•5 ^ 1c 3 * (0 ««^. IE ~5 ""9 Ql ♦S *s> fc o to £ ^ 8 c w O bO C\ »25 Em < Z3 it. m E W M C3 « >S H to "^ 2 S3 O JQ 5i % 0) c s g 0) CO 2 6 t*> CL 1 £ ^~b < '££/ THE CHURCH. By ENOCH :/ POND, D. D. PROFESSOR IN THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY, BANGOR. BOSTON : PUBLISHED BY WHIPPLE & DAMRELL, No. 9 Cornhill. NEW YORK:— SCOFIELD & VOORHIES, No. 118 Nassau Street. 1837. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1837, by WHIPPLE AND DAMRELL, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of Massachusetts. WILLIAM S. DAMRELL, PRINTER, No. 9 Cornhill, Boston. ADVERTISEMENT. The author of the following pages is, not only by profession, but in principle^ a Congregationalist. He believes that the popular form of church government, adopted (with some modifications) by the Congregational and Baptist church- es of the United States and of Eng- land, is more nearly in accordance with apostolical usage, and better adapted to secure the great ends of church organ- ization, than any other with which he is acquainted. Of course, he feels an interest in the explanation and vindica- tion of this general form. ADVERTISEMENT. In common with many of his breth- ren, with whom he has had opportunity of correspondence, the writer has felt that a small treatise on the general sub- ject of the Church, designed not exclu- sively for the learned, but rather for the instruction of the common mind, was much needed at the present time. This need it has been his object in some measure to supply. How far he has succeeded in this attempt, the public will decide. - V-"--'-' •V CONTENTS. Page. Section I. Signification of the word Church, in the New Testament, 9 Section II. Has Christ instituted any precise form of Church government ? 10 Section III. Scriptural authority for Congrega- tional Churches, ..-.., 13 Section IV. The apostolic Churches voluntary Associations. In what respects Churches differ from other voluntary Associations, 18 Section V. The Question of written Creeds and Covenants, 23 Section VI. Independence and mutual Fellow- ship of Churches, 27 !# Vi CONTENTS. Page. Section VII. Powers and Rights of a Church. Right to elect its own officers, admit and exclude members, hold and control property, &c, 34 Section VIII. Officers of a Church. Two dis- tinct orders of standing church officers, presbyters and deacons. Arguments of Episcopalians exam- ined. Ordination, 39 Section IX. Church Discipline, 78 Section. X. Privileges of Church Members, ... . 86 Section XI. Concluding Remarks. The Church an honorable and important institution. Duty of all persons under the Gospel to become connected with it, 89 APPENDIX. Note A. Deaconesses, 103 Note B. Ancient Creeds. The Apostle's Creed. Creed of Irenaeus. Creed of Origen. Creed of Tertullian. Creed of Gregory Thaumaturgus. Creed of Lucian the martyr. Creed of the Church at Jerusalem. Creed of the Church at Alexandria. Creed of the Church at Antioch, 105 CONTENTS. Vll Page. Note C. Should the articles of a Church contain any thing more than what is absolutely essential to piety ? 113 Note D. Different modes of communion or fellow- ship among the ancient churches, 117 Note E. Date of Paul's first Epistle to Timothy. Written before his last interview with the Ephesian elders, 119 Note F. The question of an apostolic succession of bishops considered, 121 Note G. The Epistles of Ignatius probably spu- rious, 126 THE CHURCH. SECTION I. Signification of the word Church, in the New Testament. The Greek word commonly rendered church, in the New Testament, literally sig- nifies a congregation, an assembly. Thus the congregation of Israel in the wilderness is called a church, Acts 7: 38; and to the riotous assembly at Ephesu3 the same orig- inal word is applied, Acts 19: 32, 39. With reference to Christians, we find the term used in the three following senses: 1. To denote the general invisible church, comprising the whole body of true believers, whether on earth or in heaven. Heb. 12: 23. Col. 1: 18, 24. 10 THE CHURCH. 2. To denote particular visible churches, or those bodies of professed believers, which were accustomed to assemble for divine worship and other religious purposes in one place; as the church at Jerusalem, the church at Anti- och, the churches of Galatia, and of Macedo- nia. This is the more literal, and much the more common use of the word in the New Testament. 3. The word is also used, though not fre- quently, to denote the general visible church, considered as embodying all the particular visible churches. Rom. 16:23. 1 Cor. 12:28. SECTION II. Has Christ instituted any precise form of church gov- ernment ? It has been made a question, whether there is any precise model of church organization and government laid down in the New Testa- ment, to which Christians universally are under obligations to conform. By some it has been contended, that this is the case; — that nothing is left to the discretion of the church; — that we are bound to copy, in every partic- THE CHURCH. 