■mmmF-~ LIBRARY PRINCETON^ N. -J^^X^ iV 647 .P843 1872 >orteous, James Moir. 'he government of the Kingdom of Christ THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM OF CHRIST AN INQUIRY AS TO THE SCRIPTURAL, INVINCIBLE, AND HISTORICAL POSITION OF PRESBYTERY. BY THE REV. JAMES MOIR PORTEOUS, WANLOCKHKAD AND LEADHILLS. ^ITH PREFACE BV THE REV. HO RATI US BONAR^ D.D, " Veritas Vincit." EDINBURGH: JOHNSTONE, HUNTER, & CO. LONDON: JAMES NISBET & CO. BELFAST: C. AITCHISON. 1872. [RigJit of Translation and Reprodiiction reserved.'] PRINTED BY BALLANTYNE AND COMPANY EDINBURGH AND LONDON PREFATOEY NOTE. A Prize of Fifty Pounds was offered ' For the best Essay on the Fundamental Principles of Presbyterian Order and Government/ open to any Student, Preacher, or Minister of the Free Church of Scotland. The adjudicators, the Kev. Professor Douglas, D.D., Glasgow ; the Rev. William Laughton, Greenock ; and the Rev. A. Walker, Ciimbrae (appointed instead of the late Rev. Dr Macintosh, Dunoon), were unanimous in awarding the prize to the writer in 1869. This volume — intended as an introduction to the study of the subject — is a revision and enlargement of that Essay, the general plan of which has been retained. It is published at the desire of a number of friends, and is sent forth in the hope that it may prove a contribution towards the more thorough recognition and adoption of Scriptural Govern- ment in all the departments of that ' Kingdom which cannot be moved.' Cordial acknowledgments are tendered to those who have aided in obtaining recent and reliable statistical information. February 1872. PREFACE. A Chtjech without government must be a Church without order and without power. Even a State, to be powerful and united, must be well governed. If there be government, there must be the rulers and the ruled. If there are no rulers, or if all are rulers, there is no government; and if there is no government, unity breaks up, compactness is gone, discipline is impossible, purity is hope- less. The moment two or three are gathered together in the name of Jesus, government begins ; and when the two or three are multiplied, then government develops itself, and the necessity for the control of law and for the recognition of some to carry out that law becomes indispensable. If all things in the Church are to be done decently and in order, law and administration must step in, otherwise every man will do what is right in his own eyes. In the Church, as in the State, there have been in all centuries two extremes of rule — despotism and socialism. Did the Head of the Church mean either of these ? Do we find, either in His own words or in those of His apostles, any intimation of these '? He meant His Church to be governed. Has He anywhere indicated His purpose that it should be governed by one or governed by all 1 Perhaps the ecclesiastical tendencies of our day do not favour the former so much as the latter, yet still it is needful that these two opposing governmental systems should be examined. It may be found that there is a more excellent way than either, a way which preserves all that is good in both, and yet exhibits A "L PEEFACE. something more perfect, more sufficient, and more scriptural than they. One of the great truths brought up by the Reformation was individual responsibility and individual energy. The great ecclesiastical aggregate of ages was broken up, and each man made to feel his own importance and power. Then came the question, How are these individualities to be regulated and brought into harmonious action % What government is best for such a new state of things % What government, or principles for the construction of a government, are to be found in the New Testament? Different answers were given, and the results of these still remain impressed upon the different Protestant Churches of the world. Rome has retained its ancient method of ruling the irresponsible aggregate for which she thinks and believes and performs religion; but for men beginning to exercise the birthright of individual responsibility, something less despotic was necessary. Consciences were alive, and living consciences were not to be pressed down and crushed by mere weight and power. England answered the question in one way, Germany in another, Switzerland and Scotland in another. The object of the present volume is to investigate this great question, for great assuredly it is. The results of the author's investigations are now before the public. Let them be calmly studied. The subject has not been discussed superficially, but minutely and carefully, with learning and ability. The whole question has been most thoroughly gone into, yet without dif- fusiveness or irrelevant expansion. The volume is one specially for our students and for the members of our churches, that they may know why they are Presbyterians, and that they may be able to give a scriptural and intelligent reason to others for their adherence to the ecclesiastical government which John Knox reared, Andrew Melville consolidated, and Samuel Rutherford defended. HORATIUS BONAR. Edinburgh, January 1872. OUTLINE OF contents; PAET I. AN INQUIRY AS TO THE ESSENTIAL SCRIPTURAL PRINCIPLES OF CHURCH GOVERNMENT. The Kingdom. — The Monarch — Universal Sway— The Community. The Laws. — Reason insufificient — One Statute-book — Others subordinate. The Government. — By Officers — Temporary and Permanent— Authoritatively administering the laws in several assemblies. CHAPTER I. WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES? Questions as to Church government — The analytic method of reply — The synthetic preferred, . .' . .17 The aim toascei-tain features of Apostolic Church, and the nearest modern form — Loose views on this subject are rea- sons for inquiry, 18 Advantages of a satisfactory solution — If divinely planned, strong claims — Danger of mere outward forms — Their proper use — A humble and cautious spirit necessary — Questions for exami- nation, 19 CHAPTER 11. I. The Kingdom. Features of a kingdom— Its extent— How shaken— The analogy. CHAPTER III. THE MONARCH. The person of the King, His victorious conflict, His exaltation. 20 CHAPTER lY. UNIVERSAL SWAY, Universal terms describe the mediatorial sovereignty — Creation — Providence — Angels — Men — Associations, . . 25 Nations specially put under Christ, • 29 CHAPTER V. THE PARTICULAR COMMUNITY. Men regarded as spiritual and immortal —Definition of 'The Church,' . . 27 Two principal applications, yet one Church — The Head of that one body . 28 Wherein the figure fails : existence, sus- tenance, influence, authority, ordi- nances, flow immediately from Christ, 29 Spirituality of the kingdom, . . , 3i) The first principle deduced, . . .30 CHAPTER VI. THE TRUE CHURCH — INVISIBLE- UNIVERSAL. The life and death of Christ the greatest event of time— What that secured, . 31 Who are embraced in His Church — Proofs that it is invisible to men, . . . 31 * To be studied before each part or chapter is read. be written out from memory. Answers to questions, afterwards to OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. Its catholicity— The lower and upper pro- vinces— Barriers, The bond of unity, CHAPTER VII. THE VISIBLE KINGDOM. The preparation-place of the redeemed —The Church visible of old, More visible from the birth of Christ to His crucifixion, and after the ascen- sion, The Church an organized body by Christ's authority for certain ends — Govern- ment also visible, .... Professed subjection to Christ the test of membership — A mixed community, Visibility of external organization not essential to existence ; proved by past history of the Church — Consequent ex- pectations and duty, .... The second principle, .... CHAPTER Vin. II. The Laws of the Kingdom. The visible Church subject solely to the will of the King— That will known only in the Bible — It supplies the want of earnest souls, revealing a perfect plan and a powerful agency, . . .39 Reason insufficient, being defective as fallen, and that defect having been supplied by God — llevelation disclosing truths unknown and absolutely neces- sary— Reason's office to test evidence of that gift — It must then give place to faith, 40 This statute-book perfect, decisive, com- plete — Ministerial interpretations to impart Christ's teachings — The use of subordinate standards, . . . 41 Bestowed for guidance, the Bible contains, explicitly or inferentially, all that is necessary — It invites classification as an important exercise — Complaint of a scarcity of materials irrational before inquiry, 42 The third principle, . . . .43 CHAPTEPv IX. III. The Government of the Kingdom. Government implies the execution of laws by proper officers, for the well-being of subjects — The perpetuity and blessed- ness of Christ's government pre- dicted—Exercised in Old Testament times 44 Its continuance to be expected under the more perfect dispensation — Actually conferred by Christ on His disciples — The seventy — Various classes of officers after His ascension, . . . .45 CHAPTER X. APOSTLES. Apostle, meaning of the word — Qualifica- tions of this definite class, . . .46 First, Immediately called — Secondly, Eye-witnesses, 47 Thirdly, The power of the Spirit, working miracles, conferring gifts, speaking and writing by inspiration, . . .48 Fourthly, Commission universal — under- stood'and acted upon — For a special and extraordinary purpose — Hence temporary, 50 CHAPTER XI. PEOPHETS AND EVANGELISTS. Prophets to unfold divine mysteries — Ceased with completion of the canon of Scripture — Permanent for declarative announcement, . .... 51 Evangelists also special and temporary, in relation to apostles— The work of evangelization ministerial, aided by all Christians— In what sense evangelists may be continued, . . . .52 CHAPTER XII. APOSTOLIC GUIDANCE. How the apostolic office is perpetual — Cautions as to their practice— Scrip- tural—Apostolic — General— Universal —Those that are uncertain, Why their example isbinding— Two rales: what cannot be omitted, and what must not be introduced into the Church — "Why details not always given, The fourth principle, .... 53 CHAPTER XIII. PERMANENT OFEICERS. The supreme end of the Church— Three- fold subordinate end — Can this be ac- complished without Government Offi- cers appointed for this purpose? — Two classes permanent, . . . .66 CHAPTER XIV. 1. The Office of Elder. Existence of the office indisputable — Meaning of the term ' elder ' — 1. Origin of the office. — Spiritual and civil functions— Its continuance, . 58 2. Us perpetuity inferred from general principles — Two stated — Never abro- gated— Not a Jewish peculiarity, . 60 3. Actually retained in the New Testa- ment Church— Introduced in Churches of the Gentiles — Associated with apostles, as formerly with priests, . 60 4. Frovision is made for its continuance. OUTLINE or CONTENTS. — ^The persons— Duties and reception prescribed, 61 The fifth principle, ... .61 CHAPTER XV. THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. 62 63 65 The promised gift of pastors bestowed, . § 1, Communication of the ojjice. — Aaron and the Levites — Where no distinct office, the duty left to all— Tlie typical and ritualistic finished — A special mi- nisterial office bestowed on the Chris- tian Church, as foretold — From the Three-Oue Jehovah the ministry is specially an agency in the hand of the Spirit, for all time, .... § 2. Specific titles. — Pastors, teachers, ministers, preachers, ambassadors, stewards, elders, laboui-ers,&c. — Clearly distinguished from others, . ? 3. Qualifications. — Ability to reason and exhort, expound, and apply, as tested andapproved— Feeling own in- sufiiciency," 67 § 4. Duties.— Neglectins not— Publicly to preach — Administering sealing ordi- nances—Caring for the flock, by edify- ing doctrine — Being wholly devoted, . 68 § 5. Obligations of the people. — To know and esteem their pastors, obeying, en- couraging, and making suitable tem- poral provision for them, . . .69 § 6. Perpetual transmission of the office enjoined, and unrepealed, . § 7. Special promises. — Divine presence, protecting, assisting, confirming, sym- pathising, rewarding, .... The strength of the argument — An- nouncement by all, private ; this public, The sixth principle, .... CHAPTER XVI. PASTORS ARE ELDERS OR BISHOPS. Variously described, but bishop and pres- byter one office — Never spoken of as distinct offices— Terms interchangeably used — Three positions, describing rank and duty — Rank restricted, so oversight, The seventh principle, .... 70 71 CHAPTER XVII. ELDERS, THEIR NUMBER AND FUNCTIONS. (1.) A plurality in every church — (2.) The labour divided — Pastors both taught and ruled— Elders who chiefly ruled, . 75 The eighth principle, . . . .77 CHAPTER XVIII. ELDERS, THEIR POSITION AND POWER. Love of power shown amongst the dis- ci'iles — Christ's law on this subject — The apostleship temporary — No supe- riority amongst ordinary ministers — One platform amongst Ephesian elders —So in Philippian and other Churches ^AU on equality — Authoritatively ap- pointed—To regulate— Members sub- mitting willingly. Elders the only ordi- naiy administrators, ministerially, and entitled to cheerful obedience, . . 73 The ninth principle, ... .79 CHAPTER XIX. 2. The Office of Deacon. The origin of the office — Division of la- bour, so that neither temporal nor spiritual things neglected — Tlie order observed in their appointment — The title 'deacon,' and its absence in that narrative, ...... 80 Not instituted only for an emergency, as, solemnly instituted, recorded, and filled up in all other Churches, . . 81 'Helps' — Apost'i"; and elders acted as deacons— Con lianlly necessaiy, . 81 The tenth principle, .... 82 CHAPTER XX. 3. The Call to Office. 1. Theinner call.— The disciples by Christ personally — This office, and the inner call to it, still from Him — No Church act can prove a substitute for this — His commission must be acknowledged and given eS"ect to S3 2. The outer call from the people— Im- portant for prevention of evils — Brought about by His arrangement — Hence a duty and privilege, as formerly. First, Election of an apostle — Secondly, The election of the seven deacons — Thirdly, The election of elders— Fourthly, The election of a fellow-labourer of the apostles, 84 The eleventh principle, . . . .87 CHAPTER XXI. ORDINATION. 3. Ordination completes the title to office— (a) An apostle, (b) The deacons, (c) Barnabas and Saul, (d) The elders, (e) Timothy— In three cases, imposi- tion of hands — In four, a special ser- vice of prayer — The titles ' ordination,' by the 'presbytery,' scriptural — What ordination is — The duty of the elder- ship or presbytery, .... Imposition of hands, its meaning— A sign, no spiritual efficacy in itself — De- pendence on God for that blessing shown by prayer, .... These five cases not the communication of the power of the Spirit, . OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. la what capacity the apostles ordained those elected or selected — Titus no ex- ception, 91 The twelfth principle, . . , .91 CHAPTER XXII. 4. Administration in— 1. THE CHURCHES. The divine rule regarding the Churches — Confusion pi'evented and peace pro- moted only by government — The term concrete also, 92 Third application of Church — A single congregation. Modern application to the building or place of meeting — Not generally misunderstood, . . .93 Government administered in each Church by associated elders — Seen in election and ordination, and other instances — Apostles acting as elders — So directions for admission, regulation, expulsion, imply this, 94 The thirteenth principle, . . .95 CHAPTER XXIII. 2. CHURCHES OF A LOCALITY. Question, whether single congregations, or more than one in the places men- tioned—In several instances 'a plural- ity of congregations ' are found ' under one common government,' to which the term ' Church ' is given— This is a fourth application of the term — Seen — 1. In Jerusalem, from the number of dis- ciples, and of preachers, . . .96 2. Similar features are recognized in An- tioch — Inference, . . . .98 o. Corinth expressly reveals ' Churches' in the one Church^Also a Church at Cenchrea — These declarations addi- tional to the same features above named, 99 4. Ephesus had 'a Church' in a private dwelling besides the Cliurch proper — That Church very extensive, and hav- ing many teachers— High probability as formerly, 100 5. Laodicea had one Church distin- guished from another, and both termed ' one Church,' 102 6. Rome had small stated assemblies in private dwellings, recognized as por- tions of the one Church at that place, 103 Probability in the case of Antioch rising almost to absolute certainty in that of Jerusalem— In four other places a plu- rality under one government is pre- sented, removing all doubt, and illus- trating the rule regarding confusion and peace, 104 The fourteenth principle, . . . 104 CHAPTER XXIY. 3. THE DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY. In vai'ious aspects this assembly a model for the Church universal, . . . 105 § 1. Its Co^isiiYttiioTO.—' The Church,' and apostles and elders, welcome a deputa- tion—Three parties— The deputation, the elders, the apostles, all represen- tatives—Private members do not appear deliberating — The reference not to them— The others come to consider- No private member spoke — The de- cision ordained by ' apostles and elders,' 105 § 2. Its Occasion.— Judaizing teachers at Antioch — Enforcing the law of Moses essential to salvation— Failure of local elders to settle the dispute— Why uot settled by an inspired apostle ? an au- thority in which all could acquiesce necessary — The question having a wider range than Antioch, consequent- ly a reference and deputation appointed — Both parties present with the refer- ence at Jerusalem, .... 107 § 3. Deliberation. — Proof of authority possessed, and of accordance with the divine will — Must have been for au example — First, A full discussion — Secondly, The apostles' reasoning upon the question is noted— James' proposi- tion not a final decision till acquiesced in by the apostles and elders — Not a decision of inspiration — Ordinary means employed to ascertain the mind of God, 110 § 4. The Decision. — The authority of God in His Word and providence recog- nized — Terms of the deliverance — Liberty and prohibition — The prohibi- tions necessary from peculiarities of the age — The use of blood no longer prohibited, as not now countenancing idolatry — Legal sacrifices have ceased, and every creature good — All the mem- bers of the Church present concurred— Important for the thorough satisfaction of the agitated Churches — Decision drawn by reasoning, .... 112 § 5. Its Recognition. — Commissioners de- livered and declared the decrees — Accepted cordially, not as a mere ad- vice— Not confined to Antioch — No sci'uple or refusal — Accepted as autho- ritative, 115 This the highest instance of government, binding the entire visible Church — Churches not detached, but united under one government — Another indi- cation of such government, this the fullest — Power in appeals as in re- view, 116 The judgment embraced doctrine, dis- cipline, worship, and government — A brilliant example, .... 117 The fifteenth principle, . . . .117 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER XXY. THE SCRIPTUEAL GOVERNMENT. The questions answered— This govern- ment permanent — The example left — Action in concert by responsible officers — With concurrence of the membership, 110 Essential scriptural principles, , . 120 Combined into one — Government by ' the presbytery,' 121 The one pervading feature, by 'divine right,' 122 PART 11. PRESBYTERY — UNTENABLE OR INVINCIBLE ? Unity apostolic. — Divisions evil— Which or whether any prevailing polity essentially divine ? Government Devised.— % 1. Separatism.— * The Holy'— The Friends- Ply- mouthists.— § 2. Erastianism.— § 3. Libertinism. Government Localized. — Independency — Congregationalism. Government Centralized. — I. Prelacy. — § 1. Support in Scripture. — § 2. Antiquity.— § 3. Expediency. II. The Papacy.— Supremacy— Church— Ministry- Standard- Worship—The System Doomed. Government Harmonized. — Presbyterial Episcopacy. — § 1. Liberty. — § 2. Authority.— § 3. Unity. CHAPTEPv I. CHURCH DIVISIONS. Unity the condition of the Apostolic Church — Danger from parties — The outward bond and the spiritual centre, 127 Evil of mere outward union— Essential unity possible with outward separation — Evils of division, how remedied, . 128 Why this question has been variously aiiswei-ed — Five grand distinctions — Which or whether any prevailing polity is essentially divine, .... 129 Settlement not by human authority or moral worth, but by the application of S';riptural principles, .... 130 CHAPTER II. Government Devised. § 1. SEPARATISM. Division into those who deny and who attirm scriptural government — Three classes deny and devise — Professed characteristics. 131 1. ' The Holy ' to be distinguished from 'The Men,' 132 2 The Society of Friends or Qual-ers.— Why so classified — Peculiarities after- wards dealt with— Preaching for hire and the ministry — Origin of the Society and name of Quaker— Why baptism and the Supper rejected— System of government by meetings— Results and anticipations, ..... 132 3. Flymouthism or Brethrenism. (1.) Their chosen sphere.— Active opera- tions—Separatist the proper appella- tion — The apostolic rebuke — Usual mode of procedure— Their apology- Object— Dangerous tendency, . . 135 (2.) Their Or/fifm.— Walkerism, Kellyism — The term ' Plymouthist ' — Schism and parties— Operations in America — Avowed objects should be known, . 136 (3.) Views of the C7mrc/i.— Origin ascribed to Pentecost— Membership impossible — Positive principles— Call, ' Come out of her,' misapplied— Apostolic customs not equally to be observed— Exercise of discipline— No warrant for Church members to separuty, . , . . 138 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. CHAPTER III. 1. IS EVEEY CHRISTIAN ENTITLED TO ASSUME THE OFFICE OF THE MINISTRY? Four Separatist denials and aflBrmations in rejecting Church officers, . . 142 The gospel ministry is — 1. Divinely authorized, . . . 144 2. Described by various titles,. . . 144 3. Continued by express appvintment, . 145 4. To supply necessities, . . . 145 6. In fulfilment of promises, . . 147 6. Separatist insinuations fallacious. — (1.) From predictions of gospel times — (2.) New Testament declarations — (3.) Examples — (4 ) The persecution at Jerusalem — Who were scattered ?. — (5.) Liberty to prophesy — Miraculous— Not ordinary ministrations — Not liberty for every one, 149 CHAPTEE lY. ^ 2. AEE PUBLIC MINISTRATIONS BY WOMEN LEGITIMATE ? The law announced in four ways. Forbidden by — 1. Apostolic authority.— (l.) 1 Cor. xiv. Disorders the occasion, not the reason —(2.) 1 Tim. ii. The contrast— Public prayer also forbidden — The formulas show a deliberate judgment of inspira- tion, 158 2. The practice of the Churches. — Founded on model of the synagogue — Includes every organized assembly of whatevei kind where both sexes are, . . 161 8. The principles of Scripture.— The law of the animal kingdom extended — Law of relationship must be regarded — Two reasons — Creation — Fall — Woman's proper sphere— Not founded on tran- sient exigency, 1C3 4. Reason protesting against the practice. — In what way a shame? 1 Cor. xi. — — Desires for knowledge met— Not ex- cluded from labour in ihe gospel— Ob- jections valueless— Only three methods open — (a) Denial of reasons — b) Denial of inspiration — (c; or submission to the command, '. 165 CHAPTER V. 3. IS A SETTLED MINISTERIAL INCOME UNLAWFUL? Answers of Scripture, 1 Cor. ix.— Phra- seology of Sepai'atists- Miiller's case no example, 169 CHAPTER YI. 4. WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OR OUTWARD GUIDE ? Assertions — Development of Separatism a practical refutation — Testimony of the Rev. C. H, Spurgeon—Burgess' question, J 73 CHAPTER YII. Government Devised. § 2. ERASTIANISM. Views of Thomas Erastus — Admissions — Followers — Threefold principle, . 177 Supports tested — 1. Government of the Jewish Church, . 179 2 Jewish magistrates, . . . .181 3. Prophets and apostles, . . . 181 4. The government of the Church is therefore distinct from the State, . 1S3 CHAPTER YIII. Government Devised. § 3. LIBERTINISM. Liberty to choose or reject claimed — Three questions, ..." 184 1. Is this government to be according to human discretion ? . . . . 184 2. Has the monarch ceased to care for his subjects? 1S5 3. ]May the government be altered or dis- pensed with? 189 CHAPTER IX. Government Localized. I. INDEPENDENCY. Two prominent ideas — Origin and extent of the Independent form — General pi'inciples alone accessible, . . 190 Independency. — The question, Was there a common government? answered by two propositions : — 1. The Church one body, possessing a common government — Proof fourfold, . 191 (1.) Numerous Christians, (2.) Teachers, (3.) Associated in government— (4.) Congregations so associated terme.d one Church, 192 The Church of a nation a proper title — The reading of Acts ix. 31— Efforts to destroy the force of these passages — Conclusion — To whatever extent an associated government, to that extent one Church, 194 CHAPTER X. 2. GOVERNMENT OP CHURCHES WIDELY SCATTERED. The assembly at Jerusalem is proof suffi- cient of second proposition, . .196 Two waysofregardiug it by Independents, 1. Not an example of an infallible deci- sion, 197 2. Not of advice of one Church to an- other—(a) The reference not to the Church — (6) Not advice, but a decree issued, 198 3. Various Churches were subordinate to the decision, 200 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. 4. Necessities not met by the Independ- ent plan — (a) Individual cases — (6) • Tliose afifecting the Church generally— (c) An enlightened administration im- possible in every case, . . . 201 I 5. Courts of review acknowledged by earlier Independents — Those at West- minster — Dr Thomas Goodwin — Dr John Owen, 204 CHAPTER XI. Government Localized. II. CONGREGATIONALISM. In this second aspect, three sections of inquiry, 206 § 1. HAVE THE PEOPLE AUTHORITY TO RULE ? Christ's rule for offences, Matt, xviii. understood by — (1.) The procedure in Jewish courts, . 207 (2.) The practice of Apostolic Churches, 209 Discipline in the Corinthian Church — Four assertions, .... 211 CHAPTER XII. § 2. WHO ARE TO BEAR OFFICE ? 1. The Ruling Elder rejected by Congre- gationalists and Prelatic Episcopalians — Adifference— The evidence, . . 214 2. Deacons substituted. — Confessions — Rev. Mr James— Dr Campbell, . . 217 3. Eminent Independents contend for scriptural usage, .... 218 CHAPTER XIII. § 3. THE EXTENT OF OFFICIAL POWER. 1. Elders alone authorized to rule.— As a parent — Injunctions, .... 220 (1.) Exercised in admission— (2.) Disci- pline—The keys an ordinary power committed— For every age, . . 222 (3.) The act of ordination. When adopted by Independents — When denied, . 224 2. Mule by all incompatible. — Admissions — Conjoint impossible, . . . 226 All real power withheld from Congrega- tionalist members — Authority vested in elders — Assemblies to guard the peoples rights, 228 CHAPTER XIV. Government Centralized, I. PRELATIC-EPISCOPACT. § 1. SUPPORT IN SCRIPTURE.— THE QUES- TION AND THE THREEFOLD MINISTRY. The High Church theory — Perpetuity of the apostleship in an order of lordly power — Presbyters deprived of rule, and without authority if not ordained by a prelate 231 Substitution of distinction of orders in the discussion inadmissible — Grand question. Whether an order of exclu- sive rank and power is essential and permanent? 233 § 1. Support in Scripture— Ambiguous definitions and shifting appeals — The Low Church view — A threefold order, 233 (1.) Were New Testament bishops pre- lates? This is assumed— Proofs that bishop and presbyter identical, .... 234 The question decided by the ablest critics of the Chui-ch of England — Prelacy not being mentioned, cannot be essential, . 234 'Confirmation' is not scriptural, but ordination is, by presbyters, . . 238 Allegations that Paul alone ordained Timothy, or that the ofiBce of the pres- byterate is intended, refuted, . . 239 (2.) Did Christ appwint priests under the Gospel f Three subordinate questions must not be overlooked — Ministers, as all Chris- tians, only priests in a subsidiary sense — The use of the term dangerous, as well as unauthorized, . . . 240 (3.) Were deacons constituted ministers of the Wordf Proof that the office was for temporal con- cerns, confirmed by prelatic writers, . 241 Acknowledgment that presbyters and deacons are more essential, . . 244 CHAPTER XY. DID CHRIST APPOINT PRELATIO BISHOPS? Christ, the twelve, and the seventy said to constitute three orders. Had the twelve authority over the seventy ? — Reply in the negative, . 2^5 Was Christ a separate ministerial order? — The theory a fiction, . . . 247 CHAPTER XVI. WERE THE APOSTLES DIOCESAN BISHOPS? The title bishop not applied to the apos- tles— Their universal commission dis- proves the theory — If true, it would overthrow other prelatic assertions — Eleven instances supposed, . . . 249 Was James Bishop of Jerusalem ? — The evidence totally insufficient — Facts disprove the assertion, . . .25] CHAPTER XVII. WERE- TIMOTHY AND TITUS APOSTLE- BISHOPS ? Was Timothy prelatic bishop ofEphesus ? — (1.) The Ephesians had other bishops — (2.) If any one, Paul might have been their bishop — (3.) Timothy was sent thither as an evangelist — the assertion negatived by candid prelatists, . . 253 10 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. Was Titus prelatic hifhnp of Crete?— One word disproves this assertion— The se- lection unfortunate — Titus did not or- dain alone — Paul the master, Timothy and Titus his messengers — Their office a necessity — The postscripts interpo- lations— Dr Whitby's repudiation of the theory, 255 Epaphroditus a prelate, because he car- ried money — Translators of the Eng- lish Bible have decided against this, . 257 CHAPTER XVIII. THE ANGELIC AND OTHER THEORIES. Were the angels of the seven Churches dio- cesan bishops f A mystical term is not a sufficient basis, yet the prelatic refuge — Explanations of the term 'angel' are difficult to all others — Two probable, .... 258 (1.) A company of men— Angel used for gospel preachers— (2.) One representa- tive man — A select messenger highly probable — Dr Trench's exceeding strong argument for the episcopate not conclusive — Answered by Dr istilling- fleet 260 Bo angels above authorize prelacy below ? The assertion contradictory of Scripture, and prelacy wanting, .... 202 Does the Old Testament priesthood sanc- tion a Neio Testament prelacy f Jerome's statement — The consequences, if applicable — Wherein the argument fails— The inference, . . . .263 No authority for Prelacy — Two direct charges against Prelacy — Litton's ac- knowledgment, and Dr Onderdonk's conclusion, 2G5 CHAPTER XIX. APOSTOLIC SUCCESSION— IS IT FACT OR FICTION ? The High Church claim overthrown by two facts, The position to be maintained is, that this succession never began, . . 206 Succession to the apostles implies posses- sion of their endowments — Dr Isaac Barrow's declaration — Apostolical power not to continue, . . . 267 Men of an apostolical spirit different from holding the office, .... 268 The evidence of unbroken succes- sion wanting — Apostolic endowments claimed by bishops collectively — The theory not only speculative but de- structive, . 269 CHAPTER XX. § 2. WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? The demonstration of Prelacy — Poor sup- port for four reasons, .... 271 Was the Church of the first three centuries Frelatic or Fresbyterian ? The argument hypothetical, sustained by equivocal allusions — Statement by Theodoret in fifth century, . . . 272 (1.) Some hold Scripture insufficient, and consequently defective, and place their chief reliance for Prelacy upon anti- quity—(2.) Others, while Scripture is sufficient, antiquity confirms Prelacy — A slight distinction not enough— The place of the apostolical fathers — Corro- boration of a fact already established alone legitimate, 272 The testimony of Clement of Rome — Five particulars, 274 /'o/t/cot'J)— Fourparticulai's, . . . 276 Ignatius — Only three of fifteen epistles regarded— Their character, . . . 278 The difference between Ignatius and those living after him, . . • . 278 Justin Martyr— His conversion — Writ- ings— Account of the Church, . . 279 Cyprian the great battle-field — The changes in his time— Rights of the presljyters and members— Sir Peter King's inquiry — Deacons — Relations of Churches, 280 Clement and Polycarp the chief wit- nesses—Prelatic confessions, . . 282 CHAPTER XXI. CAN THE INTRODUCTION OF PRELACY BE ACCOUNTED FOR ? This explanation not absolutely neces- sary, yet possible, .... 285 1. Prelacy accounted for otherwise than by apostolic sanction, .... 285 2. Not necessary to charge martyrs with its sudden introduction — During two centuries an alteration clearly trace- able— Jerome's testimony accepted, . 285 CHAPTER XXII. § 3. THE ARGUMENT FROM EXPEDIENCY. (1.) Expediency the resort when other supports fail— Paley's view — Dr Hooker — Four considerations of utility — (2.) Distinction between order and de- gree— Usher — Consequences — (3. ) Pro- per to submit to civil and ecclesiastical authorities— Can arrangements desti- tute of Scripture authority be allowed ? — Dr Whately's disallowance — The lowlier and safer path, . . . 287 Prelacy inexpedient. — Remedy worse than disease — The system, not those within Tc, held inexpedient — Failed in pro- moting the extension and beneficial regulationof the Church— Instances, . 291 Conclusion. — (1.) The arguments are be- side the question— (2.) Prelacy has not been proved to be of Divine right — (3.) Presbytery fully established — Assumptions — Presumptions — And longings, 293 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. II CHAPTER XXIII. Government Centralized. II. THE PAPACY. The climax— The Popish assumption- Monarchical government — Authorized by the decisions of the Council of Trent, 294 1. The Supremacy — Misquotations of Scripture— The Church not a mon- ster—A visible head unnecessary — Claim of gifts as well as the office of Christ — Apostasy the consequence of submission, 297 ?. Nature of the Church — Always visible, 299 3. The Ministry corrupted — Priests — Ex- ternal organization — Power of absolu. tion, 300 4 The Standard of iato— Added to — Withheld— Prejudged, . . . .301 5. Worship, sacraments, and doctrines corrupted, 301 6. Tlie system doomed by divine predic- tions in Daniel, Paul, John, . . 302 CHAPTER XXIV. Government Harmonized. PRESBTTEKIAL EPISCOPACY. Three important conditions of good government, 305 1. Liberty, not lawlessness, secured — Church power inherent in all the mem- bership— This is for doctrine, discip- line, worship, and government — Exer- cised in well-appointed cliannels — (1.) Election — All have an equal voice in the selection of officers- Essential to liberty— (2.) Eej^resentation— Exercise of power by representatives consistent with liberty— (3.) Assent or consent must be obtained in extraordinary cases — (4. ) Ajjpeal and protest — If aggrieved, there may be reference or appeal— Protest the last resort— The ruling elder the embodiment of free- •dom, 305 2. Authority.— 'Mimsterml authority not from the people, but from Christ — To make and associate disciples — The highest office— No authority to domi- nate. Manifestations — Separatists^ Congregationalism — Popery — Prelacy — The argument from monarchy in- volves Popery — Contradicted by Scrip- ture and experience — How dignity rises and falls — Equal authority — Ten- dencies to Prelatic Episcopacy — Pres- byterial parity manifesting authorita- tive guidance and instruction, . . 309 3. Unity maintained is manifested— (1.) Locally — (a) Conjunct government manifests unity in the congregation — (&) So, amongst neighbouring asso- ciated congregations, as a river — This impossible when there is a refusal to unite — This removable — Circumstan- ces regulate extent and regularity — In- dependency may be a necessity, . . 316 (2.) Nationally. — In a province, for re- view of proceedings and difficulties in presbyteries — So, in a nation, the smaller subject to the larger, and that to the Church — Continual association of teaching and ruling elders neces- sary— People ought not to assemble for deliberation — Two chambers — The check provided — Free representative assemblies the cardinal principle, . 318 (3.) Universally. — The government co- extensive with the Church — Difficulty of solution — Two questions— (a) Is uni- versal government by Presbytery sci'ip- tural ? — Answered by commission, actions, predictions — (b) Has such government been beneficially exem- plified ? 322 Three instances— (1.) The Council of Nice — Occasion — Proceedings — Benefit — (2.) The Si/nod of Dor t — Convention^ Decision — Usefulness — (3.) The West- minster Assembly — General — The re- sult, 323 May not universal representative govern- ment obtain its proper place?— Only great questions — At rare intervals — A grand moral spectacle — The Evangeli- cal Alliance — Something more definite necessary — Cannot yet be authorita- tive— May it not be for conference ? — How obstacles to the establishment of the kingdom may be removed, . . 327 No modern fancy — Reformers, English ministers, Second Book of Discipline, and Westminster divines desired it — The hope of the world, . . .329 Table scriptural principles — How re- garded by the Churches, . . . 331 The finding from the previous scriptural inquiry — In this examination Presby- tery remains — Presbytery the medium of harmony — Wherein it harmonizes with Prelacy and Independency — Presbytery, in its fundamental prin- ciples, binding by divine right, . . 332 If universal assembly possible— Still 'the Presbytery' subject to the guidance of the Word and Spirit of Christ— Liberty, authority, unity nowhere else— Most fully exercised and harmonized when moved by the Holy Spirit, . . . 333 12 OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. PAET III. THE PAST AND PRESENT CONDITION OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH.- A HISTORICAL CONFIRMATION. CHAPTER I. STARS IN THE NIGHT. Chronological table, first five centuries, 336 § 1. Early condition of the kingdom. —Lis foundation laid — Its influence extended — Prevailing characteristic of govern- ment— Whether history confirms, a question of interest— Hindrances of the period— The evidence defective- Sufficient to establish five particular facts in the first three centuries — Cloud spreading over the firmament, . . 337 Chronological Tree, see p. 567. § 2. Times of darkness. — The fog and its requirements— The starlight obscured by three methods, .... 339 Fourth century— Jerome, Ambrose, and Augustine 340 Fifth and sixth centuries— Law of the Church— Nine bishops in Italy, . . 341 Seventh century— Papal corruptions — Mansuetus— The Paulicians,- . . 341 Eighth century— Bede and his work- Bavaria, 343 Ninth century— Claud of Turin, . . 344 Tenth, eleventh, and twelfth centuries— The Cathari and Albigenses, . . 345 Thirteenth century— These and the Wal- denses spread over Europe, . . 246 Fourteenth century— John Wickclifife, . 346 Fifteenth century_John Huss, Jerome of Prague, and the Lollards, . . 347 CHAPTER IL THE CDLDEES. 1. Introduction of Christianity. — By highway between Britain and Syria — By the transport ships of Rome — By the persecution — The missions of Ninias and Palladius abortive, . . 350 . 2. The Green Isle.— Va,tiick,his churches and presbyters, 352 ■ 3. Missionary Institutes. — Columba and lona — Abernethy— The Holy Isle- Why termed Culdees — The Church not prelatic, nor popish, but presby- terial, 353 [4. The Struggle — Two discussions proof that not subject to Rome— Coleman's protest — How and when subdued — Murray's protest— Traces of its exist- ence and influence, .... 355 CHAPTER IIL THE WALDENSES. § 1. The FaZZeys.— Magnificent situation — Present limited condition, . . 358 § 2. Origin. — Assertions as to Waldo — Bruys— The NoUa Ley^on, . . 