedingly if we supposed that they were men of the same principles and tem- per with many who succeeded to their places, or that they were satisfied with the pitch to which they had carried the reformation in the English church, and regarded it as a paragon and perfect pattern to all other churches. They were strangers to those ex- travagant and illiberal notions which were afterwards adopted by the fond admirers of the hierarchy and hturgy. They would have laughed at the man who would have seriously asserted that the ceremonies constituted any part of "the beauty of holiness," or that the imposition of the hands of a bishop was essential to the valitiity of ordination; they would not have owned that person as a Protestant who would have ventured to insinuate, that where this was wanting, there was no Christian ministry, no ordinances, no church, and perhaps no salvation ! Many things which their successors have ap- plauded they barely tolerated ; and they would have been happy, if the circumstances of their time would have permitted them, to introduce alterations which have since been cried down as puritanical innova- tions. Strange as it may appear to some, I am not afraid of exceeding the truth when I say, that if the English reformers, including the Protestant bishops, had been left to their own choice, if they had not been held back by a large mass of popishly-aflPected DISCOURSE II. 91 clergy in the reign of Edward, nor restrained by the supreme civil authority on the accession of Elizabeth, they would have brought the government and wor- ship of the Church of England nearly to the pattern of other reformed churches."^ Many testimonies to this effect might be adduced from the early divines of the English church, from men distinguished by their piety and learning. Many of them assert, " That there were but two offices of Divine institu- tion in the church, viz., elders or bishops to feed the flock, and deacons to minister the charity of the church to the poor and needy." A book, entitled '- The Erudition of a Christian Man," was composed by the ecclesiastical committees appointed by the king, and published by his authority in the year 1540. In this public and important document it is declared that " the Scripture makes express mention of those two orders only, priests and deacons." And, it is added, " Whereas we have thus summarily declared, what is the office and ministration which in holy Scripture is committed to bishops and priests, and in what things it consists, as is before rehearsed, we think it expedient and necessary that all men should be advertised and taught, that all such lawful authority and power of one bishop over another, were and be given them by consent, ordinance, and positive com- mands of men only, and not by any ordinance of God in holy Scripture." The pious andexcellent commentator, Scott, when speaking of the apostolic age, gives his opinion in these words, " It must be allowed that there were not distinct orders of ministers in the church at that time. They were at first called either elders or } M'Crie's Life of Knox, vol. i, page 106. 92 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. overseers, that is presbyters or bishops indifferently, and no one had any direct authority over the rest} We thus find that our Saviour issued an express command forbidding his ministers to have any pre- eminence over their brethren. We have undoubted testimony that presbyter and bishop are names for the same persons or officers, and we have seen that in the Scriptures there is not the shghtest intima- tion of a difference between them. It appears also from the writings of the apostles, that in the first and purest age of the Gospel, instead of one bishop being over many churches in an extensive diocese, and of an order superior to other ministers, there were many bishops even in one town, upon the most perfect equality with each other. And there is added to all this the recorded sentiments of the best and most learned divines of the English church, that, though sanctioned by human authority, the system of prelacy has no foundation in the word of God. It being evident that bishops and presbyters were the same in the apostolic age, it follows that all ministers of the Gospel, regularly called and ordained to the sacred office, are bishops within the limits of their respective charges, according to the true and genuine spirit of the Gospel. When Christianity first appeared in its native beauty and simplicity, there was no assumption of authority by one minister over another. Even the apostles themselves, the chosen friends of our Lord, who had heard from his sacred lips the words of eter- nal life, upon whom the Holy Spirit had descended, and who were enabled to control and suspend the I See Note E. DISCOURSE II. 93 laws of nature, even they claimed no pre-eminence. They were actively engaged in feeding the flock of Christ, and in performing the most laborious duties of the ministerial office. And they addressed the pastors and ministers of the word as their " brethren," over whom they asserted no authority of rank or sta- tion. The Christians in the primitive churches called no man "father," in a spiritual sense, for one was their Father who is in heaven. They called no man " master," in a spiritual sense, for one was their Master, even Christ the Lord, and all they were brethren. From this mass of evidence, the truth of the proposition with which I set out must, I think, be established in every unprejudiced mind; namely, that the pastors of the flock, who are to give themselves to the ministry of the word, and to conduct the ordi- nances of religion, are of one order, have no earthly superiors, and are equal in rank and power. To this view of the subject, which I hold to be alone the scriptural view, objections have been made which it is now my duty to examine. An advocate for episcopacy commences by telling us, that " the system of equality is not the system of God, and that subordination and distinction seem to pervade all the works of the Lord of wisdom."^ This fact is adduced as favourable to the system of Prelacy; and in order, it is supposed, to have some counter- part to such officers as archbishops and archdeacons in the church, a new order of beings is said to exist in heaven. We are told that " in the circle of its glorious inhabitants are found not only the angels ' Sermons on the Church, page 37. 94 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. who minister to their Maker's will, but also the ai'changels who surround his throne." We read indeed of the Archangel, who is generally believed to be the Angel of the covenant, the Lord Jesus Christ, but no where in the word of God do we read of an order of beings denominated archangels. The text adduced, (Isaiah, vi, 2,) gives no evidence of its existence. But waiving this, the argument from the grada- tions that exist in the material and spiritual creation, does liot in the slightest degree affect the point at issue. Presbyterians hold that the pastors of the flock are of one order, and of equal authority; but they never denied that there should be subordination among the officers as well as the judicatories of the church. We acknowledge Christ as the only King and Head of the Church ; presbyters are under him; deacons are under both. This is a fair subordina- tion of officers. But, it will be said. You have not enough. Well then, if we are to have gradations in the church to correspond with the gradations in the material and animate creation, where are we to stop ? We must then have an infinite variety of officers ; for, tell me if you can, the gradations to be found from the humble blade of grass to the glorious lumi- nary of day — from the worm that creeps upon the earth to the angel that burns before the throne of Jehovah. An argument is brought for episcopacy from there having been a high priest, priests, and Levites in the temple at Jerusalem. Let it be remembered, how- ever, that there was only one high priest under the Mosaic dispensation — one high priest for the whole DISCOURSE II. 95 commonwealth of Israel — and how can this single individual be considered a type for hundreds of bishops ? Let Episcopalians beware how they urge this argument. As they employ it, it proves too much for them. It makes more for the authority of the Roman pontiff than for their hierarchy. The Jewish high priest was indeed a typical cha- racter. And of what was he the type? Not cer- tainly of a great array of bishops ! but of our Lord Jesus Christ. It is evident that the high priest was to have no earthly representative under the Christian dispensation. In the New Testament, the Saviour is expressly called " The High Priest of our pro- fession." (Heb. iii, 1.) We have still one High Priest, even Jesus Christ, who is entered into the Holy of holies, the heavenly sanctuary, and we have two orders of oflBcers on earth under him, presbyters and deacons. The argument, therefore, instead of being against us, is in our favour. In the " Sermons on the Church," this argument is brought forward in a prominent manner, and in the Appendix, (page 186,) Clemens Romanus is quoted as a confirmatory witness : " To the high priest pro- per offices are committed ; to the priests their pecu- liar office is assigned, the Levites ^ have their own ministries ; and a layman is bound to laic perfor- mances. Let every one of you, brethren, give thanks to God in his proper station, living conscien- tiously, and not transgressing the prescribed rule of his service or ministry." " This passage," it is ' The writer here introduces the word " deacons " without any authority from the original. Where did he learn that there were deacons in the Jewish church ? 96 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. said, "not only conveys the idea that the Jewish priesthood was the framework of the Christian, but shows, that before the death of the apostles, the three orders were recosnised and estabUshed in the church." To this I reply, that this passage by no means proves that there were three distinct orders in the Christian church. The venerable father intreats the believers at Corinth to be subject to their spiritual guides, as the Jews had been to theirs. While he does this, there is no evidence, but quite the contrary, that he ever thought of drawing a parallel between the Jewish priesthood and the Christian ministry. It may just as well be asserted, that the officers in the Christian church corresponded with those in the Roman army, because the same Clemens has said, " Let us observe with what order and promptitude and submission sol- diers execute the orders of their commanders. All are not generals, or chiliarchs, or centurions, or com- manders of fifty, or subordinate officers, but each in his own rank executes the orders of the king and his commanding officers." The matter stands thus : Clemens in one passage mentions incidentally the high priest, priests, and Levites, therefore it is concluded, there are three orders of ministers in the Christian church. The same Clemens enumerates j^ije sets of officers in the Roman army; therefore there ought to he Jive orders of ministers in the Christian church. The reasoning in both cases would be equally con- clusive. The quotation from Clemens, so confidently adduced, has no bearing upon the point at issue. The temple and temple services were local and typical. When Christ died upon the cross, they all DISCOURSE 11. 97 were abolished. The constitution of the sjaiagogue, being more simple and better suited to a religion that was to be universal, is the model, we conceive, upon which the church is constituted. In the apos- tolic age, the name " synagogue " was applied to a Christian church ; and from it the very names of its officers are taken. The term used to designate a priest under the law is never applied in the New Testament to a Christian minister.^ In opposition to our views of equality, we are told of the twelve apostles and the seventy disciples. These it is said were two distinct classes of officers; and, in order to make up the required number of three, our Lord himself is represented as the bishop, and as a distinct order of ministry in his own church. Let any individual examine the commissions given to the twelve in the tenth chapter of Matthew, and to the seventy in the tenth chapter of Luke, and he will find that they were quite similar. Both were clothed with the authority of their Master, both were en- dowed with miraculous powers, as credentials of their mission; both were appointed to preach "the kingdom of heaven is at hand." The fact is, the church was not organized at all during the time our Lord was upon the earth. The ministry of John the Baptist, his own ministry, and that of the apostles and seventy, were intended only to prepare the way for its establishment. This could not be effected so long as the Jewish polity continued, and it could not cease until our Lord had " finished transgression, and made an end of sin " by the sacrifice of himself. The reasoning from this is ^ See Note F. E 98 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. just : " If" the Christian church had no being before Christ's death, then certainly there was no govern- ment ; and consequently the argument is lost to all intents and purposes. It is clear as light, that the followers of Christ, in the days of his flesh, were under no distinct government but that of the Jewish church, with which they were still incorporated."^ The principal stress of the episcopal argument here is made to rest upon the assumption that " the vacancy in the circle of the apostles occasioned by the suicide of Judas was filled up from this body." (The seventy.) But where is the evidence for this ? None is offered. The argument is based upon an assertion that cannot be proved. No where do the Scriptures say that the apostles ever exercised any authority over the seventy, or that Matthias had been one of that number. A statement like this, without any evidence to support it, is useless to any cause. The next allegation to be noticed is that James was bishop of Jerusalem. If bishop be used in the Scripture sense, it may be fairly said that James was a bishop at Jerusalem, but if in the modern sense, then I controvert the statement. We are told that "the writers of the early ages, with one voice, style him Bishop of Jerusalem." It is rather remarkable that a leading authority adduced is Augustine, who lived towards the close of the fourth century. This is just as if I were to bring forward a minister now living to certify, in a disputed case, as to who had been pastor of a church in a German city in the fif- teenth century. The advocate of prelacy acknow- ledges that " Scripture makes no precise statement, ' Dick's Theology, vol. iv, page 333. DISCOURSE ir. 99 contains no definite record upon this fact," but he thinks it enough to show that James was frequently found at Jerusalem. Although this be admitted, it proves nothing to his purpose. A minister may be often in a particular town or district, yet that will not establish his right to the exercise of supreme ecclesiastical authority. But the council of Jerusalem is pointed to as conclusive in this matter. You will find an account of its proceedings in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts. It appears that the apostles and elders were met together upon this occasion, and such of the brethren as thought fit addressed the assembly. In the course of the proceedings, which, you will ob- serve, were strictly presbyterial, James also gave his opinion, and used the expression, as it is rendered in our version, "my sentence is." This, however, he does not do, as it is asserted, "in the tone of official authority." The original word means nothing more than the result of reflection, or the expression of opinion, and might have been used with equal propriety by any member of the court. ^ Many of the most learned episcopalian authors themselves admit that it by no means conveys the idea of an authoritative decree. Is any disposed to question this assertion, and to say that James alone decided the matter in debate — look then to the fourth verse of the following chapter, and there we are expressly told that " the decrees were ordained," not by James, but " by the apostles and elders which were at Jeru- salem." This was afterwards asserted (chapter xxi, 25,) in the presence of James himself, without any expression of anger upon his part, that his sup- ' See Note 100 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. posed episcopal authority had been invaded. And further, the decree was received and obeyed through- out all the Asiatic churches. If it had been made by James alone, his authority must have extended much more widely than is generally represented. He must have exercised control over all the apostles and elders who were present; together with the distant churches from which they came. This would quite confound the episcopal arrangements which have been made regarding other apostles who are said also to have had appointments "limited and restricted to a particular territory." There is not the slightest evi- dence from Scripture that any of the apostles were restricted in the discharge of their duties by local boundaries, or that James was, in the modem sense of the word, bishop of Jerusalem. Our attention is next called to the Epistles of Timothy and Titus, "documents which," we are told, " must be erased from the Bible before the doctrine of ministerial equahty be considered a truth of inspiration." Here let me inform you that the postscripts of these epistles form no part of the original. They were excluded from the earliest English translations, but when our present version was made, in the reign of James the First, they were placed, very improperly, where they now stand, but they are of no authority whatever.^ With regard to the offices held by Timothy and Titus, there is a considerable difference among Epis- copalians themselves, some make them diocesan bi- shops, while others insist they must have been arch- bishops. ' See Note H. DISCOURSE II. 101 Extracts from the Epistles addressed to Timothy and Titus are adduced to prove their prelatical au- thority, but the directions contained in them are just such as may be addressed to any presbyterian mini- ster. Because Timothy was to give advice, and administer rebukes in certain cases, does it therefore follow that he alone was authorised to exhort and rebuke ? He was warned to " lay hands suddenly on no man." Does it therefore follow that a diocese was marked out for him, and that in a certain prescribed territory no other persons had a right to ordain? We are told that Titus ordained elders at Crete, and that Timothy gave a charge to the Ephesian elders, therefore, it is argued Titus was diocesan bishop of Crete, and Timothy, diocesan bishop of Ephesus. Let us apply this reasoning to other parallel cases. Titus ordained elders in every city, therefore Titus was bishop of Crete. But Paul and Barnabas ordahied elders in Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch, therefore Paul and Barnabas were joint bishops of Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch. Timothy gave a charge to the Ephesian elders, therefore he was bishop of Ephesus. But Paul gave a charge to the Ephesian elders, therefore Paul was bishop of Ephesus. Thus, it is plain, that the very same reasoning that proves Titus to have been bishop of Crete, and Timothy bishop of Ephesus, will prove all the apostles to have been bishops of all the places where they exercised any of those offices which the Episcopal church has confined to her prelates. If, after all, Titus and Timothy were diocesan bishops of Crete and Ephesus, they shamefully neglected their duty. We hear of them travel- 102 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. ling about in all directions. We find Timothy at Lystra, Berea, Athens, Thessalonica, Corinth, Rome, and then proposing to go to Judea. So we discover Titus in Jerusalem, Corinth, Macedonia, and when sent to Crete he was to remain there only until relieved by Arteraus or Tychicus, and then Paul expected to meet him at Nicopolis. (Tit. iii, 12.) If it be said that they were bishops of every place to which they went in the service of the church, they must have been bishops of a great part of Asia and Europe, which would prove that they were popes rather than diocesan bishops. Let me quote upon this point the opinion of Dr. Whitby, — an eminent episco- palian writer : " If, by saying Timothy and Titus were bishops, the one of Ephesus and the other of Crete, we understand that they took upon them those churches or dioceses, as their fixed and peculiar charge, in which they were to preside for the term of life, I believe that Timothy and Titus were not thus bishops; for both Timothy and Titus were evangelists. Now the work of an evangelist, saith Eusebius, was this, to lay the foundations of the faith in barbarous na- tions, to constitute them pastors, and, having com- mitted to them the cultivating of those new planta- tions, they passed on to other countries and nations."