11 ular, after the divine pattern which has been given us. By others it is asserted, that we have no divine pattern which is at all obliga- tory;- — that Christians are left to their own judgment in this matter; — that it is not only their right, but their duty, to modify the gov- ernment of the church according to the cir- cumstances of the age and country in which they live. The truth, I think, lies between these two extremes. The Scriptures do furnish us with at least some general outlines of church organ- ization and government, from which no body of Christians is at liberty to depart. They describe, for example, the object of church organization, and the character of church members; and no Christians would be at liberty to form a society for a merely moral or secular object, and without any regard to the character of its members, and to call it a church of Christ. Nor has any body of Christians, calling themselves a church, a right to dispense with religious worship and divine ordinances, or with the ministry and officers of a church. Nor, in place of a stated pastor, would the members of a church have a right to assume the pastoral office in rotation, U 12 THE CHURCH. one after another, for a limited time. Nor, in place of deacons, would they have a right to substitute a church committee, chosen annu- ally, or for a shorter period. The practice of nearly all Christians shows, that they con- ceive some things in regard to church order to be settled in the New Testament; and so settled, that they are not at liberty to depart from them. On the other hand, it would be idle to pre- tend, that every thing relating to church af- fairs, is authoritatively settled in the New Testament, so that nothing is left to the judgment of Christians. For example, the Scriptures prescribe that ministers of the gospel are to be supported; but they do not fix the precise amount of their salaries, or define the mode in which their salaries are to be raised. The Scriptures enjoin the duty of public worship; but they do not direct Christians where they shall meet, or at what hour of the day, or in what shape or form they shall build their temples. We shall search in vain for any inspired precept, re-^ quiring or forbidding church organs, or church bells, or defining particularly the length, or the precise order, of the services of the sane- THE CHURCH, 13 tuary. We have a general injunction, that "all things be done decently and in order;" but in what particular order many things are to be done, is wisely left to the judgment of Christians. The truth in regard to the question before us seems, therefore, to be this: there are some general outlines of church organization and government marked out for us by the pen of inspiration; and these, so far as they can be discovered, are to be strictly regarded. But within the range of these, God has wisely left many things to be judged of by the light of reason, and to be modified according to cir- cumstances in providence. SECTION III. Scriptural authority for Congregational Churches. It is evident from the sacred writings, that Christ intended to embody his professed fol- lowers on earth, not in one corporate, univer- sal church, but in particular, Congregational churches.* He prepared the materials for * I use the word Congregational here in a general, and hot in a technical or sectarian sense. 14 THE CHURCH. such a church during his public ministry, which church was fully organized at Jerusa- lem soon after his ascension. Acts 1 : c 26, and 6: 5, 6. It was a principal labor of the apostles to form such churches in the cities and villages where they preached, and where disciples were multiplied. Nearly thirty different churches are spoken of specifically in the New Testament, besides a much greater number which are referred to in more general terms. That these churches were not of a national or provincial character appears from the fact, that when the churches of a particular country or province are mentioned, they are always spoken of in the plural number. Thus we read of, not the church, but the churches of Judea, of Syria, of Galatia, of Asia, and of Macedonia. See Acts 9:31. 15: 41. 1 Cor. 16: 1, 19. 2 Cor. 8: 1. And when there were converts in a place adjoining a large city, it was not the custom of the apostles to gather them into the church of the city, but to form them into a separate church. Thus at Cen- chrea, the port of Corinth, there was a church, distinct from the larger church in the city. See Rom. 16: 1. THE CHURCH. 15 These particular churches were distinct organizations, each having its own members and officers. To be a member of one church did not constitute membership in another; nor did the holding of office in one church consti- tute the person holding it an officer of any- other church. Thus, the teachers spoken of in the church at Antioch were not teachers or members of the church at Ephesus; nor were the elders of the church at Ephesus officers of the church at Rome. Acts 13: 1. 20: 17. Epaphroditus was a member and officer of the church at Philippi; and Phebe was servant (or deaconess) of the church at Cenchrea.