360 § 3. Persecutions, for five centuries — Instances of divine protection — Crom- well—Banishment, colonization, re- turn—Still a people— Milton's ode, . 362 § 4. Government. — Essentially presbyte- rial — Dr G-illy and others— Practices — Creed— Assertion that this recently introduced a mere supposition, . . 364 § 5. Present order and condition, . . 367 CHAPTER IV. THE EEFORMATION. — GERMANY. Supremacy of Rome— The Church re- formed after the divine model — Ty- ranny felt, but not withstood — A feeble presbyter instrumental, . . . 372 § 1. !Z'AePrtf56]/^er.— Luther's propositions — Papal demands and bulls consumed — Diet of Worms declared Luther and others enemies of the empire — The Wartburg— Demand of German princes — The action of the Elector of Saxony followed, 373 § 2. The Pi'Otest.— Change of religion de- clared to be unlawful, protested against, 375 § 3. The Augsburg Confession. — The com- pact—Conference — Confession — This not permitted to be read in public, and declaration of vengeance — War, . . 376 § 4. Positions and Priiiciples. — ISo diffei-- euce of ministerial rank — Superinten- dents—Restoration of doctrine only by the overthrow of false government^ Luther's views — Articles of Smalcald and the Lutheran Church — Too much yielded to magistrates, . . . 377 § 5. Religious Condition. — The Prussian State — Bavaria — Wurtemberg — Saxony —The Moravians— Spiritual life— Ra- tionalism 380 Table of statistics, 383 CHAPTER V. SWITZERLAND AND THE REFORMERS. • § 1. The Sxviss Reformation. — Simultane- I ous enlightenment of Zwingle— Un- OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. 13 trammelled exposition— Opposition to indulgences — Reformation iu Zurich — Calvin the second founder — Church at Geneva presbyterial before he came, . 389 §2. Polity of the Reformers. — Ignor&nt assertion that invented by Calvin — His accurate exposition, and its first establishment— Liberty^ authority, and unity, 392 §3. Artful practices of Prelatic contra- versiaiists. — Wordsworth's garbled ex- tracts— Endeavours to pi-oye Calvin and Beza in favour of Prelacy — Luther'3 reproof, 394 § 4. JPresent condition of Swiss Churches, 396 CHAPTER VI. FKANCE AND KEFOKMATION. § 1. Progress amidst persecution. — Meaux and Brissonet — Le Clerc— Francis I. and Margaret of Navarre — Huguenots, 398 § 2. Organization. — La Chambre Ardente —Noblemen— Synod of 1559, . . 400 § 3. ,The Massacre and the medal — D'Aubigny's account of sufferings, 1572 ■ — The instigators and the king — Feeling of horror — Rome's joy — The medal — The end not accomplished — Henry IV. and the issue — Defenders of polity, . 401 §4. Present condition of Protestantism, 404 CHAPTEE VII. OTHEK CONTINENTAL CHURCHES. § 1. Italy— Libert// and Infallibility. Confessors in the sixteenth century — The recent awakening — Infallibility — Signer Gavazzi's account — Three stages — Advantages in Rome and Italy, . 408 The Old Catholic movement in various places, 413 § 2. Spain and Portugal. Contact with Reformation views by the wars of Charles V. — Confessors de- stroyed— Spain has now the Scriptures and ample toleration — First Assembly in 1869, 415 In Portugal the Inquisition abolished, but destitute of a reformer— Dr Kalley's work, and other efforts, . . . 416 § 3. Austria. 1. Hereditary provinces— Reformation- Extinction— Toleration — Organization, 418 2. Bohemia, Silesia, and Gallicia — Posi- tion and historic interest of Bohemia — The choice of 17S1 — Disadvantages — Book of order, 419 3. Hungary — Organization in five free cities — The treaty of Vienna and of 1711— The freest constitution, . .423 4. Transylvania — Liberty in 1791 — Table of Churches in Austria, . . . 425 § 4. Poland. Evangelical truth possessed prior to the Reformation— The Synod and book of order— John a Lasco— Great and Little Poland — The confederation abrogated — Socinianism, 425 § 5. Russia and Greece. Peculiarity as to Greco-Russian priests — Limits of toleration — Constitution in Greece, 426. § 6. DenmarTc, Sweden, and Norway. Beginnings of Reformation — The Churches all Lutheran — Erastianism — Change by political constitutions — Greater independence desired — ' The bishop' — Ih Sweden the government in a sense Presbyterial, having more self-government — Theological schools — Pietistic party— The Danish consti- tution— Swedish and Norwegian regula- tions—Table of Scandinavian Churches, 427 § 7. Holland. Revolt of Seven Provinces — Liberty se- cured by the Prince of Orange, . . 431 Polity of the Swiss adopted— The Synod of Dort— Co-ordination not realized, . 432 Statistics of Dutch Reformed Church, . 434 § 8. Belgium. A small Protestant community divided in sentiments— Synod at Brussels, . .435 European national statistics, . , 436 CHAPTER VIIT. ENGLAND AND PEESBYTEKT. § 1. Exceptional adoption of Prelacy. — For fifty years after the Reformation — The king's supremacy — The Six Ar- ticles— Restoration of Popery — The Puritan element — Reformation ar- rested, 437 g 2. The Presbyterian Church. — Religious meeting forcibly interrupted — The first regular presbytery — Rise of Congrega- tionalism— Rise of High Churchism — The 'millenary petition' and Hampton Court conference— Absolutism — Parlia- mentary struggle, .... 442 § 3. The Westminster Assembly. — Desire for further reformation — The ordin- ances— The proceedings and decision, 447 § 4. Presbyterian and other Churches. — Condition after the Revolution — Uni- tarianism — Revival of evangelical re- ligion— Presbyterian Church, . . 452 Welsh Calvinistic, Congregational, and Methodist Churches— The Church of England, 455 CHAPTER IX. THE CHURCH OF SCOTLAND. Chronological diagram — History and branches of the Church of Scotland, . . 462 u OUTLINE OF CONTENTS. § 1. TJie Reformation Church.— ComV\t\on in the sixteenth century — Call of Knox — Abolition of Popery — First General Assembly — First Book of Discipline — The Tulchan bishops, , . .463 § 2. The Second, Book of Discipline'. — What implied by Establishment — The charter of the Church, . . .471 § 3. The two Prelacies. — The 'angelical' assembly — The Second Reformation — Second twenty-eight years' struggle , with Absolutism through Prelacy, . 478 § -4. The Church of (he Revolution. — Re- formed Presbyterian or 'Cameronian' Church — Dissatisfaction — The Union of Scotland with England — Restoration of Patronage — 'Moderatism' and dissent — 'New Light' splits and unions — The Relief— United Presbyterian Church, 484 § 5. The conflict and the Free Church- Large-hearted liberality, . . . 492 §6. The Established Church— The union of Churches, 499 § 7. Independency and Episcopacy, . 503 CHAPTER X. IRELAND AND PRESBYTERY. § 1. Early Stages .—Tmnsfer of Ireland to England, and triumph of Popery — Futile attempts at reformation — At- tempts at colonization — Dr Usher and Presbyterians — Prelatic persecutions — The massacre, 505 § 2. Organization. — Carrickfergus Pres- bytery and loyalty — Renewed persecu- tions 508 § 3. Derry and liberty. — The traitor Lundy^Defence of the city — Relief — ' The Regium Donum ' — Prelatic oppo- sition— Internal defection, . . 509 § 4. Union and progress. — Secession operations — Union in 1840 — ' Commu- tation and sustentation,' . . . 512 Statistics of Church and United King- dom, 514 § 5. Prelacy. — Disestablishment and re- construction, 515 Table — Presbyterial Church in Great Britain and Ireland, .... 518 CHAPTER XL AMERICA AND PRESBYTERY. § 1. Organization. — Romish missions— 'The Pilgrim Fathers '—First Presby- tery in Philadelphia— The Dutch in New York — Extensive field and opera- tions—The ' Log College' and Univer- sities, . 519 § 2. Branches and Unions. — (1.) Old and New Schools — Opposition to re-union — (2.) The Dutch Reformed— (3 ) The German Reformed — (4.1 The Lutheran — (5.) Scottish Secession and other Churches, 523 § 3. First General Assembly of the Re- united C/i wrc/i.— Statistics, . . .533 CHAPTER XII. PRESBYTERY IN BRITISH COLONIES. § 1. British North America. — Canada — Population — Presbyterian Churches — Negotiations for union — Basis agreed to, September 1871, . . . .538 § 2. West Indies, § 3. Gibraltar— Malta. 541 §4. South Africa. — Dutch Reformed Presbyterian — Formation and extent — Struggle with Rationalism — Synod of 1870, 542 Other Colonial Churches — Natal — Orange Free Territory — Transvaal Republic— The Cape— Statistical table, . . 545 § 5. Australasia — 1. Victoria — Origin, union, extent, . 547 2. New South "Wales — Past and present condition, 549 3. Eastern Australia — Endowment of college, 550 4. Tasmania — Struggle with ' the bishop' — Ununited, .... 550 5. Western Australia, one Church, . 551 6. South Australia — Extent of United Church, 551 7. Queensland— Population, . . 552 8. New Zealand — Situation, climate, and capabilities — Ecclesiastical his- tory— Presbyterian Church of New Zealand — Church of Otago and South- land—Statistics of population, , 552 9. New Hebrides' mission, . . . 55S Table of Australasian Churches, . . 559 § 6. Egypt; § 7. China and Japan, . 55!:» '^^. India; %9. Siiria, . . . .561 Colonial Empire of Great Britain. . . 565 General Statistics of Presbyterian Church, 560 Proportion of Presbyterians to Protest- ants, 566 Chronological tree, 567 CHAPTER XIII. PRESBYTERIAL POSITION AND PROSPECTS. One result from the threefold inquiry, . 569 The wide-spread adoption and influence of Presbytery— A'l^.proximations, . 570 Obstructions — Separatism — Centraliza- tion, 571 Obstructions from without, ensnaring and unblushing assertions of Prelacy, 572 The Scottish branch essentially Romish, 576 Recent utterances of Deans Ramsay and Stanley, 577 Melville's warning, 582 Obstructions from vjithin — Fruits of Erastian domination, while Presbytery held and acted upon, .... 582 Centralization the most insidious evil — Some assertions of Dr Carson have been, and must be allowed— Dr Cun- ningham— A threefold duty, . . 583 Anticipations, by resisting beginnings of evil, and bringing the government into harmony with the apostolic model, . 585 Disadvantages counterbalanced by ad- vantages — Eucoui-agement — Stimula- tion by the coming glory of the univer- sal dominion of Christ, . . . 587 THE GOVEENMENT KINGDOM OF CHRIST. PAET I. AN INQUIRY AS TO THE ESSENTIAL SCRIPTURAL PRINCIPLES OF CHURCH GOVERNMEET. ' All kino;doms and all princes of the earth Flock to that light : the glory of all lands Flows into her; unbounded is her joy. And endless her increase. . . . . . . From every clime they come To see thy beauty and to share thy joy, 0 Zion ! an assembly such as earth Saw never, such as Heaven stoops down to see." — COWPER. CHAPTEE I. * WHAT SAITH THE SCEIPTUEES 1 ' Has any form of Cliurcli Government been instituted by the Lord Jesus Christ ? If so, what is that particular form ? These questions may be answered thus : — One definite form may be selected, its characteristic features delineated, and that form ■vindicated, by comparing its provisions with Scripture, history, and opposing plans. One theme is thus kept continuously before the mind. This gives concentration in defence. But this course seems already to determine the result. The conclusion is rather assumed than reached by patient investigation. Evidence is sought only to sustain what is believed to be right. Instead of this, a careful investigation may take hold of fun- damental principles, and these in combination may present an actual result. The field of Scripture may be traversed for positions, facts, details. From the stronghold thus constructed, adversaries may be repelled. History may then be traversed for confirmation. If opponents are not effectually dislodged, their outposts may be taken, or put to silence. Let us pursue this last method of inquiry. Let passages of Scripture be considered in their connection, so as to deduce great leading principles, and, if possible, to solve these questions. Let us take note of the Kingdom, its Governor, and Laws. Let us, apart from the din and dust of human contendings and battle- cries, ask after that government of the kingdom which embodies the mind of the Lord ; and then let us compare the result with prevalent forms, and bring it into contact with the facts of his- tory. Assuming that a form has been appointed, two leading aims are before us : First, To ascertain the outstanding features B 18 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. of tliat which Christ and His apostles sanctioned ; Second, To mark what modern form most closely conforms thereto. Careful consideration that the answer be conformable to truth, hearty adoption, energetic and faithful operation, can alone make this inquiry promotive of the glory of God and the good of man. Many have, by birth and training, a goodly heritage, but rest content, without proof of right, by reference to the title- deeds. Most men hold their opinions on this, as on other sub- jects, simply because their fathers maintained them. Searching investigation is beyond their resolution. Bound to a church by many ties, others shrink from inquiry. They fear the discom- fort of a discovery that proper authority is wanting. Others, again, cast about for that church which, in government, as in doctrine and worship, lies nearest to the Word of God. Others still, pronounce that their hill-side is the whole mountain rangOc Surrounding hills cannot be parts of the whole, being destitutg of their high peaks and deep clefts. The Christianity of many is even denied, because wanting their peculiar form. In their ever-thickening mist of scornful denunciation, perplexed travellers stumble and lose their way. For the relief of such travellers, it would be well to have a finger-post erected, pointing out the proper path. Christian men are too apt to put questions of church govern- ment aside, and to reckon these subordinate, if not wholly needless. Doubts are allayed by the declaration that this is a matter of small importance. But it must be asked, Can any revealed truth be unimportant? Some truths alone are absolutely essential for salvation; but every revealed truth is essential to some end. There is, certainly, an immense advantage in being well assured that what we profess to hold has a solid foundation in the Divine Word. Whatever is true is then more firmly possessed. To handle the legal documents, to put your finger on the very words of conveyance, confirms your assurance of possession. In this matter, according as views are unsteady or settled, so will they influence other views of truth and duty. This government is but the outer court of the temple. There you may meet with your Great High Priest ; there His sacrifice may be appropriated ; from thence, by Him, you may be led ' WHAT SAITH THE SCRIPTURES ? ' 19 within the holiest of all. Entering boldly, you may obtain mercy and find grace in your every time of need. Let not the outer court be despised, disowned. The Lord Himself hath planned it. According to His pattern He com- manded its construction. He qualified and authorised its builders and instructors. This is a very large part of God's own house. To it all Israel have free and continual access. Because there the Lord hath recorded His name — comes and blesseth His people — let it have at least some reverential regard. There is, doubtless, an ever-growing tendency to put the mere forms of an outward organization in the stead of spiritual life. It is a possible thing to have the utmost purity of creed and of church government, and yet to have no part in Christ — as, grace being sovereign, it is a possible thing to be saved without these privileges. But they are privileges, nevertheless, and perfectly consistent with, and promotive of, the highest development of living faith. Godly jealousy is necessary to prove that our souls are indeed united to Christ ; but that possession of a vital union renders responsibility all the greater that our church government be that which He has prescribed. We must ' buy the truth, and sell it not.' Prone to look through the magnifying-glass of prejudice, and so to pronounce and act, let us * put on — bowels of mercies, kind- ness, humbleness of mind,' — avoid harsh denunciation, — restor- ing in the spirit of meekness. If connected with a branch of the Church of Christ whose polity as well as doctrine will stand the test of Scripture, then, instead of despising others, * let him Jhat thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall ; ' and, when grieved with evils and inconsistencies in churches, as in individuals, let us carry these burdens to the divine footstool, with the cry, ^ 0 Lord, revive Thy work — in wrath remember mercy.' Questions. 1. What interrogations are init regarding clmrch government ? 2. State tivo methods of reply, and say which is to he followed here, with the leading aims to he Icept in view. 3. Give reasons why this inquiry should he earnestly prosecuted. 20 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 4. Answer the ohjection that this matter is uniniioortanU 5. What te7idency requires to he guarded against 2 6. In ivhat spirit should the inqidry he prosecuted ? CHAPTER II. THE KINGDOM. A KINGDOM is an organised community, ruled over by a monarch, in order to proper regulation and well-being. The king gives authority to wise and equitable laws. The government is ad- ministered by officers of his appointment, and, according to his ordination, courts are held to receive the homage of his subjects, to declare his will, or to exercise beneficial rule. Royal authority is further confirmed by ai)pending the seal of the kingdom to charters bestowed. Because enemies, foreign and intestine, are ever ready to disturb jDublic peace and prosperity, fortifications and strongholds, armies and auxiliaries, are maintained. The kingdom may occupy more than one country, for the community m.ay be widely scattered over land and sea. Wherever the sole authority of one monarch is acknowledged, there exists the one kingdom. Let that monarch be disowned, disorganization pre- vail, other laws have force, other officers have power, adminis- tration be unsettled, the constitution changed, — then, not merely rebellion, but ruin is in store, — the stability of the kingdom is shaken. The Church is the proper kingdom of Christ. This emblem, in every particular, applies. Christ Himself claimed His right of rule. ' My kingdom,' ' The kingdom of heaven,' ' The king- dom of God.' There is more here than emblematic language. In all essentials the Church is a real kingdom, in which the government of Christ is truly exercised. This, also, consists of a Monarch, an organised community, and laws. His government is exercised by officers in a settled course. They are duly com- missioned. All is well and wisely ordered. Irregularities arise from the intermingling of human passions, thoughts, and actions THE MONARCH. 21 ill these affairs. The temporal idea sets forth distinctly the spiritual reality. . Foreign foes — the gates . of hell — continually seek the overthrow of the Church of Christ. Corrupt members and officers, professedly building the walls of Zion, in reality cause the work to cease. Traitors, deceitful hearts, may be bribed into conspiracy. ISTevertheless, the kingdom is secure. Each subject, provided with suitable armour, is enrolled, trained, called out, to fight the good fight. The hosts of heaven are ready with instant assistance. The attributes of the Godhead are strong ramparts, — Salvation, impregnable walls and bul- warks. ' God is in the midst of her : she shall not be moved.' Questions. " 1. Describe the chief features of a Icingdom, 2. Wherein lies the analogy in the Church of Christ ? CHAPTER III. THE MONAECH. *Who is this King of Glory?' is the question still proposed with reference to this kingdom. The inaugural reply at the dedication of the Temple gives full declaration of His personal and official dignity. 1. Personally He is glorious: 'The Lord strong and MIGHTY,' — almighty to save, almighty to destroy. (1.) Essen- tially ' He is God over all, blessed for ever.' Possessed of excel- lences peculiar to none else, His proper Deity is expressly declared. There is no distinctive mark of Deity that is not ascribed to the Lord Jesus Christ. In the beginning with God — He was God — the Alpha and Omega, Almighty — Omniscient, knowing what is in man — Omnipresent, specially present with His Word, ordinances, servants — by whom all things were created — by whom they consist — honoured as all men honour the Father — raising the dead — sovereign Judge of eternal destinies — the true God and Eternal Life. The highest created intelligences, 22 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. although glorious, are but ministering spirits. Unto the Son, Jehovah saith, ' Thy Throne, O God, is for ever and ever ; a sceptre of righteousness is the sceptre of Thy kingdom.' This is the Sun of the system of grace. (2.) Specially He is the Lord strong and mighty, because ' God manifest in the flesh.' The foundation of His mediatorial character is laid in His incarnation — ' made of a woman, made under the law.' In fulfilment of the conditions of the Covenant of Grace, He partook of flesh and blood. This is the bush burning, never consumed ; celestial fire dwelling in a lowly shrub of earth. This mystical living Person is the glory of Christianity, the Eock on which the Church is built. Here is found ' Glory to God in the highest, peace on earth, goodwill to men,' for He is 'the King, eternal, immortal, invisible, the only wise God, and our Saviour.' 2. Officially He is glorious. ' The Loed mighty in BATTLE.' A great battle was inevitable, Jehovah having deter- mined to deliver the prey from the mighty. By eternal decree, this mighty Lord, the Mediator, was set apart for its accomplish- ment. In His official glory He was predicted by types and prophecy — The Priest-King, ' after the order of Melchisedec,' * King of Ptighteousness, King of Peace' — The Prophet-King like unto Moses, King over Jeshurun, an upright people. — Anointed and victorious King like unto David. — His reign brilliant, peaceful, and extensive, like unto Solomon, having homage bespoke in prophetic song : * Go forth, 0 ye daughters of Jerusalem, and behold King Solomon with the crown.' This great battle and its efiects were foretold from the earliest period. He, the seed of the woman, was to bruise the head of the serpent. He is the Shiloh, the Prince of Peace, to whom the people would be gathered, the Star out of Jacob, bearing the sceptre of dominion, the ' Ptuler in Israel, whose goings forth have been of old, from everlasting.' Lo, He came in the fulness of time, qualified by titles, personal dignity, worth, power, and entered upon that contest, claiming to rule over His kingdom. ' Thou sayest that I am a King : to this end was I born.' To do mighty battle, to destroy the works of the devil, He came forth. This conflict was with the Prince of Darkness. Satan claimed as his right that souls should be held by him in THE MONAECH. 23 eternal bondage. The moral law of God being violated, its penalty was death, temporal, spiritual, eternal. The Lord the Son said, ' Lo, I come.' He became incarnate on purpose to render willing obedience and satisfaction, as Surety, to that broken law. But this Satan resisted. So soon as Jesus was born in Beth- lehem, the conflict be2;an in earnest. Satan assembled his legions, lie rushed to the battle. BafHed in his attempt to murder the Holy Child, he watched his opportunity. Defeated in the wilderness, many agents were employed. They sought •occasion for the overthrow of Jesus. With bitter malignity Satan pursued, till midst an ocean of ungodliness, Messiah was struck down to the dust of death. He endured the crushing curse of the law, ' made a curse for us.' God, men, and devils afflicting, Jesus died. But mark His dying cry : ' It is finished ! ' Then He bowed His head and yielded up the ghost. He fell in death, but Satan was beneath in the death-struggle. Jesus conquered in falling. He arose the Conqueror — arose, as He said, from the tomb, *the First-born from the dead.' * Through death. He destroyed him that had the power of death.' He 'delivered them who, through fear of death, are ^11 their lifetime subject unto bondage.' Never, in heaven or earth, did battle rage more fiercely, and in that conflict Jesus stood alone. Forsaken by every being in the universe — friends and foes on earth — angelic messengers from heaven — yea, left by God the Father — Jesus hung on Calvary. That was a spectacle on which both worlds might gaze with wonder. Then He proved Himself Hhe Lord mighty in battle.' Not as a subject, but as conqueror. He entered the grave, to rob hell and •death of innumerable victims. By His own mighty power and grace He burst open the gates of the pit of woe, and let the oppressed go free. He ' spoiled principalities and powers ; He made a show of them openly, triumphing over them.' 3. ' The Lord of Hosts, He is the King of Gloey.' His might in battle is rewarded : " Exalted a Prince and a Saviour.' By purchase as Mediator, not simply as of essential right, He saith, ' All poaver is given unto Me in heaven and on earth.' Being the true God, all was originally inherently His. The Son of God necessarily possessed unlimited underived power. It was 24 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. in His official character as Mediator tliat sovereignty was con- ferred. Mighty power was ' wrought in Christ when He raised Him from the dead, and set Him at His own right hand in the heavenly places, far above all principality 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 the Head over all things to the Church, which is His body' (Eph. i. 19-23). As- Mediator, Christ is invested by the Godhead with a right ta employ powers, always possessed, for the full salvation of His people. He who is so strong and mighty, so mighty in battle, is advanced to the highest position of honour, seated at the Father's right hand till all His enemies are made His footstool — He is constituted the Lord of Hosts — King of Glory. His- service of transcendent merit, reinstating man in the favour and fellowship of God, required this. ' Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into His glory ? ' To give men a due sense of the value of His work, reward of the highest order was necessary. He had an internal reward — namely, satisfaction in seeing of the travail of His soul. The divine approbation was also given during the execution and at the com- pletion of His work. Regal exaltation was further necessary to manifest His glory. 'He humbled Himself.' 'Wherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name that is above every name.' At His resurrection, and specially at the ascension. He was fully invested. This was the inaugural solemnity. Then, by His own blood He entered once into the holy place. Then His chariots were twenty thousand, thou- sands of angels : the Lord was among them. The approach of the Son of Man, who ascended in the clouds, was unspeakably magnificent. Entrance for Him was demanded : ' Lift up your heads, O ye gates ; and be ye lift up, ye everlasting doors ; and the King of Glory shall come in.' To give opportunity to recount His glory, the keepers of the everlasting gates inquired, ' Who is this King of Glory ? ' Satisfied with His credentials, He was welcomed with songs of praise, by bright burning spirits, to the throne of His glory : — UNIVERSAL SWAY. 25 ' Tliou hasfc, 0 Lord, most glorious, ascended up on high ; And in triumph victorious led captive captivity. Thou hast received gifts for men, for such as did rebel ; Yea, ev'n for them, that God the Lord in midst of them might dwell.' From the first of time He had exercised His royal authority. That was on the ground of His meritorious death, it being absolutely certain. Every one of His acts referred to His victorious conflict. Now, these have more amjDle display and exercise. His ascension was His coronation, His public and solemn investiture, His full and formal recognition. He was conspicuously enthroned, ' the Lord of Hosts, the King of Glory.' Hence His mediatorial rule is both general and special, uni- versal and particular. Questions. 1. Mention the essential and special characteristics of the King. 2. What was the special work foretold and accomplished in and hy Him ? 3. With ivhat poivers was Christ invested on rising from the dead, and ivhy ? 4. In ichat relation did Christ stand to these poivers as God and as Mediator respectively ? CHAPTER lY. UNIVERSAL SWAY. ' All things are delivered unto me of my Father,' is the pro- clamation of the Son of Man. No more universal terms are possible: 'All power,' 'every name,' 'all things under His feet.' Nothing is left that is not put under Christ. The elements, the animate and inanimate ceeation, are at His control : ' Thou madest Him to have dominion over the works of Thy hands ; ' ' Behold, the winds and the sea obey Him.' Plagues of Egypt, waters of the Red Sea, manna from heaven, water from the rock, quails from the east, the river 26 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Jordan, sun and moon in the valley of Ajalon, stars in tlieir courses, lions in their den, fire in the furnace — manifestly there is no creature nor element that is not subject to this Lord. Events in providence. His throne is above the firmament, wherein Avheels within wheels continually revolve. Not a sparrow falleth but by His permission. Angels, good and bad. The seraphim stand around His throne with wings outstretched. Fallen spirits, too, are subject. Satan himself reserved in chains. Men too : ' Thou hast given Him power over all flesh.' Thus, by His gospel, can He reach those far off, thus cause the interests of His Church to be promoted, thus execute His threatened judgments on the wicked. Consequently — Associations of men, of whatever kind, are put under Christ. The ecclesiastical must be subject solely to His will. The civil, too, families and societies, are responsible to be guided by His law. AVere societies of any kind free from moral responsibility, no country could be secure from the grossest crimes. Naturally under law to God, all are placed under law to Christ for the accomplishment of the ends of redemption. Hence — Nations, monarchs, and peoples, are commanded to embrace and serve the Lord, the King. Nations act by rulers, and they, by whatever designation known, are commanded at their peril to serve Messiah. ' Now, therefore, kings be wise, be taught, ye judges of the earth; Serve God in fear, and see that ye join trembling with your mirth. Kiss ye the Son, lest in His ire ye perish from the way : If once His wrath begin to burn, bless'd all that on Him stay.' ' By Me,' saith Christ, ' kings reign, and princes decree justice. By Me princes rule, and nobles, even all judges of the earth.' To His Church He proclaims, ' The nation and kingdom that will not serve thee shall perish, yea, those nations shall be utterly wasted.' The Lord Christ is, therefore, ' the Governor among the nations.' He is ' the Prince of the kings of the earth,' the blessed and only Potentate, 'the King of kings, and Lord of lords;' who can smite the nations, and rule them with a rod of iron. THE PARTICULAR COMMUNITY. 27 Great blessings are in store for nations that acknowledge the truth of Christ, protect and promote the interests of His Church. * The sons of strangers shall build up thy walls, and their kings shall minister unto thee.' Under the universal sway of Zion's King, ' the kings of the earth do bring their glory and honour into it,' ' they shall bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.' 'Then the heathen shall fear the name of the Lord, and all kings of the earth thy glory.' ' They shall speak of the glory of thy kingdom, and talk of thy power. To make known to the sons of men His mighty acts, and the glorious majesty of His kingdom.' * Praise ye the Lord.' Questions. L Give 807116 of the scjnptural €X2oressions that prove the uni- versal sovereignty of Christ. 2. Mention departments of the imiverse under His mediatorial ride. 3. By what considerations are nations and their rulers com- manded to serve Christ and His Church ? CHAPTER V. THE PARTICULAR COMMUNITY. Jehovah saith, ' I have set My King upon Lly holy hill of Zion' (Ps. ii. 6). The inhabitants of the holy hill are spiritual, im- mortal. The kingdom is heavenly, of which they are the subjects. Earthly kingdoms regard men chiefly as temporal. Ordained of God, they exist principally for the promotion of man's material interests. The kingdom of Zion is for heavenly ends. Not simply as possessed of reason, man is regarded as having an immortal soul. His moral and spiritual interests are cared for. This is in order to secure his eternal well-being, and that ' to the praise of the glory ' of Jehovah's grace. Zion's inhabitants are not isolated and self-regulated. They are members of the particular organised community, created, 28 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. upheld, governed by the King. His special subjects are those who belong to ^ the Church of the living God.' The Church is the congregation of the called {>tXy}TOi). They are the called out (s-/.7tXyjffia) of sin and the world, to believe on and unite in serving the King. Hence the word * church,' originally meaning ' an assembly,' is ever employed in Scripture to mean ' a society of believers.' However applied, the word ' church ' ever retains this signification. The extent to which the term is applied must, in each case, be learned from the context. The Church is the organised community of those called together, as the servants and subjects over whom Messiah the King reigns. Delaying various applications of the word, the two principal must here be noted : — Peimakily, those who are called, justified, sanctified, glorified. This is ' the Church ' proper. This comprises only those chosen in Christ before the foundation of the world (Eph. i. 4). In- visible to man, they are known fully to God. Secondarily, those who profess subjection to Christ in all the earth — a visible community, maintaining ordinances for the glory of God and the good of men. These are not two churches : they are difi'erent aspects of the one Church of Christ — the external and the internal. They are visible or invisible to man, who can see only the outward appearance. The visible contains within it that which is in- visible, although the terms are not interchangeable. They are one in the eye of Him who looketh upon the heart. Of that one Church, under both aspects, the Lord Jesus Christ is the sole Head and King. This additional figure of ' head ' is employed to impress us more fully with His sole supremacy : ' He is the head of the body, the Church' (Col. i. 18). Mark how expres- sive is this metaphor. The head is the glory of man, and Christ is the glory of the Church : ' His head is as most fine gold ; ' He is ' the chiefest among ten thousand ; ' ' Yea, He is altogether lovely.' ' The Church, which is His body,' consists of very many and varied members, to whom there is one living directing Head. The human head is distinguished by forethought, device, wise judgment. It is the centre and seat of all that is noble in man, and its entire influence and power are exerted on behalf of the THE PAETICULAE COMMUNITY. 29 body as a whole, and of its several members in particular. To none but its own head is the body subject ; to nothing can any one member consent or act, until the permission and direction of the head have been obtained. Now, whatever the human head is to the body, that Christ is to the Church. The head is the supreme governor of every member ; eyes, ears, hands, feet, all are in perfect subjection. As the head is the monarch of the body, so is Christ of the Church. He only is 'the King of saints.' He is the sole Representative and Surety of the Church invisible before God the Father ; He is the sole Lord, Lawgiver, Director of His visible kingdom on earth : ' ' The government is laid upon His shoulder ' (Isa. ix. 6). Even this figure is insufficient fully to express the supreme glory of Christ in the Church. The human head can neither give being to, nor sustain the human body. The body of which Christ is the Head would never have existed had not He created it. Every individual member receives from Him spiritual life. That existence proves the forethought, wise judgment, sovereign power of the Head. His body is also sustained j all saving truth is imparted by Him : ' Neither knoweth any man the Father, save the Son, and he to whomsoever the Son will reveal Him.' Every local congregation, every wide-spread Church, is organised by subjection to His will, and in conformity with His providential arrangements. It is not by the mere consenting votes of indi- viduals, or by the authoritative acts of any body of men, that the scattered members of His body are called together and compacted for His service. It is specially by the knowledge of Himself which He has imparted. It is by the influence and authority of Christ. By virtue of His command alone His servants can and must ' go^ preaching the gospel to every creature, administering ordinances, and teaching all that He has commanded. Wherever that preaching and knowledge are received profitably by the souls of men, there a portion of His visible Church is called into being. Every ordinance in that Church must have His authoritative appointment. Doctrine, worship, government, discipline, all are provided by Christ the Head. Ordinances and ministers are valuable only as made instruments of spiritual blessing : ' With- out !Me ye can do nothing.' Salvation flows direct from Christ so THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. into souls, independently of the will or efforts of men: 'The Head of every man is Christ.' Authority in the Church flows ever immediately from the Head to all the members. Only then, so far as the will of Christ is acted out by His officers, can the consciences of men be bound. Singly and unitedly the entire body is subject only and wholly to Christ. Every conscience, congregation, portion of the Church, must yield to the Son who is 'Lord over His own house.' The Church is, then, a spiritual kingdom. Its charter is spiri- tual. It is established on the covenant promise of Jehovah — * I will be a God imto thee, and to thy seed after thee ; ' ' Neither shall my covenant be removed, saith the Lord, that hath mercy upon thee.' The Church has existed, and will exist, in every age under this charter. Its members are spiritual. Entered by pro- fession, none are its true members but those who are saved and called with an holy calling. Its authority is spiritual. Christ's body must be independent of mere human authority. Minister- ing servants by His grace must endeavour, free from all restraint, to awaken sinners and perfect saints, edifying the body of Christ. There is thus warrant to deduce this — I. Principle. — The only King and Head of the Chuech IS THE LoKD Jesus Christ. Questions. 1. IIoiv are men regarded in the Icingdom of Christ ? 2. Wliat is the origincd meaning of the word ' church,^ and how is this ivord generally employed in Scripture ? 3. Give the two principcd app)lications of the word, and show how these apply to one society. 4. In ivhat relation does Christ stand to this community in both aspects ? 5. How does the influence of Christ surpass that of a human head 1 6. What consequences flow from that connection to individual and to the community ? 7. Give the first p)rinciple draivnfrom these considerations. THE TEUE CHUECH — INVISIBLE — UNIVEESAL. 