^ Thus does this commentator judiciously account for the frequent travels of these servants of God. Thus does he rescue theu- characters from those who, pro- fessing to elevate, really degrade them. We are next referred to what is ushered in with the pompous title, " a striking body of evidence which meets us in the Book of Revelation." If ^ Whitby's Commentary, vol. ii, page 430. DISCOURSE II. J03 indeed there be here a striking boJy of evidence, it is rather unfortunate for the cause of episcopacy that the name bishop is never once mentioned from the beginning to the end of the book. The only pas- sage dwelt upon is the epistle addressed to the angel of the Church of Ephesus, and the argument for episcopacy rests upon one word in that epistle. It is asserted that by the angel was intended a single individual, and then it is concluded that he was a dio- cesan bishop. This is an assertion without one par- ticle of proof. Supposing the angel to have been a single individual, Presbyterians have just as good a right to assume that he was the moderator or clerk of the presbytery, to whom official documents always are addressed. The mere fact of a letter having been written to a person to be communicated to all the members of an association to which he belongs, will not surely invest him with supreme authority over all its members. But there is strong presump- tion that by the angel was not intended a single indi- vidual. Any unprejudiced reader will observe, on examining the epistles to the seven churches of Asia, that the angel of a particular church is addressed in the singular or plural number indifferently. Thus our Lord Jesus Christ addresses the ancrel of the church of Smyrna: "Fear none of those things which tkou shalt suffer; behold the devil shall ca^t some of you mio prison that ye may be tried, and ye shall have tribu- lation ten days ; be thou faithful unto death and I will give ^/iee a crown of life." (Rev. ii, 10.) Another passage from the Book of Revelation utterly over- turns this assumption in favour of episcopacy : " I 63w," says the beloved disciple, " another angel J 04 PRESBYTER] ANISM DEFENDED. fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting Gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation and kindred and tongue and people." (Rev. xiv, 6.) By applying to this text the rea- soning employed to render the former available to the use of prelacy, the Gospel is to be preached " to every nation and kindred and tongue and people," by " a single individual," and he must be a person of " episcopal dignity." This interpretation cannot stand. Let us try if we cannot give a more consistent view of both these passages. The Gospel is to be preached by men ; and the angel in the latter passage is the emblem of a human ministry. And so it is in the place that has been quoted. The epistle was ad- dressed to the ministry of the Ephesian church ; or, as we would say now, to the Presbytery of Epliesus. Driven from Scripture, the advocates of episcopacy fly to the Fathers for assistance.^ Here we do not propose to follow them. Antiquity is not a sufficient foundation for our faith. If doctrines are to be re- garded as necessarily true because they are ancient, then must these very heresies which the apostles combated be implicitly received because they were found in the earliest periods of the church. Testi- monies from the Fathers are very little to be regarded. Many sayings attributed to them, as you have lately heard in the case of Ignatius, were, in all probability, never uttered by them. During the dark ages, their writings were changed from the simplicity of primitive times to suit the domineering views of the papacy, which claimed the world for its dominion and all man- ' See Note I. DISCOURSE II. 105 kind for its slaves. At all events they are useless as a test of discipline or doctrine. Let it not, how- ever, be supposed, that the testimony of the Fathers is unfavourable to the presbyterian view. No : Their earliest and most authentic records bear evidence to the fact, that Presbytery was the general system of the church, in the age immediately succeeding the age of the apostles.^ Not content with the Fathers, the name of Calvin has been used in support of prelatical authority. A quotation has been made from his works that is ap- parently decisive in favour of episcopacy. In the Appendix to the " Sermons on the Church," we have the following extract from Calvin's Institutes: " They named all on whom was enjoined the office of teaching, presbyters. They chose one of their number in every city to whom, in particular, they gave the name of bishop, lest from equality, as usually happens, dis- sensions should arise." Here it was quite prudent for the advocate of prelacy to stop ; but there is no reason why we should withhold the remainder of the passage. The whole runs thus : " Hitherto we have treated of the mode of government in the church as it has been delivered to us by the sure word of God and of the offices in it as they were instituted by Christ All those to whom the office of teaching was assigned were denominated presby- ters. To guard against dissension, the general con- sequence of equality, the presbyters in each city chose one of their own number, whom they distin- guished by the title of bishop. The bishop, how- rver, was not so superior to the rest in honour and ' See Note J. D 2 106 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. dignity as to have any dominion over his colleagues, but the functions performed by a consul in the senate — such as to collect the votes, to preside over the rest in the exercise of advice, admonition, and exhortation, to regulate all the proceedings by his authority, and to carry into execution whatever had been decreed by the general voice — were the func- tions exercised by the bishop in the assembly of the presbyters. And that this arrangement was introduced by human agreement on account of the necessity of the times, is acknowledged by the ancient writers themselves." ^ You see then with what justice Calvin has been pressed into the service of episcopacy. The bishop of whom he spoke was nothing more than Moderator of the Court. I have often heard another argument for prelacy drawn from the supposed expediency of the system. We are told that it is necessary to have exalted stations in the church, to serve as objects of ambition to the inferior clergy, and to afford ease and leisure for those who can defend by the press the doctrines of the Gospel. Were these high offices never bestowed except on account of piety and learning there might be some reason for this arrangement. But need I tell you that this is not the case ? Do we find Stackhouse, Simeon, John Newton, Thomas Scott, or Legh Richmond among the dignitaries of prelacy ? No : They were left in comparative obscurity. We hear the Church of England frequently and highly lauded for the works which she has contri- buted to our theological literature. We do not wish to deny that she has done good service to the cause ' Calvin's Institutes, Book iv, chap, iv, sect. 1, 2. DISCOURSE II. 107 of our common Christianity, and for that service we are grateful. But it must at the same time be observed that lier claims in this respect have been vastly overrated. Much of her theology is exceedingly unsound. For instance, Dr. Samuel Clarke, rector of St. James's, Westminster, by his writings in support of Arianisra inoculated the Protestants of Britain with that dangerous heresy. Warburton and Berkeley have been placed in the forefront of episcopal theology.^ Well had it been for the Christian world if the writings of the former never had been penned ; for his pro- ductions are distinguished alike by the unsoundness of their principles and the bitterness of their spirit. And what contribution has Berkeley made to immor- talise his name ? I know indeed of treatises com- paratively insignificant ; but who has heard of any important work that he has contributed to the tlieo- logy of Britain ? The writings of Magee, Paley, and others, of the English church, are pervaded with the leaven of Arminianism. If we want sound and substantial theology we go rather to presbyterian and puritan writers: to such men as Halyburton, Wither- spoon,Willison, Durham, Dickson, Doddridge, Howe, Owen, and many others. And what living author has contributed so much to the stock of theological litera- ture as the eloquent and illustrious Chalmers ? We see, my friends, what has been said in favour of prelacy. We have brought it to the law and to the testimony, and found it wanting. There is abun- dance of assertion, but great scarcity of evidence. A gorgeous fabric has been raised ; but it is a building of " hay and wood and stubble." Our ' Sermons on the Church, page HT. 108 PKESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. pure and scriptural church, founded on the Rock of Ages, yet stands secure. Her ramparts are un- scathed amidst the heaviest artillery of lordly prelacy. Still do 1 assert the principle with which I set out ; a principle which has been strengthened by the at- tempts made to overthrow it ; still do I assert that the pastors of the flock, who are to give themselves to the ministry of the word, and to conduct the ordi- nances of religion, are of one order, have no earthly superiors, and are equal in rank and power. When you perceive the slight foundation upon which prelacy is built, you will be surprised to hear of the exclusive spirit, and the uncharitable language of its votaries. It has often been asserted that Pres- byterians have no church : that all without the pale of the episcopal communion are left to the uncove- nanted mercies of God. How dreadful this sentence of excommunica- tion !^ How awful thus to pronounce the everlasting destiny of millions ! How awful to declare that the ministers of all those churches that have flourished in Geneva, France, Holland, America, England, Scotland, and in our own island, have had no commission to preach the word of God — that they have had no right to administer the sacraments of religion, and vet that these are neces- sary to salvation — that those heralds of the Gospel who, though they bowed not to the mitre, have carried the lamp of truth into the dark regions of idolatry, and left it burning there with a pure and steady flame — that all those faithful ministers and private Christians who have adorned the doctrine of ' See Note K. DISCOURSE ir. 109 God their Saviour, hundreds, thousands of whom have passed into the dark valley of the shadow of death fearing no evil, who in the last and trying hour have been cheered by the consolations of the Gospel and animated by the bright prospect of coming glory, whose dying lips have breathed the language of assured hope, " I know that my Redeemer liveth " — that all these were without the pale of the church, were destitute of covenanted grace and have gone to a hopeless and undone eternity — and this merely because they have not acknowledged the authority of Prelacy ! Who does not shudder at the thought ? Oh ! 'tis enough to freeze the blood at its very fountain and strike horror to the heart. Jt is right, however, distinctly to state, that I do not find these uncharitable sentiments in the Ser- mons to which I have referred, except in so far as they are implied in the exclusive application of the title, " The Church" to that comparatively small section of Christians to which the writer belongs.^ Presbyterians should learn, from a review of this subject, more ardent attachment to their principles. We have seen that our church rests upon the word of God, and we have no reason to be ashamed of it. It is too much the fashion of the present time to look upon religious principles as matters of indif- ference. But did our venerated fathers treat them thus ? Oh ! no. They watched the first inroads of superstition, and, though the arm of power was lifted up against them, they boldly stemmed the torrent, nor would they ever permit the foul inven- tions of man to stain the purity of the faith once ' See Note L. 110 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. delivered to the saints. Deeply affecting is the account of their sufferings. They have been driven from their families and their homes, because they would not bend their necks to human authority. They have worshipped the God of their fathers with no other covering than the canopy of heaven. The barren rocks and desert glens have echoed with the voice of praise. Their prayers have ascended, from the temple of nature, that their children might live in peace and enjoy the blessings of religious liberty. " They were troubled on every side, yet not dis- tressed, perplexed but not in despair, persecuted but not forsaken, cast down but not destroyed." Let imagination place us for a moment in one of their worshipping assemblies, and our hearts must be cold indeed if we do not feel for their sufferings and venerate their memories. It is the holy day which God himself hath blessed. They seek the seclusion of the mountain vale, that, beyond the reacli of earthly tyrants, they may pour out their prayers to the God of heaven. We see hastening to the ap- pointed spot, the young in the buoyancy of health and vigour, the old bending under the infirmities of years, and the fond mother, clasping the tender in- fant to her bosom, and braving the fury of the winter storm, that she too may join the sacred band. Now the assembled worshippers catch the spirit of the upper sanctuary, and in the notes of their favourite and heart-touching melodies they pour into the listening ear of their Father in heaven, the sorrows that oppress and the hopes that cheer them. The voice of age is raised in prayer, and childhood lisps the praises of its Creator. With holy reverence they read the DISCOURSE II. Ill book of life, and hear from God's ambassador the message of the Gospel. Obedient to the dying command of the Redeemer, they observe the solemn rite which he appointed the same night on which he was betrayed. Amidst the wildest of nature's scenery, they press to their lips the emblems of their Saviour's love, and from this world of sorrow their thoughts are wafted to " the rest that remaineth for the people of God." The shades of the sacred day appear closing in safety — the whole air is filled with devotion, tranquillity, and peace. When suddenly, from the distant hill, their watchmen give the sig- nal of alarm. In this dread moment there is pic- tured, upon many a countenance, that firmness and resignation which religion only can impart. Amidst the shriek of terror from the young and helpless, the tramp of an approaching multitude is heard — the minions of power are let loose — the weapons of war are turned on the defenceless worshippers, and the ground that but a moment before was hallowed by their prayers, is now — crimsoned with their blood. Oh ! how is it when we think of their devotion and their sufferings, that we can be careless of the bless- ings which they so dearly purchased ! Some may think it unnecessary and wrong that the presbyterian ministers of this city should bring be- fore their people the distinguishing principles of their church. But let it be remembered that these principles we hold sacred, because they are the principles of the Bible, — that they have been from time to time assailed, — that attempted refutations of them have been circu- lated among our people, — that, when set apart to the work of the ministry, we solemnly promised in the 112 PRESBYTERIANISM DFFENDED. presence of" God to "defend them to the best of our abiUties." Let these thmgs be remembered, and I am convinced that no right-minded EpiscopaUan will blame us for keeping at our posts and contending for the faith. Let it be remembered too, that pernicious doctrines have spread extensively in the Church of England, and that the great principles of the Refor- mation are novp openly called in question by profess- ing Protestants.