* Phil. 2: 25. Rom. 16: 1. The churches under the apostles were com- posed, each of them, of Christians, who were expected to come together in one place for public worship, and for celebrating the ordi- nances of the gospel. Perhaps all of them did not assemble uniformly in one place. The distresses of the times, and their want of suit- able accommodations, might have prevented this. But that, on all occasions of common interest and concernment, the members of a * See Appendix, Note A. 16 THE CHURCH. church, and even of the largest churches, were accustomed to come together, is certain. On the day of Pentecost, the church at Jeru- salem were assembled "with one accord, in one place." And many years after, when messengers from the church at Antioch went up to Jerusalem, with the question respecting circumcision, the apostles, and elders, and the whole church came together to deliberate and advise in relation to this matter. Acts. 2:1. 15: 22. When Paul and Barnabas returned from their first mission to the heathen, "they gathered the church at Antioch together, and rehearsed all that God had done with them, and how he had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles." Acts 14: 27. "Upon the first day of the week," the church at Troas "came together to break bread." Acts 20: 7. It is repeatedly said of the church at Cor- inth, that they were accustomed to "come together into one place," to attend upon divine worship, and to administer the discipline of the church. See 1 Cor. 5: 4. 11: 18. 14: 23.* Indeed, if the administration of disci- * "If therefore the ivhole church be come together into one place," &c. THE CHURCH. 17 pline belongs to the church, as by the express appointment of Christ it manifestly does (see Matt. 18: 17), then the church must of neces- sity come together, to transact this painful but important work. It is thus indisputably certain from our sacred writings, that Christians, under the ministry of the apostles, were collected into distinct and separate organizations, called churches, each having its own members and officers, and each consisting of such as were accustomed to assemble in one place for relig- ious worship, and for transacting the affairs of the church. I will only add, that if the plan of the apos- tles, in this respect, had been followed out in the succeeding ages; if, when Christians in the large cities and their suburbs became too numerous to assemble conveniently in one place, instead of attempting to continue to- gether, they had amicably separated into dis- tinct organizations; one of the stepping-stones to Romanism would have been removed, and a principal source of ambition and corruption would have been kept out of the church. In this case, the sees of Rome, and Antioch, and Alexandria, and Constantinople, would never 2* 18 THE CHDRCH. have been converted into princely thrones, and aspirants would not have waded into them through scenes of turmoil and blood. • SECTION IV. The apostolic Churches voluntary associations. The churches, in the days of the apostles, were all of them voluntary associations. The apostles had no compulsory power to bring men into the churches, nor did they desire any. All who joined themselves to any of the churches did it freely, and of their own accord. The three thousand, who were baptized on the day of Pentecost, acted freely. So did the Ethiopian eunuch, and Saul of Tarsus, and the Philippian jailer, and the family of Cornelius, and every other individual who, at that period, was added to a Christian church. There was no compulsion, or any thing ap- proaching to it, in any case. The churches then were, and ever should have been, strictly voluntary associations. But although every church of Christ is, and of right ought to be, a voluntary association, still, every voluntary association is not a church. THE CHURCH. 19 It is necessary to inquire, therefore, what there was peculiar in the associations of which we speak, which went to constitute them churches of Christ. And, 1. These associations consisted of persons of a particular character. All who joined themselves unto the churches of the apostles were required to profess faith in Christ, and to give credible evidence of piety. It was those "who were pricked in the heart," and repented, and "gladly received the word," who were admitted to the church on the day of Pentecost. It was not till the Samaritans " believed Philip, preaching the things con- cerning the kingdom of Christ," that they were received by him to baptism and the church. The Holy Ghost fell on the family of Cornelius, and satisfied Peter as to their piety, before he would admit them to the church, and administer to them the ordinances of the gospel. Ananias objected to baptizing Saul of Tarsus, till a voice from heaven as- sured him of the piety of this recent perse- cutor. "He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel." Acts 9: 15. We here see what were the terms of admis- 20 THE CHURCH. sion to the apostolic churches, and what ought to be the terms of admission to all the visible churches of Christ. A visible church is that which is visibly, or which appears to be, a branch of the real church. Consequently a member of the visible church should be one who is visibly, or who appears to be, a real dis- ciple and follower of the Saviour. To say that a person can be a consistent member of the vis- ible church, and not appear to be a member of the real church, is a contradiction in terms. Besides; none but a truly sanctified person can consistently perform those sacramental acts, which are required of all the members of a church. Do not those who go to the table of Christ, and feed upon the symbol of his broken body, herein plainly manifest that they are pre- pared to feed upon him by faith ? Do not those who bring the consecrated cup to their lips, and partake the emblem of a Saviour's blood, herein significantly say, that their trust is in this precious blood? Do not those who sit at the table of Christ, in visible communion with his people, manifest, in this transaction, that they have, or that they trust they have, holy, spiritual communion with the saints? In other words, is not the whole transaction of com- THE CHURCH. 