31 CHAPTER VI. THE TRUE CHUECH I^'VISIBLE UNIVERSAL. That whicli ennobles our world is the glorious truth that on it * Christ hath loved the Church, and gave Himself for it/ This earth has been the scene of mighty human transactions. Of vast importance, they have produced lasting consequences. Stu- pendous as they are, they can never approach the greatness and glory of the one event for which this world will eternally be dis- tinguished. The Son of God, incarnate, died on earth for sinful men. Born to die, He lived to die. His death was the consum- mation of redemption. This one fact will be ever remembered with adoration and gratitude. ' The Church of God,' ' He hath purchased with His own blood.' The salvation of the Church was thus infallibly secured. His purpose was, ' that He might sanctify and cleanse it, with the washing of water by the Word, that He might present it to Himself a glorious Church, not hav- ing spot or wrinkle, nor any such thing ; but that it should be holy, and without blemish.' The true Church manifestly comprehends all that ever shall be saved (Eph. v. 26, 27). This is the society of the redeemed — ' Them that are sanctified in Christ Jesus.' They are not believers in name, but in deed and in truth, — the called (xX'/jro/) out from (sx) the world and sin unto salvation and the service of the Lord. The Church embraces that portion now in heaven, — all who from the fall to the present moment have passed through the gates into the Celestial City. It embraces that por- tion now on earth, — all the living who have been, or yet will be, brought into a covenant connection with Christ. And it em- braces all those yet unborn, who, on earth, shall come into pos- session of the great salvation. In a word, all to whom the King at last shall say, ' Come, ye blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world.' The true Church ' consists of the whole number of the elect that have been, are, or shall be gathered under Christ, the Head thereof.' The members of the true Church may be unknown to man ; 32 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. they are all well known to the Omniscient. No one can with infallible certainty pronounce upon the eternal destiny of his fellow-man. We may, in the judgment of charity, hope well. Tokens there may be, leading to the conclusion that the salva- tion of some are probable, in a lower or higher degree. There may be as much reason to fear the reverse regarding others. And yet, at the last great day, there may be found some a wanting that were supposed to have gone to heaven. Others may be found in glory, who of all men were least expected there. A godly man may mourn, from what falls under his observation, that there are few who shall be saved. He may declare, ' I, even I, only am left,' while the Lord is proclaiming, ' Yet I have left Me seven thousand in Israel.' Divine sovereignty has been, and ever will be, conspicuous in the salvation of souls. Man, at best, is short-sighted. He is swayed in judgment by many interests. This secret thing belongeth to the Lord. As redeeming grace is heralded throughout all lands, souls are ' called out of darkness into marvellous light ;' but man cannot say with certainty who are its subjects. He cannot see into the heart. He cannot accurately weigh its conditions and purj)oses in the balances of the sanctuary. This God only can. The Church thus, in its highest application, is invisible to human observation. The par- ticular members of which it is composed cannot be accurately discerned and numbered by man. Every attempt to do so must fail ; it savours of presumption. The Church, invisible to man, is universal or catholic. Its members are found in every age and country, people and tongue. It has its lower and its upper provinces j the lower having its seat in human hearts : ' Behold the kingdom of God is within you ; ' it ' cometh not with observation.' Wherever grace takes possession of a soul, whatever its outward circumstances — whether in connection with, or far removed from, a visible com- munity of professing Christians — that soul is a true member of the Eedeemer's kingdom. Then there is the iipper province of glory. That too is wholly invisible to the eyes of living men. But there, assuredly, the whole number of the saved, openly acknowledged and acquitted, shall be * gathered into one in Christ.' They shall constitute * the general assembly and Church of the First-born, which are written in heaven.' THE TEUE CHUP.CH — INVISIBLE— UNIVERSAL. 33 Wherever then, on earth, genuine piety is found, as shown by repentance, faith, and love to Christ, there exist the members of the true Church. Divided they may be by many barriers. High mountains, broad rivers, stormy seas, imaginary bound- aries, human ignorance, passion, prejudice, unbelief and sin, may keep them apart. They may be found in every section of the professing Church. They may be distinguished by dif- ferent names, opinions, practices. Marvellous as it may appear, some may even be found within the shadow of false churches for the Most High God is Sovereign, and delights to manifest His thorough independence of human thoughts and conditions. Saved ones may even be gathered out of heathen lands. They are found on lonely islands of the deep, far in the Australian bush, by frozen seas, in ships of ocean, in sandy deserts of the torrid zone. No matter how or where, if united to Christ by a living faith, these are the sheep for whom Jesus died. These are brethren, — all one in Christ Jesus, 'kept by the power of God, through faith, unto salvation, ready to be re- vealed.' Notwithstanding all peculiarities, they are one in the unity of the Spirit. They are all living members of their one glorious Head. They are all built upon the one Foundation laid in Zion. ' In whom all the building, fitly framed together, ^Toweth unto an holy temple in the Lord.' Questions. 1. What grand transaction highly distinguishes this glohe ? 2. State the -purpose of Christ, and how this points out the true Church. 3. How may its memlers he regarded hy men and hy God ? and why ? 4. Where is the lower p)rovince of the kingdom? What are its boundaries ? and ivhere is the upper ? 5. State some of the obstacles to full union and communion among its members, and where is found the grand centre of unity. 34* THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTER VII. THE VISIBLE KINGDOM. The true Church of Gocl on earth embraces those 'called to be saints/ — ' all that in ' every place call upon the name of Jesus Christ our Lord, both theirs and ours/ That this is the place of the preparation of the redeemed, is the fact next in importance concerning this world. The Church visible on earth is preparatory to the Church of the First-born. In addition to the inner province of grace and the higher province of glory, there is also the province of visibility in this united kingdom. The second general application of the term * church' is to this universal visible community of professing Christians. In all ages it has possessed this characteristic more or less. The Church of God was visible i?^ Old Testament times. In the first family, when *Abel offered unto God a more ex- cellent sacrifice than Cain.' In the patriarchs, when from the altar of Noah the Lord smelled a sweet savour, and promised that the ground would be so cursed no more ; when Abraham, in obedience to the divine command, bound his beloved Isaac, and took the knife to slay his son ; and when, his arm arrested, he took the ram and offered him in the stead of his son. These acts of solemn homage unto God were visible at least to that son of the promise. In the Mosaic economy, the Church was more fully visible. When the first-born were slain, a bitter wail arose in Egypt, while Israel in safety were redeemed. The Egyptians could not fail to perceive the rite of blood- sprinkling on the Israelitish dwellings, and, most of all, the miraculous triumph of the Church at the passage of the Red Sea. When, through the wilderness, they 'did all eat the same spiritual meat, and did all drink the same spiritual drink ' — when, on the great day of atonement, the high priest offered for himself, and then for the people — when, with the blood THE VISIBLE KINGDOM. 35 of the goat on which the Lord's lot fell, he entered into the holiest — when — ' The scapegoat on its head The people's trespass bore ; And to the desert led, Was to be seen no more ' — that impressive solemnity was conspicuous to the twelve as- sembled tribes. Ay ! when the pillar of cloud by day, and the pillar of fire by night brought them onward in their march — when their enemies quailed and fell, until they took possession of, and rested in, the land of promise, — then surrounding nations and tribes failed not to observe that there was a visible professing Church of God. So also in all the Old Testament history, — in the building and service of the temple — the captivity — the restoration and rebuilding at Jerusalem, — all loudly proclaimed by visible tokens that Jehovah was the true God^ and Israel His people. The Church was more clearly visible under the New Testa- ment DISPENSATION, On the arrival of Eastern sages, inquir- ing, ' Where is He that is born King of the Jews ? for we have seen His star in the east, and are come to worship Him ; ' that worship was eagerly observed. So when shepherds, to whom angels brought glad tidings, said, ' Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, and see this thing which is come to pass; and when they had seen, they made known abroad the saying which was told them concerning this Child.' The Church was most visible when Jesus inquired and taught midst doctors in the temple, — when He w^as baptized at Jordan, — when He sat on the mountain and taught, — when, standing in the fishing- boat, or resting on the brink of a well, He unfolded to sinners the way of life and peace. His Church was visible when, distributing bread and wine in the upper room. He commanded, ' Do this in re- membrance of Me,' — visible in His agony in the garden and on the cross, — as, gathering a multitude of disciples around Him, their risen Lord, in the mountain in Galilee, He said, ' Go, preach, baptize, and teach,' — and, as from Olivet ' He was taken up, and a cloud received Him out of their sight.' Bereft of the bodily presence of Jesus, the Church was of 36 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. necessity visible to men. The disciples were ' witnesses ' to Christ now for all the earth. Their fervent waiting in sup- plications for the promise of the Father ; their baptism on the Day of Pentecost with the Holy Ghost and fire ; their preach- ing in every language ; their baptizing of the multitudes con- verted ; the mighty works wrought by them in the name of the Lord ; their fellowship daily in the temple, and in breaking of bread from house to house, visibly manifested the society of believers in Jesus Christ. Then ' the Lord added to the ' visible ' Church daily such as should be saved.' Persecution brought the Church more prominently into view. Men saw Stephen stoned, and heard him ' calling upon God, and saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.' They observed Saul of Tarsus when he ' made havoc of the Church, entering into every house, and haling men and women, committed them to prison.' The persecuted were well known as followers of the Crucified. The company of the called all profess to. believe on and to serve the Lord. They are united, an organised body by His authority. Called out of the world, they share, as one body, the same privileges and duties. The ordinances and govern- ment of that Church present its visibility for a convincing testimony to the world. Assembling for the solemn worship of God, services of praise, prayer, reading, exposition, are visibly engaged in. The elements of water, bread, and wine, and the actions in communion, show forth much concern- ing the Lord and His relation to believers. The grand essentials are the same, where one table and one house of prayer are impossible. In these spiritual ordinances, the union and communion of the whole company of believers may be fully realised. Government is also visible. The exercise of obed- ience and of rule is a visible testimony to the world of the exist- ence of the Church. Instruction as to these visible duties is given to Timothy. He is taught how to behave in the ' house of God, the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth' (1 Tim. iii. 15). Professed subjection to Christ is the grand outward test of membership. ' The Church consists of all those throughout the THE VISIBLE KINGDOM. 37 world that profess the true religion, together with their chil- dren.' Various metaphors are used in Scripture to describe the Church. It is a vineyard, the house of the Lord,- the flock of God, a city walled and defended, the kingdom of God and of heaven. These discover its mixed condition. It is a field, where some seed is lost, scorched, choked, while some is productive. There tares are sown by the enemy as well as wheat by the husbandman. Detected, these tares are left to grow together with the wheat till reaping- time. Not only a grain of small seed becoming a great tree, leaven pervading many measures of meal, hid treasure carefully possessed, a pearl purchased by the loss of all else, — the Church is a net containing fish of every kind, both good and bad. The parables of Christ teach plainly that there will ever be mere professors, as well as true believers in the Church. His inten- tion evidently is, not to bestow supernatural means to distin- guish the outward from the genuine. In the little congregation over which He Himself presided, a Judas had a place, who, betraying his master, destroyed himself and went to his own place. In the congregations presided over by inspired apostles there were such characters as Ananias and Sapphira, Simon Magus, Demas, Diotrephes. In the Church of God at Corinth some required to be cut ofi" and delivered unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh. Paul had to pray for the Galatians, ' I would they were even cut off which trouble you.' He who walks in the midst of the golden candlesticks had to write to one of them, ' I will spue thee out of My mouth.' How, then, can it be expected that there will be any Church on earth entirely free from mere professors 1 Whatever society is organised with a professed subjection to Christ, for the main- tenance of divine ordinances, the ingathering and edifying of souls, that society thus holding forth the word of life must be allowed the title of a true Church of Christ. Visibility as to external organisation is not an essential property, such that without it the Church would cease to be. Its absence may not disprove the existence of the Church. Outward fellowship may be wanting in w^hole or in part, and yet the Church exist. The promise of Christ secures that the 38 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Church will not cease till the final consummation. The gates of hell shall never prevail against the kingdom of heaven. The seat of the Church may be changed. Judgment to one locality may be for a blessing to another. The candlestick may be removed, but the candle is not extinguished. There will always be some on earth chosen to salvation ; but no Scripture warrant leads to the expectation that a fully organised Church will always be visible in every age. As in the past, so in the future. The tide of the river of grace has ebbed and risen alternately in every age. When ' the earth was filled wdth violence, and it repented the Lord that He had made man/ in that flood of wrath grace seemed well-nigh obliterated from the earth. Nevertheless it rose securely above the surging flood. When idolatry pervaded earth's millions, where could the grace of God be discerned ? Yes ; one man was called out of Ur of the Chaldees ; then, in his family and nation, the living w'aters flow^ed. When Ahab reigned, and the Lord's servants w^ere slain, who can trace it now ? Was Elijah, faithful and valiant, only left 1 Nay ; seven thousand never bowed to Baal. Few looked for redemption in Israel when the long-promised Messiah appeared. After His message had been delivered by Himself and His servants, the first gathering after His departure numbered only one hundred and twenty. But, as predicted, the Holy Spirit came. It was a rushing mighty wind. In one hour, three thousand were found believ- ing and rejoicing. Speedily the gospel won its way. It /became a prevailing power in the earth. In a parching /season, when the heavens were as brass and the earth as iron, the stream of grace w^as almost hid from human eye. Never- theless it flowed. Then, as heaven oj)ened its windows, and 1 the fountains of the great deep were broken up, see how it swelled and heaved with millions of the ransomed of the Lord ! This has ever been its history. Shall it not prove good in time to come 1 Yes ; in God's good time, all nations shall be made to flow toward the mountain of Jehovah's house. Mighty cataracts of anxious and earnest souls shall pour over every opposing obstacle into the bosom of the Saviour, and find themselves absorbed in the ocean of eternal love. So shall it THE LAWS OF THE KINGDOM. 39 surely be ; for God saitli still of Zion, ' Behold, I will extend peace to her as a river, and the glory of the Gentiles like a flowing stream ;' ' Be still, and know that I am God : I will be exalted in the earth.' These considerations fully warrant this — II. Peinciple. — The visible Church is the organised SOCIETY OF THOSE PROFESSEDLY BELIEVING IN, AND BEARING TESTIMONY UNTO, ChRIST. Questions. 1. MeMtion another important fact regarding this world, and ■another province of the hingdom of Christ. 2. Run over some visible characteristics of the Church in Old 'Testament times ; 3. Also during the life of Christ, and after His ascension. 4. State some of the features presented hg the Church to the world. 5. What characteristic of the Church ivas p>rominent in the parables of Christ ? amongst His own disciples ? and in the Apostolic Church ? 6. Hoiu do you reconcile the occasional absence of outivard organisation with the perpetuity of the Church on earth ? 7. Give some illustrations and promises respecting God's deal- ings with His Church, and state our duty. 8. Mention the second principle deduced. CHAPTER VIII. the laws of the kingdom. ' The law of the Lord is perfect.' Christ being the sole Mon- arch, the inhabitants of His kingdom are subject solely to His will. That will is known by whatever He has commanded. The Bible is thus the sole statute-book of the kingdom. It embodies 4ill necessary laws. 40 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM, Is there one sure and perfect guide that may hush the mental storm to rest, and secure for me tL.e haven of eternal peace 1 This is the question of every earnest spirit, anxiously looking within and onward to futurity. No question is of greater im- portance. The Statute-book of the King supplies the want. To be perfectly adapted to my necessity, the guide (a priori) must ac- knowledge and reflect this anarchy within. It must also reveal some plan by which the honour of the King may be successfully maintained, while all-subduing mercy is bestowed upon the rebel. That guide must further prove itself sure and perfect. It must (a posteriori) root out the evil, and plant grace instead. My tormenting fears must be banished. My soul must be filled with joyful hope. The Bible alone will stand these tests. The light of nature is the voice of God ; but that is not a suflScient, because not a perfect rule. For, Jirst, we are not now upright as when man came forth from the hand of the Creator. Experience testifies that we have fallen. We have still the gift of reasonable faculties ; but reason looks through a glass darkly at celestial objects. Ply the oar of reason to the utmost. Whither are you conducted ? Into the vestibule of Deity it may be ; but there to feel that the vast ocean of truth, eternal and immutable, lies beyond. And secondly, the fact remains that God has given a written revelation of His will. This revelation is attested by evidence most complete. That evidence, externally, internally, experimentally, is most minute and forcible. To deny that revelation in the face of that evidence, outrages our convictions, ay, our constitution. Eeason has here an important duty to perform. It has to judge of the validity of the evidence by which this revelation is attested. But there its office as a standard is at an end. For what is a revelation from God? Is it not the disclosure of truths {a) beyond the reach of man, and which (6) the Infinitely Wise deems necessary for man's highest good 1 Eeason is called on to say whether this revelation is proved to be from God. That done, reason is no longer a standard. It must give place to faith. Entering upon the study of that revelation, reason is not wholly laid aside. It must still hear, discriminate, decide ; THE LAWS OF THE KINGDOM. 41 but all this in subordination to the truths revealed. These truths, coming from the Incomprehensible, cannot be fully com- prehended by man. If to be savingly or rightly apprehended, the aid of the enlightening Spirit must be sought. And when they soar into regions where the mind's eye fails to follow, we must humbly trust, although we cannot trace. These truths must all be received as the very truth of God. This Statute-book claims perfection, decision, completion. Hence it converts the soul, and makes wi?e. ' All Scripture is profitable,' ' that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished.' Every other guide is powerless. ' If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded though one rose from the dead.' Decision IT claims. 'If they speak not according to this "Word, it is because there is no light in them.' The Church is to be heard, rulers obeyed, things wanting set in order ; but all ' according to this Word. Even Apostles, in witnessing, said, ' None other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come.' Completion it claims. ' If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this Book.' All standards must give place to this. There only can infallibility be found. Everything concerning the Church must be decided in the last resort by an appeal to ' Thus saith the Lord.' The supreme standard of decision is thus complete and perfect. Ministerial interpretations of Scripture are not in themselves the very teachings of Christ. These are means which He has instituted for imparting the benefit of His own teaching. But these interpretations must be tested by the written Word. Only in so far as they are in accordance therewith are they to be received and acted on. The sovereign will of the King, in all that concerns His kingdom, is the grand ultimate standard. Subordinate standards are, however, necessary for the Church. (1.) To exhibit the united belief of the community ; (2.) To testify against error ; (3.) To test doubtful interpretations, oj^inions, practices; (4.) To instruct in great fundamental truths; and (5.) To form a common bond of united action. In this way is 42 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. tlie Cliurch enabled to testify for Christ. They express in human Language the sense in which the Church receives and holds forth the Word of life. These views, though emanating from bodies of men, are valueless, unless they agree with the Word of God. ' The supreme Judge, by which all controver- sies in religion are to be determined, and in whose sentence we are to rest, can be no other but the Holy Spirit speaking in Scripture.' To the visible professing Church, Christ has given the com- pleted revelation of His will. This gift is for the guidance of the Church. Being the pillar and ground of the truth, its grand paramount duty is to keep that truth prominent before the minds of men. Both by instruction and by practice the Church is called to hear and obey : * Ye shall be witnesses unto Me.' That, then, must be the purest and best portion of the Church which, in doctrine, discipline, worship, government, most closely con- forms to the will of the King. In government, as in doctrine, the Bible must be the unerring, sufficient, and obligatory guide. It contains the entire laws of the kingdom. These are laid down either in explicit statements or by legitimate inferences. Its Divine Author knew what He had revealed in all its proper bearings. All that can logically be evolved, as well as everything expressed, were fully present to the mind of Inspiration. ' The whole counsel of God is either expressly set down in Scripture, or by good and necessary con- sequence may be deduced from Scripture.' Facts are not methodically arranged in respect to government any more than doctrine. Truths are not laid down in scientific arrangement. They are given in detached portions. The like method prevails in all departments of the universe. This does not debar man from classification. That pleasant and profitable duty is rather encouraged. The invitation is as strongly pre- sented in the spiritual as in the vegetable, mineral, or animal kingdoms. It is as inviting with respect to government as in doctrine. The work of classification fosters diligence in study. It suits every variety of condition. The thoughtless and un- lettered may receive small portions suited to their capacity. The highest and most cultivated may find material for the exercise THE LAWS OF THE KINGDOM. 43 of profoundest thought. To gather, compare, judge, arrange, is a suitable and invigorating exercise. It trains to fuller ac- quaintance ; it stimulates to practical conformity. Let a multi- tude of minds be engaged on the same materials, then a unanimous finding will strengthen the conviction that the result is the true one. So in regard to this subject. We may be impressed that the conclusion found is that intended by Him Avho is the Author of the Bible ; and who has promised to guide and sanctify in- quiring minds engaged in honestly searching for the truth. The King alone is entitled to say whether He has provided a government for His subjects, and in what particular form. Earnest attention to this one source is therefore all-important. This spring sends forth an adequate supply for every function. Before examination to complain of a scarcity, or to deny that sufficient materials are provided, would be a vain attempt to escape His suj)reme authority. Is it not possible that He may be found to speak so plainly and fully, that those willing to obey may rejoice in the abundance of His law ? In this mine of the mountains, located not on the surface merely, but deep down as well, treasures rich and rare are to be reached and possessed only by earnest exertion. This one Statute-book must give form and action to all the kingdom. ' He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith unto the Churches.' III. Peinciple. — The Word op God is the only ultimate STANDAED OF LAW TO THE ChUECH. Questions. 1. Why is the ivill of Christ alone to he obeyed in the Church ? 2. What necessities (a priori cmd a posteriori) are sujyplied by the Bible ? 3. Hovj can you shoiu that reason is an insufficient guide 1 4. What is a revelation ? 5. What office, if any, has reason respecting a revelation ? 6. Mention some claims which the Bible maintains. 7. Distinguish the teachings of ministers from those of Christ. 44 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 8. Of ivhat use are suhordinate standmxh in the Church, and when are they valueless ? 9. What paramount duty has the Church in regard to divine truth ? 10. In what manner are the laivs of the kingdom laid doivn, and how are they to he possessed ? 11. Give the third principle arrived at. CHAPTEE IX. THE GOVEENMENT. ' The Lord shall reign over them in Mount Zion from hence- forth, even for ever ' (Micah iv. 7). That reign cannot be a mere abstraction. Government implies the exercise of author- ity not only in the creation, but in the execution of laws. Suitable officers are appointed and supported to put the laws in force. Iso kingdom can exist without some such organiza- tion. These officers rule by the authority of the crown. Sub- jects are bound to yield reverence and obedience to those holding the commission of the king, for these officers represent the authority of the monarch. That rule and that obedience are intended for the promotion of the liberty and well-being, for the protection and advancement, of all good subjects. All this redounds to the honour of the king. So is it in this kingdom. ' The government shall be upon His shoulder,' who is supreme, * the Prince of Peace.' It is to be perpetual : ' Of the increase of His government and peace there shall be no end, upon the throne of David, and upon His kingdom.' That perpetual government is to be distinguished for wisdom and justice. He is ' to order it with judgment and with justice from henceforth, even for ever ' (Isa. ix. 6, 7). Is it possible that this divine prediction should fail of accomplishment 1 A definite government was certainly provided and exercised in Old Testament times, from the period when the Israelites were orsjanised into a Church and nation under Moses and THE GOVERNMENT. 45 Aaron. In the restoration, also, Ezekiel was directed to ^Sliow them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, and all the laws thereof, and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them ' (Ezek. xliii. 11). As distinctly was the government borne by Messiah in order- ing and establishing the Church of the New Testament. It was not to be expected that all outward government would cease with the abrogation of the old economy. The Church of Christ being one under both dispensations, necessary changes alone were requisite. Now He brought it into that more per- fect form which it was to retain till His second coming. No- thing could be more unreasonable than to expect, in contradic- tion of the prophecy, that He on whom the government is laid for ever, should cause that government to take end. To say that now He has left it to be ordered and established according to the caprice, genius, or circumstances of men, is surely to impeach His faithfulness. That would be to remove the government from His shoulder. Look into the gospel narratives, and do we not perceive the Lord Jesus wisely and justly ordering and establishing His kingdom ? He gave His disciples ' power and authority over all devils, and to cure diseases, and He sent them forth to preach ' (Luke ix. 2). ' The Lord appointed other seventy also, and sent them two and two before His face ' (x. 1). He gave special direction as to the treatment of an erring brother : ' But if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I say unto you, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven' (Matt, xviii. 17, 18). Authority to exercise govern- ment was most undoubtedly bestowed by Christ upon His disciples. The Lord Jesus ' ascended up far above all heavens, that He might fill all things.' Then His infinite power and fulness are not restricted to the ingathering and sustenance of His spiritual kingdom. The 'all things' filled must comprehend government as well. Hence the following statement : ' And 46 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. He gave some, apostles ; and some, prophets ; and some, evan- gelists ; and some, pastors and teachers ; for the jDerfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ' (Eph. iv. 11, 12). These officers are His gift for the benefit of His Church, and they are set or established therein. He who is ' God hath set some in the Church, first apostles ; secondarily, prophets ; thirdly, teachers ; after that, miracles ; then, gifts of healing, helps, governments ' (1 Cor. xii. 28). These express statements show that the prediction has ample fulfilment. He still bears the government. He still orders and establishes it with justice and with judg- ment. To various officers He gives authority to rule under Him in His kingdom by a settled course of administration, that saints may be perfected, the work of the ministry promoted, the body of Christ edified. Questions. 1. What is implied in the government of a hingdom ? and for what end is it valuable ? 2. Prove the perpetuity and perfection of Christ's government of the Church. 3. Give instances of its exercise. 4. Frove that Christ hestovjed special and genercd officers, and established them in His kingdom after His ascension. CHAPTER X. APOSTLES. Of the officers bestowed and established in the Church, the first in order are aj)Ostles. These were more than mere dis- cij)les or learners. They were more than messengers, as the word apostles primarily signifies. More than missionaries, although they were sometimes so regarded. They were jDleni- potentiaries of the King, commissioned to go and act as His special ambassadors, teaching and ruling in His name. These APOSTLES. 47 terms, ' the apostles/ ' the twelve,' ' the apostles of our Lord/ describe this definite class. They were endowed with special qualifications. Four, at least, were manifestly enjoyed by the twelve, as well as by the Apostle Paul. First, They were immediately called by Christ Himself. ' He called unto Him His disciples ; and of them He chose twelve, whom He named apostles' (Luke vi. 13). * He ordained twelve, that they should be with Him, and that He might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sick- nesses, and to cast out devils' (Mark iii. 14, 15). Matthias was no exception. When the disciples gave forth their lots, they appealed to the Lord Himself : ' Thou, Lord, .... show whether of these two men Thou hast chosen; and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles ' (Acts i. 24-26). Paul was no exception. He claimed to be ' an apostle, not of man, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ ' (Gal. i. 1). Secondly, They were eye-witnesses of the majesty of the Lord Jesus. This qualified them to be personal witnesses, attesting the truth of His resurrection from the dead. Matthias must have companied with the eleven ' 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 up from us.' His ordination was declared to be for this special purpose, ' to be a witness with us of His resurrection.' This was the special command which the Lord enforced ere He ascended : ^ Ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth ' (Acts i. 8). Accordingly, this witness-bearing is continually referred to in all their labours. Peter testified at Pentecost : ' This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses.' So continually, 'With great power gave the apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus ' (Acts ii. 32 j iv. 33). This is the high position claimed by Paul : ' Am I not an apostle 1 Have I not seen the Lord Jesus Christ?' ' Last of all, He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time ' (i Cor. ix. 1 ; XV. 8). Peter put the scattered disciples in remembrance thus : ' We have made known unto yow the power and coming 48 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. of our Lord Jesus Clirist/ and ' were eye-witnesses of His majesty^ (2 Pet. i. 16). Had this qualification been unneces- sary, it would not have been demanded of Matthias, and urged as proof by Paul and Peter. ' We are witnesses,' said the apostles, ' of all things which He did, whom they slew and hanged on a tree.' This testimony would have been incomplete had they not been able further to testify, ' Him hath God raised up the third day, and showed Him oj)enly ; ' and that * He commanded us to preach, and to testify that it is He who was ordained of God to be the Judge of quick and dead ' (Acts X. 39-42). For 'if Christ be not risen,' then preaching is vain, and faith in Christ is also vain. Apart from personal eye-witness of the majesty of the person and work of Christ, there can be no apostleship. Thirdly, They loere endowed with the i^wer of the Holy Ghost. That power enabled them to work miracles, confer similar gifts on others, write and speak as inspired and infallible. 1 . This miraculous gift for the healing of sicknesses and the casting out of devils, was conferred at their ordination. This evidence was necessary to secure the attention of the heathen to this — to them — new and unheard-of religion. The Lord Jesus gave this proof of His divinity : ' If ye believe not Me, believe the works.' He, in His own name, and by His instant com- mand, gave sight to the blind, hearing to the deaf, health to the sick, life to the dead. And the apostles gave this testimony to the divinity of Christ and Christianity. Not in their own, but in His name, they wrought miracles. ' In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk.' Look at that man, lame from his mother's womb, as ' Peter took him by the right hand, and lifted him up. Immediately his feet and ankle- bones received strength.' See how * he leaping up, stood, and w-alked, and entered with them into the temple, walking and leaping, and praising God.' Listen to the expostulation of the apostle : ' Why look ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we had made this man to walk ? ' He declares that it was wholly by the power of the Prince of Life ; that ' His name, through faith in His name, hath made this man strong ' (Acts iii. 7-16). That this power was a necessary APOSTLES. 49 qualification of the apostlesliip is declared by Paul : ' In nothing am I behind the very chiefest apostles. Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you, in all patience, in signs, in wonders, and mighty deeds ^ (2 Cor. xii. 11, 12). The power of God was manifest in them. 2. In addition, they were empowered to endow others with miraculous gifts. Peter and John came down to Samaria and prayed that the new disciples 'might receive the Holy Ghost;' ^ then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.' So evident was this, that Simon offered money to the apostles that he might receive a similar endowment, ' That on whomsoever he might lay hands, he might receive the Holy Ghost.' When Paul laid his hands upon the Ephesian believers, ' the Holy Ghost came on them, and they spake with tongues and prophesied ' (Acts viii. 15-19; xix. 6). The apostles were simply channels, but they were the selected instruments through whom the Holy Spirit was bestowed. 3. Further, they were inspired, — specially endowed with the Holy Spirit to declare divine truth infallibly to the Church. Thus were they made to know the counsel of God, and were used as instruments to communicate this, without error, by word and writing. The risen Eedeemer 'breathed on them, and said, Eeceive ye the Holy Ghost.' Again He commanded, ' Wait for the promise of the Father, and ye shall be baptized of the Holy Ghost.' So were they ' filled with the Holy Ghost ' (John xx. 20-22 ; Acts i. and ii.) The purpose of that baptism He had unfolded : ' The Comforter shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you ; ' ' When He, the Spirit of truth is come, He will guide you into all truth ; ' ' He shall glorify Me ; He shall receive of Mine, and shall show it unto you.' The apostles are likened to wise master-builders, who, along with 'holy men of old, — who spake as they were moved of the Holy Ghost,' — were engaged in laying that solid foundation of divine truth on which the mem- bers of the Church were to build for eternity. Those who, through Christ, have access unto the Father, ' are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets.' 