^ But still it may be said, far better to have nothing but unity and peace. To secure these every sacrifice should be made. Had the per- sons who hold these views lived in the time of Scot- land's trials, how they would have complained of the intrepid Knox, the learned Melville, and the godly Rutherford, for the discussions which they excited ! Had they been contemporaries of Luther, and beheld his struggles for the removal of error, how they would have scowled upon him ! Had they lived, when our Lord travelled on the earth, ahouseless wanderer, they would have had no sympathy in his doings, they would have been quite dissatisfied with the controversies which he excited. His plain truths about the dig- nitaries of his day would quite have shocked their sensibilities. Had they been consulted, the money changers would never have been driven out of the temple, his faithful warnings never have been uttered. Unity and peace are indeed desirable, but only when they can be had without the sacrifice of principle. " The wisdom that is from above is first pure, and then peaceable." (James, iii, 17.) We cannot, we dare not compromise the truth. It is the command of Heaven, "Prove all things; hold fast that which ■ See Note M. DISCOURSE IT. 113 is good." (1 Thess. v, 21.) Sincere inquirers after truth may and should pursue it without aught of bitterness dweUing in their minds. Animosity and discord are not necessarily connected with discussions of this nature. But if they must be, better let them come than allow error to prevail. Let them come — as they may be succeeded by lasting purity, freedom, and peace. "Give me," said the eloquent Thomson, " give me the hurricane rather than the pestilence — give me the hurricane, with its thunder and its light- ning and its tempest — give me the hurricane, with its partial and temporary devastations, awful though they be — give me the hurricane with its purifying, health- ful, salutary effects — give me that hurricane infinitely rather than the noisome pestilence, whose path is never crossed, whose silence is never disturbed, whose pro- gress is never arrested by one sweeping blast from the heavens, which walks peacefully and silently through the length and breadth of the land, breathing- poison into every heart — carrying havoc into every home — enervating all that is strong — defacing all that is beautiful — and casting its blight over the fairest and happiest scenes of human life, and which from day to day and from year to year, with intolerant and interminable malignity, sends its thousands and tens of tho-usands of hapless victims into the ever- yawning but never-satisfied grave." ^ To conclude, let us reflect with gratitude on the religious blessings and privileges which we enjoy. Our lot has been cast in a land where we are per- mitted to worship God according to the dictates of our conscience, without any to make us afraid. Our ' See Note N. 114 PRESBYTER! ANISM DEFENDED. beloved Zion, though long enveloped in the flames of persecution, is unconsumed. She has emerged from the fiery trials of affliction in her native loveli- ness and purity, and " built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone," she stands, amidst prevailing error, "the pillar and the ground of truth." But let us bear in mind that it is not alone the purity of our church that can procure us salvation. The greater our privileges, the greater our responsibility. " Unto whomsoever much is given, of them the more will be required." How awful to think that we may belong to a pure and scriptural church, and yet be outcasts from the family of God, that the Gospel may shine in all its brightness and glory around us, wheu not one ray to cheer or to comfort may have penetrated the heart. How awful to think that the possession of religious privileges may tend only to lull the conscience into a deeper insensibility, and whisper, " Peace, peace, where there is no peace." Solemnly, I entreat you to examine your hearts and lives, to enquire how your account for eternity now stands. Have you been humbled under a sense of your sins ? Have you fled for refuge to lay hold on the hope set before you in the Gospel? Is Christ all your salvation and all your desire ? Are you living a life of prayer, a life of devotedness to the service of God ? Are you bringing forth the fruits of holiness in your walk and conversation ? Oh ! see that you be worthy of the profession that you have made, worthy of those devoted men who preserved by their blood the privileges that you enjoy, worthy of your once crucified, but now exalted Saviour. Live DISCOURSE II. 115 as becomes candidates for immortality and expectants of eternal glory. Then will our church be adorned with the beauty of holiness — then may we trust that God will hear the prayers that have been offered in her behalf by many a dying martyr on many a bloody scaffold — then will she appear, " fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners." " Now unto Him that is able to keep you from falling, and to present you faultless before the presence of his glory with exceeding joy, to the only wise God our Saviour, be glory and majesty, dominion and power, both now and ever. Amen." NOTES TO DISCOURSE IL Note, A, p. 81. It was necessary to show that the apostolic office was extra- ordinary, and ceased with the lives of those who held it, as epis- copal writers generally maintain the opposite view. For instance, Dr. Hickes, a distinguished scholar of the Church of England, thus speaks : " Bishops are appointed to succeed the apostles, and like them to stand in Christ's place." I hold that there are none at the present day entitled to be called apostles ; but if there be, they are not the prelates of England, but the missionaries who preach the Gospel to the heathen, who labour in word and doc- trine, and resolve to " spend and be spent " in their Master's ser- vice. But where have modern bishops undertaken this labour ? " A few persons," says a late writer, "have gone out from the Church of England, as bishops among the heathen, as the bishop of Calcutta. However, they are not strictly apostolical bishops, they generally go where the laborious missionary has Jirsl laid the foundation. There perhaps has not been a single instance for the last thousand years of a bishop deserving the title of apostolical bishop by going to preach Christ where he was not named." When arguing with Presbyterians, the supporters of English prelacy are accustomed, like Dr. Hickes, to insist upon the perpetuity of the apostolic office ; but when they would over- turn the pretensions of the papal hierarchy they adopt our line of argument, and hold that the apostles were extraordinary officers, who have no successors in the church. The learned Dr. Bar- row in his " Treatise against the Papal Supremacy," published by Archbishop Tillotson with a high encomium, felt himself obliged to destroy the foundation of prelacy by showing " That the apostolical office, as such, was personal and temporary, 118 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. and therefore, according to its nature and design, not succes- sive or communicable to others in perpetual descendance from them. That it was as such in all respects extraordinary, de- signed for especial purposes, discharged by special aids, endowed with special privileges, as was needful for the propagation of Christianity and founding of churches." — Barrow's Works, vol. 1, page 77. Note B, p. 86. The terms. Episcopacy and Episcopalian, are frequently used in this discourse. These are more applicable to the Presbyterian church than to any other, as, in accordance with Scripture, it recognises each minister as bishop or overseer of his own flock, but they are at present employed in the common acceptation to mean the church government by primates, archbishops, bishops, archdeacons, deans, prebends, and the various other officers con- nected with the hierarchy. This system is more properly called prelacy. Note C, p. 87. The most strenuous defenders of episcopacy are forced to admit the fact that the ordinary ministers of the word were called by the same names in Scripture. The author of the " Sermons on the Church " acknowledges (page 179) that "the terms pres- byter and bishop are indiscriminately applied to the same indivi- duals," but he tries to evade the just and natural conclusion de- ducible from this fact, that these officers were the same. I am at a loss to discover any fallacy in the inference we have drawn. Can it be thought that the sacred writers meant any thing different from what their words express ? They use the same terms as applicable to the same persons, what right then has this author to make any difference between them ? How does he venture to assert that the inspired writers have so confounded the names of ministers that his superior discrimination is necessary to set them right ? Having acknowledged that they were originally the same, the NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 119 author proceeds to show how the subsequent alterations took place. It appears from his account that the change was gradual. Like other corruptions of the church, prelacy was silently intro- duced. It advanced by degrees, until at last, its yoke becoming intolerable, it was cast off by almost all the churches of the Refor- mation. Prelacy did not at once mount the throne of spiritual despotism in the church, and exhibit all its earthliness and pride. It did not at once burst upon the world in the aspect of intolerance which it afterwards assumed in the ages of papal tyranny. Its introduction was silent — its progress gradual. Had the author of the " Sermons on the Church " borne in mind this fact, he needed not have felt the wonder which he ex- presses in page 192, that Christians were so long " silent on the subject of this innovation upon the purity of the system provided by the Saviour." But it is further argued: "We rely upon facts and things — not upon changing appellations. The fact is, that the New Tes- tament and all antiquity speaks of, recognises, defines the duties of a certain officer in the church, be his title what it may, who was superior to his brethren in the ministry, to whom apper- tained offices which they could not discharge." (page 183.) Where is the authority in Scripture for this assertion ? We might surely expect that a Protestant minister, solemnly proclaiming that he had the New Testament on his side, would condescend to furnish one text upon the subject. But no. Instead of this we are referred, first to Ambrose, a writer of the fourth century, and then to others whose testimony cannot be admitted upon a point that the Scriptures only can decide. He has quoted the Fathers let us go to the New Testament and examine what it says regarding ministers of the Gospel. Scripture evidence on this point is thus well and briefly stated by Powell on Apostolical Succession. I. The word Bishop, scr/o-xo^ro;, is never used in the A^ew Tes- tament to signify the office of oversight over ministers but only over the FLOCK of Christ. Acts, xx, 28; 1 Pet. v, 2, .3. II. Bishops and Presbyters have the same qualifications. Titus, i, 5—7; 1 Tim. iii, 1, 2, &c. ; Acts, xx, 17, 28. III. Bishops and Presbyters have the same ordination. Acts, XX, 17, 28; Tit. i, 5—7. 120 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. IV. Bishops and Presbyters have the same duties. 1 Tim. iii, 2, 4, 5 ; V, 17, togetlier with proofs as above. V. Eishops and Presbyters have the savie power and authority. In the above passages no distinction is made, neither is there any in the New Testament, at least '\n favour of bishops. VI. Presbyters and bishops have the same names promis- cuously, as implying the same office. That the names are used indiscriminately is not denied. These things are surely enough to prove their identity, or at least that bishops were not superior to Presbyters, But we go farther : — VII. Presbyters only are expressly said to ordain : " Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery." Tim. iv, 14. VIII. The apostles sometimes call themselves Presbyters, but never Bishops. IX. Presbyters are mentioned as joining the apostles in the council at Jerusalem, but no express mention is made of bishops. Acts, XV, 2, 4, 6, 22, 23. X. The collections for the poor at Jerusalem are to be sent to the Presbyters, and no mention is made of Bishops. Acts, xi, 30. XI. It is well known that each church containing the congre- gation of a city and its suburbs, was, in the apostles' time, the whole diocese. It was never called Diocese by the earliest Chris- tian writers; the term Parish was the only appellation. Now Presbyters are the only ministers expressly mentioned as having the oversight and government of the churches planted by Paul and Barnabas : Acts, xiv, 23, " And when they had ordained them elders (presbyters) in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord on whom they be- lieved." If any are yet disposed to say, in the face of all this evi- dence, that the offices of bishop and presbyter were diflferent in the primitive church, let me submit to them another con- sideration. The apostles were accustomed to give very minute directions to those persons whom they addressed. They salute individual ministers and private Christians, both men and women, by name, but they never say one syllable regard- ing a higher grade of ministers. They give frequent and exact directions respecting the duties of presbyters, and deacons, NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 121 but they never speak of duties to be attended to by dignitaries superior to them. If, as we are told, the offices were different, we might surely have expected to find a class of particular in- structions suited to their respective ranks and duties. If to the prelate alone belongs the power of ordination and government, how can he be addressed respecting his peculiar duties in common with persons who have no such power ? Would it be rational to suppose that the chief magistrate of our city should have no other instructions given him than those addressed to his constables? Might we not have expected that the apostles, when addressing any of the churches, would have paid the first and greatest atten- tion to that order appointed to succeed them, that order without which we are told that the Christian church can have neither form nor government nor ministry nor sacraments, no nor even existence? ' It is impossible to believe that this order should first be instituted by the apostles, and then be passed over with marked neglect when they were writing to the churches, and at the very time wlien their inferiors were specially named. How then are we to remove this difficulty ? The simple way of removing it is this. No reference is made to bishops as superior to presbyters, because there were no such bishops in existence. We still assert then, that the change of names proves a change of tilings. At what time after the completion of the sacred volume this may have happened does not affect the argument at all. If it could be proved that the change took place twenty years after the canon of Scripture was closed, or twenty hours after the death of the apostles, it would prove nothing. It is of no consequence how the terms Bishop or Presbyter were used in after times. We abide by the New Testament. There, beyond all controversy, they signify one and the same order of rulers, and we therefore insist that the same terms ought to mean the same things that the apostles meant by them. The after change of application in the scriptural titles on which Episcopalians so much depend, proves a change from the original system of the church. The earlier they can show this to have taken place, the earlier do they prove the introduction of a system that had no authority from the word of God. 1 " No Bishop, no Church," is a current maxim among the adherents of Prelacy. F 122 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. Note D, p. 89. This argument might be considerably expanded by reference to the constitution of other churches in the Apostolic age. The early churches of Jerusalem, Corinth, and Rome, were undoubt- edly constituted on the Scriptural principle, each having a number of rulers, equal in rank and power. The system of government that prevailed among them aflFords not the slightest justification for the assumption of prelatical authority, and still less for that to which it led, the usurpation of the Pope of Rome. Note E, p. 92. The principal reformers and most eminent divines of the Church of England were clearly of opinion that bishops and priests were not two things, but one office, in the beginning of Christ's religion. Abundant evidence of their views regarding the Christian ministry may be found in Neal's History of the Puritans, vol. i ; M'Crie's Life of Knox, vol. i, p. 386, ith edi- tion ; and also in the second volume of the works of the Rev, Joseph Boyse. A few passages are quoted from the substantia' writings of the last named author. After giving the recorded opinions of Cranmer, Alley, Pilkington, Jewel, Willet, and others, he proceeds -. " Bishop Morton, in his Apol. Cath. tells the Roman Catholics, ' that the power of order and jurisdiction which they ascribe to bishops doth, de jure divino, belong to other presbyters, and particularly that to ordain is their ancient right.' " Dr. Whitaker, that learned defender of the Protestant cause, making his remarks on St. Jerome's telling us, that " the difference between bishops and presbyters was brought in by men, long after the apostles, as a remedy against schism," ob- serves that " the remedy is almost worse than the malady, for it hcqat and brought in the pope, with his monarchy , into the church." —Whitaker de Eccl. Regim. Dr. Laurence Humphrey, and Dr. Holland, both of them professors at one of the English uni- versities, maintained the doctrine of the Scriptural bishop and presbyter being the same. The latter was so offended with Dr. NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 123 Laud for his asserting, in his disputation for his degrees, that ""episcopacy, as a distinct order from presbytery, was of divine and necessary right," that he told him "he was a schismatick, and went about to make a division between the English and other reformed churches." To these may be added the judgment of the learned archbishop Ussher, who took not episcopacy to be a distinct order from presbytery, but only a superiority of degree in the same order. These testimonies have been quoted for the benefit of unpre- judiced members of the Church of England who may peruse these pages. They will see that the Presbyterian doctrine of minis- terial equality is not only the doctrine of Scripture, but was held by the worthiest divines of their own church ; and I trust they will be convinced of the impropriety at the present day, of pour- ing contempt upon a system which the most learned and pious episcopalians have acknowledged to be founded upon the Word of God. The same sentiments were expressed by Luther, and were embodied in the standards of almost all the reformed churches on the continent. For instance, the French Protestants are presbyterians, and state the following as a leading article of their faith. "Nous croyons (Matt, xx, 26, 27) tous vrais Pasteurs, en quelque lieu qu'ils soient, avoir meme autorite et egale puis- sance sous un seul chef, seul souverain, et seul universel Eveque, Jesus Christ; et pour cette cause, que nulle Eglise ne doit pre- tendre aucune domination ou seigneurie sur I'autre." The declaration of the Helvetic churches is equally explicit. " La puissance des ministres est la meme ou egale. Tous les ministres ont re^u pour le fonds un meme pouvoir, ou une fonc- tion egale dans I'eglise. II est certain qu'au commencement les eveques et les pretres gouvernaient I'eglise en commun. Aucun d'eux ne se preferait a un autre; aucun ne s'arrogeait un pouvoir plus etendu, ni une domination sur les autres eveques ses colle- gues ; ils se souvenaient de ces paroles du Seigneur : " Que celui qui voudra etre le premier entre nous, soit votre serviteur;" Matt, xxi, 27,) ils se contenaient dans Thumilite, et s'aidaient mutuellement pour gouverner I'eglise." — Confession de Foi Hel- vetique, 121. The Synod of Dort, representing the Reformed Church of 124 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. Germany, adopted the confession of faith belonging to the Beigic church. The thirty-first article contains this statement: "As regards the ministers of the Divine word, they have every where the same power and authority." A note is appended to the " Sermons on the Church," headed " Modern Research," which is intended to show that the Syrian church of Malabar is at present prelatical in its government. The writer quotes from Dr. Buchanan's Christian Researches; but he has omitted to mention what is there stated respecting the previous history of these churches. About the beginning of the sixteenth century, " the Portuguese, on their arrival, were sur- prised to find upwards of a hundred Christian churches on the coast of Malabar. But when tiiey became acquainted with the purity and simplicity of their worship they were offended." In consequence of this, every art of persuasion and force was tried to bring these simple people to adopt the Romish system, and especially to acknowledge the authority of the Pope. These attempts appear to have been partially successful in corrupting tlieir worship and discipline. The Inquisition was established in their neighbourhood, and a Synod held, at which a Romish archbishop presided. One of the accusations brought, at this time, against the Syrian Christians was, "that they had no other orders or names of dignity in the church than priest and deacon." Dr. Buchanan visited these churches in 1806. He was anxious to effect a union between them and the Church of England, and for this purpose had an interview with some of the clergy. Of course, we might have expected that such a tempting offer would have been eagerly embraced, and that these poor and humble Christians would have rejoiced at the prospect of being united to a church, not only the richest in the world, but which boasts of apostolic ordination in all its purity. Let us mark the answer given to Dr. Buchanan's proposals. " The bishop's chaplains confessed to me that they had doubts as to English ordination. " The English," said they, "may be a warlike and great people; but their church, by your own account, is but of recent origin. Whence do you derive your ordination ?" " From Rome." " You derive it from a church which is our ancient enemy, and with which we would never unite." — Buchanan's Christian Re- I earches, p. 129. NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 125 Note F, p. 97. The following is the