21 municating, a symbolical profession of faith and holiness, such as no one can consistently make, unless he is a holy person ? To me, I must ac- knowledge, this matter is altogether too plain to be made the subject of dispute or doubt. It ought never to have been called in question in the church of Christ. No person can come to the Lord's table without making a virtual profession of piety; and no person should be encouraged or permitted to join himself to a church of Christ, and enter into obligations to come to his table, without furnishing satis- factory evidence, that he is prepared to come in a holy, acceptable manner. 2. Those voluntary associations, formed by the apostles, and by them denominated church- es, not only consisted, as we have seen, of persons of a particular character, but they were formed on ^peculiar basis, viz., that of the holy Scriptures. In establishing other voluntary associations, the members are guided by the particular object which they have in view ; and they so form and adjust their constitution and laws as will best tend to promote this object. But in establishing churches, all who would follow in the steps of the apostles, must build entirely on the platform of the Scriptures. 22 THE CHURCH. Their constitution and by-laws must conform to the Scriptures. All who become connect- ed with a church must be required to take the Scriptures as their rule. They must profess to believe whatever the Scriptures plainly teach, and promise to obey, so far as they are able, all that the Scriptures enjoin. Here then, is a very important particular in which the churches of Christ differ from all other voluntary associations. 3. The object for which churches are formed and sustained is altogether of a peculiar char- acter. The object for which professed believ- ers become associated in a church is to pro- mote, not any merely moral or secular end, but altogether a spiritual end. Their object is, to maintain the worship and ordinances of the gospel; to promote, by all proper methods, the edification one of another; and to labor, more efficiently than would otherwise be pos- sible, for the advancement of Christ's kingdom and the salvation of souls. Such is in brief, the object of all church organization. A wor- thy and important object truly!* An object * It is evident from the object of church organization, that churches should be particular or congregational; in other words, that each should consist of those only who can statedly and conveniently come together in one place. THE CHURCH. 23 in reference to which the church is gloriously distinguished from all other associations exist- ing among men. The remarks in this section may be summed up in a definition, from which it will be seen, at a glance, in what respects churches differ from other voluntary societies. Jl church is an organized body of professed believers in Christ; formed on the basis of the holy Scrip- tures; and having for its object the maintenance of the loorship and ordinances of the gospel, the edification of its members, and their more efficient action in promoting the cause and kingdom of Christ. SECTION V. The question of written Creeds and Covenants. That those who associate together in a church must have some compact or covenant, written or unwritten, expressed or implied, is obvious. Otherwise, there would be no mutu- al agreement or understanding between them. They would have no bond of union, and would not know at all what duties to expect, or what were expected, one of another. And if there mi In 24 THE CHURCH. must be a compact or covenant, it certainly would seem desirable that this should be a written covenant; one that could not well be forgotten, and to which all the members might have liberty of appeal. From the nature of the case it is certain, that the churches, in the days of the apostles, must have had, each of them, its covenant. other words, there must have been a mu- tual understanding, an agreement, between the members, as to what course of life they were to pursue, and the duties they were to perform one towards another. We are told that they gave themselves up first unto the Lord, and to one another by the will of God. 2 Cor. 8: 5. Whether the covenants of the churches were committed to writing, at so early a period, we have no certain means of information. In the age immediately succeeding that of the apostles, we find frequent mention made of the covenants of the churches. Tertullian, describing a church, says, "We are a body united for the conscientious performance of the duties of religion, by an agreement in dis- cipline, and a covenant