'I certify you, brethren,' wrote Paul, ' that the gospel which was preached of D 50 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. me is not after man. For I neither received it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of Jesus Christ.' The New Testament Scriptures are thus Uhe revelation of Jesus Christ/ which God gave to the apostles to show unto His servants. Fourthly, Their commission was universal. Their labours were not confined to any one particular place. * Beginning at Jerusalem,' they were to order and establish the kingdom through- out the province of Judea. Then the old territory of Israel was included in the term Samaria. Finally, 'unto the uttermost part of the earth,' as the Spirit and the providence of God enabled them. Their commission extended to every creature, to all nations, to all the world. That the aj^ostles understood well the terms of their commis- sion is obvious from their actions. (1.) Everywhere they organized and settled worship and government. The history of their acts and their epistles show how fully they carried out their instructions. As they ' received of the Lord Jesus,' they delivered the ordinances. The care of all the churches came upon them daily' (1 Cor. xi. 23; 2 Cor. xi. 28). (2.) Every- where they instituted necessary offices, and ordained to these office-bearers. Deacons, elders, evangelists, were selected, ordained, sent forth. (3.) Everywhere they exercised authority in discipline. Their practice is a practical commentary on the language of the Lord, ' Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them ; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.' This remitting and retaining, the binding and the loosing, are as manifestly figurative as the keys. Keys speak of power ; apostolic practice tells the kind of power. When the incestuous person was cast out of Corinthian fellowship, there was a retaining of the sin. These figurative expressions thus refer only to acts of outward discipline. The power exercised was 'for edification, not for destruction.' It was wholly ministerial. The qualifications show that the office of apostle was for an extraordinary and special purpose, that of ordering and establish- ing the Church. Everywhere they did so as to doctrine, discipline, worship, and government. That purpose accomplished, no successors in the apostleship were appointed. Ordinary adminis- PEOPHETS AND EVANGELISTS. 51 tration is left to ordinary officers. Having served the grand purpose of the apostolic office, they disappeared. That office could no longer be filled by living men, because none possess these special qualifications. In that apostleship they had no successors. Questions. 1. Give the meanings of the term apostle, and point out its definite application. 2. Mention several extraordinary qualifications peculiar to apostles. 3. In what loays were they specially endowed ivith the power of the Holy Ghost ? 4. What proof is there that the apostles understood the terms of their commission ? 5. In what respect can they have no successors, and why ? CHAPTER XL PROPHETS AND EVANGELISTS. Peophets were miraculously endowed to unfold divine mys- teries. Human culture being rare, and attainments compara- tively small, and, at best, v/hoUy insufficient, this office was necessary for edification. The gift was far above all human ejffort in the most favourable circumstances. By the gift of inspiration, Scripture was infallibly expounded, immediate re- velations presented, future events foretold. Like the apostolic office, the prophetic, also necessary for the establishment of Christianity, was not perpetuated. The office ceased with the completion of the canon of inspiration. Then the gift was with- drawn, and no perpetuation of the office can be traced. Only as prophecy is used in its wider acceptation for the declarative announcement of the will of God, does it still remain. The minis- terial prophetic office is merged in that of pastor or teacher. 52 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Evangelists were also the gift of Christ. When this title describes the high powers with which such officers as Timothy and Titus were invested, the class evidently was special and temporary. They were the delegates or vicars of the apostles. They were clothed with special powers for a limited time and purpose. Under special apostolic direction, they travelled and acted in the organization of churches. As such they could have no successors. It is worthy of note that evangelists are omitted in the list of officers in the Epistle to the Corinthians. The third class there spoken of are teachers. May this not be intended to intimate that these offices are practically the same? To evangelize is to announce the glad tidings of great joy. This, as a public office, is the special work of the ministers of Christ, yet all Christians may, in a measure, do the work of an evan- gelist. They may co-operate according to their capacity and opportunity in spreading the knowledge of salvation. The work of preaching to the world was specially intrusted to the apostles, and evangelists were largely employed by them for this end. Those they delegated were qualified by the Holy Spirit with extraordinary powers. Sometimes they are found, as Philip, acting under the special impulse and direction of the Spirit (Acts viii.) Their work was important, though temporary, and ceased so soon as churches were fully organized. They were not mere itinerant missionaries ; they were stated officers with a wide range of duty. Their sphere was the Church at large. As they were deputed, clothed with apostolic power, they went forth under apostolic supervision. As such, this office, along with that of apostle and prophet, fell quietly out of sight and ceased. Whether evangelists or teachers, possessed of ordinary powers for ordinary labour, under direction of the ordinary officers of the Church, be not still necessary, is another question, to be settled on its own merits and evidence. But this is certain, that the special office of evangelist, divinely inspired and apostolically directed, ceased with the special requirements of the apostolic age. APOSTOLIC GUIDANCE. 53 Questions. 1. Of what use were prophets in the Nexo Testament Church ? 2. In what respect has that office ceased? 3. What was the position of an evangelist in apostolic times? 4. What question may now he proposed as to evangelists ? CHAPTER XII. APOSTOLIC GUIDANCE. Personally the apostles have passed away. Practically their guidance is continual. Being dead, they still speak and act. Clearly and fully they yet speak by their inspired writings. Thus they are still present everywhere throughout the Church and the world, ordering and establishing as the plenipotentiaries of the King. They still put the Church in remembrance of all that is necessary and essential. But they do more. They teach by example. Their practice, in as far as it is apostolic, is given for authoritative guidance. In their illustrative ex- amples, ordering and establishing the churches, Christ is still bestowing apostles, prophets, evangelists, for the work of the ministry. In this sense of teaching and guiding by example, the Church has continuously the blessing of the office of apostle. Four cautions are here important : — 1. Their practice must be read in the Bihle. Every fact known with certainty as to their principles and practice in the establishment and constitution of the Church is preserved there, and there alone. Other sources have but human authority; this is divine. Unless established by Scripture, it is of no force. 2. It is * apostolic practice ' that is authoritative. As men, the apostles were liable to err. The contention was so sharp between Paul and Barnabas, ' that they departed the one from the other.' Human errors are recorded regarding them, in order to be avoided. 54 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 3. Whatever was special in their office cannot he aspired after. None but the apostles could have received an immediate com- mission from Christ, be personal eye-witnesses of His majesty, and be endowed with the miraculous powers of the Holy Ghost. 4. Temporary practices, also, are manifestly not intended to be perpetuated. Whatever practice was sanctioned by the apos- tles, which arose evidently out of the peculiarities of the time or place, as the love-feast, or the kiss of charity, cannot be regarded as imperative, or designed to be permanent. Such usages were suited only for the circumstances of the age. Unless positively enjoined, these local customs cannot be binding on the Church. Apart from these considerations, the apostolic model must ever be that to which the Church should conform. If we are uncertain whether some practices were merely temporary, or were intended to be permanent, then that uncertainty must be allowed its weight in their adoption. This will not militate against all those practices that are clearly apostolic and per- manent. Such are of universal obligation. This is evident from these facts : — Fij^st, The Church ivas established by the apostles, as it ought to be, according to the mind of Christ. Secondly, Their practice is recorded in the Divine Word for guidance. Otherwise there is no reason why so much of what they did should have been preserved and transmitted, while so few precepts are laid down. Thirdly, No change in the constitution or government of the Church is so much as hinted at. No trace can be found in the New Testament of such a possibility. Consequently, Apostolic practice, established by ScPvIP- TUEE, NOT OF A TEMPORARY CHARACTER, IS BINDING ON THE Church. This principle may be embodied in two rules : — I. No TRULY APOSTOLIC PRACTICE CAN BE LAWFULLY IGNORED BY THE Church. II. Nothing can be lawfully introduced into the Church which is destitute of apostolic sanction. APOSTOLIC GUIDANCE. 55 It cannot be doubted that the faithful application of these rules would soon bring the various portions of the Church into a position of purity, liberty, authority, unity, and energy, that would tell powerfully upon the world. Wherever scriptural apostolic practices are not adopted, the Church ought to be prepared with proof that these were temporary institutions. To introduce and perpetuate arrangements destitute of such example, is not only to degrade the apostolic office, and to elevate ordinary officers to their position, but to prefer the wisdom of men to that* of the Most High God. In this case no limit can be put upon the inventions and innovations to which the Church would be exposed. The divinely-appointed standard is to be observed in what- ever the apostles introduced and omitted. Qualified and em- po^Yered by Christ Himself, their practice as well as the prin- ciples they announced had the divine approbation. Wherever that practice is faithfully observed and followed, the Church conforms to the mind of the apostles. There may be difficulty in ascertaining what that practice exactly was in every case. We need not be surprised at this, for it was unoecessary for them to enter into details. The apostles wrote to churches, knowing that their members were fully conversant with these. In such circumstances, occasional facts and indirect hints alone were necessary. These were sufficiently intelligible to those addressed. These brief allu- sions set forth in practice the main principles that entered into the constitution of the Church. This is a striking peculiarity of the Word of God. In rare instances does it enter into details. Generally it lays down great principles applicable to a variety of circumstances. Man attempts to legislate for every specific case, God has abstracted from each what is peculiar to all. That general rule He bestows for our guidance. ' Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself,' applies to all relative and continuous duty. These general principles decide the multitude of instances. These perfect laws change not with ever-varying circumstances. They are compendious and suitable to every case. So in the constitution of the Church. Apostolic prac- tices furnish the grand leading principles. These are not in 56 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. tlie form of mere abstract principles; they combine the ad- vantage of reduction to practice. They are thus of perpetual obligation, and are applicable to every exigency. This applica- tion of principles to each case is a fitting exercise for the ordinary officers and members of the Church. They are given to be applicable until fellowship on earth is consummated ia the purer fellowship of the completed body of Christ in heaven. IV. Peinciple. — Apostolic scriptdeal practice is of universal and permanent obligation. Questions. 1. How may the a2:)ostles he regarded as still guiding the Church ? 2. What cautions are to he ohserved in following apostolic, example ? 3. What proofs can he given that apostolic practice is of per- manent ohligation ? 4. Mention two explicit rules that are imperative and salutary,. 5. Why did not the apostles enter into fuller details ? 6. How does this illustrate a peculiarity of the Divine Word? 7. Mention the fourth principle thus ohtained. CHAPTER XIII. PERMANENT OFFICERS. * Glory to God in the highest ' is the supreme end of th& Christian Church as a visible organised society. This is pro- moted by a threefold subordinate end. First, The building up of the people of God in faith, holiness, and comfort unto salva- tion. The perfecting of the saints and the edification of the body of Christ, come first and last in the divine description. Secondly^ Disciples are to be made through the proclamation of the gospel. This work of the ministry is ever to be kept midway in view, while the completion of the Church is aimed at. Thirdly, Con- PERMANENT OFFICERS. 57 tinual witnessing — holding forth the Word of Life to the world is imperative. The truth of God, the realities of eternity, the glory of Immanuel, are ever, and by all appropriate means, to be maintained. This threefold work of ingathering, perfecting, witnessing, is for the special end that there ' might be known by the Church the manifold wisdom of God.' Can these ends be accomplished without the exercise of good government? Keclamation, progression, proclamation can- not be effected apart from official administration. Instruction, regulation, protection are necessary. These continual processes are only possible by means of officers clothed with royal autho- rity and suitably maintained. Officers supernaturally qualified, and peculiar to the apostolic age, having ' fulfilled their course,' how can these ends thereafter be accomplished'? How is this threefold work of building, evangelising, testifying, to be carried out ? Is it left to any one, or every one, to be performed or neglected as circumstances and feeling prompt? Nay; the two portions of the Word already before us, show that for this very end permanent officers are appointed by the King. In the Epistle to the Ephesians, it is expressly declared that ' He gave some pastors and teachers.' In that to the Corinthians, besides ' miracles, gifts of healing, diversity of tongues,' obviously pecu- liar to the apostolic age, it is stated that * God hath set some in the Church — teachers — helps — governments.' Careful examina- tion of these and other portions of the Word lead to the conclu- sion that those thus mentioned are included in two classes of officers — elders and deacons, and that these are of permanent appointment. Questions. 1. State the supreme end of the visible Churchy a?id also its threefold subordinate end. 2. What relation has Church government to these ends ? 3. Has Christ made any appointment with that view ? 5S THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTER XIV. THE OFFICE OF ELDER. That the office of elder existed in apostolic times admits of no dispute. ' The elders which- are among you I exhort,' says Peter in his first Epistle (v. 1), The word 'elder' /"Ipt Hebrew; ?75£ff/S'jr£^oj, Greek), is significantly applied in Scripture to an ancient, an aged, a venerable, an official person. The office, ori- ginating in ancient times, was filled by men venerable for age or wisdom. 1. This office was instituted and perpetuated in the Old Testament Church. So soon as man fell, the Son of God began to discharge His mediatorial office, applying His redemp- tion by ingathering and perfecting the souls of men. Not only were individuals saved, a nation and Church were established under His direction and authority. He was the supreme Ruler, and His government, civil and ecclesiastical, was carried out by means of officers called elders. The earliest mention of the office regards it as having a civil character. When Joseph went up to Canaan to bury his father, there went up with him ' all the servants of Pharaoh, the elders of his house, and all the elders of the land of Egypt' (Gen. 1. 7). The next mention shows that the office was established amongst the Israelites. ^^loses was commanded by God to go and gather together the elders of Israel, and speak to them (Exod. iii. IG). These had spiritual as well as civil duties to discharge, for to them Moses committed the divine instructions for the observance of the passover : ' Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said. Draw out, and take you a lamb' (Exod. xii. 21). In their organization before the Israelites left the land of Egypt, elders were appointed, and acted according to their office. That spiritual office existed prior to the appointment of civil rulers or elders. This was when Jethro paid a visit to the camp of Israel. Then 'Aaron, and all the elders of Israel, came to eat bread with ]\Ioses' father-in-law before God' (Exod. xviii. 12). It was on the morrow that the advice of Jethro was given and acted upon : THE OFFICE OF ELDER. 59 * Tliou slialt provide out of all the people able men, such as fear God, men of truth, hating covetousness ; and place such over them to be rulers, and let them judge the people.' Let it be observed that this advice was in subordination to the divine institution of the office : ' If thou do this thing, and God com- mand THEE so.' That divine sanction obtained, ' Moses chose able men out of all Israel, and made them heads over the people, and they judged the people at all seasons : the hard causes they brought unto Moses, but every small matter they judged them- selves' (xviii. 13-26). Thus, before the Israelites came to Sinai, this office of elder, both for civil and s^^iritual matters, was in full operation. That office, in this double aspect, may be traced as exercised throughout all their subsequent history. At Sinai the Lord declared : ' Ye came near to Me, even all the heads of your tribes ' — the civil rulers — ' and your elders ' — rulers in spiritual matters (Deut. v. 28). In the time of the Judges, the young men of Succoth described unto Gideon ' the princes of Succoth' — the civil rulers — 'and the elders thereof — the spiritual (Judges viii. 14). During the great famine in Samaria, because of the siege of Benhadad, ' Elisha sat in his house, and the elders sat with him' (2 Kings vi. 33). Following the example of Moses, Jehoshaphat set judges in the land, ' the chief of the fathers of Israel ' (2 Chron. xix. 5-8). Not only for civil judg- ment; there were elders who were specially associated in council with the priests. These were appointed, or ' set for the judgment of the Lord, and for controversies.' ' Amaziah, the chief priest, was over them in all the matters of the Lord ' (2 Chron. xix. 8-11). There were thus two classes of elders in Israel, * ancients of the people, and ancients of the priests' (Jer. xix. 1). Notwithstanding all successive changes, this office of elder, associated with the priests in ecclesiastical or spiritual matters, continued till the time of Christ. This is proof that the office was essential. He showed that He must ' suffer many things of the elders and chief priests.' ' The chief priests and the elders of the peojDle came unto Him, as He was teaching in the temple, and said, By what authority doest thou these things 1 ' Jesus was led away to the high priest, ' where the scribes and the elders 60 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. were assembled.' ' All tlie chief priests and elders of tlie people took counsel to put Him to death' (Matt. xvi. 21, xxi. 23, xxvi. 57, xxvii. 1), For the ecclesiastical offence of ' making Himself the Christ,' ' the Son of the Blessed,' ' equal with God,' Jesus was arrested and tried by elders, scribes, and priests. So rulers, elders, and scribes were associated in the trial of Peter and John as to their spiritual instruction of the people, and as to the power or authority by which they professed to have healed the lame man at the gate of the temple (Acts iv. 2-7). 2. That this office of elder must have been perpetuated IN" the Christian Church, is evident from the general principles common to both dispensations. Those, for in- stance, applied in regard to the Sabbath or infant baptism, are equally applicable to this ofhce. First, Whatever the Head of the Church has instituted can only he abolished hy His express authority. Secondly, Whatever the Old TestamentChurch possessed, essential to it as a Church, and not a Jeiuish peculiarity, that was con- tinued in the Church of the New Testament. These being only two branches of the one Church, this office of elder was instituted by His authority in the former branch. Never has it been abrogated. It was essential to the existence of that Church, continuing in it throughout its entire history. It was not a mere Jewish peculiarity, as the rites instituted in the wilderness. It must needs then be as essential in the more recent branch. Elders, doubtless, acted as magistrates in the Jewish theocracy, but others took order with the priests in the spiritual supervi- sion of the people. Some may have acted in both capacities, but that does not invalidate the latter office, any more than the office of civil magistrate now would prevent an individual from bearing any necessary office in the church to which he is attached. This office, to which men of esteemed wisdom were called, was the only permanent and essential office in the Jewish Church. It must therefore be as essential and permanent in the other. But we are not left to reason {a priori) what ought to be ; for — 3. The office of elder was retained in the Christian Church. This fact is fully manifested. Never do we read of THE OFFICE OF ELDER. 61 its formal institution by the apostles. At once tlie elders are recognised in the churches of Judea. The first converts to Christianity were native Jews. They were accustomed to the government of the elders. They were well acquainted with the nature of the office. They required not to be instructed to re- tain it. The disciples at Antioch were at no loss to whom to intrust the relief they sent to the sufferers by famine in Judea. They ' sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and Saul ' (Acts xi. 30). The only reference to its introduction was in the churches of the Gentiles. In these the office had, of course, no previous existence. It required to be initiated ; so the same hands of Barnabas and Saul were employed for this end : ' They ordained them elders in every church' (xiv. 23). These elders were associated with the apostles in the govern- ment of the New, as formerly with the priests in that of the Old Testament Church. When Barnabas and Saul returned as part of the deputation from Antioch, they were received, not only by the Church at Jerusalem, but by the apostles and elders. They came together to consider the matter, determined and acted for the regulation of the churches. The apostles are found exhort- ing the elders to act in governing, and they are ever found so acting, as the essential and permanent officers of the kingdom. Kecognised by apostles as overseers of the flock of God, they were commanded to transmit their office to other faithful men. Nothing indicates its discontinuance. Everything requires and supposes that the eldership is a permanent institution. 4. Peixciples aee laid down for its continuance, a full description regarding the office is given for the direction of the Church. (1.) Suitable men are to be selected; (2.) Special duties are to be discharged by these officers ; (3.) They are to be properly received and acknowledged by the members of the Church. No such minute directions would have been given, were that office speedily to pass away. V. Principle. — The office of elder is essential and per- manent IN THE visible ChURCH. 62 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Questions. 1. What are the scriptural meanings of the word ' elder .?' 2. Relate the institution of the office, with its distinctions in the Old Testament Church. 3. What proof is there that the office existed, ivith these distinc- tions, in the time of Christ and His ajjostles ? 4. By what rides might this office have heen expected to continue in the Church after the Mosaic economy ? 5. In what New Testament Churches ivccs the office i^etained ? and in what introduced hy the apostles ? 6. Prove that the apostles meant the office to he permanent, 7. Give the fifth principle deduced. » CHAPTER XV. *THB GOSPEL MINISTEY.' *I WILL give you pastors according to Mine heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and understanding' (Jer. iii. 15-17). This divine promise was given by Jeremiah regarding gospel times. Then ' all nations shall be gathered to the name of the Lord, to Jerusalem ;' then the Lord will take one of a city, and two of a family (or tribe), and bring them to Zion. So selecting and gathering His Church, its members are not to live as they please, but under rightful government, as a flock under the wise and skilful direction of the shepherd. Pastors are graciously promised as a rich gift from God, who, after His own heart, will make it their special business to feed the flock with the wisdom and understanding contained in the Divine Word, so that they may become wise unto salvation. Most abundantly has this promise been fulfilled. Pastors ought to be esteemed as the special *gift of Christy' for * when He ascended up on high, He gave some pastors and teachers ' (Eph. iv. 7, 8, 11). THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. 63 § 1. The Communication of the Ministerial Office. When all Israel was appointed by God to be unto Him ' a kingdom of priests and an holy nation ' (Exod. xix. 6), the dis- tinct ministry of Aaron and his sons, with the whole tribe of Levi, was communicated for their benefit. ISTo Israelite, other than those divinely-appointed, dared to take the honour upon himself of serving God publicly and authoritatively. Where there was no distinct office, the duty was left to all in common. The communication of the authoritative duty of serving at the altar proclaimed the special office, for it would have been both useless and ridiculous to confer upon a few what was the duty and privilege of all. That typical and ritualistic service was 'finished' — thoroughly abolished — when the Jewish nation crucified the Lord of Glory. Then the ministry of priests and Levites for ever terminated. Now, under the gospel, all ritualistic worship is worship only in pretence. It is utterly meaningless and vain. Now, the true worshippers approach through our Great High Priest, who is passed into the heavens, and worship the Father in spirit and in truth (John iv. 23). Nevertheless, a special office of ministry has been divinely communicated to the Christian Church. This was particularly foretold by the Holy. Spirit through Isaiah, in express predictions concerning the times of the gospel, when God's glory would be declared 'among the Gentiles, and they shall bring all your brethren out of all nations to my holy mountain Jerusalem;' then, in Old Testament language, it was added, 'And I will also take of them for priests and for Levites, saith the Lord' (Isa. Ixvi. 19-21). This cannot be literally understood. The Levitical priesthood is abolished. It cannot mean the personal spiritual service of believers, for this is common to all the children of God, who are regarded as 'an holy priesthood, to o&er up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ ' (1 Pet. ii. 5). It can only relate, therefore, to the communica- tion of the ministerial office. The Lord declared that He would ' take of them ' — make a special selection of individuals, and set them apart to the whole employment of spiritual ministry. Has 64 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. this divine prediction been accomplished, or is there nothing equal to the description in the kingdom of Christ 1 Its accom- plishment has been most complete. Before His ascension to His mediatorial throne, the Lord Jesus came to the eleven disciples on a mountain in Galilee, and com- municated to them the ministerial commission. ' Go ye,' He said, * and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost, teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you : and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen' (Matt, xxviii. 16-20). Manifestly (1.) the authority here com- municated is that of the Three -One God ; (2.) the agency for the instruction and salvation of all nations is double — that of men authorized to perform spiritual actions — teaching divine truth — and that of the Spirit of Christ rendering these effectual ; (3.) and further, that double agency is perpetual — it ceases not till ' the end of the world.' Consequently that authoritative communication of the ministerial office cannot be confined to the personal ministry of the apostles. The work of making Christian disciples in all nations of the earth, with their baptism and instruction, is authori- tatively to be prosecuted, not only for a time, after the last of the apostles has passed away, but so long as time itself shall last. By whom, then, are these spiritual duties to be discharged 1 Are they left to be performed by any, all, or none of the Chris- tian community, at their individual discretion, destitute of au- thority 1 or are they committed to official persons, specially authorized and designated by God ? The language of the New Testament affirmatively declares the latter to be the will of the King of Zion. The same God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who authori- tatively commissioned the apostles, has as authoritatively com- municated the ministerial office to pastors and teachers, who are thus elders and overseers of the Church. No language could be more express : ' God hath set some in the Church — thirdly, TEACHEKs' (1 Cor. xii. 28). Christ hath ascended, and ^gave gifts,' 'and He gave some pastors and teachers' (Eph. iv. 7-11). ' Take heed to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath MADE YOU overseers' (Acts XX. 28). God the Father hath THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. 65 constituted teachers intlie Cliurcli — Christ hath bestowed pastors and teachers upon it — the Holy Ghost hath appointed overseers over the same flock of God. By the authority of the Three- One Jehovah, pastors and teachers — elders who are overseers or bishops — have the office of ministry in the Word and Sacraments committed to them as their special function. Consequently, the argument employed by the Holy Spirit is, that it would be as absurd for all to exercise the same authoritative office of teacher as that of apostle — *^ Are all apostles? are all teachers'?' (1 Cor. xii. 29.) If the Three-One Jehovah, ' the God of truth '—Christ w^ho is ' the truth ' — ' the Spirit of truth ' — has thus emphatic- ally pronounced that the ministerial office is communicated to persons taken from among their brethren, — then that office is j)ermanently and divinely authoritative in the Church. § 2. Specific Ministerial Titles. These also attest that the office is authoritative and perpetual. (1.) Pastor or Shepherd, who is the overseer of the sheep, while figurative, all the more clearly points out a real and per- manent distinction. ' Feed the flock of God, taking the over- sight, being ensamples to the flock' (1 Pet. v. 2, 3). When every sheep can assume the office of its Shepherd at will, this divhie distinction and direction "will cease to be bindinsj on the Church. (2.) Teacher is destitute of figure. In connection with the imperative duty of the taught, the distinction between them and their teacher is even more emphatically proclaimed : ' Let him that is taught in the word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things ' (Gal. vi. 6). (3.) Minister, although a general term indicative of any service, is yet so employed as to set forth laborious spiritual service. As those who toil at the oar, as the word indicates, are distinguished from passengers in, the boat, so ^Ministers by whom ye believed' — 'the ministers of Christ' (1 Cor. iii. 5, iv. 1), are distinguished from those to wdiom this S23iritual service is rendered. (4.) Freacher or herald of God declares the authoritative E 66 THE GOVEENMEKT OF THE KINGDOM. proclamation of the gospel : ' How shall they hear without a preacher? and how shall they preach except they be sent? (Rom. X. 14, 15.) (5.) Ambassador or plenipotentiary : ' Now then we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us : we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God ' (2 Cor. V. 20). Any person may carry the intelligence of a treaty offered; the ambassador alone can present the treaty with authority. (6.) Steward has no meaning if destitute of authority. The master alone can appoint the steward, who has authority over all the household, according to the master's will. ' Ministers of Christ' are 'stewards of the mysteries of God' (1 Cor. iv. 1). ' Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom His Lord shall make ruler over His household, to give them their portion of meat in due season V (Luke xii. 42.) The steward and the household are distinct. (7.) ' Elders that rule well, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine' (1 Tim. v. 17), can never be confounded with those over whom they rule, and amongst whom they so labour. (8.) Labourers in the harvest field are radically distinct from the grain they handle. Such a figure declares emphatically the distinct office instituted and perpetuated by Christ. His direc- tion is ever to be obeyed : ' Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that He will send forth labourers into His harvest' (Matt. ix. 38). So with other terms : ' Ministers of Christ are the husband- men, BUILDERS, CHARIOTS AND HORSEMEN, STARS and ANGELS of the churches. Whatever is absolutely necessary for men in their natural and social relations, that is as absolutely necessary for men in their spiritual relationship in the Church of the living God. But that absolute necessity has been fully supplied by His wise and gracious appointment. For by the peculiar titles given to His ministering servants He has clearly dis- tinguished them from the Christian people generally, and thereby He has declared that the office is by His authority perpetual. This must be acknowledged by all who are not THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. 67 prepared to deny that the titles given by God are ' according to truth' (Rom. ii, 2). Where no real difference existed, the only wise God would not so carefully distinguish. § 3. Ministerial Qualifications. A high degree of knowledge and gracious attainments is inculcated upon all Christians, as the standard toward which they ought to aspire. But beyond what is required in others, ministers of Christ have set before them very special gifts and qualifications. (1.) Ahility and readiness in the .communication of divine hnoivledge is a grand qualification. Every believer is exhorted to be * swift to hear, slow to speak' (Jas. i. 19); whereas a man desiring the office of a bishop must be ' apt to teach ' (1 Tim. iii. I, 2), ' able to teach others also ' (2 Tim. ii. 2). (2.) The poiver of reasoning and of exhortation is a higher gift required. In addition to the possession of a calm, just, holy, and temperate disposition, a bishop is one ' holding fast the .faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gain- say ers ' (Tit. i. 9). (3.) Ahility to expound and apply the divine word, so as to influence the souls of men, is a qualification to be aimed at. ' Study to show thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth ' (2 Tim. ii. 15). (4.) Further, the possession of these qicalities are to he tested and approved hy the riders of the Church. No man is a com- petent judge of his own qualifications. Even deacons are first to be proved (1 Tim. iii. 10). Much more those who are to occupy this high and responsible position. Hence that solemn charge to those already in office, ' that thou observe these things without preferring one before another, doing nothing by partiality. Lay hands suddenly on no man ' (1 Tim. v. 21, 22). Finally, a feeling of utter insufficiency^ notwithstanding that approval, is requisite in a true minister of Jesus Christ. ' Who is sufficient for these thin£s?' (2 Cor. ii. 16.) The necessary 6S THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. qualifications are many, tlie work of eternal consequence, tbe success various. Well, then, may men tremble in entering upon this high vocation. This is not an office into which men may intrude themselves — ' understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm ' (1 Tim. i. 7). Eegarding contemp- tible offerings it is written : ' Should I accept this of your hand? saith^the Lord' (Mai. i. 13). § 4. Paeticular Duties. Particular duties are assigned to the ministerial office in nume- rous passages. For instance — (1.) The office or gift conferred by means of ordination is not TO BE NEGLECTED. ' Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery' (1 Tim. iv. 14). (2.) The Gospel is to be authoritatively, publicly, and labo- riously preached. * Necessity is laid upon me ; yea, woe is unto me, if I preach not the gospel' (1 Cor. ix. 16). 'Preach the AVord ; be instant in season, out of season ; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and doctrine ' (2 Tim. iv. 2). (3.) The Sacraments are to be administered by Christ's autho- rity. ' Go, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost; and lo, I am with you always' (Matt, xxviii. 19, 20). * The cup of blessing which we bless, is it not the communion of the blood of Christ 1 The bread which we break, is it not the communion of the body of Christ?' (1 Cor. x. 16). 'I have received of the Lord, that which also I delivered unto you. That the Lord Jesus, the same night in which He was betrayed, took bread' (xi. 23). 'For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till He come' (xi. 26). (4.) Thefloch are to be specially cared for, not in a lordly, but in a ministerial capacity. ' 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 ; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock' (1 Pet. V. 2-4). They that 'have the rule over you' — THE GOSPEL MINISTKY. 69 •watch for your souls, as tliey that must give account' (Heb. xiii. 17). (5.) Edifying doctrine is specially to be taught. ' Take heed unto thyself, and unto the doctrine ; continue in them : for in doing this thou shalt both save thyself, and them that hear thee' (1 Tim. iv. IG). (6.) To this great icorh ministers are to give themselves wholhj. * We will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the minis- try of the Word ' (Acts vi. 4). ' Meditate upon these things j give thyself wholly to them, that thy profiting may appear to all' (1 Tim. iv. 15). The apostles, with transcendent qualifications, would not allow themselves to be diverted from this great work ; how much more important that those whose gifts are so inferior should challenge their whole powers to ' give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine' (1 Tim. iv. 13). Discour- agements, infirmities, and opposition require this, so that in the work of the ministry they may ' be strong in the grace that is in Christ Jesus' (Tit. ii. 1). These duties are not those of the Christian community, but of those accounted the ministers of Christ. § 5. Corresponding Obligations. The Lord has enjoined distinct duties to be performed by the Christian people towards their pastors. These obligations are not for extraordinary seasons. Both in feeling and in action they are ordinary and perpetual. Thus — (1.) Pastors are to he achioivledged and esteemed, 'We be- seech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you; and to esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake' (1 Thess. v. 12, 13). Their work is so high that angels desire to look into it. Things are ministered, ' which are now reported unto you, by them that have preached the gospel unto you, with the Holy Ghost sent down from heaven ; which things the angels desire to look into' (1 Pet. i. 12). Hence this duty is to be discharged ' in love.' If the ambassage to you is one of love, and thereby you love the sender, obligation is laid upon you to acknowledge and esteem highly in love those whom He has sent. 70 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. (2.) Obedience and encouragement are also inculcated. 