account of the historian Mosheim of the time and manner in which this argument was first used: "The Christian doctors had the good fortune to persuade the people that the ministers of the Christian church succeeded to the character, rights, and privileges of the Jewish priesthood; and this persuasion was a new source both of honours and profit to the sacred order. This notion was propagated with industry some time after the death of Adrian, when the second destruction of Jerusalem had extinguished among the Jews all hopes of seeing their government restored to its former lustre, and their country arising out of ruins. And, accordingly, the bishops considered themselves invested with a rank and character similar to those of the high priest among the Jews, while the presbyters repre- sented the priests, and the deacons the Levites. It is indeed, highly probable that they who f.rst introduced this absurd com- parison of offices, so entirely distinct, did it rather through igno- rance and error than through artifice or design. The notion, however, once introduced, produced its natural eflFects, and these effects were pernicious. The errors to which it gave rise were many, and one of its immediate consequences was, the establish- ment of a greater difference between the Christian pastors and their flock than the genius of the Gospel seems to admit." — Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, voi. i, p. 179- NoTE G, p. 99. The original word, K^ivm, employed by James in the council at Jerusalem, occurs in several other passages of the New Testa- ment, and its proper meaning may be ascertained by reference to a few of these. (Luke, vii, 4)3,) "Simonansweredandsaid, I suppose that he to whom he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged " (o^^m; ix^im;). Simon's judgment was certainly not an official sentence, it was only his own opinion. (John, vii, 24i,) " Judge not (M>i x^/vErt) according to the appearance, but judge 126 PRESBYTERTANISM DEFENDED. rigltteous judgment (K^/V/v K^ivan). (Acts, xiii, 46,) "Seeing ye judge yourselves (Kj/vste) unworthy." (2 Cor. v, 14,) "The love of Christ constrainethjus, because we thus judge" (K^viaura; In all these instances the same word is used as that employed by James, meaning evidently nothing more than what he intended to give, the expression of opinion, or the result of reflection. This view has been adopted by the present bishop of London, (Bloomfield,) who, in his Lectures on the Acts of the Apostles, page 154, speaks of the "proposition" made by James, and of tiie "requirements" as being "all the result of discussion and deliberation." I am happy to be able to add to the above the testimony of Mr. Boyd himself, who, in his sermon on the " Offices, Rites, and Ceremonies of the Church," (page 135,) informs us that " The apostles and elders came together to consider of the matter, and they issued this decree." In the " Sermons on the Church," page 54, it is said, " The manner in which this apostle is distinguished from other ministers in that metropolis in the narrative of Paul's interview, is utterly inexplicable upon any other ground than that of his being of superior station to them. " The day following Paul went in unto James, and all the elders were present." How does the simple fact of their calling at a certain brother's house prove that he was of " superior station "? Let me suppose a parallel case. A number of ministers from a distance meet in this city. The day following they call upon me. Who would dream from such a trivial circumstance that I possessed prelatical authority? The advocates of prelacy find it very difficult to prop up the episcopal throne when they have recourse to such an argument as this. Note H, p. 100. The postscripts are of no authority whatever. — Paul exhorted Timothy to " do the work of an evangelist," but it was not his pen, or that of any inspired writer, that styled Timothy and Titus bishops at the end of the epistles addressed to them. " The subscriptions annexed to the epistles," says Home, an episcopal writer, "are manifestly spurious***The subscription annexed to Mie first epistle to Timothy is evidently the production of a writer NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 127 of llie age of Constantine the Great, and could not have been written by the Apostle Paul ; for it states that epistle to have been written to Timothy, from Laodicea, the chief city of Phrygin Pacatiana; whereas the country of Phrygia was not divided into the two provinces of Phrygia Prima or Pacatiana, and Phrijyin Secunda, until the fourth century. According to Dr, Mill, the subscriptions were added by Euthalius, bishop of Sulca, in Egypt, who published an edition of the Acts, Epistles of St. Paul, and of the epistles, about the middle of the fifth century. But, whoever was the author of the subscriptions, it is evident that he was either grossly ignorant, or grossly inattentive." — Home's Introduction to the Study of the Scriptures, vol. ii, page 155. Note I, p. 104. Driven from Scripture the advocates of episcopacy fly to the fathers for assistance. — When testimonies of antiquity are brought forward in support of prelacy, the same quotations are usually made by episcopal writers, totally regardless of the fact that they have been again and again refuted. Mr. Rhind has attacked the presbyterian system, and quoted the passages from Irenseus, Tertullian, and Clemens Romanus, which we tiiid in the " Ser- mons on the Church," pp. 68, 69, 186. He was most ably an- swered by Anderson, minister at Dunbarton, who thus notices his testimony from Irenaeus. " We can enumerate those who were instituted bishops in the several churches by the apostles, even to ourselves. The apos- tolic state of the church is known through all the world by the succession of bishops, to whom the apostles gave power to rule and govern the church." — Lib. iii, c. 3. It is answered, first, supposing Irenaeus were against us, yet his judgment about traditions is of no great weight. For in the same chapter which has been cited, he asserts not only the pre- eminence of the Church of Rome, but the necessary dependence of all other churches upon her. And elsewhere he asserts Christ to have been past the fortieth and near the fiftieth year of his age when he suffered, and he is very angry with those who think otherwise. When he stumbled so prodigiously in so plain a case, pray what credit is to be given to his traditions about the succes- ]28 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. sioii of bishops, which is generally acknowledged by Episcopa- lians themselves to be a most perplexed and uncertain piece of history ? Again, there is no need either of declining Irenaeus' testimony or refining upon his words. For that the apostles appointed bishops in the churches every Presbyterian owns. But that they appointed prelates or diocesan bishops no Episcopalian has yet proved. If they will still go on to expose themselves by insisting upon the word bishop, nobody can help it. Presbyterians must take care they be not imposed upon by mere sounds. It is certain that Ireneeus took bishop and presbyter for one and the same officer. " Wherefore," saith he, " it behoves us to hearken to those who are presbyters, in the church, to those who, as we have shown, have their succession from the apostles; who, together with the succession of the episcopate, have also received the gift of the truth, according to the pleasure of the Father." Thus, Irenseus — " And what strange confusion," says Stillingfleet, " must this cause in any one's mind that seeks for a succession of episcopal power over presbyters from the apostles by the testimony of Irenjeus, when he so plainly attri- butes both the succession to presbyters and the episcopacy too, which he speaks of." Anderson notices, in a manner equally satisfactory, the quota- tion from Tertullian, and concludes — " I have now gone through his antiquity, and hope that it is plain, that when he was entering upon it he might have spared his harangue, wherein he would persuade Presbyterians to appeal to the Fathers ; for I can hardly believe he has gained much by referring to these judges. And if his own conscience be satisfied with these testimonies he has produced, I must needs say it is no ill-natured one." It would be no difficult task to show that the testimony of the Fathers, so far from being opposed to the presbyterian system, is decidedly in its favour. I shall content myself with quoting the opinion of the learned bishop Stillingfleet upon this point. "I believe upon the strictest inquiry, Medina's judgment will prove true, that Nieron, Austin, Ambrose, Sedulius, Primasius, Chrysostom, Tiieodoret, Theophylact, were all of the same judg- ment as to the identity of both name and order of bishops and presbyters in the primitive ctiurch." NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 129 Note J, p. 105. It is pleasing to know, that there never was a period in the history of the church when all had apostatised from the purity of the faith. Even in the darkest ages, the purity and simplicity of apostolic times were preserved by some. " It is now generally admitted tiiat the primitive church of Ireland, though not free from error, differed most materially, and for a length of time, from that of Rome. The free and commanded use of the Scriptures, the inculcation of the doctrines of grace, and of the efficacy of the sacrifice and intercession of Christ, without any allusion to the mass, to transubstantiation, purgatory, human merit, or prayers for the dead — the diversity in the forms of celebrating Divine worship — the rejection of the papal supremacy — the mar- riage of the clergy — the Scriptural character of early bishops, each having the charge of only one parish, and being labourers in word and doctrine — the presbyterial order of the Culdees, and their singular piety and zeal — all their important points of doc- trine and discipline, which were maintained and practised in the ancient Irish church, clearly indicate its opposition to the papal system."' St. Patrick is said by Ussher to have instituted 365 bishoprics, which we must suppose to have been parochial charges, one or more bishops presiding in each congregation. The following ex- tract will show the extent of Irish bishoprics at the time to which it refers: "By a canon of a general council holden by Paparo at Kells, A.D. 1152, the village bishoprics of that diocese were converted into rural deaneries ; and this was adopted and enforced by a Synod holden A.D. 1216, by Simon, bishop of Meath. Thus Athenry, Clonard, Kells, Slane, Screen, and Dimshaghlin, became rural deaneries from village bishoprics." — Dr. Mason's Catholic Religion of St. Patrick and St. Columbkill, p. 17, note. Note K, p. 108. How dreadful this sentence of excommunication ! — It is neces- 1 The above is an extract from the valuable History of the Presbyterian Church iu Ireland, vol. i, by Dr. Reid, professor of ecclesiastical history for the Synod of Ulster. F 2 130 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. sary, though painful, to quote some of the uncharitable expressions of prelatists respecting those not belonging to their communion, expressions which stand out in broad and striking contrast with the sentiments of the early reformers in the Church of England. "The devout participation of the holy eucharist will appear indispensably necessary to salvation. None can possess autho- rity to administer the sacraments but those who received a com- mission from the bishops of the church. It must be essential, therefore, to the efficacy of the Lord's Supper, that it be admini- stered by those who have received lawful authority." — Hobart's Companion to the Altar. Bishop Skinner has asserted that " no scheme of ecclesiastical polity can conduct Christians to salva- tion but diocesan episcopacy." The following declarations are taken from among many others of a similar kind from a " Trea- tise on the Church," published in Belfast in 1813, by Edward Barvvick, of Trinity College, Dublin. " Christ and his holy apostles instituted but one form of church government and com- munion, and confined the covenanted means of salvation to the living members of this one communion, and to none other." — Preface, xv. " Without an episcopal commission the word cannot be preached nor the sacraments administered with any effect or validity. We can no more lay aside episcopacy, and yet con- tinue the Christian priesthood, than we can alter the terms of salvation and yet be in covenant with God." — Page 85. " The promises of the Gospel are exclusively directed to the faithful, the obedient, and the charitable members of Christ's one apostolic church, and those who lightly separate themselves from the church, and yet hope for salvation, must hope without promise and without Scripture." — Page 180. Dr. Hook, the present Vi- car of Leeds, author of the sermon on " Hear the Church," preached before Her Majesty in June last, states the following in one of his discourses : " You will observe how important all this is which I have now laid down. Unless Christ be spiritually present with the ministers of religion in their services, those services will be vain. But the only administrations to which he has promised his presence is to those of the bishops who are suc- cessors of the first commissioned apostles and the other clergy acting under their sanction and by their authority." NOTES TO DISCOURSE II, 131 But it may be said that the opinions of a few bigotted church- men should not be charged upon the body to which they belong. I am well convinced that many pious episcopalians disapprove of such sentiments and language, but it is to be lamented that the canons of their church breathe mucli of the same spirit. For instance, the fifth canon of the Church in Ireland stands thus : " Whosoever shall separate themselves from the communion of saints, as it is approved by the apostles' rules in the Church of Ireland, and combine themselves together in a new brotherhood, accounting the Christians who are conformable to the doctrine, government, rites, and ceremonies of the Church of Ireland, to be profane and unmeet for him to join with in Christian profession; or shall affirm and maintain, that there are within this realm other meetings, assemblies, or congregations than such as by the laws of this land are held and allowed, which may rightly challenge to themselves the name of true and lawful churches, let him be EXCOMMUNICATED, and not restored until he repent and publicly revoke his error." It is consolatory for Presbyterians to turn from these fearful denunciations of fallible men to the word of God, and to be as- sured by Him who will be their judge, that ''the curse causeless xhall not come." — Prov. xxvi, 2. Note L, p. 109. Exclusive application of the title the Church. — The very title •" Sermons on the Church " savours of great illiberality. Does the author intend to intimate, as his words would lead us to sup- pose, that his is the onli/ church ? This haughty assumption is not uncommon among episcopalian writers. We have " Essays on the Church, " to wltich Mr. Boyd acknowledges himself in- debted. And a work has lately issued from the press by Bishop Russell, entitled " The History of the Church in Scotland," by which he means the small body of episcopal dissenters, and inti- mates, what others have roundly asserted, that the Established Church of that kingdom should not be recognised as a church of Christ at all. How much does this resemble the spirit and con - duct of him of whom the apostle John complains, "who loveth to have the preiirainence, prating against us with malicious words, 132 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. and not content therewith, neither doth he himself receive the brethren, and forbiddeth them that would, and casteth them out of the church."— 3 John, 9, 10. Note M, p. 112. Pernicious Doctrines have spread extensively in the Church of England. — An interestingarticle upon this subject appeared in the February number of the Edinburgh Christian Instructor, one of the best religious periodicals of the day. After stating the well-known fact, that in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, Roman Catholic priests took orders in the Church of England for the purpose of under- mining the Protestant faith, the writer traces through the several succeeding reigns a continual leaven of Popery from the first down to the present day. The principles of the Roman Catholic sys- tem are now openly taught in the colleges of the English church. With the doctrines of that system the minds of its future mini- sters are being deeply imbued, and this not by stealth, but openly, and by the professors upon whose instructions they are required to attend. This party, which of late has shown itself more prominently in the Churchof England, meditates a change in the constitution, rites, and liturgy of the church, in order to bring it nearer to what they themselves call their " sister" of Rome. That this is their object they glory in asserting, " So successful has been this new col- lege " de propaganda" that, at this moment, they possess an influence which is all but sovereign in the church; and nothing, we are verily persuaded, prevents their acting upon their princi- ples out and out, but a salutary fear of the Church of Scotland, of the English dissenters, and of the spirit of the age." ' The Rev. James Graham, curate of the cathedral, London- derry, has faithfully recorded his views in the Deny Sentinel, October, 1838, The following passages are extracted from his letter: — "This new school of theologians are evidently dissatis- fied with the Church of England as she now stands, on the ground that she is " too Protestant," to use a phrase of their own, and they seek for a return to principles and practices from which at the time of the Reformation our ancestors deemed it expedient to 1 See Edinburgh Christian Instructor, February, 1839. NOTES TO DISCOURSE 11. 