of hope." Justin Mar- tyr represents those who were admitted into THE CHURCH. »5 church fellowship, as agreeing in a resolution to conform in all things to the word of God." Pliny, in his letter to Trajan, says, that the Christians whom he had examined, confessed nothing worse than this, that " they had enter- ed into a covenant to commit no theft, robbery, or adultery, to break no promise, to violate no engagement, and to do no dishonest thing." The same course of remark which has been pursued in relation to church covenants, may be extended also to creeds. It is certainly desirable, that those who are to unite habitu- ally in the most solemn acts of worship, should be agreed in the essential articles of their faith; and as every Christian who believes any thing, has a creed, so every society of Christians, which holds any articles of faith in common, has a common creed. The only question is (if this can be a question), whether the creed shall be matter of public record, to which all concerned may have free access, and liberty of appeal, or whether it shall be left to uncertain tradition and forgetfulness. That the churches, in the days of the apos- tles, had each of them its creed, or common articles of belief, relating to the birth and life, the teachings and actions, the death, resur- 3 26 THE CHURCH. rection, and ascension of Jesus — the duties which Christians owed to him, and the hopes which they entertained through him, is certain. Whether these creeds were formally written out by any of the apostles, cannot now be as- certained. We know that there were written creeds in the churches, at a very early period. The apostle's creed (so called) is an ancient document; though not written certainly — at least not all of it — by any of the apostles.* A written creed should never be substituted in place of Scripture, but should be regarded as a concise expression of what is deemed to be the sense of Scripture. To the church adopting it, it is not itself the standard of faith, but a transcript, an epitome of that infallible stand- ard which God has given us in his word. No church has a right to impose its creed upon others, but merely to propose it for con- sideration, leaving those to whom is is pro- posed at full liberty, either to adopt it, and walk with that particular church, or to reject it, and enter into some other connexion. With the explanation above given, I see no valid objection to written creeds and cove- nants, while the benefits of them are so nu- t See Appendix, Note B. THE CHURCH. 2T merous and obvious, as to entitle them to an universal adoption.* SECTION VI. Independence and mutual Fellowship of Churches. While the churches planted by the apostles maintained a fraternal intercourse one with another, in all holy fellowship and communion, they manifestly were independent one of another, so far as jurisdiction and authority were concerned. The apostles, indeed, as the divinely commissioned and inspired founders of churches, had a degree of authority over them, which was peculiar to themselves; but among the churches, we find no one of them, and no confederated body of them, presuming to exercise authority over the others. Not even the mother church at Jerusalem, consid- ered in its church capacity, and as separate from the apostles, ever undertook to dictate to the other churches, or to extend its juris- diction over them. The independence of the primitive church- * Appendix, Note C. 28 THE CHURCH. es, in the sense and to the extent here ex- plained, is not only sanctioned by the Scrip- tures, but most explicitly asserted bv learned and impartial historians, who have investiga- ted the subject. Waddington, an Episcopa- lian of the church of England, speaking of the church in the first century, says, "Every church was essentially independent of every other. The churches, thus constituted and regulated, formed a sort of federative body of independent religious communities, dispersed through the greater part of the Roman em- pire, in continual communication, and in con- stant harmony with each other." * Mosheim, a Lutheran, who could have had no predilection for the doctrine of Indepen- dency, thus describes the state of things in the first century: "All the churches, in those primitive times, were independent bodies; or none of them subject to the jurisdiction of any other. For though the churches which were founded by the apostles themselves frequently had the honor shown them to be consulted in difficult cases, yet they had no judicial author- ity, no control, no power of giving laws. On * Ecc. Hist., p. 43. THE CHURCH. 29 the contrary, it is clear as the noonday, that all Christian churches had equal rights, and were in all respects on a footing of equality. " The same author, speaking of the second century, says, "During a great part of this century, all the churches continued to be, as at first, independent of each other, or were connected by no consociations or confederations. Each church was a kind of little independent repub- lic, governed by its own laws, which were enacted, or at least sanctioned, by the peo- ple."