'Obey tbem that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves : for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account, that they may do it with joy and not with grief (Heb. xiii. 17). ' Eemember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the Word of God ; whose faith follow ' (ver. 7). To these the Word of God adds the obligation of (3.) Providing a 2^Toper temjyoral maintenance. '■ Do ye not know that they which minister about holy things, live of the things of the temple? Even so hath the Lord ordained that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel ' (1 Cor. ix. 13, 14). 'Let him that is taught in the Word communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things ' (Gal. vi. 6). ' Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the Word and doctrine. For the Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn : and, The labourer is worthy of his reward ' (1 Tim. v. 17, 18). Seeing that the world unthankfully despises the ser- vants of Christ and their message, the people of God are to make this up, by accounting them worthy of double the reward be- stowed upon other men. Such distinct obligations were meaningless were there not a perpetual and authoritative office of the ministry. § 6. Perpetual Transmission. Wherever the apostles planted new churches, their first care was to provide them with proper officers for the work of the ministry. ' They ordained them elders in every Church ' (Acts xiv. 23). So they made provision for similar appointments in their absence. Titus in Crete was ' to set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city,' as he w^as appointed. These elders were to be able to exhort and convince. So also directions are given in the pastoral epistles for the con- tinual transmission of the office of the ministry. ' The things that thou hast heard of me, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also ' (2 Tim. ii. 2). This law of the kingdom being unrepealed, is of perpetual force. THE GOSPEL MINISTRY. 71 § 7. Special Peomises. These are made to those holding the office of the ministry of — (1.) The continual 'presence of Christ, ' Lo, I am with you always;' or all days, ' even unto the end of the world. Amen^ (Matt, xxviii. 20). (2.) Specially x>rotecting them; 'holding the stars in His right hand ' (Kev. ii. 1). (3.) Assisting them in their ivorh ; ' Our sufficiency is of God, who hath made us able ministers of the New Testament ; not of the letter, but of the spirit (2 Cor. iii. 5, 6). (4.) Confirming their spiritual acts; ' Whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven ; and whatsoever thou loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven' (Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 17, 18). (5.) Sympathizing with them under all difficulties ; ' He that heareth you, heareth Me ; and he that despiseth you, despiseth Me ; and he that despiseth Me, despiseth Him that sent Me ' (Lukex. 16). (6.) Finally, A glorious reioard : 'And when the chief Shep- herd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away ' (1 Pet. v. 4). Seeing that such express promises are made to the ministers of Christ, those are warned who despise the office : ' He that despiseth, despiseth not man, but God, who hath also given unto us His Holy Spirit ' (1 Thess. iv. 8). Each of the foregoing arguments of the Divine Word is suffi- cient to establish the position that the ministry is divinely authoritative and perpetual. Taken together, they give a body of irresistible evidence. The commission bestowed upon parti- ticular persons — their distinguishing titles — special qualifications and particular duties — calling forth corresponding obligations on the part of the people — together with the provision carefully made for the continuance of the office, and the special j^romises appended; — all together proclaim that the ministry is of Divine and permanent appointment. Every Christian is bound and entitled to announce the message of mercy. ' Let him that heareth say, come ' (Rev. xxii. 17). 72 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ' Every one according to his time, talents, and opportunity-, and in tlie calling Avlierein lie is called, is invited and besouglit tO' exhort his fellow-men' (Heb. x. 25). The joyful and spon- taneous diffusion of the gospel is permitted and required of all that believe : ' Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven' (Matt. V. 16). That perpetual duty is, however, a private duty. It is totally distinct from the public and authoritative exposition and proclamation of the truth. This is entrusted only to the ministers of the New Testament. Thus- are we conducted to the — YI. PRINCIPLE. — The office of the ministry is divinely AUTHORITATIVE AND PERMANENT IN THE CilURCH. Questions. 1. Shoiu what ivas of old promised hy Jeremiah for gospel timeSy and hoiv the promise has heen fulfilled. 2. What action on the part of God proclaimed the distinct ministry of the Old Testament Church ? 3. Give a promise of Isaiah, and shoiv how that referred to the gift of a Chinstian ministry. 4. What three princip)les are contained in the commission of Christ ? and how do they prove that this commission coidd not apply merely to the apostles ? 5. Where and in ivhat terms has the Three-One, God authorita- tively and particidarly commissioned the ministerial office ? and what is the inevitahle conclusion ? 6. Quote some of the specific ministerial titles given in the New Testament^ and state luhat is the effect of their hestoival. 7. Is any standard of attainment prescribed to ministers as distinguished from the members of the Church ? Quote them, and say how this affects the question of the ministry. 8. Recapitulate some of the duties incumbent on ministers, and not on oixlinary members. 9. What particidar obligations are laid upon the Christian people ? and ivhat do they impjhj ? PASTOES ARE ELDERS OR BISHOPS. 73 10. Give an unrepealed law for the 'perpetuation of the Chris- tian ministry. 11. Mention some of the promises given specially to the minis- ters of Christ, and a corresponding warning to the people. 12. What is the force of these arguments singly and combined 2 13. Why, then, are all helievers enjoined to assist in calling sinners to Christ? 14. What principle clearly follows from these premises ? CHAPTEE XVI. PASTORS ARE ELDERS OR BISHOPS. The one office of the ministry is variously described. Pastors or shepherds who feed, overseers or bishops who superintend, teachers who instruct, elders or presbyters who guide by wise judgment, are the same officers. The several names declare several aspects of the one office. Thus bishop and presbyter are one. For, First, No passage speaks of the presbyter or elder as holding an office distinct from that of bishop. Bishops and elders are never spoken of in the same Scripture. Paul writes ' to all the saints in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and deacons' (Phil. i. 1.) Elders are not mentioned. Why 1 Evidently because bishops are elders, and elders are bishops. ' Is any sick among you,' says James, ' let him call for the elders of the Church' (Jas. v. 14). Why not call for t^e bishops *? Why are bishops and elders never read of in the. same connection ? Is it not simply because they are different names for the same officer. To say bishops and elders would be as great a tautology as to speak of pastors and ministers, or of deacons and deacons. In the one case the laws of lan- guage would be as much violated as in the other. The one term being sufficient to indicate the officer, the other was un- necessary in the same passage. Secondly^ These terms are used interchangeably. This is found 74 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. in the descriptions given of tlie qualifications and duties of the office. This is observable in the qualifications described. Titus is left to ' ordain elders ' in Crete. Without a break in the same passage, the character of these elders is set forth : * If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. For ' it is added, ' a bishop must be blameless ' (Tit. i. 5-7). Elder at the com- mencement, is exchanged for bishop at the close. No private member was eligible for ordination as an elder unless he had the qualifications necessary in a bishop. To suppose that these terms do not speak of the same office, renders the passage meaningless. So in describing the duties of the office. Travelling from Greece to Jerusalem, Paul t6uched at the seaport of Miletus. From thence he sent to Ephesus, thirty-six miles distant, calling to him 'the elders of the Church.' To these elders he gave the solemn charge to ' feed the flock of God,' over (or in) which the Holy Ghost had made them (s'Trigzo'Troi) bishops or overseers (Acts xx. 17, 28). These elders were manifestly also bishops by the express appointment of the Holy Ghost. The apostles were at the same time elders, for the higher office includes the lower. They term themselves elders : ' The elder unto the elect lady and her children' (2 John 1). Peter as well as John claims this title. In doing so, while describing the duties of the eldership, Peter shows that the office of elder is identical with that of bishop : ' The elders I exhort, who am also a (fellow) elder : feed the flock of God {i'7ri6-/.o-ovvTsc, acting the part of bishops), taking the oversight thereof, neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock ' (1 Pet. V. 1-3). These portions of the Divine Word establish at least three positions — First, Ordinary ministers are termed elders or presbyters to denote their rank, and bishops to point out their duty. Secondly, That rank or position is restricted, and they are forbidden to be lords over God's heritage. Thirdly^ The only field of their authority is oversight of the flock entrusted to them. Oversight of several pastors and ELDEES, THEIR NUMBER AND FUNCTIONS. 75 flocks by one elder or bishop has no countenance. But these may be reduced to this — VII. Peii^ciple. — The office of elder or bishop is iden- tical. Questions. 1. How is the office of the ministry described in the New Testament ? 2. Why are bishops and elders never spoken of in the same passage ? 3. Show how these terms are used in the descriptions of the quali- fications and duties of the office. 4. What positions and what one principle are thus established ? CHAPTER XVII. elders, their number and functions. 1. In every church a plurality of elders was cqypointed. — When Paul and Barnabas revisited and confirmed the societies of Chris- tians they had established, and ' when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they com- mended them to the Lord in whom they believed ' (Acts xiv. 23). These churches might have very few members, because of the great difiiculties with which they had to contend — prevailing heathenism and persecution. Yet, in the smallest church, elders — a plurality — were ordained. There were elders in Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, Antioch, as in Ephesus. The first place where the gospel was preached in Europe was Philippi, a noteworthy city of ancient Thrace. There the Lord opened the heart of Lydia ; there the jailer and all his house, upon believing, were baptized. A church was organised which met with determined opposition. Ten or twelve years thereafter, Paul wrote, as we have seen, to the church there : ' Paul and Timotheus, the servants of Jesus Christ, to all the saints in Christ Jesus, which are at Philippi, 76 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. with tlie Bishops and Deacons.' The Epistle was not sent to one bishop or elder, but to a plurality, along with the other constituent parts of the Church. In Crete, too, Paul notes down that Titus was left there for the special purpose of setting ' in order the things that are wanting, and ordaining elders' — a plurality — ' in every city.' By apostolic appointment, no church was to be wanting in the services of several ordained elders. 2. And there ivas a division of labour amongst these officers. — This was to be expected from the appointment of many. Had only one bishop or elder been appointed, the entire duties had fallen to him alone. Accordingly, it is found that — First, There weee pastors who both taught and ruled. ' Know them who labour among you, and are over you in the Lord' (1 Thess. v. 12). ^Remember them which have the rule over you, who have spoken unto you the Word of God ; ' ' Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves, for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account' (Heb. xiii. 7, 17). Not only in the Church of Thessalonica, wherever the Hebrew Christians are organised into companies of the called, they are recognised as having pastors, w^ho both instruct and regulate in the Lord. Second, There were elders who engaged chiefly in RULING. These do not appear to have engaged in the public teach- ing of divine truth. In private spiritual exercises, no marked distinction was drawn. When any were sick, they were directed simply to call for the elders, who w^ere to pray in the name of the Lord, assured that ' the prayer of faith shall save the sick ' (Jas. V. 14, 15). That they were not all public instructors, ap- pears from the distinctions employed to indicate their several duties. ' Having ministry, let us wait on our ministering j ' 'He that ruleth with diligence' (1 Cor. xii. 28, 29). The special w^ork of ruling is here carefully distinguished from that of the ministry of the Word. Express mention is also made of ' governments,' or governors, as well as of ' teachers,' when those officers are enumerated whom God hath set in the Church. ' Are all apostles ? are all prophets ? are all teachers 1 ' This last question, as much as in the two preceding, indicates a special department for ' governments,' or governors, as distinguished ELDEES — THEIR NUMBER AND FUNCTIONS. 77 from ' teacliers/ in tlie estimation of Paul. This division of labour amongst the elders in each cliurcli is further marked in PauFs directions to Timothy, which must be held applicable to all the churches to which he was sent. ' Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double' honour, especially they who labour in the Word and doctrine ' (1 Tim. v. 17). The word * especially ' points out that some not only ruled well, but, in addition, proclaimed the truth of God. If especial honour was to be conferred on those who performed this double duty, then there were some who had not the special labour of the Word. There were elders who confined themselves to ruling well. Doing so they were to be abundantly honoured. Those who were enabled to discharge both departments were to be specially honoured. They were entitled to this greater consideration, be- cause of their full employment in the entire duties of the elder- shi23. The office of bishoj) or elder is one ; but it is for the edification of the body of Christ that the elders, according to capacity an'd opportunity, occupy the respective departments of that one office. YIII. Principle. — Every coxgregatiox should have a plurality of elders, among whom the duties of teaching and ruling are distributed. Questions. 1. Give instances of the appointment of more than one elder in the churches. 2. To ivhom did Paul address the Epistle to the Philippicms ? 3. What might ive expect from the appointment of a plurality ? 4. Prove that some elders hoth taught and Tided. 5. In what duties was there no marhed distinction among them ? 6. Quote Scriptures that indicate a distribution of clidies. 7. Hoiu does the passage in 1 Timothy, chapter v., prove this ? 8. What jjrinciple folloivs ? 78 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTER XVIII ELDERS, THEIR ;POSITION AND POWER. Occasion was not wanting for man's natural love of power dis- closing itself amongst the disciples of Jesus. Some desired preferment to a higher rank than the others. These last were moved with indignation. The Lord Jesus emphatically set the matter at rest. ' Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority over them. But, it shall not be so among you : but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minis- ter ; AND WHOSOEVER WILL BE CHIEF AMONG YOU, LET HIM BE YOUR servant' (Matt. xx. 25-27). This rule of the King is for all the officers in His kingdom in every age and place. The only gradation in rank which He allows and acknowledges is zealous devotion in His service. Apostles, it is true, held an exalted position. That was a special and temporary arrange- ment. Their superintendence is still to be had in the princi|)les and practices which they disclosed. After them no superiority is found amongst the ordinary ministers. The address of Paul to the Ephesian elders proves that they occupied one platform of position and power. These presbyters or elders were summoned as the representatives and rulers of the whole Ephesian Church, w^hatever its sub-divisions. These officers were divinely ap- pointed, and as such they w^ere exhorted. Through them all elders were instructed, whether then living, or in aftertimes. They were overseers or inspectors who fed the flock — teachers and rulers. Bishop is the anglicised word employed for (linsxo'roi) overseer. Those who oversaw were (-roscr/S'jrs^o/) presbyters or elders, men of venerable parts. It was the flock of Ephesus they were to feed and oversee. Elders and flock were not subjected to one bishop. The elders were united in a common govern- ment. They were, therefore, of equal position and powder. All were to feed. All were to take the oversight in view of approach- ing danger. The sole charge of the flock was, by the authority of God, committed to their care. Upon them unitedly w\as the ELDEES, THEIE POSITION AND POWER. 79 full duty of tlie work of the ministry laid, under solemn respon- sibility. The same equality of position and power in the elders or bishops is observable in other Churches. No higher position existed in the Philippian Church, as has been seen, than ' bishops and deacons.' So in all the other Churches. Therefore, let it be noted that (1.) equality in the eldership or overseers is un- mistakable,— divergence was unknown ; (2.) these officers were authoritatively appointed (3.) ordinarily to administer divine ordinances; and (4.) to regulate the interests of the Church, (5.) the members of the Church submitting willingly to that govern- ment. Elders or presbyters are thus the only ordinary adminis- trators of the laws of the kingdom. They determine as to the admission of candidates for its outward privileges. They suspend, exclude, restore. They admit to or exclude from office. Every case, common or difficult, is to be adjudicated upon by them. They are to remove hindrances, devise and control helps. In a word, the government of His little flock is, by the Great Shepherd, committed to these under shepherds. Hence (1.) their rule is simply ministerial. It must be in accordance with His laws, not by arbitrary human will. And (2.) cheerful obedience is due to their authority, because the laws of Christ are merely applied by these officers. His will and authority must in them be recoo-- nised. Summed up, we have this — IX. Peinciple. — The highest position is that op eldek ok bishop, whose kule is wholly mi^'isteeial. Questions. 1. What rule has Christ laid down regarding preferment amongst His ministering servants ? 2. Is it denied, then, that the apostles occupied an exalted position ? 3. What is p)roved hyPauVs address to the Ephesian elders ? 4. Mention five positions that may he noted regarding the eldership. 5. What conclusions, and what principle, may be drawn from these facts? 80 THE GOYEllNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTEK XIX. THE OFFICE OF DEACON. Unlike that of tlie eldership, this was a new institution. It arose out of the exigencies of apostolic times. Similar exigencies claim its continuance. The disciples becoming numerous, certain Gie- cian converts complained that the widows were neglected in the daily ministrations. These were evidently Jewish proselytes who spoke the Greek tongue. Previous to this the apostles, probably by deputies, had discharged these necessary temporal as well as spiritual duties. From the great increase of their labours, in preaching to and regulating the extended Church, this was now impossible j and all agreed that it was unreasonable that they should be so oppressed, when others who were able to assist could be found. Helps were needful, that all things should be done decently and in order. Thus those apt to teach would be enabled to give themselves continually to the Word of God and prayer. The labour was to be so divided that neither temporal nor spiritual concerns should be neglected. (1.) The multitude of believers were accordingly summoned, when (2.) the apostles explained to them the kind of men required for the office, and (3.) directed them to look them out or select them, (4.) declaring their readiness as apostles to appoint men of the peoj^le's own selection for that special sphere : ' Wherefore, brethren, look you out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.' This proposal was cordially entered into. Seven were selected by the people, and ordained : ' They chose Stephen ' and six others, ' whom they set before the apostles : and when they had prayed they laid their hands on them ' (Acts vi. 1—6). Thus was the office of deacon instituted to meet the necessity of the Christian Church. It was to have an ample service of tables. In other words, these seven were ordained to the charge of the temporal affairs of the Church. The title ' deacon ' is not given to the seven in this account, but the thing is practically intended. Besides, it is distinctly stated that the want arose in the daily THE OFFICE OF DEACON. 81 -service or deaconising Qv rfj diuKovicc xadyj/Msoirf). The business to which the seven were appointed was to deaconise or serve tables (diazonTv roaTi^aig). The verb is used thirty-three times in the New Testament. Some two-thirds of these instances may- be applied to the serving of tables. They used or ministered the office. Consequently the seven are recognised as deacons by the almost unanimous voice of the Church. The term ' deacon ' sig- nifies merely one that serves or ministereth. It is therefore applicable to all manner of service. It is used in its technical sense as well, to denote this special office to which men were solemnly ordained. This office of deacon was not called into existence for a mere passing emergency. (1.) Its institution was gone about with a solemnity, and was recorded with a particularity, which could not be supposed were it only local and temporary. To question that the seven were deacons is a modern novelty. The narrative speaks plainly to all men of appointment to temporal duties, which are contrasted with the spiritual to which the apostles gave themselves. (2.) The office was filled in other Churches. Philippi, as noticed, had ' deacons,' who were singled out in Paul's Epistle. So had the early Church of Eome : ' He that bath ministry,' service or deaconship, is exhorted to ' wait on his ministering or deaconising' (Rom. xii. 7). This passage is taken out of the region of doubt by the light of the foregoing and other declarations. So all the Churches visited by Timothy. Special direction is given regarding the character and duties of those appointed to the office of deacon : * Likewise must the deacons be grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre.' ' Let these first be proved, then let them use the office of a deacon.' ' Let the deacons be the hus- band of one wife.' ' For they that use the office of a deacon weU purchase to themselves a good degree, and great boldness in the faith of Christ' (1 Tim. iii. 8-13). These and other minute directions prove that all these Churches had, or ought to have, these officers; and further, that this was designed to be a perpetual office in the Christian Church. These descriptions are handed down for practical purposes. In the enumeration of offices, it is declared that God hath set F 82 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. in tlie Churcli ' helps/ That deacons were helps in the Apostolic Church is indisputable. True, the apostles and elders some- times acted as deacons to the saints, and this appointment did not set aside their rights in this matter — the higher office ever included the lower. The general of an army is still a soldier, and, if necessity require, may perform the duty of the latter. The deacons were not left alone. The elders united with them in the temporal management. Relief came ' to the brethren by the hands of Barnabas and Saul.' Paul said, ' I go up to Jeru- salem to minister to the saints ' (Bom. xv. 25). Hebrew Chris- tians are spoken of as deacons, their acts of charity referring to the special office and its engagements. The temporal concerns of the Church were thus the peculiar oflSce of these helps. And such helps are still required. There are still widows who ought not to be neglected. Daily ministrations, the serving of tables, are still important : ' The poor have ye always with you.' To promote and maintain Christ's cause, even in respect of its tem- poral interests, is still a noble and blessed duty. Those who officially give their time and talents for these ends, with a single eye to the glory of God, truly purchase to themselves a good degree. Such helps are a great means of blessing, and cannot fail of a full reward. X. Pkinciple. — Every Chctech should have a plurality of deacons conjoined with the elders, specially intrusted with temporal affairs. Questions. 1. Mention the exigency that gave rise to the new office of deacon. 2. State the order of procedure in the appointment of the seven at Jerusalem. . 3. Why is the absence of the title ' deacon^ in this account im- material ? 4. State how this ivord is generally used in Scripture, 5. Prove that the institution of the office was not for a mere temporary purpose. THE CALL TO OFFICE. 83 G. Who ivere united with the deacons in the temporcd manage- ment ? 7. Whj is this office still necessary ? 8. What xorinciple may he recorded? CHAPTER XX. THE CALL TO OFFICE. The call to office is twofold — tlie inward and the outward — that of Christ and that of His people ; and this last is complete when ordination is conferred. 1. The inner call is from the Lord: ' How shall they preach, except they be sent?' (Rom. x. 15.) This is the foundation of an authoritative call. It is given by His Word and Spirit in the heart. This is the highest and best of all commissions. Christ personally called His disciples : ' Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men' (Matt. iv. 19). So He called Saul of Tarsus : ' Rise, for I have appeared unto thee for this pur- pose, to make thee a minister and a witness both of these things which thou hast seen, and of those things in the which I will appear unto thee' (Acts xxvi. 16). That direct, personal, im- mediate call cannot be enjoyed by the ordinary officers of the Church. It was peculiar to apostolic times. Their authority was clearly evidenced to be from the Lord Himself. And it is so still. Every office must take origin and authority from Him who is the author and embodiment of them all. Christ is the apostle, the prophet, the evangelist, the pastor, shepherd, bishop, deacon, or servant. He ' came not to be ministered unto, but to minister ' (Matt. xx. 28). Every office must be held by His appointment. He bestows gifts. Grace in the heart is there solely by the working of His Spirit. Christ gives not merely the inner call for salvation, but likewise that to go forth on His behalf. He decides in that choice. He sustains in that war. If Christ withhold, no commission or outward ceremony of men can supply the lack. Every usual and orderly step may 84 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. be taken, solemn investiture of office conferred ; but if destitute of the inner call of Christ, the man is destitute of the heavenly commission. He acts without the authority of the King : * I have not sent these jDrophets, yet they ran ; I have not spoken to them, yet they prophesied ' (Jer. xxiii. 21). No act of the Church can stand in the room of His authoritative commission. When Christ saith, " Go, and tell this people,' that commission ought to be acknowledged, and effect given to it by His Church. When Barnabas declared how Saul of Tarsus ' had seen the Lord in the way, and that He had spoken to him,' and how Saul * had preached boldly at Damascus in the name of Jesus,' then Saul was recognised by the Church, and ' he was with them coming in and going out at Jerusalem ' (Acts ix. 27, 28). So is His Church ever bound to act. 2. The outer call is from the Chistian peox^le. The secret call of Christ can be known only by outward means. Now, He so overrules, that ordinarily His commission finds recognition and expression in election and ordination. Such manifestation is important to prevent self-deception and other evils. That outward call is expressed by the voice of the members of the Church. Christ endows His Church with everything necessary for her maintenance and extension. He has but to employ His own gift, and that outer voice in plain language will call those whom He has qualified and sent. This forms one of the highest duties and privileges of the Church, and it was actively exer- cised so soon as the bodily presence of Christ was withdrawn. An apostle, the deacons, the elders, and companions of apostles were thus selected. First, The election of an apostle was by the voice of the people. The Apostle Peter stood up in the midst of the one hundred and twenty disciples and gave directions. He first spoke of the vacancy by the apostasy of Judas. Then he stated the qualifications necessary in the person selected. He declared the duties of the office, to bear witness of the resurrec- tion ; and finally, that one must be ordained. The brethren, members and apostles together, acted upon this instruction. First, they selected two individuals. In consequence of this double choice, after in prayer they had appealed to God for THE CALL TO OFFICE. 85 decision, second, ' they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias, and he was numbered with the eleven apostles' (Acts i. 15-26). This appointment was to the highest office of bishopric, ministry, apostleship, by the lots or free choice of these ' men and brethren.' The address of Peter to them was meaningless, were they not to act upon it. The apostles were inspired for the purpose of establishing the Church. This vacancy was in their own order, and being so qualified, one might have been infallibly chosen by themselves. Instead of this, ' men and brethren ' are by their direction beheld appoint- ing or electing, and giving forth fresh lots or indications of their judgment. For what other end could this be but for guidance to the Church then and in after times 1 For — Secondhj, The election of the deacons is also given in detail. When the complaints of the proselytes occasioned the origina- tion of the new office of deacon, no one can dispute that the apostles had power to appoint proper men for its discharge. Instead of this, first, ' the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them.' Then, the apostles explained the functions that were necessary. Thirdly, they instructed the people to select suitable men for the office : ' Brethren, look ye out seven men, whom we may appoint.' Finally, ' the saying pleased the whole multitude, and they chose ' seven men as directed, * whom they set before the apostles' (Acts vi. 1-6). No language could more emphatically declare that this election was by the people. The lowest, as well as the highest, officer was selected by their free choice. This also was a precedent for future action. If not so, the conduct of the apostles on both occasions is in- explicable. After these details of election by the people had been given, allusion is made to the same practice — Thirdly, In the election of elders. As the office of elder was not newly introduced, their introduction into churches amongst the Gentiles is stated in the briefest manner : ^ When they had ordained them elders in every church ' (Acts xiv. 23). This reference is to Paul and Barnabas, who were preach- ing, confirming, exhorting, and commending these Churches to the Lord. At first sight this short statement appears to refer solely to the appointment of elders by Paul and his companion. 86 THE GOVERNMEXT OF THE KINGDOM. When the word used is examined, it may be read, * When with lifting up of hands they had chosen them elders' {^^uporovriffav- rsg). The question still remains, Whose hands were lifted up 1 This is the common mode of expressing the votes given by an assembly to this day. The passage itself is indecisive. Taken in connection with the full details of election by the choice of the ' whole multitude of disciples,' and the ' men and brethren ' of the foregoing passages, an impression is left on the mind that the proceedings went on in the usual way. Then Paul and Barnabas appointed these officers, ' with the lifting up of hands,' by the members of these Churches. The act of ordination is undoubtedly the principal thing intimated. The particular mode of election is not prominently introduced. Still, the use of that very expressive word, originally signifying the vote of an assembly, appears to lead to the conclusion stated. Had no other or fuller account been given of the election of church officers, the selection of this word might be regarded as without design. Taken in connection with these explicit details, the impression conveyed is, that the choice was by the people, while the induction to office was by Paul and Barnabas. A similar case is — Fourthly, The election of a fellow labourer of the Apostle Paul. Writing to the Corinthians, he not only thanks God for the earnest care for them put into the heart of Titus, but declares, ' We have sent with him the brother whose praise is in the gospel throughout all the Churches.' Then he proceeds to fix their attention upon his election : ' And not that only, but who was also chosen (^eioorovr,ds!c;) of the Churches to travel with us with this grace, which is administered by us' (2 Cor. viii. 18, 19). As the individual is not named, and as the conditions mentioned — one well known and having the confidence of the churches — meet in many persons, we cannot know with cer- tainty who he was. It is not a little remarkable that the same expression should be used as in the case of the elders. The word in this incidental allusion literally means, ' chosen by the stretching out of the hand,' and therefore popularly. The approbation and election of the members of these Macedonian Churches was the method of the appointment of this brother to THE CALL TO OFFICE. 87 travel and administer grace along with Paul the apostle of the Gentiles. The only legitimate inference from these cases is this : the apostles enjoined and sanctioned the election of all church officers by the free choice of the members of the Church. This, then, is an inherent right of the Christian people. This method of appointment is according to the will of God, and best gives expression to that will. Were we even to lay aside the two last cases, the two preceding examples are in themselves amply sufficient to establish the principle of popular election. To remove this right, or to render it of no effect, is consequently to act in opposition to the will of Zion's King. XI. Principle. — The election of all officees is an in- herent RIGHT OF THE MEMBERS OF THE ChURCH. Questions. 1. What is the foundation of an authoritative call to the ministry ? how is it conferred ? and hoiu should the Church regard it ? 2. How is that call ordinarily recognised and expressed ? 3. Prove that the free election of the people toas exercised in the choice of an apostle in the room of Judas. 4. Give like proof in the appointment of the seven deacons. 5. What statement maJces a similar call highly probable in the ap>pointment of the elders ? 6. In what other case is a corresponding expression used 2 7. Siq^posing the two last cases were not taken into account^ what ivoidd form sufficient proof that this is an inherent right of the people ? 8. What principle is therefore sanctioned ? 88 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTER XXI. ORDINATION. Ordination by the elders completes tlie title to office. 1. When an apostle was about to be elected, it was declared that ^one must be ordained.' The lot falling upon Matthias, ' he was numbered with the eleven apostles.' That ordination was accompanied with prayer. There was a solemn recognition of the hand of the Lord in the whole transaction : ' Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two Thou hast chosen.' 2. When the seven deacons had been chosen by the multitude of disciples, it is stated, * Whom they set before the apostles, and when they had prayed (or praying), they laid their hands on them.' The apostles, praying, laid their hands on those whom the people caused to stand before them, as the officers of their choice. These two acts, praying and imposition of hands, were simultaneous ; that done, the ordained were accounted the chosen of the Lord. Other instances proclaim that this act was not one peculiar to the apostles, but rather to the elders. 3. The Holy Spirit chose Barnabas and Saul for a special mission. He called upon the prophets and teachers that were at Antioch to separate them for that work. The mode of sepa- ration is specially narrated : ' "When they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away ' (Acts xiii. 1-3). As in the former case, the solemn imposition of hands, accompanied with religious exercises, constituted their ordination to the work. 4. This same practice was followed by the two so ordained.. When first they set out, planting the standard of the cross, those who believed were not in a condition to be thoroughly organized. Their faith and life required to be more explicitly developed. They required further to know one another more fully. But on their return journey, Paul and Barnabas enjoined every Christian, community to immediate and thorough organization. At lengthy men of suitable eifts and s;race must have been discovered. OEDINATION. 89 These miglit, with advantage, be selected to fill the necessary offices. Hence, as noticed, ' When with lifting up of hands they had ordained them elders in every Church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord.' These ordination services were, at the least, accompanied with the full approbation of the people ; and were accomplished by solemn services that declared the outward form dependent on the ratification and blessing of God. This being done in every Church, or ' Church by Church,' and neither the ofiice of elder, nor the mode of ordi- nation being new, the statement is briefly given. 