133 dissent." "They require us to receive not only views upon baptism, the reverse of our twenty-seventh article, but wish to return to exorcisms, by which the Christian priesthood are to ex- pel the devil at baptism, besides those unsound sentiments upon tradition, and the eucharist, and an approval of prayers for the dead. They deplore the loss of the Romish ritual, and entertain the question whether it could not be safely restored." " These are views of the ' Tracts for the Times,' " Mr. Graham adds, "which I can assure you I have not gathered either from the reports of prejudiced persons, or from any garbled or unfair quotations. I have known the books themselves, and I am per- suaded that their authors have very strong tendencies to Popery." After this statement, from an authority so respectable, every Pro- testant must feel that these doctrines are pernicious. But living as we do at a distance from the place where they are principally promulgated, it may be thought that the reports of their extent may have been exaggerated. I quote, therefore, from the London Correspondent of the Derry Sentinel, October, 1838 : — " Your excellent pastor, Mr. Graham, was far mistaken in supposing that the awful heresies of the Oxford Tract writers were not obtaining a footing in this country. The fact is they are every where creeping into houses, and into churches too." In the same article an extract is given from the seventy-fifth number of these " Tracts for the Times," which is recommended to the use of Protestants, " Holy Mary and all the saints intercede for us to the Lord that we may be worthy of his help and salvation who liveth and reigneth world witiiout end." The following testimony is quoted in order to prove the great prevalence of these errors in the Church of England. It is that of the Rev. Henry Allen, formerly curate of the Chapel of Ease, Londonderry, but, for some years back, vicar of St. Mafy le Wig- ford, Lincoln, a clergyman whose situation gives him every op- portunity of being accurately acquainted with the views of his brethren in the ministry. In a letter upon this subject, he quotes with approbation, a hymn, commencing — " Ave Maria, Mother blest;" he gives it as his opinion that the compilers of the Prayer Book maintained the efficacy of prayers for the dead, and declares tbat 134 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. " The writers of the Oxford tracts deserve any thing but the con- demnation of honest churchmen, and the greater number of the clergy with whom I am acquainted feel that they are zealous and able advocates of the truth." How strange the boast — " No peace with Rome ! " — Sermons on the Church, p. 35. Note N, p. 113. Presbyterians form the great majority of the Protestant popu- lation in the north of Ireland. In many districts there are more than ten Presbyterians for one Episcopalian. Yet, notwithstand- ing their present strength and growing importance, their principles are little understood. They are most erroneously supposed by some to be inimical to an established church, while by others they are represented as a body of Arians. It is right that their views upon such points should be made known to prevent their " good from being evil spoken of, " and to secure that charity and good will which might be lost through ignorance or misconcep- tion. These discourses, though more immediately called forth by the circumstances stated in the text, may be useful in these respects. The present statement of our views respecting the constitution of the Christian church may, it is true, excite some temporary dissatisfaction, but we trust that it will eventually be productive of permanent good. Truth will never suffer by the most rigid examination. The following are just observations of Mr. M'Neile, of Liverpool : — " Whatever may be said, and truly said, about the acrimonious spirit in which religious controversy is usually conducted, still it is a recognised fact, that the most prosperous times of the church have been times of controversy. In this deadening world, we have much more to fear, as Christians, from stagnation, than from storms. IndiflFerence, at heart, to the distinguishing peculiarities of vital truth, concealed beneath a su- perficial bustle about ou,twardly useful things, is far from a pros- perous state. The ease and harmony and seeming unanimity engendered by it, are fatal symptoms of a growing, though dis- claimed latitudinarianism. An intruder upon the fascinating spell is condemned as an enemy to peace. And since the bond of its union is not the depth of truth, the man who presses forward NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. 135 any deep truth, whatever his particular view of it may be, is deemed an intruder ; not in reference to ivhat he says, for that is not carefully examined, but in reference to his saying any thing which every body else does not say. It would not, indeed, sound well to bring the real accusation against him, to wit, that he is a searcher into more of the truth of God than is usually brought forward; and that he proclaims what he knows with the boldness of honest enthusiasm, uncaring consequences ; this were an hon- ourable charge ; it suits better the temper of the times to charge him with a breach of love, a want of brotherly kindness, a harsh Ishmaelitish spirit." — M'Neile's Lectures on the Jewish Na- tion — Preface vii. END OF NOTES TO DISCOURSE II. DISCOUESE III. BY THE REV. JAMES DENHAM, LONDONDERRY. The Officers and Government of the Presbyterian Church — Her Spiritual Independence — Presbyterians not Disloyal — The Principle of Church Establishments Asserted — Reasons why we cannot become Members of the English Church — Advantages of Presby- terianism. " For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given, and the government shall be upon his shoulder, and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The Mighty God, The Everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end ; upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom to order it and establish it with judgment and justice from henceforth even for ever." — Isaiah, ix, 6, 7. That this passage refers to Christ is manifest from the fact, that the first two verses of the chapter are quoted by Matthew, (iv, 14 — 16,) and the text by Luke, (i, 32, 33,) as applicable to Messiah. It is said that the government shall be upon his shoulder, probably alluding to the ancient custom of persons invested with power carrying the ensigns of it on their shoulders. Thus it is said, in Isa. xxii, 22, " And the key of the house of David will I lay upon his shoulder, so he shall open and none shall shut, and he shall shut and none shall open." It is further prophesied of Christ, that he should sit upon the throne of David and reign over his kingdom, to order it and to establish it for ever. This we are not to 138 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. understand literally of the material throne and terri- torial dominion of David, but of that spiritual king- dom typified by Israel, and over which Christ shall rule for ever. To him is given of the Father all authority and power in heaven and earth, for the establishment and defence of the church : " I have set ray king upon my holy hill of Zion." " God raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all prin- cipality and power and might and dominion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come, and hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be head over all things to the church." He is declared to be " a son over his own house" — "The head of the body, the church " — « Lord of hosts "— " Lord of all "— " King of kings": As such he "gave commandments to the apostles ;" and the church is called upon to " fulfill the laiv of Christ." She is required to meet in his name, to observe his ordinances, to submit to his ofiicers, ruling under him and according to his direc- tions, and to acknowledge no other spiritual head, or lord, or master, for one is her Master, even Christ. In addressing you this evening, I shall endeavour to show, — That Christ has instituted a peculiar form of government for his church, which is the Preshyte- rianform. This has been denied by two classes of writers. Those who hold the views of Erastus say, that it be- longs to the civil magistrate to fix what shall be the form of the church's government. Our Lord well knew that none of the kings of the earth would be converted to Christianity for the first 300 years, and DISCOURSE III. 139 according to this scheme, he must have designed that his church should have no government durinor that period. And if it could subsist so long under the trying circumstances in v?hich it was then placed without a government, we see no reason why it might not always do so. But this is a theory so unscrip- tural and so full of absurdity as might well stagger the most sycophantic flatterers of kings. Others say that Christ has given no definite form,^ and that his directions or hints on the subject are so loose and general, that men may adopt whatever form seems to them best. This is argued by a late writer on the ground that no mention is made in the New Testament of the ordination of many who preached the Gospel. He does not pretend to affirm that the sacred historian says they were not ordained, — but because their ordination is not fully recorded, he wisely concludes they received none. Hume in his history of England has occasion to speak of judges, of whose elevation to the bench he says nothing, are we therefore to conclude they were not regularly invested with their office ? Where there was such a vast number of believers, and of course very many preachers, an account of each ordination would have been a very useless repetition. It is enough that a few cases are fully recorded to establish and explain the appointment of Christ's officers. But even had we no positive statement, it is reasonable to suppose such officers would be appointed in the church. We know it is essential to the well-being of any society that it shall be under the control of laws ; but laws, however wise and excellent, are of no use unless ' See Note A. 140 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. officers are appointed to apply them. In the church persons are often found who, if left to themselves, and without being under control, would subvert all her order, destroy her peace, prevent her usefulness, injure her character, and dishonour her king. It is therefore indispensable that an authority be exercised by which the thoughtless shall be restrained, the weak strengthened, and the guilty either brought to repen- tance or expelled. And can we suppose that her Lord and Lawgiver should leave her destitute of what appears essential to her existence as a visible society ? It may be said. He has given laws to di- rect our conduct, and thus protects his church. But seeing he is himself gone into the heavens, where he shall remain till coming to judgment, we again ask. Of what avail those laws for this purpose when, without an executive, they are left to be obeyed or trampled on according to the caprice of every one ad- mitted into the society ? Under the Old Testament dispensation a govern- ment existed in the church, which guarded the ordi- nances of God and separated between the clean and the unclean; and if in the church there are still found unsound members, should there not be some means by which Christ's institutions shall be preserved from prostitution and contempt ? Hath God laid the government on Christ's shoulder to order and to establish his kingdom ? Then we cannot believe that he has left his church in utter disorder — that he has left it without a government. Why, even in the church above, where sin and selfishness are un- known, in his own person there is a government exer- cised, to which all bow, and under which all is bar- DISCOURSE III. 141 mony and peace. But how much more necessary must an efficient control be in the church on earth, where may be found in active operation the unsub- dued passions of false professors and the waywardness even of God's own children. Such control cannot now be exercised by Christ personally, since he is gone away ; and if it exist at all it must be under a regular fixed form of government, sustained by wise and active and intelligent and faithful officers ; men who shall affectionately but fearlessly use their autho- rity in the church to correct irregularities, remove scandals, and unite all the members in the bonds of a holy brotherhood. Yet in this I would not have your faith to stand in the wisdom of man, but rather in statements of the inspired record. I do not claim your obedience to such officers on the ground of its reasonableness and its necessity, but on the far higher ground that it is commanded you of Him who "holdeth the seven stars in his right hand." In 1 Cor. xii, 28, it is declared that " God hath set in the church ' governments.^ " In 2 Cor. x, 8, Paul speaks these words, " Our authority/ which the Lord hath given us ;" and this authority he desired the rulers of the church to exercise " in the name of the Lord Jesus" by casting out a wicked man from among them. In Acts, xx, 28, he desires the elders to " take heed of the flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers." From these passages we learn, that the rulers in the church do not exer- cise their authority because they deem government essential, but because God hath set them in the church. The Lord gave them their authority — the Holj/ Ghost made them overseers. Nor do the 142 PKESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. members obey because of any supposed reasonable- ness in the duty, but because they are commanded of God " to obey those who have the rule over them, and submit themselves, for they watch for their souls." And now, having cleared away objections to the existence of a government in the church, we come to the important question, By whom shall that govern- ment be exercised ? By Prelates ? You have had it demonstrated to you that no such class of officers exists in a scripturally constituted church. In such a church there are bishops or overseers or elders, all of whom bear rule, though some perform also the higher duty of preaching. Those who do not preach are usually distinguished by the the title of " Ruling JEldcrs." It is not unusual for those who dislike our form of church government to assert that " ruling elders " were first employed by Calvin, and have no authority in the word of God. How utterly ground- less is this assertion, I hope I shall be able to show you by a reference to the Bible. From the Old Testament we learn, that the Jews generally chose persons of prudence and experience to occupy places of authority. These, being usually advanced in years, were called elders ; and the title came gradually to be applied to a person filling an office, without reference to his age. In Egypt Moses called the elders together. In the wilderness a council of seventy elders was formed by the command of God to assist Moses. In every city elders were appointed — of whom some ruled in civil, and others in ecclesiastical matters. We often find the distinc- tion made between the judges and the elders, and DISCOURSE III. 143 still more accurately is this marked in the New Tes- tament. The elders of the Jewish church are dis- tinctly spoken of. Thus, in Mark, v, 22, it is said, " There cometh one of the rulers of the Synagogue." In Acts, xiii, 15, " The rulers of the Synagogue sent unto them." The Jews only went up three times each year to worship at the temple, so that the syna- gogues were their ordinary places of worship. In them the Scriptures were read and expounded each Sabbath, public prayer offered up, and provision made for taking care of the poor and maintaining discipline. There were never fewer than three elders who ruled in the synagogue ; but in large cities there were often a great many more. Now in speaking of the officers of the new dispensation, reference is often made to the temple and its priests and its ritual ; and it is attempted to be shown that the church of Christ should be modeled after that ritual. But in this attempt the fact is lost sight of, that the temple, and the temple service, were local and tem- porary and typical, and that the priesthood was utterly abolished by the death of Christ. The forms of the synagogue being more simple, and fitted, not for Judea alone, but for all nations and all times, it is evidently the model on which the Christian church is reared. But, as I may be considered partial in my views, allow me to quote to you what is said by Bishop Burnet.^ " In the synagogue, there was first one that was called the Bishop of the congregation ; next the three judges, called by the Greeks elders. These ordered and determined every thing that con- cerned the synagogue or the persons in it. Next to ' See Observations on the 1st and 2nd Canons. I4.i PRESBYTEUIANISM DEFENDED. them were the three deacons, whose charge was to gather the collections of the rich and distribute them to the poor Now the nature of Christian worship shows evidently that it came in the room of the synagogue, which was moral, and not of the temple worship, which was typical and ceremonial. Like- wise this parity of customs betwixt Jews and Chris- tians was such, that it made them be taken by the Romans and other observers for one sect of religion. And finally, any that will impartially read the New Testament will find that when the forms of govern- ment or worship are treated of, it is not done with such architectural exactness as was necessary if a new thing had been instituted, which we find practised by Moses. But the apostles rather speak as those who give rules for the ordering and directing of what was already in being. From all which it seems well grounded and rational to assume, that the first con- stitution of the Christian churches was taken from the model of the synagogue, in which the elders were separated for the discharge of their employments by an imposition of the hands, as all Jewish writers do clearly witness." Neander, at present professor in the university of Berlin, a most distinguished scholar, and who was himself a Jew, says, " The government of the early Christian church was directed by a spirit of love and counsel and prayer, and adds, — We may suppose that when any thing could be found in the way of church forms, consistent with this spirit, it would be appropriated by the Christian community. Now there happened to be in the Jewish synagogue a system of government of this nature, (not monarchical, DISCOURSE III. 145 but rather aristocratical) or a government of the most venerable and excellent. A council of elders con- ducted the affairs of that body. It seemed most natural that Christianity, developing itself from the Jewish religion, should take this form of govern- ment." Having thus seen the system of worship and disci- pline established in the Jewish churches, and esta- blished, we believe, (not as the writer of the Ser- mons on "The Church," would have us to suppose,) by the wisdom of self- constituted ceremony-makers, but under the immediate direction of some of those inspired men raised up by God to guide his people, and establish all things in Israel, we come to enquire whether, in the organization of Christian churches, the apostles took this as their model. In not a single instance in the New Testament are any of Christ's officers designated by the term used to signify a sacrificing priest. No altar is raised, no oblation is offered. This whole system has been abolished by its consummation in the sacrifice of our great High Priest. But we have very frequently mentioned as oflBcers of the church, bishops, or elders and deacons : " Acts, xiv, 23, They ordained them elders in every church." " Acts, xx, 17 : He sent to Ephesus and called the elders of the church." " James, v, 14: Is any sick among you, let him call for the elders of the church." " 1 Pet. v, 1 : The eZtferswhich are among youlexhort: Feed theflock."^ "Tit. i, 5: Ordain elders in every city." *'Heb. xiii, 17 : Obey them that have the rule over you." From ' The Greek, here translated " Feed," is in the New Testa- ment frequently rendered "Rule." See Matt, ii, 6; Rev. ii, 27— xii, 5— xix, 15. 