* The testimony of Neander on the subject before us, is entirely accordant with that of Mosheim. He enlarges upon the free and popular form of government adopted by the churches in the first century, and describes them as sustaining, in relation to each other, "a sisterly system of equality." But while the primitive churches were, in the sense explained, independent of each other, they were bound together by the strong- est ties, and maintained (as hinted above) a constant intercourse, in all suitable acts of fellowship and communion. They were to * Ecc. Hist. (Murdock's edition), vol. i, pp. 86, 142. 3# 30 THE CHURCH. each other objects of deep interest, and of mutual concern and prayer. As their teach- ers journeyed from place to place, it is not to be doubted that they had an interchange of pastoral labors. The members, too, when absent from their own churches, were freely admitted to communion in the assemblies of their brethren. The primitive churches sent Christian salutations and letters of instruction and warning one to another. They also sent messengers one to another, and administered relief to one another in distress. They cheer- fully bore one another's burdens, and in cases of doubt and difficulty, looked to each other for advice. This fellowship of churches, established by the apostles, was continued under the ministry of their immediate successors. Before the close of the first century, Clement of Rome addressed an epistle to the Corinthian church, which commences as follows: "The church of God which is at Rome, to the church of God which is at Corinth, elect, sanctified by the will of God, through Jesus Christ our Lord." Various instances occur, in the age immediately succeeding that of the apostles, in which one church, or the pastor of some THE CHURCH. 31 one church, addresses letters of exhortation to other churches.* This intimate and holy fellowship of church- es is no more inconsistent with their indepen- dence, than the friendly intercourse of neigh- bors is inconsistent with their being, each and all of them, independent citizens. I have no right, as an individual, to exercise author- ity over my neighbor, nor he over me. Still, it is proper that we should maintain a mutual friendly intercourse, and perform towards each other all the offices of neighborhood and kindness. The independence of churches, in the sense here explained, I hold to be one of those pe- culiar, apostolical features of church govern- ment, which ought never to have been invaded or relinquished. It began to be invaded, about the middle of the second century, by the establishment of synods with dictatorial powers ,'f and it continued to be invaded more * Appendix, Note D. t "These synods or councils," says Mosheim, "of which we find not the smallest trace before the middle of the second century, changed the whole face of the church, and gave it a new form ; f^r by them the ancient privileges of the people were diminished, and the power and author- vi 32 THE CHURCH. and more, till at length it utterly disappeared from the church. And when this was gone, there was no let or hindrance to the progress of usurpation, until all the churches became merged in one universal church; and all power was concentrated in the lordly bishop of Rome. The independence of particular churches, modified by established forms of ecclesiastical intercourse and fellowship, constitutes the pe- culiar characteristic, and (as I think) the glory of Congregationalism.* In the govern- ment of many denominations of Christians, this independence is taken away. The par- ticular churches are all merged in a general church, and are subject to a jurisdiction above ity of the bishops greatly augmented." There could have been no danger in these synods, and might have been much benefit, if they had confined themselves to delibera- tion and counsel; but they soon "turned their influence into dominion, and their counsels into laws, and openly asserted that Christ had empowered them to prescribe to his people authoritative rules of faith and manners." — Ecc. Hist., Cent, ii, Part ii, Chap. 2. * I use the term Congregationalism here, as in other places, in its widest sense, including under it all those sects of Christians who retain tbe principle of independen- cy, and whose government is of the popular kind. THE CHURCH. 33 and without themselves. But not so in the Congregational churches. All power here originates (under Christ) in the church, and terminates in the church. The stream never rises higher than the fountain. There may be church conferences or consociations, and ministerial associations for mutual encourage- ment, edification and prayer; but these can exercise no jurisdiction, control, or authority over the churches. Councils may be called, and may give advice; but this advice may be accepted or rejected. To be sure, where the advice of a council is unreasonably rejected, there may follow a breach of fellowship be- tween the churches giving it, and the church rejecting it. Still, each and every church re- tains its independence, so far as jurisdiction is concerned, being amenable only to its di- vine Shepherd and Head. To some, this system of government has appeared loose and defective; but I have no doubt that it is, for substance, the same, which was bequeathed to the churches by the divine Saviour and his apostles. And neither can