5. Timothy, selected by the Apostle Paul as his companion and evangelist, because of his rich spiritual endowments, was thus ordained. No statement of New Testament Scripture is more explicit. He was introduced to the exercise of his gifts ' by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery,' or body of elders (1 Tim. iv. 14). The presbytery publicly acknowledged and designated Timothy to the work to which Christ had called him by the inward qualifications bestowed. Thus Timothy was ordained by the presbytery ; elders in the various Churches by Barnabas and Paul ; they themselves by prophets and teachers ; the seven deacons and Matthias by the apostles. In all these five instances, a plurality of elders, or the presbytery, were engaged in the solemnity. In three out of the five, the solemn imposition of hands is recorded. In four, a special service of prayer is declared. The title of ' presbytery ' is given by the Holy Spirit to the plurality of presbyters, and that of ' ordination ' to the service of appointment to ofiice in the Church. Thus, ordination was a solemn admission to office by prayer and the imposition of the hands of the presbytery. Such examples show that it is the duty of church officers to ascertain whom the Lord hath chosen. The free choice of the members of the Church proclaims w^ho are the chosen of the Lord. Necessary qualifications are known by examination. To ascertain these is the duty of the eldership or presbytery. Timo- thy was specially instructed to * lay hands suddenly on no man ' (1 Tim. V. 22). Their duty, consequently, is to recognise the Lord's servant, and by the solemnities of prayer and imposition of hands, to set him apart to his work. These acts simply 90 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. amount to a recognition that tlie individuals possess the call of the Lord, and that the Church gives her full consent to the transaction. Immediate direction sometimes pointed out the parties. Even then the solemn admission by ordination was not laid aside. In all other cases the voice of the people sepa- rated the servant of the Lord, Public acknowledgment and admission followed, as the imperative duty of the Church. The solemn imposition of hands was not of recent introduction. It was anciently nsed as a natural symbol of communication and transfer : ' By faith Jacob, when he was a-dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph ; ' ' Israel stretched out his right hand, and laid it upon Ephraim's head ; and his left hand upon Manasseh's head' (Heb. xi. 12; Gen. xlviii. 14-16). This symbol was divinely appointed to set forth the grand doctrines of substitu- tion and imputation : ' Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat;' 'confessing over him all the iniquities;' 'putting them upon the head of the goat;' 'and the goat shall bear upon him all their iniquities' (Lev. xvi. 21, 22). In the ordination of persons to office in the Church, the ser- vice of imposition of hands and prayer is an appropriate solem- nity. It is a sign of the communication of special gifts; an outward sign of an inner blessing; the outward by men, the inward by Christ. Ordination, consequently, gives positive in- troduction to, and investment with, the office. Still it is but a sign. The act in itself has "no intrinsic spiritual efficacy. The solemn recognition of God by prayer, when the hands are im- posed, shows dependence on Him alone for the bestowal of His own gifts and grace. No essential virtue flows from these hands to the head of him on whom they are laid : * God . . . bless the lads,' said Jacob. Such a solemn recognition of the sole pre- rogative of God to give the blessing, is also very marked in the New Testament narratives of ordination. Imposition of hands was frequently employed in working miracles and in conferring spiritual gifts : ' They shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall recover' (Mark xvi. 18). Peter and John 'laid their hands' upon the disciples at Samaria, and 'they received the Holy Ghost' (Acts viii. 17). Let it be noted, that in the five cases before us, no extraordinary or miraculous gift OEDINATIOIt. 91 was conferred. This sign was nevertheless employed to illustrate the bestowal of necessary gifts by God for each particular office. Where miraculous gifts are withdrawn, this precedent remains. The apostles alone seldom ordained. Usually they performed the work in company with the elders, and they themselves, there- fore, as elders. Now, this could only be for an example. Were it allowed that the evangelist Titus himself alone ordained the elders in Crete, yet he was appointed by apostolic authority so to act. Thus his would be an exceptional case. But there is reason to believe that he was not alone. There were other officers at Crete — Artemas, Tychicus, Zenas or Apollos. As seen in these examples, the elders in their collective capacity, or ' the presbytery,' ordained. Even Timothy was thus publicly desig- nated, although the gift of the ministry was conferred upon him in consequence of prophetic intimations. Wherever practicable, ordination was the act of a plurality. XII. Principle. — Admission to office must be by peayek, AND the imposition OF THE HANDS OF THE BODY OF ELDERS. Questions. 1. What term is applied to the appointment of Matthias, and with ivhat was it accompanied ? 2. What tivo things concurred in the apypointment of the deacons ? 3. Give another instance in obedience to the special direction of the Holy Sp)irit. 4. What did the services at the ordination of the elders signify ? 5. What express terms are used to describe the ordination of Timothy ? 6. Give that tvhich is common to cdl these five transactions, and the scripturcd terms by ivhich they are described. 7. Have the elders no duty to discharge before ordaining those of supposed capacity who have been elected by the people 1 8. What do the solemn acts of ordination mean ? 9. Explain by illustration what was intended by the imposition of hands. 92 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 10. Why might not the above instances mean the bestowal of supernatural 'power ? 11. May not apostolic ordination, and especially that by Titus, take the act out of the elders' hands ? 12. What princijyle embodies these facts? CHAPTEE XXII. ADMINTSTKATION IN THE CHUECHES. ' God is not the Author of confusion but of peace, iis in all the Churches of the saints' (1 Cor. xiv. 33). Were there no other statement in the New Testament, this sufficiently indicates that government was, and is to be, exercised in every Church. Con- fusion cannot be prevented and peace promoted without a definite course of administration. Government must be exercised. Pri- vileges that are secured by law must be guarded and extended. Offenders must be dealt with, as justice and law, tempered with ■mevcj, require. Authority must be exercised by some, submis- sion must be yielded by others. Without such administration of government, confusion reigns to the exclusion of peace, and the name of God may be thus blasphemed. This abstract term becomes concrete in the course adopted by the apostles. The government stands distinctly before our eyes in a definite shape or form. To fix our attention upon that form is important, as alone authoritative in regard to each congrega- tion or church. The Greek word sTixXriaia, occurring one hundred and fifteen times, is almost invariably translated * church ' in the New Tes- tament. The civil meaning is simply an assembly called together (Acts xix. 39). The usage of the Scriptures, as noted, is ' the assembly or society of believers.' The two principal applications of this word ' church' have been considered, viz. — 1. The company of the redeemed, who are predestinated, called, justified, sanctified, glorified (Eom. viii. 30). This is the grand leading application in the New Testament. ADMINISTEATION IN THE CHUECHES. 93 2. The universal visible community of professing Christians. The Church unto whom daily the Lord adds such as should be saved, who continue ' steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayers.' 3. The third application of the term ' church ' is to a single congregation. In the Epistle to the Eomans, ' the Church which is at Cenchrea,' ^ all the Churches of the Gentiles,' ' the Church that is in the house of Priscilla and Aquila' (Rom. xvi. 1, 4, 5). Similar expressions, as Hhe Churches of Galatia' (Gal. i. 2), show that a church is the smallest portion of the Christian com- munity, statedly meeting as an organized society, with officers legitimately appointed over them in the Lord. It may be so small as to be capable of regularly assembling in a dwelling-house, and yet it is a church. It is in consequence of this continual application of the word ^church' to every separate assembly, that this word has been given in modern usage to the building where they assemble. This common application is not misunderstood by persons of ordinary information. It is vain to denounce this application, for general usage is the law of language. The various significations of this, or of any other word, must be determined by the usage of the best writers. Tried by this test, the proper well-known ap- plication of ' cliurch ' is to the assembly within. Only in a secondary sense is it given to the building. The English word * church ' is probably derived from the Saxon circ, of which the Scotch is ' kirk,' from Kv^taxov, the Lord's house. If so, nothing can be more appropriate than ' house of the Lord,' as applied to a building erected for the special service of Jehovah. That is a scriptural term, applied as well to the household of the Lord assembling within. The double application is constantly made without any confusion : ' Moses was faithful in all his house, as he who builded the house hath more honour than the house.' So ' Christ was counted worthj^ of more glory,' ' as a son over His own house ' (Heb. iii. 2-6). The argument of the apostle is not misunderstood by this double application. Confusion of ideas from this practice can only be in the minds of unintelli- gent worshippers. How, then, was the government administered in each of these 94 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. congregations or separate churches ? Evidently by associated eklers 1 In all that we have observed in the election and ordination of officers, associated elders were found administering the govern- ment. They called the meeting of believers for the special pur- pose. They explained the object, and informed them how to proceed ; and while maintaining the peoj^le's right to elect, they gave admission by solemn ordination. In all that administra- tion, the apostles must be regarded as acting the part of elders. They claimed to be elders, and they associated themselves with elders in these acts. Thus the apostles decided as well as inquired into the cases of Ananias and Sapphira. "While ' great fear came upon all the Church,^ the people magnified the officers of Christ in the dread transaction (Acts v.) It is true, they acted as no ordinary officers could. They read infallibly secret purposes and actions, and pronounced accordingly. Still, even in this transaction, their conduct as elders, exercising discipline for the good of the Church, must not be overlooked. A similar example of govern- ment is given in the detection and expulsion of Simon Magus in the Church at Samaria (Acts viii. 9-24). Saul of Tarsus was received into the fellowship of the Church by the apostles and elders. Ananias and Barnabas were special instruments rather than the apostles in this matter (Acts ix. 26-28). Cornelius and others ^Yere admitted to ordinances and fellow- ship at Caesarea by Peter, who carried the brethren present along with him by the question, ' Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized?' (Acts x. 47, 48.) Peter and John were sent to Samaria by the apostles and elders ; Paul and Barnabas to the Gentile nations by the same authorities. Barnabas was associated with Paul in ordaining elders. Timothy was ordained by the presbytery ; and the elders at Jerusalem exhorted Paul to purge himself from a false charge. Paul gave charge to the Corinthian Church : ' When ye are gathered together ' ' to deliver such an one to Satan, for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day ADMINISTEATION IN THE CHUKCHES. 95 of the Lord Jesus ' (1 Cor. v. 4, 5). Tliis act was for tlie spiritual good of the individual, as well as for the purity and warning of the Church. And this old leaven was to be purged out by officers ^ set to judge,' 'wise men, able to judge between brethren' (1 Cor vi. 4, 5). In every Church, admission, regulation, expulsion is by asso- ciated elders, with the concurrence of the people. In Thessalo- nica the Cliristians are exhorted to * know them that are over them in the Lord.' Hebrew Christians also, to ' remember them which have the rule over you.' ' Obey them which have the rule over you, and submit yourselves, for they watch for your souls as they that must give account' (1 Thess. v. 12 ; Heb. xiii. 7, 17). In the enjoyment of their undoubted right, the people have selected these elders, who act as their representatives, guid- ing the congregation with order and harmony, preventing confu- sion and promoting peace. Their authoritative call has been recognised and re-asserted by the act of ordination. Conse- quently, these representatives are legitimate rulers, who are to be known, remembered, obeyed, submitted to — because they are legitimately set over them in the Lord. It is to ' rulers ' the people are to give submissive obedience, these rulers having been chosen by the people themselves as their representatives ; and as their judgment is deliberative — that of a plurality, and not the arbitrary will of one — such rule is reasonable as well as scriptural. Therefore — XIII. Peinciple. — The course of administration" in every CONGREGATION IS BY REPRESENTATIVE ASSOCIATED ELDERS. Questions. 1. Name a divine cliaracteristic implying an appointed govern- ment in each church or congregation. 2. Recapitidate the meanings of the word ' church,' already re- ferred to. 3. Illustrate a third application hy instances. 4. Say ivhy this word is applied to a building, and whether confusion is likely to arise therefrom. 96 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 5. Prove that government in each congregation was hy asso- ciated elders, giving instances and exhortations. 6. Why is such government reasonable as ivell as scriptural ? 7. State the pri7ici2:>le thus discovered. CHAPTER XXIII. CHURCHES OF A LOCALITY. Mention is made of ' the Church in Jerusalem,' ' the Church at Antioch,' Hhe Church of God which is at Corinth/ 'the Church of Ephesus/ ' the Church in Smyrna/ ' the Church in Pergamos/ and in various other plnces. Were these simply- single congregations, or were there more than one in the same locality ? In several instances there appears to have been a plurality of congregations under the common government of associated elders, and under the title of the Church of that locality. Let us see whether this view is confirmed by the cir- cumstances in which the first churches were placed. If so, the fourth application of the term Church is, a plurality of congrega- tions under one common government. § 1. Jerusalem. The first organized was ' the Church which was at Jerusalem ' (Acts viii. 1), and, doubtless, on the model there produced, other churches were formed. In that Church there were a larger num- ber of disciples and teachers than can be conceived possible in one congregation. First, Tahe the statements as to disciples. At the election of Matthias, there were one hundred and twenty names in Jeru- salem. Paul declares that the risen Redeemer was seen in Gal- lilee of about five hundred brethren, but these may have been gathered from various parts of Palestine, therefore they may be left out of account. On the day of Pentecost, there were added to the hundred and twenty about ' three thousand souls,' and daily the Lord added to the Church. The apostles continuing CHUKCHES OF A LOCALITY. 97 to preach in tlie temj^le, ' many of tLiem whicli heard the word believed, and the number of the men was about five thousand ' (Acts i. 15, ii. 41-47, iv. 4). Let these numbers be put together, and it will be found that there were, at the least, eight thousand one hundred and twenty in Jerusalem. Or, let us suppose that the five thousand include the former numbers j yet we have various large numbers to add. As ' many signs and wonders were wrought, believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.' Again, ' the Word of the Lord increased, and the number of disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly ; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith ' (Acts v. 12-14, vi. 7). These multitudes, and disciples who multiplied greatly, go to augment the five thousand. But deduct them if need be, and still it must be asked, how five thousand people could be profitably organized, and assemble together regularly, to participate in divine ordin- ances, as one congregation, and in one place ? This supposition is further confuted, when it is stated, after the dispersion by persecution, that there were still immense multitudes of believers in Jerusalem : ' Thou seest, brother, how many thousands (myriads) of Jews there are which believe ' (Acts xxi. 20). The proper reading is myriads, or ten thousands. There were many of these still in that city ; but let three, at least, be supposed : here are thirty thousand believers. This statement indicates that .the former numbers do not include each other, but should be added together. Where and how the former eight thousand, or these myriads, could unite together as one congregation in divine worship, is something inexplicable. The temple could not contain them. It was only used on the occasions referred to by sufferance. Being under the control of the Jewish priests and elders, the apostles were speedily laid hold of, and prevented preaching there in the name of Jesus. Even at the first, they not only ' continued daily with one accord in the temple,' they broke bread ' from house to house,' praising God, and having favour with all the people. Until debarred, the temple was the resort for preaching to all who assembled. But those who believed met house by house for acts of worship, instruction, participation of sealing ordinances and discipline. They had no G 98 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. buildings such as are now designated cliurclies or chapels.. The large four-square Eastern houses, with their open courts, galleries, and flat roofs, formed a fitting substitute. But none- of these could accommodate the thousands of worshippers em- braced in the Church at Jerusalem. Convenience of residence, vast numbers, diversity of language, and close fellowship, ren- dered it imperative to have separate assemblies or congregations. Companies of the called breaking bread and praising God from house to house, explains the difficulty otherwise insoluble. There were several congregations in this one Church. In other words, the churches at Jerusalem were under a common govern- ment, and thus united, were termed 'the Church.' Secondly, Preachers were numerous. Apostles, prophets, evan- gelists, pastors, and teachers, were constantly employed. If the seventy sent forth by Christ be included, there could not be less than one hundred. But setting them aside as being probably in the country, the others cannot possibly be supposed to have been engaged in ministering to one congregation. That they were all fully employed is evident from the appointment of the seven deacons. This was in order that the ministers might give them- selves continually to spiritual and public exercises. It is not improbable that some of the great company of the priests who believed might also be so engaged. That all were perpetually occupied with one congregation is inexplicable. Their number strengthens the conclusion arrived at. Several companies met house by house for the service of God, having a full supply of ministers. Still they were one Church, having a common govern- ment. § 2. Antiogh. Next to Eome and Alexandria, Antioch was the greatest city of the then known world. Here the gospel took root and spread. From this city Christians and Christianity went forth to subdue the nations of the earth. Persecuted believers came hither from Jerusalem, who ' spake unto the Grecians, and preached the Lord Jesus,' ' and the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed.' When Barnabas was sent thither, ' much people were added to the Lord/ Thereafter, he CHUECHES OF A LOCALITY. 99 and Saul ' a whole year assembled themselves with the Church, and taught much people/ And * the disciples were first called Christians at Antioch ' (Acts xi. 20-26). These expressions — a great number, and much people — twice repeated, point out a very numerous body of Christians. Besides men of Cyprus and Cyrene, Barnabas and Saul, prophets and other teachers, were all labouring there, and with marked results of their several and united labours. The term ' Christian,' there first bestowed, implies that believers abounded. From that great work of God, the presence of so many eminent servants, and that amongst a numerous body of Christians, the inference seems fairly warrantable that there must have been more than one congregation at Antioch. Still, they were one Church. When the famine, predicted by prophets, came, the relief sent to the suffering brethren in Judea went from a united body. Though not to the same extent, the same elements are here as in Jerusalem. These lead to the same conclusion. The Church at Antioch must have had a plurality of congregations. These constituted one Church and therefore were under a common government. § 3. COEINTH. When the Apostle Paul was repressing the disorders that had broken out in the Church at Corinth, he deals with the abuse of female preachers, and adducing the practice of all the Churches of the saints, he commands, '■ Let your women keep silence in the churches.' As in the whole of Christendom, so let silence be enforced on your women in all the churches in Corinth. These churches were not widely scattered, for these ladies were evidently at home. Further direction is given them rather to be disciples than teachers : ' If they will learn any- thing, let them ask their husbands at home, for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.' Silence is to be enforced in the ' churches,' which is the ' Church ' (1 Cor. xiv. 33-35). Writing from Corinth to Kome, and in the commendation of Phebe — incidentally showing how devout women may serve Christ and His Church, succouring very many — Paul speaks of 'the Church which is at Cenchrea' (Rom. xvi. 1). Corinth 100 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. was situated on a narrow isthmus having two ports. Cenchrea was the sea-port that lay towards Asia. It was usually em- braced in the city of Corinth. As at Jerusalem and Antioch, Corinth had a numerous body of believers, and a large supply of officers, richly furnished with spiritual endowments. For a year and six months, Paul, Silas, and Timothy, laboured there. After * many of the Corinthians, hearing believed, and were baptized,' the Holy Spirit assured the apostle, ' Be not afraid, ... for I am with thee ; . . . I have much people in this city' (Acts xviii. 8-11). The sup- position, 'If therefore the whole Church be come together' (1 Cor. xiv. 23), cannot be held to assert that there was only one congregation. The same expression might be employed regarding an assembly convened in any of our capitals, from all parts whither the Church has spread. Such general terms might be employed, although portions or representatives of the Church alone could be present. Were there no express statements on which to found, those that declare that much people were added to the many who had believed, with the large number of teachers, would strengthen the probability, as in the case of Antioch. Here, however, the plurality of congregations in this one Church cannot be ques- tioned. Not only was there a Church in that sea-port of Corinth, and one in the city proper, but that one is expressly divided by the pen of inspiration into a plurality. And yet that plurality was governed by one united body of elders, and was addressed as ' the Church of God which is at Corinth.' § 4. Ephesus. Internal evidence proves that the first Epistle to the Corin- thians came from Ephesus. Paul there writes, * I will tarry at Ephesus till Pentecost ' (1 Cor. xvi. 8). The appendages to the Epistles were the production of a later and corrupt age, and are consequently untrustworthy. That epistle was not written at Philippi but at Ephesus. From thence Paul sends the saluta- tions of Ephesian Christians to those of Corinth. In this con- nection he states, * The Churches of Asia salute you. Aquila CHUKCHES OF A LOCALITY. 101 and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the Church that is in their house' (xvi. 19). The reason of this strong salutation is found in the fact that Aquila and Priscilla had recently come with Paul from Corinth to Ephesus (Acts xviii. 18, 19). Their occupation was tent-making. They required large apartments for their business, and these, wherever they sojourned, were opened as a regular place of meeting for Christians. In their house a company of believers met together as an organized company in the name and service of the Lord. The salutation from the Church that was in their house at Ephesus, was evidently from a regular society assembling there. It was not from a religious family, which in New Testament usage is ever termed 'a, household.' It could not be from stray in- dividuals, who came once and perhaps never again. If so, the Corinthians could not tell from whom the salutation came. This, then, was one congregation, however small, in the house of these tent-makers. But that could not be the entire Church of Ephesus, which was one of the most flourishing of apostolic times. To Ephesus, one of the chief centres of Eastern heathenism, came the Apostle Paul on his second missionary tour. On his third journey he remained three months, disputing and persuading concerning the kingdom of God. After the separation of the unbelieving Jews, he disputed daily in the school of one Tyrannus. Thus 'by the space of three years' Paul 'ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears ; teaching not only publicly, but from house to house.' Ephesus was highly favoured : in addition to those already mentioned, Apollos, Timothy, Tychicus, and some twelve other gifted men, there sowed the good seed of the kingdom. It is also supposed that Ephesus was the chief residence of the Apostle John in his latter days. The seed thus sown found in Ephesus a kindly soil. Notwithstanding the most determined opposition, its roots struck deep. A large and flourishing Church was there established. The success was so great that Demetrius declared to his fellow- workmen, ' Not only this our craft is in danger, but also that the temple of the great goddess Diana should be despised;' then *the whole city was filled with confusion.' And no wonder; for *this 102 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Paul persuaded and turned away much people, saying, that they be no gods which are made with hands' (Acts xix. 7, 26, 27, 29). These statements evince — First, That the silver shrine- makers were filled with reasonable alarm, in which the popula- tion sympathized. Their idolatry was in danger of being overthrown. And, secondly, That such a numerous body of believers could not fully carry out the purposes of a Church of Christ, unless organized in separate companies. Then, it must be noted again, that in his address to the elders of the Ephesian Church at Miletus, Paul exhorted them ' to take heed to all the flock, and to feed the Church of God.' These elders were recognized as possessing a joint-oversight in or over the whole Church. "No other overseers or bishops are recognized or charged as divinely authorized to govern the Ephesian Church but these elders. How far the Ephesian Church extended is another question. The epistle of Paul, though addressed primarily ' to the Church in Ephesus,' contains so little that is peculiar to that Church, and so much that is common to all the Gentile Churches, that it is generally believed to have had a much wider range. If so, then the Ephesian Church com- prehended more than the residents in the city, and of necessity there must have been several congregations as the combined * flock over the which the Holy Ghost ' had constituted that body of elders the governors. But leaving this question out of sight, there remains, as in former instances — First, The high pro- bability that the Ephesian Church consisted of a plurality of congregations, from the large number of its members and teachers. And, secondly. The fact that one flourishing Church was recognized as ' the Church in Ephesus,' while there was another Church in a house. Manifestly here a plurality of con- gregations constituted one Church under one administration. § 5. Laodicea. One passage brings the whole matter as to this place into a focus. Writing to the Colossians, Paul exhorts, ' Salute the brethren which are in Laodicea, and Nymphas, and the Church which is in his house. And when this epistle is read among CHURCHES OF A LOCALITY. ] 03 you, cause that it be read also in the Church of the Laodiceans ' •(Col. iv. 15, 16). Three parties are here saluted — (1.) The Laodicean brethren ; (2.) Nymphas ; (3.) The Church in the house of IsTymphas. The close connection of the passage shows 'that this Church in the house existed in Laodicea. Thus, one church or congregation, the brethren in Laodicea, is distinguished from another in the dwelling of Nymphas ; and then both to- gether are spoken of as * the Church of the Laodiceans,' in which the Epistle to the Colossians is expressly ordered to be read. A plurality of congregations constituted that Laodicean C!hurch. § 6. Rome. Aquila and Priscilla had gone to Eome. There, as at Ephesus, they opened their dwelling for the assemblies of the company of the faithful. Possibly in these times of difficulty and danger, these zealous and loving ones went thither for that very end. Paul wrote of them, ' to all that be in Rome,' the ' beloved of •God.' In his epistle, he sends greeting to Aquila and Priscilla, declaring that they were his ' helpers in Christ Jesus, who have for my life laid down their own necks, unto whom not only I give thanks, but all the Churches of the Gentiles.' Then comes the greeting to ' the Church that is in their house ' (Rom. xvi. 0-6). But that could be only a portion of the early Church ■of Rome, whose ' faith was spoken of throughout the whole world.' In addition to that assembly of Christians in that dwelling, Paul sends special salutations to some twenty-four believers of note at Rome. He further salutes two households, ' brethren which are with ' five persons, ' and all the saints which are with ' other five (Rom. xvi.) These salutations evi- dently are for the members of the larger Church at Rome. Whether these brethren which were with Asyncritus, &c., and all the saints which were with Philologus, &c., were two distinct xjongregations, as is probable, the Church at Rome was at least composed of two congregations — that in the dwelling of the tent- makers, and that to which these other parties were attached. If they had comprised but one fellowship, there would have been no necessity for saluting them with such distinctions. The small ] 04 THE GOVEKNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. congregation is carefully distinguished from all the persons ad- dressed. Thus, in Rome also, particular Churches were included in the government of one united Church. There is, then, evidence that in various localities there were small stated assemblies of Christians in private dwellings, which were regarded as regular churches or congregations, and that these were regarded as portions of the larger body. The whole are addressed as * the Church' of that one locality, and particular directions are given to each, implying the common associated government of the eldership or presbytery. This evidence is not only highly probable, as in the case of Antioch, rising up almost to perfect certainty, as in Jerusalem, but the fact is plainly stated. In the Churches of Corinth, Ephesus, Laodicea, and Eome, that plurality under one government is clearly and fully presented. These four instances remove any doubt as to the two former, and present the principle applicable to all the apostolic Churches, and the precedent on which all other Churches are to be orga- nized and modelled. Apart from some such arrangement, it is impossible to escape from a feeling that these large bodies of professing Christians must have been masses of confusion and perplexity. Let us receive these plain statements of Scripture, and this feeling is completely removed. Every Church, however large in each locality, is now beheld illustrating the truth that * God is not the Author of confusion, but of peace,' and that this is specially manifest ' in all the Churches of the saints.' XIV. Pkinciple. — The congregations of a locality form ONE Church, which is governed by the associated elders OF these congregations. Questions. 1. State a fourth application of the term ^ cliurch^ received from certain expressions. 2. Give the confirmations of this impression in the case of Jerusalem. 3. Do so also in regard to Antioch. THE DELIBEEATIVE ASSEMBLY. 105 4. Besides these, what more direct proof is furnished in the Church at Corinth ? 5. Give the facts regarding the Ephesian Church. 6. Mention three parties saluted at Laodicea, and how they are regarded. 7. Give the facts regarding the Church at Rome, 8. Gather u]o these particidars, and state the principle. CHAPTER XXIV. THE DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY. About twenty years after our Lord's ascension, a remarkable assembly was convened at Jerusalem. It was remarkable on account of its constitution, its cause, its deliberation, its deci- sion, its recognition. In each of these aspects it forms the model for the Church of Christ in all time and throughout all the earth. That assembly, consequently, claims careful and unprejudiced consideration. § 1. The Constitution of the Assembly. A public reception was given with cordial welcome to a depu- tation from a far distant community by ' the Church ' and ' the apostles and elders ' at Jerusalem. They came from Antioch, a city distant from Jerusalem as far as London is from Edinburgh. The deputation consisted of ' Paul and Barnabas, and certain others,' whose names for wise reasons are not given : ' And they declared all things that God had done with them.' Immediately after this declaration, ' there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying. That it was needful to cir- cumcise them, and to keep the law of Moses.' Thus at the first meeting of that assembly, the particular point of doctrine which had caused the deputation and reference was boldly affirmed as a ' but ' or detraction from those things which Paul and Barnabas affirmed God had done with them. The raising of that difficult 106 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. question by certain of tlie sect of the Pharisees, seems to have terminated that day's proceedings ; for in the next verse another gathering is mentioned. The matter was too solemn to be de- cided at once. Time must be given for consideration, and all 13arties interested must have due notice : * And the apostles and elders came together (for) to consider of this matter.' Purposely they met to deliberate and decide upon the issue that had been raised (Acts xv. 4—6). The assembly was composed of three parties — First, There was the deputation from Antioch, Paul, Barnabas, and certain others, empowered to * go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders, about this question' (ver. 2). Secondly, The elders. Whether there were elders present from other Churches is not mentioned. Neither is it stated that these elders were only connected with the Church at Jerusalem. That city is mentioned only as the place where the assembly met. With whatever Churches connected, a body of associated representative elders, having authority to take heed unto and to oversee all the flock over which they were divinely appointed, were undoubtedly pre- sent to give their decision. Thirdly, The apostles, who here acted in the subordinate character as elders. On several occasions they are found acting thus. They assumed the title; they joined with elders in setting persons apart to the ministry ; they re- ceived from elders commission for particular service. So at this assembly. Otherwise they would not have associated the elders with them. There was no defect in apostolic power which the eldership could supply ; no defect of wisdom which elders could improve. That the apostles placed themselves side by side with these elders, proves that they were there not so much as inspired men, as being elders together with them. But the public char- acter of the apostles remained. They did not stand in particular relation to any one Church. They were present as the represen- tatives of all Churches on earth. The apostles were there to act for all the Churches they had organized and regulated. Only on this ground could the decrees of the assembly be- enjoined on any other Church than that from which the refer- ence came. The authority of the apostles being universal, they acted in all they did for the universal visible Church. This it THE DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY. 107 was that gave to that assembly authority over all local and particular Churches. Other persons were present in this assembly. They are termed * all the multitude/ ' the whole Church/ * brethren.' These brethren appear not to have taken any part in the deliberation. As noted, it was impossible that the entire membership of the Church at Jerusalem could be present, both from their numbers, and the hostility of those in charge of the temple, — even suppos- ing that that place had been capable of containing so great a mul- titude. ' The whole assembly present,' must evidently be the meaning of ' the whole Church / for, (1.) The reference was made to ' the apostles and elders ' alone. (2.) Only ' the apostles and elders ' came together to consider the question. (3.) Of those Church members present, there is no record that any one of them took part in the discussion. And, (4.) The decision is termed, when delivered throughout the cities by Paul and others, 'decrees ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusa- lem ' (xvi. 4). Consequently, while the members of the Church who were present concurred in the deliverance, they formed no part of the authoritative constituent members of this assembly. Antioch, Jerusalem, and all the other Churches were fully repre- sented by the deputies, the elders and the apostles. The con- stitution of this deliberative assembly at Jerusalem was clearly representative. § 2. Its Occasion. The assembly was not convened without necessary cause. When Paul and Barnabas * were received of the Church, and of the apostles and elders,' they gave a full report of their work, and described especially what took place, while they abode for a long time at Antioch. Among the ' all things ' which God had done, they stated that He had permitted the Church there to be shaken by Judaizing teachers. ' Certain men,' possibly authorized teachers, ' came down from Judea, and taught, ' Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved' (ver. 1). They taught that obedience to the law of Moses was indispensable to salvation; that all the ceremonial and mora] duties there enjoined were the 108 THE GOVERNMENT OP THE KINGDOM. express condition of our salvation. Tliis doctrine with the utmost rigour these teachers urged upon the Gentiles. Profess- ing to be Christians, they still allowed that our salvation in some way was connected with faith in Christ. Still, like many who now go about to establish their own righteousness, they did not submit themselves wholly to the righteousness of Christ. They trusted simply to the righteousness of Christ as supplying the defects of their own fancied good works. Thus they robbed divine grace of its honour^ proclaimed the merit of Christ imperfect, and, in a word, subverted the grand foundation of the gospel. Along with faith in Christ they inculcated con- formity to the institutions of Moses. This first attempt to subject the Gentiles to the bondage of the ceremonial law produced an immense commotion. The legal doctrine preached was the occasion of excited and violent contention. And no wonder. The truth of the gospel, the sal- vation of their souls, the glory of God, v/ere imperilled. Paul and Barnabas could not su£fer so dangerous a doctrine to be quietly disseminated. They had not only to vindicate them- selves as preachers of the gospel ; they had to defend the truth of justification by faith without the deeds of the law. They had to deliver those souls that were being drawn into the snare. As faithful watchmen, they had to sound an alarm ; and in this emergency they were not wanting. The false doctrine and the false teachers were condemned with boldness and fidelity. It was not a mere assertion of dissent from the views proclaimed ; they entered, in presence of the Church, into a searching polemi- cal investigation : ' They had no small dissension and disputa- tion with them.' The matter Avas fully investigated, and a settlement was thus endeavoured by the authorized associ- ated elders of the Church at Antioch. Although their argu- ments were more powerful than those of their opponents, the superior evidence then, as frequently now, was not perceived by those who lay beneath clouds of ignorance, prejudice, pride, and obstinacy. A party had been gained over by these Judaizers ; consequently every eflTort failed to bring the matter to a peaceful and satisfactory termination. The church-officers at Antioch had among them an inspired apostle and a missionary full of the THE DELIBEEATIVE ASSEMBLY. 