146 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. these texts you learn that every church had more than one elder; that these several elders ruled over it; and to their authority the people were called to submit. That these should have been all preachers is an opinion highly improbable. Many of the congrega- tions must have been very small ; and while the har- vest of an unconverted world was great and the labourers few, more than one preacher would not be spared to a single church. But on this important point we are not left to conjectures. We have ex- press authority for a distinct class of officers who ruled in the church. In the 12th chapter of Romans the apostle compares the church to a human body regularly organised, having many members, and each having its own office for the good of the whole body. So in the church there are many members, and each is required faithfully to discharge the duty appointed him. We are told the minister must wait on his ministering, and " he that ruleth must do it with diligence." In 1 Cor. xii, 28, we have an enumeration of different officers in the church. God hath set some in the church — first, apostles — secondarily, prophets — thirdly, teachers — after that miracles, then gifts of healing, — hielps, — governments. By miracles, the apostle evidently means, workers of miracles, as he states in the 29th verse, and by tongues, those who speak with tongues ; and so by governments must we understand him to mean persons who exercise govern- ment. That these are not civil rulers is expressly stated, " God hath set in the church." In 1 Tim. v, 17, it is said, " Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, espe DISCOURSE III. 147 'dally they who labour in word and doctrine." An unprejudiced reader of the word of God, taking up this passage, would at once conclude, that when it was written there were in the church some officers who laboured in word and doctrine, that is m preach- ing, and others, whose duty it was to rule. This text is so plain and decisive on the point, that those who want the class of officers here spoken of, have put forth all their ingenuity to torture the passage, and silence its testimony in favour of ruling elders. A late episcopal writer,^ in endeavouring to overturn our bench of elders, explains it by saying, " That the elder or pastor who ruled or 'presided well,' (as it reads in the original,) that is, in all his offices both of ruling and preaching, was worthy of double honour, and especially if in preaching and teaching, which were the most important of them all, he were laborious or particularly dili- gent." But in Scripture we cannot find any per- mission given to preachers not to be laborious in their awfully important work ; and we cannot believe that the energetic and devoted Paul would make the un- reasonable demand on any people to give *' double honour" to men, who, though required by their Master to be instant in season and out of season, were yet idle drones. The interpretation must, we conceive, have sounded strangely in the ears of church dignitaries, for, if true, it most certainly places the curate above the prelate ; the inferior above those now esteemed the superior clergy. It proves that the present order of things in the Church of England is not the scriptural one, for it will not be denied that 'Ash. 148 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. they who labour most are paid and honoured least. But that the word especially, as placed in the text, marks not the degree of labour, but a distinction of officers, is evident, not merely from the structure of the sentence, but from many other passages where it is used. Thus, " if any man provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith." " There are many vain talkers, especially they of the circumcision." " Do good unto all men, but especially unto them who are of the household of faith." Now, in each of these, there are two classes of persons distinguished from each other by the word especially, — some who were of the household of faith, — some who were not, — some of the circumcision, some not, — so in the text under consideration some elders preached, others did not, — they only ruled. In support of this interpretation of the passage, allow me to quote to you the comment of Dr. Whi- taker, an episcopalian divine, and a Regius Professor of Theology in the University of Cambridge. Of whom Bishop Hall says, " No man ever saw him without reverence, or heard him without wonder." He writes thus — " By these words the apostle evi- dently distinguishes between the bishops and the inspectors of the church. If all who rule well are worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in word and doctrine, it is plain there were some who did not so labour; for if all had been of this descrip- tion, the meaning would have been absurd ; but the word especially points out a difference. If I should say that all who study well at the University are worthy of double honour, especially they who labour DISCOURSE III. 14-9 in the study of theology, I must either mean that all do not apply themselves to the study of theology, or I should speak nonsense. Wherefore, I confess that to be the most genuine sense, by which pastors and teachers are distinguished from those who only governed." In the Sermons on "The Church" the writer designates our ruling elders by the term " lay dele- gates." This means that they are of the class of the people ; that they do not bear office in the church, that our beloved Zion is under the government of those who have no authority from the word of God. Thus, whilst by one prelatist, speaking from the pulpit of the Derry cathedral, the ministers of our church are stript of their commission ; by another our elders are deprived of their authority. If they are called "/ay," because they are persons generally engaged in secular employments, then, I ask, did making tents strip Paul of his official character .'' Or, will managing glebes strip the rectors of the present day ? 1 say, certainly not, and neither will a similar employment strip the elders of their office. Nay, so far from depriving them of, or unfitting them for it, this rather increases their capability of ruling the church with wisdom and prudence. Ministers, on account of their particular situation, or retired course of life, are sometimes ignorant of the rules by which they should be guided in governing their peo- ple, and are ready to judge of men and things by the abstract notions they have gathered out of books, or from their own solitary musings, which do not always suit with the practical part of life. But ruling elders, being more conversant with the world, are better able 150 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. to judge what course should be pursued in difficult cases. If they are called " delegates" as implying, that being chosen of tbe people, their office is one of merely human devising, and their authority is derived only from the people ; — then, we say that the expres- sion gives a most unfair view of our doctrine on the subject of ruling elders ; believing, as we do, that they derive both their office and their authority from God. God bestows the gifts necessary to discharge the duty; through the channel of the people's election, and a regular ordination, he installs them in their office, and in his word invests them with authority. If God set them in the church, if the Holy Ghost make them overseers, if they rule in the Lord, then we know no higher authority which any pastor or prelate could possess. The elders guard the ordi- nances; expel the heretical and the unclean; deli- berate on all ecclesiastical matters ; and thus in the strictest sense fill a high and spiritual office in the church. They have as much authority over the people as any other bishop can have, in accordance with the laws of Christ; and are as truly ecclesiasti- cal officers as are the pastors and teachers. The term " lay delegates" is therefore inapplicable to them ; and whilst we, who preach the everlasting gospel, will not tamely submit to be publicly stripped by any prclatist of our own commission, we will be found equally ready to guard our eldership when a similar attempt is made to deprive them of theirs. Leaving now the high ground of Scripture testi- mony, let us see whether such a class of officers ex- isted in the early churches, and in those of later times, DISCOURSE III. 151 which were preserved from bowing under the usurpa- tion of the Romish hierarchy. Clemens Romanus, who Uved near the close of the first century, says to the Church of Corinth. " Let the flock of Christ enjoy peace, with the elders that are set over it."^ Origen, who lived a little more than 200 years after Christ, says, in his third book, against Celsus — " There are some rulers ap- pointed, whose duty it is to enquire concerning the manners and conversation of them who are admitted, that they may debar from the congregation such as commit filthiness." Ambrose, who lived in the 4th century, in his comment on 1 Tim., says — " The synagogue, and afterwards the church, had elders, without whose counsel nothing was done in the church, which, by what negligence it grew into disuse I know not, unless perhaps by the sloth, or rather bv the pride of the teachers, while they alone v.'ished to ap- pear something." It is generally supposed that the Syrian Christians settled in the east, within the first three centuries. When discovered by the Europeans, who first sailed round the cape of Good Hope, they had never heard of the Pope of Rome. Dr. Buchanan visited one of their churches, and found three presbyters or priests, two deacons and tliree elders^ acting as the office- bearers. Reinerius, who lived about 250 years .be- fore the Reformation, declares that some said the Waldenses had been since the year 314, and he adds, they are more pious than any other heretics, only they hate the Church of Rome. In their Confes- sion of Faith, as given by M. Gillies, one of their ^ Epistle i, oi. 152 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. ])astors, it is declared that — " It is necessary for the church to have pastors to preach God's word, to ad- minister the sacraments, and watch over the sheep of" Jesus Christ, — and also elders and deacons, accord- ing to the rules of good and holy church discipline, and the practice of the primitive church." Dr. Ranken, in his history of France, says of the Waldenses and Alhigenses — " The pastors were assisted in the inspection of the people's morals by elders set apart for that purpose." The Bohemian brethren, in the 16th century, published their plan of government — " To the elders authority is given, either alone or in connexion with the pastor, to ad- monish and rebuke those who transgress." This, they say, had been established among them for 200 years, and maintained through much persecution. Luther, in speaking of them, says, " Although these brethren do not excel us in purity of doctrine, yet, in the ordinary discipline of the church, which they use, and whereby they happily govern the churches, they go far beyond us, and are in this respect far more praiseworthy." At the time of the Reformation, the office of ruling elder was generally introduced by Lutherans as well as Calvinists, and is, in the present day, retained in almost all the European Protestant churches, except those of England. Were it need- ful, or would time permit, I might here adduce in favour of a ruling eldership the opinions of many of the reformers, and the most distinguished divines of the English and Independent churches; but I rather hasten on to the form of government under which they exercise their authority. DISCOURSE ni. 153 I need scarcely remind you, that as individuals and apart from each other, they can perform no judi- cial act. When called to exercise Discipline, they must do it in a regular and formal meeting of the eldership, assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus. Thus to the rulers in the church of Corinth it is commanded : " In the name of the Lord Jesus, when ye are gathered together." Our Lord said, (Matt. xviii, 18,) " Tell it to the church — verily I say unto you, whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven." The elders, with the pastor presiding as moderator, form a court, usually called, in the continental churches, " The Consistory" and by us " The Session ;" and in this, all matters affect- ing the spiritual interests of that particular church are to be dehberated on and decided. To them Christ has committed the key of discipline, and it is their province to receive members into connexion with the church, to exercise a spiritual superintendence over them, to mark any decided departure from the faith of the Gospel, or from the path of holiness, to cen- sure the delinquent, or to bring him to trial, if found glaringly guilty to suspend him from the communion of the church, and again, on a credible profession of repentance, to remit the sentence. And this we understand to be the meaning of the passage quoted above, where Christ gives authority to his church to retain and remit sins. Again, in Scripture, we often find a number of congregations united as one church, and representa- tives from each meeting in one common judicature. '1 here are many things of common interest to several congregations which should not be determined by g2 la-i I'llESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. any one of them ; and controversies may spring up between the rulers of a congregation, or between the rulers and members of a congregation, or between two congregations, which can only be decided by some superior authority. It is therefore necessary, that a court shall exist, formed of representatives from a convenient district, or from a convenient num- ber of churches, having power to arrange and regulate all matters brought by reference or appeal before it. From the vast numbers converted in Jerusalem, as stated in several places in the Acts, and in one place called " many myriads" there must have been in that city many congregations, yet all were called " The church at Jerusalem." The same remark applies to Corinth, and Ephesus, and Antioch. Now we know no reason, why all these congregations should be described as one church, except this, that they v/ere under the care of one presbytery. In the Church of Antioch there was a presbytery, the names of some of whose members are recorded in Acts, xiii, 1, and who had the honour of ordaining Paul and Barnabas. It is also stated that Timothy was ordained by the laying on of the hands of a ''^ presbytery.^' We thus learn that it is in accordance with scrip- ture example, that many congregations are placed under the care of a presbytery, whose duty it is to examine into the spiritual state of those congregations, provide preachers, when they are elected of the people set them apart to the work of the ministry by ordination, and afterwards encourage or rebuke, protect or depose them, as may be necessary. It i( .Mus to be the province of the presbytery also, to DISCOURSE III. 155 excommunicate members of the churches who shall grossly offend. The Church of Corinth must have consisted of a number of cono;reofations, for in it were very many believers, and it is expressly said, let your women keep silence in the churchES. An individual iiad brought scandal on the whole church there, by his iniquity, and the apostle (1 Cor. v,) directs the rulers what they should do : " In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one unto Satan." That this painful duty was performed by the presbytery is evident from 2 Cor. ii, 6, in which it is said, " This punishment was inflicted of many.^'' In our church, in addition to presbyteries, wo have a superior court of jurisdiction, called a synod, in which, the members of the several presbyteries meet, to consult for the common good, under the superintendence and control of Christ alone. I need not here pause to prove that there was a supreme court of Jewish law, called the Sanhedrim, consisting of seventy of the elders, which sat in Jerusalem, and in which, appeals from the inferior courts of the synagogues could be heard. In civil matters, every man is ready to acknowledge the necessity of courts of appeal, and if the interests of the church, and our religious rights are not less important than those which are merely civil, do they not demand a similar protection ? In Scripture the church is described as one body, one army, one kingdom, one house, one wife; she has one head, who is in heaven, one faith, one bap- tism, one system of laws and ordinances ; and is it 156 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. not most reasonable, must it not be to the edification of the whole body of Christ, to the well-being of the whole kingdom, to the strength and efficiency of the whole army, that it be not split up into little sections, each irresponsible for its acts, guided by its own views, and caring for its own interests ; but that it be under a general council or synod, composed of representatives from each of the parts, whereby the most complete provision is made for the safety, and the peace, and the perfection of the whole ; un- til the time, when her labours being ended and her conquests gained, she shall appear in heaven, under the immediate and personal control of Christ, as the church triumphant? But it may be asked, has her King given, in his word, any authority for such a council? Have we any example of it in apostolic times ? Any model by which it may be framed ? In reply, I say, take your bibles, and read attentively the 15th chapter of the Acts. A question arose in the church at Antioch, as to whether Christians were still bound under the yoke of the ceremonial law. The false teachers refused to submit to Paul and the presbytery, and inasmuch as the churches of Syria and Cilicia had also been harassed by them, and this was a question and a controversy likely to affect all the churches, it was resolved, that it should be referred for settlement to an assembly at Jerusalem, which would command universal respect, and from which there would be no appeal. From the 23rd verse we learn, that this assembly consisted of the " apostles and elders and brethren." By brethren, wc understand, not the private members DISCOURSE III. 15T of the Church of Jerusalem, but representatives from other churches. The names of very few who sat in the assembly are recorded, but of these, two are given in the 22nd verse, and in the 32nd we are expressly told, they were prophets or preachers.^ In this assembly the apostles did not act as inspired and extraordinary teachers, but simply as elders, and through the whole of this meeting, the other elders seem to have had equal authority with them. Elders were sent from Antioch, as well as apostles. They were sent to the other elders, as well as to the other apostles. In hearing and considering the case — writing the reply — blaming the false teachers — or- daining the decrees, the elders go on from point to point, exercising exactly the same authority as the apostles. This assembly acted in a deliberative capacity, and decided, not by direct inspiration, but by discus- sion of the subject. If the apostles had spoken as inspired, it would have been blasphemy for any to have disputed with them, but here there was " much disputing" (verse 7.) One member of the assembly at length proposed a resolution, which was unani- mously adopted as its decision on the question. This decision was not a canon, enacted by James as a prelate, or rather indeed as a pope ; nor an advice from the private members of the church in Jerusalem, but an authoritative decree, binding on all the churches. In the 16th chapter and 4th verse, it is said, " As they went through the cities, they de- livered them the decrees for to keep, which were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at ' See Note B. 158 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. Jerusalem, and so were the churches estabHshed in the faith." The Greek word here translated decree is in the New Testament invariably used to signify not a recommendation, but a law or statute, which persons were bound to obey. But it may be asked, why did the Head of the church not inspire one of his servants to declare at once His will in the matter? Why did he, by withholding his Spirit now, render it necessary for liis servants to travel up from distant places to discuss this subject? It was evidently for the purpose of setting an example for conducting ecclesiastical or synodical proceedings in all future ages. But it va^y be asked again, are synodical decrees to be received as infallible ? Certainly not. A synod being constituted of men, however wise and grave, yet of like passions with others, may greatly err, and therefore all their decrees are to be examined by the Law and Testimony. But when as in the Synod at Jerusalem, they examine a question by the light of Scripture, and in the decree which they enact, hear and obey the voice of Christ, speaking in his word, then should that decree be felt binding on the consciences of those over whom the court rules, inasmuch as Christ has said, whatever they thus bind on earth, He will bind in heaven. That power which church courts exercise, be it remembered, is not self-assumed — not self-created. It is derived immediately from Christ. He only has a right to make laws and appoint officers in His church; and the authority which they exert is therefore only minis- terial. That is, as His servants they declare and carry