I doubt, that experience has shown it to be bet- ter adapted to the great ends and purposes of church organization, than any of the numer- 34 THE CHURCH. ous forms which have been substituted in its place. Where shall we look for churches more efficient and nourishing, than those of the first century and a half of the Christian era? And where, since that period, shall we look for churches more efficient and flourish- ing, than those of the Congregationalists and Baptists of England and America? To be sure, there have been occasional breaches of fellowship; but these have resulted rather from misapprehension, or a want of brotherly love, than from any inherent defect of ecclesi- astical organization. Of course, the proper remedy for them is to be sought in a better understanding of our peculiar principles, and in an increase of the spirit of love, and not in a departure from that form of church govern- ment which we believe to have been sanc- tioned by Christ and his apostles. SECTION VII. Powers and Rights of a Church. 1. Every church has a right to elect its own officers. This is a natural, inherent right of all voluntary associations. Who would call THE CHURCH. 35 in question the right of any other voluntary society to organize itself, by the election of such officers as its constitution required? And who can, with any reason, deny this right to churches, unless indeed it be expressly denied to them by the Saviour? But this right, so far from being denied to the churches by Christ and his apostles, is, as we think, expressly granted to them. The churches were accustomed to elect their offi- cers in the presence and under the eye of the apostles themselves. When an individual was to be appointed to fill the place of Judas, the disciples chose two from among their num- ber, one of whom was designated by lot to be numbered with the apostles. Acts • 1 : 23. When deacons were to be appointed in the church at Jerusalem, these were first chosen by the church, and afterwards ordained by the apostles. Acts 6: 5. The churches of Mac- edonia chose delegates to travel with Paul and his company, and carry their contributions to the poor. 2 Cor. 8: 19.* * Clement, in his first epistle to the Corinthians, the earliest and best authenticated fragment of Christian an- tiquity, affirms, that the apostles set apart approved persons unto the office of the ministry, " with the consent of the whole church.' " 36 THE CHURCH. This right of choosing its own officers con- tinued to be exercised in the church long after the age of the apostles. During the first century, says Waddington, "on the death of a president, or bishop, or pastor, the choice of a successor devolved on the members of the soci- ety. In this election, the people had an equal share; and it is clear that their right in this matter was not barely testimonial, but judicial and elective. This appointment was final, re- quiring no confirmation from any civil power, or any superior prelate."* Mosheim, in his history of the second century, says, "The form of church government, which began to exist in the preceding century, was in this more industriously established and confirmed in all its parts. One president or bishop pre- sided over each church, wlto was created by the common suffrage of the whole people." Vol. i, p. 142. Origen, near the close of his last book against Celsus, represents elders as " chosen to their office," by the churches which they rule. Cyprian insists largely on the right of * Ecc. Hist., p. 43. Neander testifies to the same fact. So also does Bingham, in his Antiquities of the Christian Church, Book iv, chap. 2. THE CHURCH. 37 churches to choose their own officers, affirm- ing that this was the practice, not only of the African churches, but of those in most of the other provinces of the Roman empire. Epis. 68. Socrates, speaking of the election of Chrysostom, says, "he was chosen by the common vote of all, both clergy and people."* Theodoret describes the election of Eustatius in the same manner, when he says, "he was compelled to take the bishopric, by the com- mon vote of the bishops and clergy and all the people." | 2. Another obvious right of the churches is that of admitting and excluding members. The right of admitting members belongs to church- es, in common with all other voluntary asso- ciations. Also the right of censuring and ex- cluding unworthy members is clearly a natural right of the churches, and as such is expressly recognised in the New Testament. When a member of this character is not reclaimed by private remonstrance, our Saviour directs that his case be brought before the church: and if he hear not the church, he is by them to be excommunicated. Matt. 18: 17. "When," * Ecc. Hist., Lib. vi, Cap. 2. t Ibid., Lib. i, Cap. 7. 4 38 THE CHURCH. says Neander, "a vicious person is to be ex- cluded from the church at Corinth, the apostle regards it as something which must proceed from the whole church." 1 Cor. 5: 4. And when this same person, being humbled, is to be forgiven and restored, his restoration is to be effected by the same body. 2 Cor. 2: 7. 