109 Holy Ghost, yet they were unable to come to a harmonious settlement. As the Israelites rebelled against Moses, whom they acknowledged to be the special minister of God, so, under the influence of temptation, some who were corrupted from the simplicity of the faith, opposed the commissioned ambassadors of Jesus Christ. Paul as.an inspired apostle, might have authoritatively settled the controversy on the spot. He might have done so also by associating the prophet Barnabas and other inspired men with himself. Two reasons prevented this : — First of all, unless the entire controversy, embracing both sides, were reviewed by some authority in which they could all acquiesce, the difference and strife of party feeling was not likely to subside. And, secondly, this question had a wider range than the area over which the officers of Antioch presided. This was a general, not a local question, which was likely to be raised wherever Jewish and Gentile converts were intermingled. Not only, then, for the peace of Antioch, but for the good of the Church at large, it was all -important, that its authoritative decision should be by the greatest collective wisdom and power in the Church. Therefore, * they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem, unto the apostles and elders, about this question.' This was the commission of the deputies, referring the matter for decision to the assembly. This grave question was thus no longer at a distance. The two parties by their representatives were before the assembly. The manner in which verse 5th is introduced shows that its statement was no part of the report presented. The statement of certain of the sect of the Pharisees is direct. It tells what immediately occurred after the deputies had declared their cause. The false teachers and their friends would not be slow to push on the matter for decision in their favour, in which they had so zealously engaged. They met Paul and Barnabas face to face at Jerusalem. As these sat down, the others rose up. The opposition at once appeared on the floor of the assembly. The conflicting views now uttered solicited the earnest consideration and decision of the Church through her assembled representatives. The issue was clearly laid. Judgment was urgently demanded. 110 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. § 3. Deliberation. The reference has been stated, and the parties have appeared in support of their peculiar positions, and now the apostles and elders came together to consider the matter. Their assembling for this specific purpose is proof of their conscious possession of authority over these parties. Had this reference been at variance with the will of God, or had these officers wanted authority, the apostles would not have convened with the elders, and this assembly would have had no place in apostolic practice. The apostles might have authoritatively settled this question. Paul's decision at Antioch, as has been said, would have been infallible. With a word or stroke of his pen he often decided as grave questions. Or, he might have come to Jerusalem, and, having associated the other apostles with him, they might have given the decision. If infallibility alone were required, no other assemblage was necessary. Instead of this, the apostles assemble with the elders in the audience of the whole Church. What other object could be supposed in adopting this last method of settlement than for an example to the Church ? Let us mark this illustration, how questions of similar difficulty and import- ance are to be dealt with, and we must perceive that the assembly was eminently deliberative. First, It is broadly stated that there was a full discussion : ' When there had been much disputing ' (ver. 7). Which of the elders spoke, and on what side, is not recorded. ' Certain men' of Antioch, as well as certain of the sect of the Pharisees, would have their part in the proceedings. There is no evidence that there was any difference of opinion amongst the apostles. Some members of the assembly showed their predilection for their ancient institutions. Others as strongly adhered to the simple doctrines of the cross. The ' much disputing ' covers the whole. A candid declaration of their views, and of the grounds on which they were maintained, was freely allowed. Argument was maintained on both sides in the presence of the apostles and elders. THE DELIBEEATIVE ASSEMBLY. Ill Secondly, A more particular record is preserved of the reason- ings of the apostolic elders. Peter rose and addressed the assem- bly. He narrated how God had employed him to preach to the Gentiles, and gave testimony to the sincerity of their hearts in believing the gospel by the gift of the Holy Spirit. That holiness of heart, of which circumcision and legal purifications were typical, had by faith been imparted to those originally uncircumcised and unclean. God himself had thus virtually decided the question in this gift of the Spirit, putting no differ- ence between Jews and Gentiles. By faith and its fruits, the Gentiles were thus proclaimed to be true members of the Church. To make circumcision necessary to salvation would be to tempt God. The conclusion to which he had come was, that no unne- cessary yoke should be laid upon them. The Gentiles expect salvation without observing the ceremonial law. We who observe it trust not in our works, but in the merit of Christ. Why require from another that in which we place no dependence? * We believe that through the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved even as they.' ' Then all the multitude kept silence, and gave audience to Barnabas and Paul, declaring what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them.' Confirming the reasoning of Peter by similar facts, they were heard with pro- found attention. The Apostle James brought that reasoning to the test of Scripture. This admission of the Gentiles to the Church was the settled purpose of God from the beginning. Prophets had foretold that the Gentiles would be a praise to the great name of God. He gave, not the exact words, but the sense of the passage in Amos. The tabernacle of David was to be raised from obscurity to greater glory than ever, and the result would be the conversion of the Gentiles. These passages differ only in sound, not in sense. The quotation given has, as other varia- tions in Scripture, this advantage, that the Holy Spirit is not only the author of the original passage, but also of this variation, it being uttered and written by inspired men. The argument from the prophecy was this : ' It being the revealed will of God to admit the Gentiles into the Church, believing Jews should 112 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. beware of ojDposing it, by requiring that to wliich. they would not willingly submit.' James added to liis argument a proposition wliich, in his opinion, would form a satisfactory solution of the question. He thus put the conclusion of Peter into shape and words : ' Where- fore my sentence is, that we trouble not them which from among the Gentiles are turned to God, but that we write unto them that they abstain from certain pollutions.' This resolution met with the unanimous approval of the members of the assembly. James pronounced no final decision to which all were called to yield obedience. Nothing in the whole transaction indicates that one claimed any greater authority than another. No person rose and pronounced the dictate of inspiration by which the rest were overawed. Apostles and elders reasoned and consulted on equal terms, and the resolution to which they came was the result of united deliberation. Facts and arguments drawn from Scripture were the basis of their actions under the guidance ordinarily bestowed. No superiority of office or jurisdiction appears either in Peter or James. No discussion could have been permitted had the decision been that of inspiration. Or- dinary means alone were employed to ascertain the mind of God. Reason was exercised on circumstances and portions of the Scripture. The appeal thus directly or indirectly was to the will of God as supreme. No private infallible decision was given in the Church at Antioch. The ' much disputing ' at Jerusalem was not arrested by a like method. On the contrary, man by man they gave utterance to what appeared to each to be the will of God. It was on these acknowledged principles that James proposed a settlement for the acceptance of the assembly. § 4. The Decision. That authority of God speaking in His Word, and unfolded in the leadings of His providence, the assembly held to be supreme and final. Hence the unanimity of the judgment. The apostles and elders with the whole Church were pleased with the proposal of James. They strongly decided, and caused their decision to be recorded and proclaimed. The decision ran THE DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY. 113 in these terms : ' It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things ; that ye abstain from meats offered to idols, and from blood, and from things strangled, and from fornication : from which things if ye keep yourselves, ye shall do well.' The epistle containing this decision was addressed * unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch, and Syria, and Cilicia,' ^nd declared that the Judaizing teachers were troublers and subverters of souls, who had no apostolic authority for their peculiar views. Not to shock the feelings of their Jewish brethren and do dishonour to God, the Gentile Christians are exhorted to abstain from using meats in which the heathen professed to have fellowship with their gods. Things strangled, and blood used in idolatrous sacrifices are also prohibited; and, further, fornication practised as part of the homage rendered to execrable and imaginary deities. With these exceptions they are to enjoy perfect liberty in regard to the peculiar ceremonies of the Mosaic law. Such idolatrous rites not being practised in Christian lands, the prohibition as to meats and bloods cannot be considered to be binding. The question itself arose out of the peculiarities of the age. Jewish observances had not then finally ceased to be regarded. The transition period between the Jewish and Christian dispensations was passing onward to its close. This decision hastened their final abolition in the Church. Consequently the deliberation and decision were for the specialities of the period. These warning admonitions of the assembly were also against backsliding into crimes most prevalent amongst the Gentiles. The temptations to return to these practices would be constantly presented, hence they required to be put specially upon their guard. But with the exception of the sin of uncleanness, concerning which warning is ever necessary, the prohibition must be regarded as of a temporary nature. (1.) The use of blood, for instance, gives no countenance to the worship of idols, where no such worship is practised. (2.) Under the Mosaic law, blood was sacred, being appropriated to make atonement in the service of God. Where legal sacrifices have ceased, the blood of animals, slain as permitted for food, cannot be regarded as possessed of this H 114 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. sacred character. (3.) Were abstinence from blood a precept for all time, there would surely have been some mention made of it in the epistles, and that would have been excepted when Paul asserts that ' eveey creature of God is good, and nothing- to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving ' (1 Tim. iv. 3, 4). The precept was temporary, adapted to the existing circumstances of the infant Church. In this decision the members present concurred. The ex- pression, ' with the whole Church,' implies this, but no more. Not one of these arose in the course of the discussion to utter his views. The decision of ' the apostles and elders ' did not require this confirmation. It was important, however, to show to the far distant Churches that entire harmony existed as to the result. The decision might thus be more cordially accepted. It was important that Gentile brethren should see that Jewish brethren were willing that they should be relieved from the burden of ceremonial observances. The decision vitally affected the interests of every member of the Church ; hence, while they * kept silence and gave audience ' to the discussion — now that a decision has been come to — their concurrence is asked and obtained. Their understandings are convinced, and they ex- press satisfaction at the result. Such unanimous concurrence was therefore obtained for the confirmation of the Churches; and it is stated to indicate that the power of government and discipline rests not with officers alone. With great solemnity the decision was announced : ' It seemed good unto us, being assembled with one accord. For it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.' That is, it seemed good to the assembly because 'it seemed good to the Holy Ghost.* This is quite a different utterance from the language of direct inspiration, 'Thus saith the Lord.' It seemed good, directs attention to the fact that the decision was drawn by reasonings of men from the Word inspired by the Holy Ghost. The asser- tion is that the decision was not an expression of private opinion, but of the mind of the Spirit, as collected from Scripture and His operations among the Gentiles. Most warrantably, then, the assembly assumes this authoritative language, and requires the cheerful obedience of all the Churches. THE DELIBEKATIVE ASSEMBLY. 115 § 5. Its Eecognition. To carry the recorded decision to the Churches, chosen men were selected along with Barnabas and Panl. Judas, Barnabas, and Silas were so empowered. These commissioners, besides delivering the epistle, by word of mouth were authoritatively to declare the decrees. On their arrival at Antioch, the commissioners were cordially welcomed ; and when they had delivered the decision of the as- sembly with full explanation, the Church there ^ rejoiced for the consolation.' This consolation was not a mere advice : it was in- tended ' to lay upon them no greater burden than these necessary things.^ It was evidently an injunction, — 'decrees ordained.* It was not what might be accepted or rejected at pleasure, but a binding obligation laid upon them, — the mind of the Holy Spirit, as appeared to the assembly. This well-doing was abso- lutely necessary in present circumstances. And this decision, removing ceremonial observances and enjoining abstinence from heathen usages, was received with entire submission. It could hardly be otherwise, being characterized by great wisdom and tenderness. Still, when the former divided condition of the Church at Antioch is remembered, with the determination and zeal of the Judaizing party, such a reception shows how fully the authority of the representative assembly was recognized. Whatever were their feelings, this solemn decision was bowed to as a binding moral obligation. There was a satisfactory termina- tion of the controversy. Danger of future disturbances from this cause was averted by this authoritative ratification of the privileges of the Church. The decision was not confined to Antioch. Affecting all others, it was delivered to all other Churches of the Gentiles. Some time after, Paul, accompanied by Silas, went through Syria and Cilicia ; Derbe, Lystra, Iconium, and other cities of Asia Minor, were visited. In their visitation, 'they delivered them the decrees for to keep, that were ordained of the apostles and elders which were at Jerusalem ' (Acts xvi. 4, 5). These Churches, as we have seen, were represented by apostolic elders, if not by others. And now they acknowledge the authority of 116 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. that assembly. There is not a single refusal or scruple to receive and obey these decrees. This title applied to the decision, shows that it was an act of jurisdiction, a deed of authority. The word ' decrees ' must bear the same signification here as in other portions of Scripture, where it means the com- mands of princes, or the ordinances of the ceremonial law. Throughout all the Gentile Churches that authoritative act was readily accepted, and with the best results : ' So were the Churches established in the faith.' The authority of that repre- sentative assembly was universally recognized. In this assembly we are presented with the highest instance of government. It was summoned to decide upon a s|)ecial cause. A disturbing element had arisen in Antioch, which the ordinary governors of the Church in that locality were unable to remove. They referred the matter to the judgment of 'the apostles and elders,' who, as the representatives of the Church, deliberated thereon. They proceeded in the ordinary way, reasoning and pro- nouncing a decision upon it ; by that decision the entire visible Church was bound, and to it consequently the Churches yielded willing submission. The Church of Christ then was not com- posed of detached portions, which had no kind of connection with each other, and no government in common. They were all united, not merely by professing the same faith, and by esteeming each other in love, but by the eternal bond of a general govern- ment. This is the model presented, to which the Church of every age and place is bound to seek conformity. Indication is given, in the recorded proceedings in the 11th chapter of the Acts, of such a common government reviewing and deciding upon the conduct of affairs. Peter was then examined as to his conduct in the presence of the apostles and brethren in Judea. He acknowledged their authority. He gave a full account of his admitting Gentiles into the Church at Csesarea. They considered the matter, and came to a decision. * They held their peace and glorified God, saying. Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life' (xi. 1, 4, 18). But that indication receives in the 15th chapter its fullest illus- tration. That representative assembly reviewed and decided upon the proceedings of Churches, office-bearers and members. The THE DELIBERATIVE ASSEMBLY. 117 countenance given to this reference of a case, in which no finding had been arrived at, gave like encouragement to those dissatisfied with a local decision. Had the matter been settled by the elders at Antioch, and a party remained dissatisfied, they might as justly liave claimed a more general deliberation of the case. The dis- sentients from the one administration might carry their appeal to a wider and higher for adjudication. The assembly, being repre- sentative, possessed power in appeals and review, or authoritative decision; but that decision was carried out with concurrence and expression of sympathetic exhortation, entreaty, and confirm.ation. This authoritative judgment embraced doctrine, discipline, worship and government. 1. Doctrine. The false doctrine or heresy was purged out — viz., that the observance of the cere- monial law w\^s necessary to salvation. 2. Liscipline. False teachers were censured as troublers of the Church, and subverters of souls. 3. Worship and government. Practices at which be- lieving Jews took offence were ordered to be avoided. Jews, false teachers, and Gentiles are severally dealt wdth. There is a threefold correction for a threefold offence. The government ranged not only over the entire visible Church, but over every- thing embraced in Christian fellowship. That assembly was for ' an ensample ' in the administration of the kingdom of Christ. It is a brilliant example. Following that, the ofiacers of the Church are to act with a single eye to the glory of God. The truth of God, above all things, is to be protected and promoted. The peace, purity, and prosperity of Zion is to be maintained by decided action. What is defective is to be set in order, with feelings of sympathy, humility, and devo- tion. Troublers and subverters are unhesitatingly to be censured. Only cases of extreme difiiculty are thus to be brought up for decision. But, if need be, a decision is to be sought and obtained. Thereupon, cheerful submission is to be given to the decision, as unto the Lord, and not to men. XV. Principle. — Administration in difficult cases of DOCTRINE, discipline, WORSHIP, AND GOVERNMENT, IS AUTHORI- TATIVELY EFFECTED BY ASSEMBLIES OF REPRESENTATIVE ELDERS. 118 THE GOVEllNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Questions. 1. When tvas the assembly at Jerusalem convened ? 2. Mention the three parties who constituted its authoritative memhers. Say in what character the apostles ai^peared, and what therefore was its characteristic feature. 3. What p>roof is there that this was not a mere assembly of the Church at Jerusalem, or that its memhers were not authoritatively sitting there ? 4. State its occasion ; why the matter had not been settled at Antioch, and how the question was brought before the assembly. 5. What is proved by the fact that the question was entertained 7 6. Say how the question might have been decided, and why another mode was adoi:>ted. 7. How does it appear that both sides of the question ivere vindicated ? 8. Give an outline of the reasoning of the ap)ostles. 9. Ofivhat value teas the ^sentence' of James? 1 0. Prove that the decision ivas not directly inspired and infallible. 11. Give the substance of the decision. 12. Are these pirohibitions still binding ? If any are not so, give the p>roof. 13. What does the phrase ' with the whole Church ' imply ? 14. Explain 'it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us.'' 15. Hoiv does it appear that the decison was more than a mere advice ? 16. What is 2^roved by its cordial reception at Antioch ? 17. Hoiu and why ivas that decision give?! to other Churches and accepted ? 18. What does this assembly ptrove as to the outward bond of unity of the Churches ? 19. Are there any other indications of a similar practice! 20. This reference being received and settled, could ajypeals against a decision be reasonably refused ? 21. Show how doctrine, discipline, worship, and government were included in the judgment arrived at. 22. State some of the lessons which this assembly presents. 23. Give the ptrinciple warranted by these considerations. THE SCRIPTUEAL GOVERNMENT. 119 CHAPTER XXV. THE SCEIPTUEAL GOVERNMENT. The Scriptures of tlie New Testament have presented us with the fact that the Monarch of this spiritual kingdom has provided a form of government. They further reveal what is that form. The constitution of the Church of Christ, as settled by the assembly at Jerusalem, is to continue unaltered to the end of the world. It is to be ever the one Church of Christ. Jews and Gentiles are to compose one holy people in the Lord. The ceremonial lav/, abrogated by the death of Christ, was to be abandoned by all professing Christians and Churches. That organized society is to be governed according to the law of Christ, by officers of His appointment after apostolic example. The administration of every Church is through its associated elders, elected and ordained. Churches closely united are regu-. lated by a common council of representative officers -, and ad- ministration in more difficult cases is carried out by assemblies of representative elders from widely-separated Churches — this common administration being the grand external bond of unity of those holding the same essential principles. Remove from the apostles all that was peculiar to them as inspired, and from their practice all that was clearly of a tempo- rary or local nature — what is the example left 1 As elders they administered the government of the Church, not separately, but wherever practicable, by association. Their united counsel and action is everywhere conspicuous. It is only otherwise when circumstances absolutely prevent. When it was possible to act in concert, they never acted singly. That association was not merely with apostolic elders — the ordinary elders are constantly taken into their counsels, and are admitted to equal authority. Here is the scriptural government of the kingdom of Christ. It is exercised by the hand of church officers having the authority of the King. In each congregation or church — in churches of a city or district united — in assemblies from churches widely scat- tered over the earth, — the body of associated representative 120 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. elders act for the good and with the concurrence of the members of the Church. This may appear more clearly by presenting in detail those essential principles that have been deduced from our examination of Scripture. Let us gather together and combine those thus recognised. Essential Scriptueal Phinciples. I. The only King and Head of the Church is the Lord Jesus Christ. 11. The visible Church is the organized society of those pro- fessedly believing in and bearing testimony unto Christ. III. The Scriptures are the" only ultimate standard of law to- the Church, IV. Apostolic scriptural practice is of universal and perpetual obligation. V. The office of elder is essential and permanent in the visible Church. VI. The office of the ministry is divinely authoritative and permanent. VII. The office of elder or bishop is identical. VIII. Every congregation should have a plurality of elders^ among whom the duties of teaching and ruling are distributed. IX. The highest position is that of elder or bishop, whose rule is wholly ministerial. X. Every Church should have a plurality of deacons, con- joined with the elders, specially entrusted with temporal affairs. XI. The election of all officers is an inherent right of the members of the Church. XII. Admission to office must be by prayer, and the imposition of the hands of the body of elders. XIII. The course of administration in every congregation is by representative associated elders. XIV. The congregations of a locality form one Church, which is governed by their associated elders. THE SCEIPTUEAL GOVERNMENT. 121 XV. Administration in difficult cases of doctrine, discipline, worship, and government, is authoritatively effected by assemblies of representative elders. Let these principles be gathered as far as possible into one, and it is found that — - The kingdom of Christ is governed, according to His LAW, BY representative ELDERS, APPOINTED AND ASSOCIATED BY His AUTHORITY. Or, in one word of Scripture, by ' The Presbytery.' Presbyters are the permanent ministers of the Word; their office is the office of a bishop ; a plurality engage in teaching and ruling, according to capacity ; their rule is ministerial, without superiority of office ; they charge and assist deacons with the special care of temporalities ; and being the chosen representa- tives of the people, they associate in the solemn act of ordination; they administer the government in each congregation in the Church of a locality, and by reviewing or receiving appeals in special assemblies. Associated representative elders, or the Pres- bytery, is thus the one grand pervading feature of the govern- ment of the kingdom of Christ, as presented in the Scriptures. Whatever is essential is therein declared, and is thus {jure divino) of divine right. Everything circumstantial, common, minute, is left to the wise and prudent regulation of the Presby- tery. * There are some circumstances concerning the worship of God, and the government of the Church, common to human actions and societies, which are to be ordered by the light of nature and Christian prudence, according to the general rules of the Word, which are always to be observed ' (C. of F. 1, § 6). In all these great essential principles the. government is the permanent institution of Christ. Every minute detail must be regulated in harmony with these, according to the general rule : *Let all things be done decently and in order' (1 Cor. xiv. 40). 122 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Selecting the royal authority of Christ, His visible kingdom, His standard of law, with the practice of His apostles, here is a foundation of God that standeth sure. The structure of essential principles built thereon cannot but be stable, having for their authority, ' Thus saith the Lord.' The result is manifest. The King Himself having shown ' the form of the house,' attests that the fashion thereof ' is essentially presbyterial. If the questions, whether there is a form of government 1 and what that is ? are not settled by the testimony of the Divine Word, then none other of similar importance can. If grand leading principles are pro- vided both by statement and apostolic example, such principles are given with authority by Zion's King. They are thus right- ful j more than that — they are divine. By the divine right of the King, these essential principles are binding, universally and permanently, upon His subjects. Government is not left to them in the aggregate. The administration of affairs is not left to any person who chooses to assume a position of authority. The Lord Jesus Christ has entrusted this to special ordinary officers of His own appointment ; they, by associated wise and energetic action, are, as far as practicable, to 'take the oversight,' as well as to ' feed the flock ; ' not by constraint of men, not from motives of worldly ease and wealth, not from desire of position and jjower as lords ; but they are to enter the Presbytery willingly, and of a ready mind, and are to carry on their labours, public and private, as examples to the flock. By doing the work of the Lord heartily and faithfully, in the fear of God, ' when the Chief Shepherd shall appear,' they ' shall receive a crown of glory' (1 Pet. V. 2-i). Rejoicing in this divine appointment, the entire Church must declare ' Glorious things are spoken of thee, 0 city of Zion ' (Ps. Ixxxvii. 3). The children of Zion, rejoicing in Christ their King, must therefore stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made them free, bewaring lest they be entangled by a new yoke of bondage, through submitting their consciences to any species of human authority in religion. It is only the commands of that One which we are to obey, respecting whom God the Father has declared, ' This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased; hear ye Him' (Matt. xvii. 5). THE SCRIPTURAL GOVERNMENT. 123 Questions. 1. In what manner have the, questions 'proposed been answered ? 2. State some outstanding featicres of the Church settled hy the apostles. 3. What is the peculiarity of the apostles^ example ? 4. Recapitulate the essential scriptural principles deduced. 5. IIoio may these he summed up in one ivord ? 6. What form, then, of Church government is of divine right ? 7. What conseqiience follows if these questions proposed are not settled by Scrii^ture ? 8. If grand leading principles are established, what must he the consequence of their universal adoption ? THE GOVERNMENT KINGDOM OF CHRIST. PART 11. PRESBYTERY— UNTENABLE OR INVINCIBLE? 'Thus saith the Lord, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, "where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, ^Ve will not walk therein.' — Jer. vi. 16. CHAPTER I. CHUECH DIVISIONS. ' God doth build up Jerusalem, and He it is alone That the dispersed of Israel doth gather into one.' The visible Church is now in a very different position from that which it occupied in the apostolic age. It is broken up into various sections more or less conflicting. Then it was one. Over that one incorporated body special and general officers ruled by harmonious counsel and action. Even then, however, parties arose. Party feeling threatened, but did not result in an outward breach of the unity of the Church. Essential truth, practically maintained under a common government, was still the bond — Christ being the spiritual centre of that visible one- ness. Only by the development of corruption, imperilling or making a negation of essential truth, was that oneness rent asunder. That true apostolic unity, inward and outward, having Christ for its centre, knit together by the bond of the truth in love, must ever be the aspiration of the Church ; that original and rightful position must ultimately prevail. Then ' the Lord shall be King over all the earth : in that day shall there be one Lord, and His name One.' Mere outward union, without that bond of essential truth, has been largely coveted and very fully attained. ConsiDicu- ously, that outward union by a common government alone, has proved a rock of offence. That ideal betrayed the Church into the gross apostasy of the Papacy. Although outward breaches in the unity of the Church exist, the grand fact of essential spiritual union remains. However separated, all true Christians are for ever one — one in Christ their Head. Personally united to the Saviour, sanctified by the Spirit, they severally glory in the cross of Christ, confess 128 THE GOVEKNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. His name, and travel onward to the same eternal rest. Even that outward separation — evil in itself — may, in a measure, be overruled for good. Variety in nature proves most conducive to harmony and beneficial result. The currents into which variety of formations disperse the mountain springs, render many a valley fruitful, while healthily stimulating beholders to activity. Having a common origin and performing similar works, although varying in length, depth, rapidity, purity, in the same ocean these rivers are again united. So variety of dispositions and circumstances operates in dispersing the waters of Church com- munion. If truly of heavenly origin, although the channels are different, their destiny is one. And yet, thorough isolation, with opposition of Christians and Churches, are evils universally deplored. Lamentation is not enough. The question must be enter- tained, How that evil can be remedied 1 The answer is pre- sented by the King of Zion when pleading for all departments of His Church : ' I have given unto them Thy Word ;' ' Sanctify them through Thy truth;' 'That they all maybe one.' Not otherwise can true unity be promoted than by a fuller posses- sion of the truth and love of God. Christian minds and hearts must be encircled and animated by that inner bond, if they are to leave their separate channels and flow on together as one mighty river. Dividing barriers of error must be removed. Only when thoroughly agreed in essential principles is unity loving, real, and attainable. To this blessed result mighty barriers oppose themselves. Some appear insuperable to man. These God in His own good time and way can easily remove. To do this for them, He must be jDleaded with by the whole house of Israel. Till then, let not the usefulness of separate rills in watering the country be denied. If every essential truth is not held in common, that which is may be recognized. Thus harmonious action may be taken, promoting common good, and resisting common evil. Granting this, something is wrong so long as sectarian names are characteristic of the one Church of Jesus Christ. Error there must be, lie on whichsoever side it will. By one section or another, truth is only partially possessed. Error is ever CHURCH DIVISIONS. 129 partial truth. In the vastness of its reaches the truth of God cannot all at once be possessed by mind or Church. Instruc- tion, discussion, training, illumination, all are necessary, line upon line, precept upon precept, in order to its thorough appre- iiension. Even here it may be more fully known. Only in heaven will it be perfectly possessed. In the past history of the Church this question of govern- ment has been variously or partially answered. This truth has been obtained in proportion to opportunity improved. Some jDortions of it have never been seriously grasped. But that neglect, refusal to embrace, or denial of its validity, cannot destroy the power of the truth. It still remains the very truth of God. Jarring views and actions may exalt unduly the sub- ordinate, or overlook what is essential. True harmony is found in the fullest and clearest possible possession of all essential truth. The primary must have its own position, the secondary be carefully adjusted. Induction must be full and faithful, the legitimate conclusion cordially accepted. Demonstration is possible only when the whole field is thoroughly surveyed. Satisfaction and permanent influence is obtained by possession of the whole truth ; the soul and the Church being formed for the truth. Its one-sided apprehension, along with influential circumstances, has originated distinct forms and procedure. These grand distinctions may be thus enumerated : — 1. Some separate themselves from other Christians by this distinction : a refusal to acknowledge scriptural government in the Church. They consequently devise some other plan. 2. Congregations hold that they are independent of each other, and that all Church members are entitled to regulate Church affairs. Thus the government is localized. 3. Communities maintain connection through an order of high rank and power, refusing the power of rule to ordinary pastors. Here the government is centralized. 4. A more full development of the former concentrates that rank and power in one person, to whom, as ' the head,' all parts of the Church are subject. Centralization is thus complete. 5. Communities intimately connected by the government of representative associated elders or Uhe Presbytery.' In this, I 180 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. it is contended, all tlie interests of government are har- monized. Which of these forms, or is any one of them, possessed essenti- ally of divine authority ? This is our question. It cannot be settled by the discovery of moral worth, or of human authority. A satisfactory decision can only be arrived at by the Word of God. Human authority is not enough. What system is there that is wanting in distinguished men ? Moral worth is in- sufficient. The excellent of the earth may be found in every branch of the true Church. Able and pious, as well as weak and uninfluential men exist in almost every communion. Men eloquent, energetic, wise, or mighty in the Scriptures, stand out distinguished. Leadership apart from Bible truth is unsatis- factory ; the guide is human, not divine. Scriptural prin- ciples, carefully deduced and applied, alone give the decision that can be held as a firm foundation. Let us, ascending these steps, and applying these principles? long for discovery of the truth and dissipation of the error. Whether is that which is jDCCuliar to Separatism, Congregational- ism, Prelacy, Popery, or Presbytery — or is any of these — sanc- stioned by the Word of God 1 Do any of these peculiar features of Church government or no government bear the stamp of divine approval? Bringing them severally to the touchstone of the scriptural model, we may be assured that whichever is most conformable is, to that extent, most divine. ' The analogy of a modern system of Church government to the apostolic is decisive in its favour. The nearer its substantial assimilation to the divine model, the more does it commend itself to the judgment and conscience' (Eccles. Pol. p. 382). Such an examination ought to assist the truly candid in judging whether government by Presbytery occupies an untenable or an invincible position. Questions. 