into execution those laws, and those only DISCOURSE III. 159 which are agreeable to the expressed will of their Master. Like judges on the bench, they have no power either to make new laws, or change the laws already laid down. The Bible is their great code, and whenever they depart from that, they have no claim on your obedience. The force which they employ is not carnal, but moral and spiritual; a force which exerts itself, not in controling the persons of men, not in inflicting bodily penalties, not in taking possession of their properties, not in giving them over to the civil power, that by its mighty arm they may be crushed ; but in warning them of their danger, in rebuking them for their folly, in censuring them for sin, and when they belie their profession, in excluding them from the fellowship of the church. Nor can they exercise even this power over any but those who have voluntarilyjoinedthe church, and have in doing so, pledged themselves to submit to its laws. True, indeed, when our Presbyterian courts are placed in contrast with those over which the prelates rule by delegates, usually called bishops' courts; courts in each of which only a single judge presides without a jury ; into which " for his soul's health, and for the lawful correction of his manners and ex- cesses," every man, of whatever sect, may be cited; in which, in its expensive litigation, he may be stripped of his last farthing ; by which he may be sent to the dungeon, and under the sentence of which he may stand denuded of all his civil rights:^ when I say our church courts stand in contrast with these church courts, they will appear humble and insignificant. Yet inasmuch as we believe, we may expect the presence ' See Note C. 160 PRESBYTERIANISxM DEFENDED. of Christ in our courts; His sanction for their pro- ceedings; his concurrence in their enactments, and his blesssing on their labours; and inasmuch as we desire through them only to address the consciences and advance the spiritual interests of the people committed to our care, we would deeply deplore any change which would destroy their simple and scrip- tural and spiritual character. Having thus stated the form of our government, allow me now to advert to some of its advantages. The first is, that by it the spiritual independence of the church is fully secured. Our fundamental principle is, that Christ is the alone Head of the church. Here we acknowledge no pope, we bow to no earthly potentate. When the despots of the Stuart race attempted to invade and usurp this royal prerogative of Messiah,^ our fathers, though most firmly attached to the sovereign, and most conscien- tiously and cheerfully obedient to him, in all civil matters, here took their stand ; and by their struggles in the Assembly, their wanderings on the mountains, their achievements in the battle field, and their suf- ferings at the stake, they have handed down to us, stained with the blood of many martyrs, this noble birthright of Presbyterians — the independence of our church. Nor are we their sons yet disposed to give it up. It is but a few years since, when the prime minister of the day sent to our Synod the threatening message, that should they proceed to elect a teacher of theology for their youth, they might calculate on the with- drawal of the largest part of their support, the royal ' See Note D. DISCOURSE IIT. 161 bounty. How was the threat received? Recol- lecting the deeds of their fathers, and like them, valuing the liberty wherewith Christ had made them free, at once they resolved, though it should involve them and their families in deepest penury, to fling the gift to the winds, and assert and act upon their church's independence. I know it is oft asserted that Presbyterianism fosters the spirit of disloyalty. A grosser calumny has never been invented. If indeed being loyal in spiritual things to Christ constitutes disloyalty in civil things to the magistrate, then we are and ever have been chargeable with this crime. But let it be remembered, we have high authority for the mani- festation of this spirit. Christ himself has said, *' One is your Master, even Christ." Call no man your father upon earth." In obedience to this command, when any civil ruler rises up in the churchy and would claim dominion over the consciences of her members, and assert the possession of a power which the King of kings has not given him, we hold ourselves obliged to protest and refuse obedience. We say to him, as was said to king Uzziah, vvhen he ventured to take a place and perform a duty in the church which God had not authorised, " It pertaineth not unto thee, Uzziah." And let me tell you not merely how we should speak, but how our fathers did speak to kings. " In the reign of James I, deputies from the ciiurch of Scotland were admitted to a private audience of the king. They had agreed that James Melville should be their spokesman, on account of the court- eousness of his address and the superior degree of 162 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. respect which his majesty liad uniformly expressed for him. But he had scarcely begun to speak when the king interrupted him, and in a tone of irritation, challenged a meeting held at Cupar as illegal and seditious, and accused him of infusing unreasonable and unfounded fears into the minds of the people. James Melville was preparing to reply in his mild manner, when his uncle (Andrew Melville) unable to restrain himself, or judging that the occasion called for a diflPerent style, stepped forward and addressed the king in the following strain, perhaps the most singular in point of freedom that ever saluted royal ears and that ever proceeded from the mouth of a loyal subject, who would have spilt the last drop of his blood in the defence of the person and honour of his prince: — " Sire, we will always humbly reverence your majesty in public; but since we have this occa- sion to be with your majesty in private, and since you are brought into extreme danger, both of your life and crown, and along with you the country and the church of God are like to go to wreck, for not telling you the truth, and giving you faithful counsel, we must discharge our duty, or else be traitors both to Christ and you. Therefore, sire, as diverse times before I have told you, so now again I must tell you, there are two kings and two kingdoms in Scotland — there is king James, the head of this commonwealth, and there is Christ Jesus, the King of the church, whose subject James the VI is, and of whose kingdom he is not a king, nor a lord, nor a head, but a member. Sire, those whom Christ has called, and commanded to watch over his church, have power and authority from Him to govern his spiritual kingdom, both DISCOURSE III. 163 jointly and severally ; the which no Christian king or prince should control or discharge, but fortify and assist; otherwise they are not faithful subjects of Christ and members of his church. We will yield to you your place, and give you all due obedience ; but again I say you are not the head of the church, you cannot give us that eternal life which we seek for even in this world, and you cannot deprive us of it." But while thus strongly asserting our church's claim to spiritual independence, it may be necessary, to pre- vent misconceptions, that I shall state somewhat accu- rately what we believe the civil rulers may do and what they may not do, in relation to ecclesiastical matters. As rulers are subjects to Christ, he being King of kings, so it is their duty to enact only such laws as are agreeable to the dictates of his statute book; to re- move from their constitution all impediments to the extension and establishment of his kingdom ; to encourage the promulgation of his truth; to protect, and when necessary, make provision for his ministers, that the healing and holy influence of his Gospel may reach to every corner of the land, and promote the well-being and happiness of the people. And here allow me to guard myself by saying, that I am not to be understood as entering on a defence of those abuses which may exist, but, as I believe, of an important and scriptural principle.^ The civil magistrate is the minister of God for good; and if a right-hearted man, his object will surely be to secure the greatest possible amount of good to the nation. Searching for the insti umenta- ' See Note E. 164 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. lity by which this may be accomphshed, he finds from the testimony of experience and the word of God, that there is no other machinery so mighty in work- ing out the enhghtenraent and the elevation, the peace and the prosperity of any people, as those moral means which true religion affords, and which, in these realms, God has placed within his reach. There are some who aver that kings, as such, have nothing to do with religion. Can you believe it ? That God has placed them in a most respon- sible position, given them a task to perform of im- mense magnitude and difficulty, revealed the means by the aid of which this work may be most easily and effectually performed, and then sternly say, these means, though they are incomparably the best, these means, though they alone will enable you effectually to accomplish your object, yet of them you shall not he permitted to make the slightest use. This would truly seem as if the design of God in investing magistrates with authority were not the prevention of moral disease, not the promotion of tranquillity and love and joy; but either to tax their ingenuity in working out almost impossibilities, or to afford them ample opportunity of wielding the sword of vengeance over untrained, and therefore guilty cul- prits. None except infidels will deny that the word of God is mighty and powerful, and sharper than any two-edged sword, none will deny that using that weapon of ethereal temper, ministers of the Gospel — humble, holy, self-denying, apostolic ministers, must exercise a powerful influence through the district around them, in bringing men into a cheerful obe- dience to rif^hteous law: in subduins; selfish and DISCOURSE III. 165 violent passions ; in establishing harmony, in inducing habits of persevering effort, and thus most effectually securing, so far as their labours extend, the best interests, the truest prosperity of the country. When these labours are performed, and when in conse- quence, all is quietness and order and security, rights respected, property safe, life sacred,^ owes not the country a debt to the labourers — a debt oi grati- tude — a debt oi justice? God has laid down in the New Testament the principle, that " the labourer is worthy of his hire ;" and there are only two things which can prevent the state from acting on the prin- ciple; either poverty^ which we rejoice she cannot plead, or dishonesty, which we hope she will never plead. So long as it is right to pay the police who apprehend, the jailer who restrains, the crown-lawyer who accuses, the judge who condemns, and the officer who executes; it cannot be wrong in the state to protect and support those ministers of Christ's church, who, by their humble efforts, to a very large amount prevent crime, and save the country from the loss, the enormous pecuniary expense, and the fearful misery attendant on it. And now, allow me, before quitting this point, to remind you of one or two of the promises which God has made to his church on this subject. In one place, referring tothe Gospel period, and speakingof Gentile kings, he says to the church, (Isa. Ix, 3 — 10), "Their kings shall minister unto thee" — and again, Isa. xlix, 22, 23, " I will lift up my hands to the Gentiles ; and kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and their queens thy nursing mothers" — and again, Isa. Ix, ' See Note F. 166 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. 16, " Thou sbalt suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings." If God have thus promised, on behalf of Christian kings, a nursing and protecting provision to the church, it must be right in them to fulfill the promise, and it cannot be wrong in the church to accept that fulfilment. After thus stating briefly what kings may do, in relation to ecclesiastical matters, allow me to state what they may not do. And here I shall give you the words of our Confession of Faith ; " The civil magistrate may not assume to himself the adminis- tration of the word and sacraments, or the power of the keys of the kingdom of heaven." The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of his church, hath therein appointed a government, in the hand of church officers, distinct from the civil magistrate.'" Whatever, then, the king may doj^r our church, he can do nothing, as king, within our church. " In things ecclesiastical, (says the illustrious and eloquent Chalmers,) loe decide all. Some of these things may be done wTong, still they are our majorities which do it. They are not, they cannot be forced upon us from without. We own no head of the church but the Lord Jesus Christ. Whatever is done ecclesi- astically is done by our ministers, acting in his name, and in perfect submission to his authority. The raacristrate may withdraw his protection, and our church cease to be established any longer, but in all the high matters of sacred and spiritual jurisdiction she would be the same as before. With or without an establishment, she, in these, is the unfettered mistress of her doings. The king by himself, or his representative, might be the spectator of our pro- DISCOURSE III. 167 ceedings ; but what Lord Chatham said of the poor man's house, is true in all its parts of the church to which I have the honour to belong. " In England every man's house is his castle, not that it is sur- rounded by walls and battlements; it may be a straw- built shed ; every wind of heaven may whistle round it ; every element of heaven may enter it ; but the king cannot, the king dare not." Influenced as we unanimously and decidedly are by such views, it should not excite surprise, that though branded pubhcly, and that within the last few weeks, with being " Schismatics of the worst class," because we enter not the pale of the English church, we yet regard but lightly the term of reproach which is put on us.^ Had we no other objection against entering that church, had she given up her prelates, and simpUfied her forms, till she stood forth in the garb of our scriptural Presbyterianism, still, as she has parted her liberty, submitted to be manacled and managed as a king or queen may command, and asserts not, even under the most grievous and galling oppression, her claims to independence, we cannot, we dare not unite with her. Many things about her we admire, — many of her devoted and zealous sons we love ; but when we see them writhing under the painful impression that Popery is again taking its seat in her high places ; when we see their ship steering in a wrong course, while they who have both tact and energy to guide her right are bolted down in the hold, under laws and canons, and those are at the helm in whom they themselves have no confidence, ' See Note G. 163 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. can they wonder that we say, we cannot enter that vessel with you? Within our own good ship, trimmed, and ready as she is for the coming storm, we think us safer, happier, freer, and shall not seek to change. But it may be necessary that I should state more at length the grounds of our objection against wiping off this awful charge of schism by entering the Eng- lish church. One ground of objection is the law by which the king or queen of England is made the visible head of the church. I am aware, it is said by some Episco- palians, that the queen has power, not over the spiri- tual, but only over the temporal or secular affairs of the church. I might refer here for proof of the untenableness of this defence to many acts of parlia- ment, and to the articles and canons of the church ;^ but to spare your time, I shall at present pass over these, and remind you of a few facts with which many of you are familiar. In the reign of Anne, the convocation of the clergy found Whiston guilty, as they say, of " several damnable and blasphemous assertions against the doctrine and worship of the ever-blessed Trinity." Before they could depose him, they must obtain the queen's authority. She seems not to have approved of their faithfulness, and quashed the proceedings.' This was one of the last acts of the Convocation, for, since that time, the clergy have never been allowed to hold an assembly. Every year it is opened, as if but to remind them of iheir slavery, and then imme- ' See Note H. - See Bishop Burnet's History of his Own Times, vol. iv, p. 369. DISCOURSE III. 169 diately dissolved. O ! for the church's sake, for the truth's sake, for Christ's sake, I would that a convo- cation were allowed to meet in London but for even a few years. I would that such men as Edward Nangle of Achill, fearless and faithful men — and I rejoice to say the church has many such — were per- mitted their rightful privilege of taking their place in a free assembly. Soon would they counter-work the abettors of Popery now within their church. Soon would they erect a battery, by which they would level to the dust, all the hopes of the pope, that England is soon again to be his own. Soon would they effect, what our fathers did, under somewhat similar cir- cumstances, in Scotland — a second Reformation. But of this there is no hope, for though allowed to meet, they could enact no decree without the queen's leave, and when decreed, they could not promulgate it without her authority.^ Sincerely and deeply do I grieve for this. But they may ask, what would you do, if placed in the same position ? It becomes me not to say what we would do, lest I should appear to boast, but I point to what our fathers did exactly 200 years ago, when, in defiance of the king's command, and with the prospect of dungeons and death before them, they sat in the Assembly of 1638, and asserted and achieved their church's independence. We have lately been invited to go round the bul warks of England's Zion.^ Our guide first deprecates with becoming warmth the impropriety of two Eng- lish Independents^ James and Palmer, (the latter of ' See Note I. ^ "Sermons on the Church," by A. Boyd, A.M. H 170 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. whom is long since dead,) pointing out what thej looked on, as cracks and crevices in the foundations of the fortress. A Belfast bookseller, fifteen years ago, tacked to a catechism by this Palmer, some state- ments, in which he introduced the name of the Synod of Ulster, without her authority, to puff it off, and put cash into his pocket, and now when it had passed away, our friend must raise it from the grave to give it another blow, and make it the occasion for waking up a painful controversy between us. However, as from his high watch-tower, he invites us to go with him round the citadel, we cannot well refuse. With a tact which we greatly admire, he points us to her gorgeous palaces, her noble domes, her gilded mina- rets, and thus would keep those who are within, and also allure us to enter. But ere we have had time to gaze on all this magnificence and beauty, another, and another, and another watchman peals a loud alarm from within. On the north side, the keeper would persuade us all is safe ; but from a tower a little farther south, men equally faithful, and equally lovers of their church, proclaim all is in danger. At a meeting of the clergy of the diocese of Ardagh, spe- cially convened on the 10th Dec, 1838, it was, among other things, unanimously resolved — "That we cannot but view with extreme sorrow the progress of certain opinions which have emanated from a few divines in Oxford, and which, it is to be feared, have found some advocates in this country also, tending to overthrow the fundamental grounds of the protest, in the I6th century, by the blessed reformers, against the apostacy of the Church of Rome." " That we have met as a diocese to record these DISCOURSE III. 171 our unanimous and deliberate opinions, in the hope that our brethren generally may see fit to adopt the same course, and endeavour, by sounding the alarm, under Divine blessing, to arrest the progress of an evil, which is threatening fatal consequences to the purity of our reformed faith, and wounding our church insidiously and dangerously in the house of her pro- fessed friends.