3. Still another right of the churches is that of holding and controlling their own property. The apostle, speaking of widows, says, "If any who believe have widows, let them relieve them, and let not the church be charged;" a form of expression which implies that the church at that period had funds, which it dis- posed of at discretion. 1 Tim. 6: 16. The church at Jerusalem was early in possession of property to a very considerable amount. For a time, at least, it seems to have held the property of all its members. For "as many of them as were possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet." Acts 4: 34. It was to take charge of the property of the church, and see to its equitable distribution, that the order of deacons was first instituted. Acts 6: 3.* * By the laws of Massachusetts and Maine, and perhaps THE CHURCH. 6\) In short, every church may be said to have a right to dispose of its own proper internal concerns, subject only to such restrictions and regulations as have been imposed by Christ himself. It has a right to do all that is neces- sary to be done, in order to preserve its own existence, and to secure to itself the privileges and blessings of the gospel. SECTION VIII. Officers of a Church.. It is matter of general acknowledgment, that there are two distinct orders of officers in the church of Christ, viz. those of pastors and deacons.* Episcopalians divide the order of of some other of the States, " the deacons of the several Protestant churches (not Episcopal) are incorporated, to take in succession all grants and donations, whether real or persona], made either to their several churches, the poor of their churches, or to them and their successors, and to sue and defend in all actions touching the same." * There are differences in degree among church officers, which do not amount to a difference of order. Thus, in the general order of presbyters, among ourselves, there are pastors, missionaries, theological professors, and evange- \ 40 THE CHURCH. pastors into those of bishops and presbyters, thus making three distinct orders, instead of two. They insist that Christ has instituted three orders of ministers in his church, of which bishops are the first; and that it belongs to bishops, each in his own diocese, to consecrate churches, to confirm and exclude members, to ordain ministers, and in general to admin- ister the government of the church. This theory, in order to be admitted, must be es- tablished by proof; the burden of which lies, obviously, on the hands of its abettors. If they can support it by sound and sufficient arguments, then let it be universally received. If not, it may well be regarded in the light of mere theory. It is proposed now to examine the principal arguments by which the above theory has been attempted to be supported. And, 1. Some of its advocates derive an analogy in its favor from the doctrine of the trinity. lists. So in the times of the apostles, there were differ- ences in degree among the teaching officers of the church, and these were designated by different names, as apostles, prophets, evangelists, pastors, teachers; while all may have been classed under the same general order. 1 Cor. 12: 28. Eph. 4: 11. THE CHURCH. 41 This has recently been done by Bishop Hop- kins of Vermont.* This analogy however, if there be any, is too remote to be apprehended by common minds. Because there are three persons in the Godhead, it is not quite certain that there are, or should be, three orders of ministers in the church of Christ. And be- sides, if this argument were admitted, it would militate directly against the views of those who advance it. The three persons in the Godhead are equal. Do Episcopalians allow that the supposed three orders of ministers are equal? 2. Another argument for the three orders of ministers is drawn from the analogy of the Jewish jjriesthood. As among the Jews, there were the high-priest, the priests, and Levites, so among Christians, there should be bishops, presbyters, and deacons. But the priesthood in Israel was not designed to prefigure the gospel ministry, but rather the priesthood of the Son of God. The high-priest in Israel was a type of the great "High-Priest of our profession ;" and the sacrifices which were offered by the Jewish priesthood all looked forward to the * Primitive Church, &c, p. 235. 4* 42 THE 'CHURCH. great atoning sacrifice which was offered on the cross. There is properly no priest under the gospel dispensation, except the Lord Jesus Christ. " Not with the blood of goats and calves, but with his own blood, hath he en- tered once into the holy place, having obtain- ed eternal redemption for us." To call a gospel minister & priest is a palpable perver- sion and abuse of the term.* The Romanists, who hold to the doctrine of transubstantiation, and believe that in every mass, or celebration of the eucharist, there is offered a literal sacrifice, may consistently denominate their ministers priests. But in the mouth of a Protestant, the term, as ap- plied to gospel ministers, is strange and un- meaning. Hence, no analogy can be drawn from the priesthood in Israel, by which to de- termine the different orders of ministers in the kingdom of Christ. f * Gospel ministers are never called priests in the New- Testament, except as they are included in the general company of believers, who are mystically denominated