^ And whence this cry of danger ? " Do traitors link in the Cliristian hold ?" They do ! — they do ! Ay, and they too hear the shout of treason raised against them, but they laugh the faithful men to scorn, knowing that long since their fathers surrendered the keys of the fortress to one without it, over whom they have now no control ; — knowinjT that these men's hands are tied behind their backs, and except they proclaim their danger, and pray to their God, they can do nothing. We would not fear for them, had these true soldiers of the cross the power to hunt from their gates, or fling from their ramparts, the treacherous foe, who, having gained admission, is now, they assert, endeavouring insidiously to undermine and destroy the very founda- tions of their church. A traitor may rise up in any church. There was one among the twelve apostles. But, a few years since, there were some Arians and Socinians, who, by concealing their opinions, had crept into our camp, and our congregations. Where was our safety then ? In this, that so soon as they avowed themselves, every man in our church had full opportunity of dragging them before our courts; and such in point of fact were the energetic measures ' St-c Note K. 172 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. employed against them, that they fled in ill sustained disguise, — calling themselves Remonstrants. The same power retained by our mother church through many bitter and bloody contendings with those rao- narchs who would usurp her keys also, and man her towers with apostates, has saved her oft in time of danger. Not even the high attainments — the noble bearing — the devoted piety — the splendid eloquence; — eloquence, by which, as if by magic, he kept oft enchained in the Scots' church, Regent's-square, the highest nobles and statesmen of the day, could save Edward Irving, when he betrayed the trust committed to him by the Church of Scotland. And should any man within her pale dare to broach Popery, would she be in danger ? Not the slightest ! Would her watchmen meet merely to proclaim their terror ? No ! In whatever part of the church he rise up to 'inculcate such doctrines, his presbytery would at once strip him of his office, and drive hira beyond the range of her spiritual territory, degraded and powerless ! Another ground of our objection against freeing ourselves of the charge of schism, by entering the English Church, is the power claimed and acted on by the government of the country; — a government composed of Infiels, Quakers^ Romanists, Indepen- dants, Prelatists, and Presbyterians, to determine how many bishops and rectors she should possess. If but a few years ago they cut off ten of her Irish bishops, I see no reason why, if they choose, they may not cut them all off.^ If they could re- move the clergy from a very large number of parishes, as was threatened by fierce debates on the subject, • See Note L. DISCOURSE III. 173 two years ago, in the House of Commons, I see no reason, if a few more enemies to religion find their way into parliament, why they may not order all the parish churches to be closed ; — a calamity alike to the Protestantism and the prosperity of this country ; — a calamity for which I would weep the bitterest tears, and against which, I most solemnly declare I would offer up to God my most earnest prayers. Did the parliament or the queen lay a finger on one of our congregations, and say, you shall have no pastor there, we would reply, we planted one there by the authority of Christ, without your leave, and we shall keep one there despite your command. Within the last year the spirit of Scotland's Kirk has been tested again on this very point. One of her parishes had become vacant ; the people, in ac- cordance with the freedom which they enjoy, chose a pastor. On certain grounds the civil power forbade his induction ; the case vvas referred to the Assem- bly ; they at once ordered the presbytery to go on with the ordination, and with the threat of fines and imprisonment held over them, they nobly did their duty, and again asserted their church's independence. The Rev. Mr. Guthrie, speaking on this case, in Edinburgh, said — " You may imprison our ministers, we will submit to that — you may spoil us of our goods, we will submit to that — you may aboHsh our esta- blishment if you can, and we will submit to that ; but we will not submit that you pulldown the banner that we have set up, with the freedom of the people emblazoned upon it. Talk of prisons to cowards and traitors ; talk of prisons to women and children ; talk of a prison to some hungry preacher, who seeks the 1 71 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. priest's office for a bit of bread ; but talk not of prisons to men, in whose veins flows the blood of the cove- nanters; — the heads of whose fathers rolled on the bloody scaffold, and bleached above your city gates for many a long year and day. We have taken a colour, we have blazoned on it, the rights of the Christian people^ we have nailed and clenched it to our very mast head, and there at this moment it flies ; and if God, in his providence, sees meet that the church — the Ark of Scotland — shall sink below the waters, then we shall go down before the storm, and down into the deep ; but the last thing that the world shall see of the Church of Scotland, shall be the blue banner of the covenant, as it dips into the wave." Another ground of our objection against freeing ourselves of the charge of schism, by entering the English church, is the absolute power vested in the queen or her minister to appoint the dignitaries of the church — the archbishops and bishops} These, again, appoint the inferior clergy ; now, suppose a time might come when the queen's adviser would be a man utterly unsound in the faith ; — one of those trained in the Jesuitism of the Oxford school, might we not most certainly expect to see each diocese, as it became vacant, filled up with Oxford men ; and these, again, as each parish required a new pastor, giving to it a priest in disguise. What is there improbable in this ? W^hat is there now to prevent it ? O ! if such vv^ere given, the people would not receive them. The people ! Why, the people are never consulted — they have no voice in the matter, but must just re- ' See Note M. DISCOURSE III. 175 'ceive without a question or a murmur the prelate and the priest thrust upon them. I grant that the prayers of her sainted ministers and her sainted members may prevent it ; but with the most melancholy feehngs I state it, that there is nothing in the constitution of the church to save her. From the fountainhead of her power there may an evil influence, a deadly virus, which none save God can neutralize, be sent down along the whole stream of her primates and prelates and pastors, till her people, drinking in the poison, may be prepared to go back into all the abominations of apostate Rome.^ Having before mentioned some of the advantages of our government, in which all, both ministers and members, partake indiscriminately, allow me now to return to this point, and to state some which the people possess ; and some which the rulers enjoy. The first great advantage to the people is, that they have the choice of their own rulers. No man, however wise, or learned, or influential, can usurp authority over them. If he come to sit officially in their church courts, it must be through the door of their own election. It has been shown before, in the course of these lectures, and I need not therefore pause to prove, that Christ has given the people this privilege. The right is an invaluable one, and in civil matters, now held through every land, where despotism tramples not under its iron heel all the best interests of man, to be the very keystone of the people's freedom. But it is said the election of officers in the Pres- byterian churches engenders a bitter spirit, and I See Note N. 176 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. creates much confusion. Now I readily grant that instances may be found in which people have abused their privilege; but I ask, may not every other blessing be abused ? Have we not all often abused many of the best blessings of God's providence and grace ? And if he were deny us these, lest wc should abuse them, I ask, what blessings would we retain ? Instances of abuse may be found, but I hesi- tate not to say, it is truly amazing that in the evange- lical Presbyterian churches of this country, consisting of about 500 congregations, and enjoying such perfect freedom, these instances should be so rare. Let me ask, would the people of Great Britain for such reasons submit to a deprivation of their right of electing persons to fill civil offices ? Suppose that some of the aristo- cracy of the land, looking down with pity on the people because of their ignorance, and therefore unfitness to choose their representatives; or, with lengthened visage and melancholy tone, deploring the disturbance and confusion which take place at our city and country elections, should propose to rid them of all this sad inconvenience which they suffer, by doing away with our free government, and establishing an oligarchy; assuring them that these few nobility will govern the country quite as well, if not much better, than the many whom they send forward to fill the commons' house of parliament. Suppose such a proposal made, the men who make it would be esteemed only fit for a lunatic asylum ; and if they dared attempt to effect it, the people of the land would arise, and send forth such a shout of vengeance as would terrify the boldest tyrant. And if we feel so sensitively regarding our civil liberty, why should we allow any oligarchy, no DISCOURSE III. 17T matter how talented and learned they may chance to be, to rob us of rights far more valuable ; rights and liberties, not merely connected with our own and our children's well-being in time, but through the endless ages of eternity ? On this subject the highly-gifted author of "The Natural History of Enthusiasm," himself a member of the English church, says, " The necessary restora- tion to her just prerogatives, the church will not ex- pect to receive, nor should she desire it, without at the same time admitting that due leaven of popular in- fluence, ivithout which, in fact, there cannot he vitality in any church; and apart from which church power will never be any thing else but a spiritual despo- tism.*' " Unless there were room to hope for a cor- rection and reform of political prelacy, an honest and modest Christian would take refuge in the substantial benefits of Presbyterianism.'^ But it is said we are Democrats. Our whole history belies the charge. Presbyterians have ever been the unflinching advocates of monarchy, united with a representative government. True they are often taunted with the death of Charles; but most unjustly. There was only one Presbyterian in the house of commons when he was condemned, and fifty-seven Presbyterian ministers in London pro- tested against the taking away of his life ; and bishop Burnet says, "The Presbyterians were much against it, and were every where fasting and praying for the king's preservation." The usurper who put him to death they unceasingly resisted, and were the first to make a vigorous and successful effort to bring back the second, and to them, mast ungrateful Charles. H 2 178 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. But it is said you are democrats in the govern- ment of the church. We scout the principle. We say it is a most absurd thing to bring the whole members of a community, wise and foolish, calm and passionate, orderly and disorderly, educated and ignorant, men and women, to enact laws, and exer- cise rule, and decide in difficulties, and perform all the functions of a regular and well-ordered government. On the contrary, our system most perfectly provides for what all free men in civilized society have long adopted as the basis of an efficient government — the selection of the wise and the good and the grave, by the voice of the people, to form their laws and exercise authority over them. And that this is the system of which Christ approves is evident from the fact, that while he gives the Christian people the choice of the church officers, he at the same time distinctly commands, "Obey them that have the rule over you." Another advantage which the Presbyterian people enjoy, and one immediately springing from the former is trial by jury. If our church sessions are formed on this principle, no right-minded man., no man who knows what true liberty means, can refuse to submit to their decision. He is not brought to take his stand, and plead his cause before a despot, from whom he has no appeal; but he stands like a British freeman, to plead before a jury of his peers. No minister of our church dare attempt of himself a judicial act of discipline. He may entreat, he rnay warn, he may, when these avail not to keep back the offender from ordinances, lay the case for judgment before the session, or if there be no session yet DISCOURSE III. 179 formed, before the presbytery; but of himself alone he can do nothing more. Nor ought the members of a church ever to give up their rights and privileges into the hand of a single man, to be treated by him as his favouritism on the one hand, or prejudice on the other might dictate. Another advantage to the people, and one of great value, is their right of appeal to a higher court in any case in which they may suppose themselves aggrieved by the decision of the Session. We have na wish to conceal, that however admirably arranged may be the form of government by sessions, and however wise and well-selected the elders, inasmuch as they are men, they are necessarily liable to have their judgment sometimes warped by passion or pre- judice ; and may therefore give a most unrighteous judgment, and do the subject of their sentence gross injustice. But in our church there is such a remedy, as the civil law provides for those injured by law — the power of appeal; an appeal to a court composed of men strangers to him and to his cause; in which none of those who have condemned him will be al- lowed to take a part; in which, it is as impossible as any arrangements among men can effect, that he shall be partially dealt with. But if he should, he has at once, and without expense, another appeal to the highest court, in which are the representatives of the whole church assembled ; and where no petty and local prejudices can affect him. The Presbyterian church thus combines and secures to you these three great advantages, the choice of your rulers; the trial by jury ; the appeal from oppression. 180 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. But whilst the Presbyterian church thus possesses that form of government which gives the people the highest amount of privilege, it does the same to the pastor. In the English church, the presbyters do not rule, but are ruled; while in Scripture the Holy Spirit invariably speaks of all the elders having over- sight and rule. But the Church of England pres- byter has no authority whatever to exercise discipline in the church.^ True he may summon a man to the bishops' court, but he has no voice there; and in bringing the man before it, he only does what any other person may do. In notes appended to Sermons on " The Church," the writer says, that " in the rubric, before service, the church claims the right of forbidding the approach of notoriously evil livers ;" " that characters whom the church pronounces unfit to come to the Lord's table are warned not to appear there ;" that her ministers may give "frequent and faithful ad- dresses on the subject from the pulpit;" '■'■after this the matter lies between them and their God. " We content ourselves with telling communicants what they should be, and commanding them to examine themselves whether they are so, and to act upon their convictions." Then to reUeve his church, he tries to show how difficult it is to draw the line of distinction between the converted and the uncon- verted man. But we would at once save all the trouble of this argument by supposing not such a case, but that of a man coming forward, who, though he can repeat the Lord's prayer, and the ten com- mandments, and the creed, is yet grossly ignorant, ' See Note O. DISCOURSE 111. 181 SO that he cannot discern the Lord's body, and must therefore eat and drink judgment to himself; who has through his whole life been a " notoriously evil liver." Suppose he come forward, and though entreated in private, and warned from the rubric in public, yet takes his place at the altar, and insists upon a holy minister, who shrinks from coming into any contact with such a man, dispensing to him those emblems which were given only for the disciples of Christ; is the minister of God obliged, is the minister of the church of England obliged to address him as a child of God, and say to him, " Dearly beloved in the Lord," at the very time when he has every reason to believe him a child of the devil? Is he obliged to give to such a wretch the memorials of a Saviour's love and death, and thus to be a partaker in trampling under foot the blood of Christ, in dese- crating and prostituting the ordinance of Him who commissioned him in the New Testament not only to preach, but to rule in the church ? O ! if he be so obliged what a but I pause. ^ It may, however, be asked me, have you never dispensed the sacrament to unworthy persons? And if you have, does not this place you and your church on the same footing with the other? I answer, it affects not the question, whether / have acted faith- fully or unfaithfully by ray master's commission and my own duty : but the question is, when such a person comes forward, and I know his character to be vile and unworthy, must I " content myself with telling him what he should be," and directing him " to examine himself," allow him thus " to act upon his ' See Note P. 182 PRESBYTERIANISM DEFENDED. convictions;" leaving "the matter between him and his God"? Am I obliged, does my church obHge me, does the law of the land oblige me, to trample on the law of Christ ? He commands me, in a lan- guage as peremptory as that in any of his laws, not merely to "address" and "warn," but to " Have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness." " If any man obey not our word by this epistle, note that man, and have no company with him." " Put away from among yourselves that wicked person." If the statutes of parliament ordered me to violate these laws of heaven, I hope I would have grace given me, like the apostles, to obey God rather than man. If my church, after my arguing, and remon- strating, and protesting against it, would still insist that I must obey her rather than her Lord, I have no hesitation in saying, I would infinitely rather follow the example of the non-conformists of Eng- land, of whom, in one day 2000 were turned out from their churches, homeless and pennyless, than load my conscience with sin. But the law of the land inter- feres not with me ; my own church, so far from com- manding, forbids me ; and in that liberty which I enjoy, from the sore oppression, of being not only robbed of the authority which Christ gave me when he made me a minister, but of being forced to serve out the children's bread to the open and notor- ious enemies of my Lord ; I do greatly rejoice, and will let no man take my crown. But the writer of these sermons says, and is evi-