1. Give cin^ idea of the condition, the outward bond, and the centre of the unity of the Apostolic Church. 2. In what way may mere outivard union he a snare ? 3. State any heneficicd residt thcd may flow from the existing condition of the Churches, also the principle of essential unity. SEPARATISM. 131 4. What evil is universally deplored, and how may that he remedied ? 5. Whence have arisen such diverse ansivers as to Church government ? 6. Enumerate some outstanding distinctions on this question. 7. Mentio)i ivhat standards are to he rejected, and ivhat applied, in the search for truth in this matter. CHAPTER 11. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. * There is no wisdom, nor understanding, nor counsel against the Lord.' Separatism. The world of professing Christians may be conveniently regarded under two grand aspects : Those who deny, and those who affirm that the King of Zion hath appointed a special government in the hand of church-officers. These, again, admit of sub-divisions according to peculiarity of opinion and practice. Thus govern- ment is either devised, localized, centralized, or harmonized. Those by whom scriptural government is denied, while other plans are devised, may be classified under three sections, — Sepa- ratism, Erastianism, Libertinism. The Separatist keeps aloof from every Church of the Reformation, professing that every believer shares all necessary gifts and grace in common, to the exclusion of official authority. The Erastian wholly or partially yields the rule of Christ's house into the hands of the civil magistrate. The Libertine claims that he is free to choose or reject any form of government that is plausible or convenient. Separation prevails to a large extent in Great Britain as in other parts. Its professed characteristics are longings, as among the Donatists, Novatians, Anabaptists, and Sandemanians of other times, for ' a pure Church / and that every believer should be found in all respects on a position of equality. These longings are plausible and ensnaring to the inexperienced and the zealous. L32 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. The Holy. 1. Persons are found in Nortliern parts, who give evidence that they are puffed up by spiritual j^ride. With them no Church on earth is pure. They only are ' the holy.' Their holiness would be contaminated by communion with imperfect Churches. Some are seen wearing blue cloaks — which they have assumed because Paul is suj^posed to have worn one. These holy men wear white or spotted handkerchiefs bound upon their heads, which are understood to indicate the supposed degrees of sanctity to which they have attained. This "particular form of Pharisaism is rapidly disappearing. It ought not to be wholly associated with 'the Men.' They have generally retained their Church con- nection, and have rendered important services to evangelical re- ligion and the Church of Christ. (See ' The Aioostle of the North.) The Society of Friends ought scarcely to be classed under this head. As an organized community, practising the spirit of Christian love towards others, they cannot fairly be called Separatists. The difficulty of allo- cating a more suitable place to them in the arrangement of this book, and the facts that some separatist peculiarities are re- tained, and that Plymouthism, in some measure, arose out of this Society, are the reasons for introducing here a brief notice of this religious body. In so far as the j)eculiarities of the Friends respect the office of the ministry, a settled ministerial income, public ministrations by women, a ruling eldership, &c., or liberty to depart from the divinely-appointed form of government, these views and prac- tices will be considered when dealing with those who have embraced and extended them. It may be now remarked, that while a settled ministerial income is denounced by Friends as ' preaching for hire,' the Society still acknowledges that ' it may be lawful to receive such temporals as are given them freely and cordially by those to whom they have communicated spirituals' (Barclay). It is not consistent with this inquiry to examine their doctrinal views, whether Justification is, with sufficient clearness, regarded as distinct from Sanctification, &c. There can be no hesitation in saying that the early Friends did good THE SOCIETY OF FEIENDS. 133 service in concentrating attention upon a previously slighted truth. — the powerful operation of the Holy Spirit in the heart. They seem to have carried this rather far, giving it relatively an undue place, in refusing to recognize the outward call of the people and special ordination, as well as the inner call to the work of the ministry. Still they have something similar. One of them- selves thus explains their present position to the writer : — ' I should consider we had a settled ministry, i.e., a ministry duly acknowledged by the Church, and watched over by regularly- appointed elders. There are those who speak in our meetings who are not thus acknowledged; but those whom the body believe to have truly received a gift of the ministry, and to have given proof of the same, are thus recognized, and then are mem- bers of the meetings of ministers and elders. This body meets for mutual encouragement, and to watch over the ministry, but has no governing power.' This Society — recently much circumscribed — arose through the exertions of George Fox of Drayton, Leicestershire, about 1650, who was moved to testify boldly against the prevailing licentious- ness and ungodliness of his day. He was frequently imprisoned because of this. His followers were termed ' Quakers,' because he informed a magistrate that ' quaking and trembling were necessary dispositions to hear the Word of God.' His views being carried out with zeal and devotedness, members of the Friends are now as much respected as they were formerly derided. The ordinances of Baptism and the Supper they reject, be- cause they hold that the baptism of the Spirit is enough, and that true communion is internal. But a regularly-organized system of government or discipline is consistently carried out by means of monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings. This does not come up to, while it approaches very nigh to, scriptural Church govern- ment. (1.) The monthly meetings are composed of the congre- gations of a district. The meeting charges itself with provision for the poor, education, the admission, censure, or exclusion of members, with the granting of certificates to those going else- where. Further, overseers are appointed, who insist on private admonition being given to offenders prior to consideration of 134 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. such cases at future meetings. Proposals and concurrence for marriage, and for the settlement of disputes, are also attended to. (2.) The quarter^ meetings are representative. Those who are deputed by the monthly meetings bring written replies as to the conduct of the members • and appeals in difficulties, or reviews of remissness of the monthly meetings, are entered upon. The yearly meeting superintends and advises the whole, and finally determines appeals. The several yearly meetings of London, ISTew England, New York, and four others in America, maintain a friendly correspondence. This system approaches very near to Presbyterial Church courts. (3.) In addition to these meetings of men, similar monthly, quarterly, and yearly meetings of women are held at the same times and places, but without power to frame rules. In these attention is given to matters specially aff'ecting their sex. (4.) The monthly meetings select those who are judged experienced, of either sex, under the title of ' elders,' to give counsel to ministers. These, with ministers approved by the monthly meetings, hold special assemblies for encourage- ment in duty, and the counselling of those who require attention. By this meeting of ministers and elders judgment is given as to those who have thought themselves qualified or called to the work of the ministry, but the advice of the quarterly meeting must first be obtained. Such meetings are conducted according to prescribed rules, which they have no power to alter. (5.) In addition to these, meetings for sufferings were instituted during times of persecution. They are still continued to superintend the Society during the interval of the yearly meetings. This system of government appears to have wrought well, superintending not only the spiritual, but also the temporal duties of the members of the Society. Silence, forbearance, moderation, steadiness, cleanliness, decorum, above all. Christian love, stand out as well-known results. It has been so far perfected after very many earnest efforts. Amongst many of the Friends, a great modification is going on in regard to outward unnecessary peculiarities ; and it is to be hoped that a spirit of scriptural inquiry, and readiness to mould their system more fully according to the revealed mind of the Lord, will yet bring them into closer fellowship with all who PLYMOUTHISM. 135 desire to see eye to eye. — {Minnies of Yearly Meeting of the Friends, London, 1861.) Plymouthism or Brethrenism is a form of sejjaratism wliicli has of late years sprung up, having much in common with the sectaries of the Commonwealth period. § 1. Their Chosen Sphere. This party is exceedingly active and plausible, compassing sea and land to make proselytes — never from the sunken mass of the population — always from the membership of existing Pro- testant communities. Various titles, chosen or applied, are given to these separatists. •* People call us Plymouthists' — we call ourselves * Brethren.' As Oerman Anabaptists in America, they say, ' We are no denomi- nation or system — we are Christians.' That ' separatist ' is the proper appellation by which they should be distinguished, is ■evident both from their professed opinions and practices. They say that ' walking in the fellowship and unity of the Spirit involves " distinct separation " from all who are not in practice doing so likewise.' ' Those who call themselves of any denomina- tion or sect beyond that of Christians are blamed.' ' Separatism from evil is faithfulness.' ' These are man's confusions, called *' churches" or denominations.' Such high-sounding pretensions are not new. There were separatists in Paul's day as well. It is not a little remarkable that, in the very epistle to which modern separatists most frequently appeal, there should occur a withering exposure and denunciation of the sectarian spirit. Not only were there parties in the Church of Corinth who called themselves after highly-gifted ministers, saying, some, ' I am of Paul,' some, ' I am of Apollos,' and others, 'I am of Cephas ;' there were others who showed as intensely their sectarian spirit by saying, nay, ' I am of none of these human leaders — I am of Christ.' Well may it be demanded now as then, 'Is Christ divided ?' ' There are contentions among you.' ' Now I beseech you that there be no divisions among you' (1 Cor. i. 10-13). No Church in the New Testament is so severely rebuked for sectarianism, and no party more than that calling itself super- 136 THE GOVEENMENT OP THE KINGDOM. ciliously ' of Christ. This rebuke applies to separatist brethrert now even more than to others. Their separatist practice also is becoming more fully known, running to and fro, creeping into Churches and houses. At first, concealing their peculiar views, they generally enlarge on the duty of loving Christian communion. So soon as they form acquaintance with the members of a Church, they endeavour to withdraw these from a settled ministry and purity of doctrine, generally insisting on baptism by immersion, and on ' separation' from that and every organized Church, or, as they term them, ' systems.' Something may be said for the existence of these separatists. It is a recoil or protest against corruption in Churches. Further, they hold some scriptural truth. Again, the endeavour is plausible to realize a perfect community of Christians. But such has never been known on earth. It ought to be remembered, first, that when their object is avowed, this realization is to be accomplished at the expense of the entire overthrow of every organized community of Christians; and, secondly, that having no fixed creed, and propagating many errors — regarding the person of Christ, the moral law, faith, repentance, sanctification, prayer, the Holy Spirit, the Sabbath, the Church and ministry, &c. — these sepa- ratists give no security for the protection and promotion of the truth as it is in Jesus. (See Croslcerijs CaiecJdsni.) § 2. The Origin of this Separatism may be traced in Dublin at the beginning of this centur3^ In 1804, the Rev. John Walker resigned his fellowship in the Uni- versity, and trained up a sect in that city. He expounded Scrip- ture, but neither praise nor prayer formed part of public worship. Professing to follow every apostolic practice, the *holy kiss' was practised. Other religious people ^vere held in detestation — husbands and daughters renounced or denounced if they held intercourse with those beyond the pale of Walkerism. Its founder died in London in 1833. A similar sect, of some forty persons, still exists in Dublin, known as Kellyism. Its founder^ the Rev. John Kelly, was expelled from the Established Church, and died in 1855. He, however, maintained the pastoral rela- PLYMOUTHISM. 137 tion, while allowing brotherly exhortation. These sects gave birth to Brethrenism, which arose in that city under the late Mr Bellet and others. This party spread to Cork, then to Plymouth, from whence it was extended by the zeal of some renegade Quakers, who, as is usual, maliciously sought to destroy their former connection. A definite order of pastorship was sought to be framed in Plymouth by Messrs B. W. Newton, J. L. Harris, and others. They endeavoured to get their Irish brethren to agree to this ; but those in Cork replied that, ' "We will not be overruled by " the Plymouth brethren." ' Thus this term arose by which British separatists are commonly known. A schism was thus made, forerunning and forewarning the continual schis- matical actings of those who everywhere prove themselves to be bitter censorious separatists. Another schism of these Brethren occurred at Plymouth in 1845. Mr J. N". Darby, who had formerly been a minister of the Church of England, separated himself from the followers of Mr Newton, hurling excommunications against allr who declined his own authority. From these Darbyites and Newtonians various other sects have been formed ; and these may be indefi- nitely multiplied, unless the membership of our Churches are timeously warned. One of themselves recently owned, that the original Darbyites now number upwards of thirty distinct parties. This most sectarian of all sects, whose motto is, ' Divide and conquer,' is as insidiously and unscrupulously endeavouring to break up the membership of American Churches. There, in 1869, they commenced the issue of The Christian Quarterly in which they note their special and destructive commission. It is put in such terms as these : — 1. Suppression of all unscriptural terms. 2. Destruction of theological terms and sophistical ques- tions. 3. Elimination of unscriptural and sinful designations, as Episcopal Church, Presbyterian Church, iMethodist Church, Baptist Church. 4. Destruction of sporadic sects, o. Abolition of creeds. 6. Dissolution of centralized ecclesiastical govern- ment.— [Bih. Sacra.) It is important that the ministers and people of every branch of the Church of Christ should recognize this factj that i3arties 138 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. professing to be * Cliristian bretliren' are entering in among them. What they profess is ' to divide existing religious bodies called Churches, to disturb their tranquillity, and to call away every disciple from among them.' Ought not the professions of such brethren to be tested by the Divine Word, so as to ascertain whether their actions and principles are Christian, or whether they are ' grievous wolves/ of whom the Churches are warned 1 § 3. Seioaratist Vieivs of the Church. are very defective, so far as can be gathered from their hazy writings. In no one of their various tracts can a clear statement of their views be found. They ascribe the origin of the Church to the day of Pentecost. Then, say they, the formation of the body ovit of Jew and Gentile took place — of Him whom they style, in unscriptural terms, ' the Man glorified,' — ' a Man at God's right hand.' This body, ' inhabited by the Spirit of God Him- self,' is ' the entire complement of the saints from the day of Pentecost till the moment when all are in heaven.' Further, that while * all the saints between these two great events are of the body of Christ — in the mind of God ' — that body only ' em- braces all believers here upon earth at the moment I write, as at any given moment.' Thus the Church of the Old Testament is set aside as a part of the body of Christ. The martyr Stephen had no such belief. Standing before the Jewish Sanhedrim, he declared that Christ ' was in the Church in the wilderness' (Acts vii. 38). Neither had Paul. He says, ' Moreover, brethren, I would not have you ignorant, how that all our fathers drank of that spiritual Ptock that followed them : and that Rock was Christ ' (1 Cor. x. 1-4). So in proving the oneness of Christ with His people, Paul quotes the utterance of Christ, given by His Spirit in psalms sung by Old Testament saints, ' In the midst of the Church will I sing praise unto Thee' (Heb. ii. 12; Ps. xxii. 22). Manifestly, the covenant of grace was ' differently administered in the time of the law . . . types and ordinances . . . were for that time sufficient and efficacious, through the operation of the Spirit, to instruct and build up the elect in faith in the promised Messiah, by whom PLYMOUTHISM. 139 they had full remission of sins and eternal salvation/ {Con- fession of Faith^ vii. § 5.) The membership of the Church or body of Christ on earth is said by separatists to consist of true believers only. This as- sumption runs through all their published statements, confound- ing the invisible with the visible aspects of the Church. It is true that ' all believers everywhere are members of one body in Christ;' but it is- also true that 'the purest Churches under heaven are subject both to mixture and error.' ' The kingdom of heaven ' Christ Himself likens ' unto ten virgins/ * and five of them were wise, and five were foolish.' In the Church over which Christ presided, there was a Judas Iscariot; in the Apostolic Church at Jerusalem, Ananias and Sapphira ; at Samaria, Simon Magus ; at Antioch, troublers of the Church, false teachers who subverted souls; at Corinth, scandals of great magnitude (1 Cor. xi. 21); in Asia Minor, much to merit the condemnation of Christ. The Church, according to these sepa- ratists, consists only of those ' inhabited by the Spirit of God Himself.' They ' own and recognize all others who are owning and acting upon this opinion.' They refuse to recognize as Christian any who belong not to their fellowship, or who cannot agree with their opinions. The positive principles on which these separatists agree and act are thus : — First, That no existing Church is recognized as Christian. They are denounced as ruinous, voluntary, artificial, sinful. No liberal or candid con- cessions are made to any, even in the interests of truth. Any alliance amongst these Churches, though based on essential truth, is, say they, sin against the Holy Ghost, as including an agree- ment to differ on other points. Some fondness is betrayed for the apostate Church of Rome. Intense hostility is manifested to Eeformation Churches. Second, This cry is continually re- iterated to all Church members, ' Come out of her, my people.' Third, Separatism is the only way of uniting the true disciples of Jesus. Hence, the prevalent idea of these Brethren is, that God's principle of unity is separation from evil systems, that is from the Churches of the Eeformation. The passage, ' Come out from among them, and be ye sepa- rate' (2 Cor. vi. 17), is thus employed in direct contravention 140 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. both to its design and the practice of the Apostolic Churches. The Corinthian believers were commanded to be separate from idolatry and infidelity. Sacrilegious and heathen practices and connections were to be avoided in matters of faith and worship. But there is no command given to those who thought themselves believers, to withdraw from others whom they denounced as unbelievers, who were yet professedly members of the Church. Never is any Church of the New Testament denounced as ruin- ous, artificial, sinful, &c., because there w^ere in it those who acted inconsistently with their profession. Never is there warrant given to separate from professing Christians, and to denounce them as unbelievers, contrary to their own express declarations. The other passage employed continually, ' Come out of her, my people ' (Rev. xviii. 4), is addressed solely to those of God s people who may be found in the communion of the Eomish Babylon, as the jDassage from which the words are adduced origi- nally called the Jews to come forth from ancient Babylon. The command was not intended, and would be WTongfully applied, either to Jewish or to Christian believers, to separate themselves from the Church in which God had graciously placed them, be- cause they judged that some or many of the members were not what they professed to be. No passage of Scripture requires withdrawal from a person on the suggestion that he is an unbe- liever, which he denies. That modern Churches are not such, because some apostolic customs are not practised, is a mere delusion ; for many things were done which were manifestly of a temporary nature. The practice of separatists themselves is proof sufficient. Do they follow Christ's example in 'w^ashing one another's feet?' Do they, in their assemblies, embrace each other indiscriminately with ' the holy kiss 1 ' Virtually they admit that only such apo- stolic practices can be followed and are binding as are suitable for all times and places. These Separatists elevate some practices and overlook others, each fellowship selecting and following what they please. Again, it is asserted that these are not true Churches, for dis- cipline is unknown in them. By discipline they mean complete PLYMOUTHISM. 141 separation of believer from unbeliever. None of the Churclies of the Reformation will deny the scriptural discipline that the unworthy ought to be dealt with, so that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus. Greater fidelity to Christ and souls in these Churches must form the subject of prayer and effort. But there are undoubtedly many of these Churches in which discipline is faithfully exercised. How is it, then, that * the Brethren ' treat even these with supercilious contempt, and endeavour their destruction? This conduct proves that the assertion is a mere subterfuge. "Were the Churches of the New Testament now in existence, which one of them would ' the Brethren ' own to be a true Church of Christ ? As detailed in Scripture, they were all ruinous and sinful, if the judgment of ' the> Brethren ' is to be taken. Are they then unchurched because of their judgment ? And are modern Churches only such, if these self-constituted judges allow them to be so ? Nay, verily. Scripture gives no warrant for any to separate themselves from a Church, even if the unworthy are not cast out. The remedy is to mourn, privately to avoid such until they are reclaimed, and to seek reformation. Only when a portion of the Church is compelled to separate, in order to the vindication of the truth, is the withdrawal from those guilty of defection * according to Christ Jesus.' Questions. 1. Arrange all 2^yofessing Christian Churclies under two classes on this point, and then subdivide these. 2. State what is pecidiar to Separatism, Erastianism, and L ihertinism respectively. 3. What, hriefiy, are the characteristics of separatists ? and ivhat parties exist under this head ? 4. Distinguish Hhe 3£en' of the JYorth fro7n Uhe Holy,' or separatists proper, 5. Mention why the Society of Friends are thus classed, and some of their 2yeculiarities. 6. Give briefly the origin of the Society, and of the name QuaJcer, tvith their reasons for rejecting the ordinances of Baptism and the Supper. 142 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 7. State their various meetings organized for government or discipline, and in ivhat relation this x>^cm stands to that of the Scriptures. 8. Why are Phjmouthists or ' the Brethren' termed separatists? and hy whom are they rehuhed 1 9. Mention their sphere, 2^'>^ocedicre, apology, object, and ten- dency. 10. Give a slcetch of their origin and p>roriress in Ireland, Eng- land, and America respectively, as cdso of the objects they have avoived. 11. How vjcnldyou combat their views as to the origin and the composition of the Church visible. 12. Unfold again some of their positive principles, and shoio hoiv two texts constantly quoted by them are misapplied. 13. How ivould you meet their vieivs as to — (1.) ajwstolic cus- toms, and (2.) the exercise of discipline ? 14. Do the Scrip)tures warrant separation in all cases from imperfect Churches ? CHAPTEE III. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. " How shall they hear without a preacher ? And how shall they preach except they be sent ? " IS EVERY CHEISTIAN ENTITLED TO ASSUME THE OFFICE OF THE MINISTRY 1 By separatists tlie stated gospel ministry is rejected — (a) liberty being claimed for all to conduct worship and to preach, (6) women included ; but (c) to tlie exclusion of any accepting of a settled income, and (d) the Holy Ghost is said to be the only guide or president of assemblies. Have these assertions any proi:)er found- ation in the Word of God 1 First, May any Christian assume the ministerial office? Separatists deny that ' certain persons exclusively hold the place of teachers/ and assert that ' no gift from God has to wait for a sanction from the Church ere it is used.' ' I deny the right to WHO AEE TO MINISTER? 143 any one (to speak) save God, the Holy Gliost.' * It is God act- ing, tbat is the great point.' -That 'pastors and teachers^ have been given by Christ, autho- ritatively and publicly to preach and rule, is thus denied. It is denounced as a ' one-man ministry.' ' There is no man, or class of men, more fitted to present our worship, or to do anything for us in the place of worship, than we are ourselves.' ' Where, then, are the college-educated and regidarly or humanly ordained and salaried ministers 1 ' ' We certainly read of instruction and elo- cution, and also of regularly ordained elders and deacons in some of the Churches ; but only the apostles, or those with a special gift of the Holy Ghost, might appoint these.' It is thus claimed that any one may minister ; for regularly appointed ministers have ceased with the period of inspiration. But, with strange contradiction, inspiration is still claimed, for, say they, the Holy Ghost alone has the right of speech. Secondly, Has any one liberty to minister publicly in the Church ? ' Yes,' replies the separatist, ' if so gifted ; ' for the early Christians ' were commanded to give the fullest scope and liberty ' to ' the Lord the Spirit to exercise such gifts as He might see fit to develop amongst them.' To see the fallacy of such assertions, it must be asked. What is the grand end of the Church ? Most assuredly, it is chiefly the manifestation of the divine glory. For this end the Church has been instituted. The subordinate end is man's good. Souls are to be gathered in and perfected who are to confess Christ in ordinances, assemblies, and specially on days prescribed by the Lord. These ordinances imply worshippers and the administra- tion of worship. This administration has not been left to volun- tary action any more than the existence and ^perpetuation of the Church. The office of the ministry is divinely instituted and maintained : * This is a true saying, If a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work' (1 Tim. iii. 1). This ministry of the gospel, in its highest function, is the office of a bishop. This office was instituted by Christ for the public and authorita- tive discharge of the good work of conducting the worship of God. The word ' ministry ' is not used in the New Testament for civil service, spiritual worship only, or the service of a deacon, 144 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. but for tliis special ecclesiastical function. It is not power of dominion but of service, laborious but honourable. * Let a man so account of us as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God' (1 Cor. iv. 1). The gospel ministry is by divine authority. It is commissioned, described, and continued for the supply of necessities, according to divine promises. 1, The Ministry is Divinely Com3iissioned. The office is from the Three- One Jehovah. The ministry is not a mere work which any able man may perform. It is an office implying appointment, authority, and relative submission. Teachers are set by God, pastors and teachers are given by the Lord Jesus. Elders are made overseers to feed the flock by the Holy Ghost' (1 Cor. xii. 28 j Eph. iv. 11 ; Acts xx. 28). Not only apostles, but all His ministering servants were commanded by Christ to go, making disciples and administering ordinances in the name of the Three-One God. His words declare that His gracious will is — First, To have an official ministry ; Secondly, To give the Holy Spirit to render that efficacious ; and Thirdly, That this institution continue to the end of the world. His pro- mise is to be ' always ' — all days of the gospel, as long as the world lasts — present graciously with His ministering servants (Matt, xxviii. 19, 20). This commission can alone be fulfilled by a per^Detual ministry. For — 2. It is Described by Special Titles and Duties. Pastors, teachers, preachers, elders, labourers, stewards, minis- ters, ambassadors, and other names, clearly distinguish those commissioned by the Lord. The specific titles im^^ly an official position to which they are appointed. Whatever distinction is given by God must be according to truth. If there were no real difference between pastor and people, no such distinguishing titles would be employed. By the law of nations, the persons of ambassadors are inviolable : * Now then we are ambassadors for Christ' (2 Cor. v. 20). If Paul was an ambassador, all true ministers of Christ are so, and for the same reason. He and WHO AEE TO MINISTER ? ] 45 they beseech men to be reconciled to God, opening their mouths to make known the mystery of the gospel. Titles are not the only distinguishing quality presented in the New Testament, the qualifications of ministers are minutely described. They must be able to expound and apply the Divine Word j to reason and exhort, under a feeling of deep responsi- bility, but with all boldness. Their duties in publicly preaching the Word, administering ordinances, and watching over the flock are also carefully set forth. Nor are the corresponding obliga- tions of the membership of the Church omitted. Pastors are to be known, esteemed, obeyed, supported : ' He that receiveth you receiveth me,' saith the Lord. These qualifications, duties, and corresponding obligations, severally and together, prove that pas- tors and teachers are still the gift of Christ. To reason otherwise would make these portions of the Word of no effect. 3. It is Continued by Express Appointment. . The apostles being empowered to regulate all things concerning the Church, made express provision, not only for the appoint- ment of pastors in every church during their lives, but for a sufiacient staff in perpetuity. There is no more express injunc- tion than that given to Timothy : ' The things that thou has 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). Solemnly Paul had given Timothy a charge to keep particular directions concerning the ministry, ' without spot, unrebukable, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ' (1 Tim. vi. 14). It was impossible that Timothy personally could obey this so long. The commandment is given, evidently in the person of Timothy, to all commissioned to preach the Word, instant in season and out of season, under the conviction that this duty will be judged of by the Lord ' at His appearing and His king- dom ; ' even although men ' will not endure sound doctrine,' and * after their own lusts shall heap to themselves teachers ' (2 Tim. iv. 1-5). So in writing to the Churches of Asia Minor, and addressing exhortations, now to the minister or ' angel,' now to the people, ' the rest,' a charge is given to ' hold fast that which 146 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ye have already till I come' (Rev. ii. 24:, 25). Only by those perpetually commissioned can this charge be maintained. Thus appointed as the perpetual ordinance of Christ, the slighting of, or the removal of, ministers is declared to be a great sin and judgment : ' Where there is no vision the people perish^ (Prov. xxix. 18). ' As ye go, preach ; . . . but when they perse- cute you in this city, flee ye into another. . . . He that receiveth you receiveth me' (Matt. x. 7, 23, 40). A high honour is conferred upon the ministers of the gospel. ' The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof'^ (xxi. 43). ' Behold, the days come, saith the Lord God, that I will send a famine in the land ; not a famine of bread, nor a thirst for water, but of hearing the words of the Lord : and they shall wander from sea to sea, and from the north even to the east, they shall run to and fro to seek the Word of the Lord, and shall not find it' (Amos viii. 11, 12). 4. The Ministry is for the Supply of Necessities. The gospel is to be preached to all nations and to every creature. This is the ordinance of God for salvation. But this great work is far fr6m being accomplished. Consequently, the necessity for a divinely-commissioned ministry is as great as ever : ' How shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard ? and how shall they hear without a preacher 1 and how shall they preach, except they be sent?' (Rom. x. 14, 15). The argument of the apostle here is irresistible. A preacher is neces- sary to bring souls to the knowledge of Christ. His divine commission is as indispensable. None may do the work of heralding Christ but the man who is appointed a herald by the King. Nations, though civilized and highly educated, are as bad now as were Jews and Pagans of old. Nature is as thoroughly depraved and darkened as to spiritual realities. The delusions of Satan and the number of false teachers are as prevalent and powerful : ' There shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies ' (2 Pet. ii. 1). The principal ordinary means appointed of God for the prevention of evil, and the impartation of spiritual blessing, is the ministry of the WHO AEE TO :\IINISTEE ? 147 gospel. So long as necessity exists ' for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ,' pastors and teachers are graciously bestowed by Him who has ascended (Eph. iv. 13, 13). What man, or class of men, dare abolish that which the Lord hath constituted I This ministerial provision is — 5. In Fulfilment of Special Peomises. Pastors according to God's heart to feed with knowledge and understanding were promised for gospel times : ' I will set shep- herds over them, which shall feed them ; and they shall fear no more, nor be dismayed, neither shall they be lacking, saith the Lord'(Jer. iii. 15, xxiii. 4); 'Yet shall not thy teachers be removed into a corner any more, but thine eyes shall see thy teachers' (Jer. xxx. 20, Ixii. 6, 7, Ixvi. 21). These promises have been, and are being fulfilled. Teaching whatever He has commanded, and acting according to His direction — Christ has promised His perpetual presence to the persons so acting as in- vested with that ministerial oflSce. The expression used by the Lord is very full, implying that His promise would not terminate until this world end. He did not give that promise to the apostles as such, but to them as ministers. He did not say, ' Lo, I am with you all yotci^ days,' but ' all days of the gospel.' The stewards of the kingdom are, therefore, to be faithful till the second coming of their Lord. As with Moses, Elijah, Jeremiah, John the Bap- tist, Paul — aye, Christ Himself — opposition and obloquy must be expected. But all persecutions combined will only intensify the glory of the promised reward : ' Who then is that faithful and wise steward, whom his lord shall make ruler over his household, to give them their portion of meat in due season ? Blessed is that servant whom his lord, when he cometh, shall find so doing' (Luke xii. 42, 43). ' Be thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life ' (Rev. ii. 10). It is the distinct work of the ministry to turn many to righteousness, and they who do so shall shine ' as the stars for ever and ever ' (Dan. xii. 3). Their ofiice is most distinctly enunciated — in no words more forcibly than in these : — ' They watch for your souls as they that 148 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. must give account' (Heb. xiii. 17). Every minister is ap- pointed specially to watch : ' Thus saith the Lord, I have set watchmen upon thy walls, O Jerusalem, which shall never hold their peace day nor night.' Their commission is most solemn and express : ' Son of man, I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel, therefore, hear the word at my mouth, and warn them from me.' Every man is bound to watch over him- self : * Watch, therefore, for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come.' The minister of Christ has a more extended duty. He must watch regarding all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath constituted him an overseer or bishop. As the watchmen of the city in times of peace, he is to go about to satisfy way- farers asking after the Beloved. In times of warfare he must watch the motions and feints of the enemy. He must sound an alarm showing danger, arousing the sleeping, and so giving the time of night, that the earnest and anxious may know where they are. Most responsible is this office in the Church of Christ. It is the greatest delusion to think that any one will do. Would any one, whatever his character or qualifications, be selected for this office in civil matters ? That prevalent spirit of regarding indi- viduals apart from a Christian Church, is almost unknown to Scripture. The apostles addressed their epistles to Churches, so did Christ Himself. Unregulated religion, and unregulated ser- vice, however it may boast of special piety and love, acting according to caprice or convenience, is not commanded, but repudiated. As the watchman or sentinel, so is the minister of Jesus Christ. A public spirit is essential, with much anxious watching, to detect signs of approaching danger. The courageous and self-denying spirit, by mental and physical exertion, must give timeous and faithful warning : ' For if the trumpet give an uncertain sound, who shall prepare himself to the battle ? ' Let the watchman's eyes be closed, his ears deaf, his tongue dumb ; then, before the besieged are aware, the city is taken, destroyed. Hopeful of his own personal safety, he must be concerned for the salvation of his fellows. Reaching the shore himself, he cannot stand unmoved while the vessel of the Church is lured by false lights upon hidden rocks. If there is an attempt to muzzle or WHO AKE TO MINISTER ? 149 gag the watchman, as the dumb son when his father was being murdered, he will burst forth with a terrific cry. His voice will be heard as Esther lamenting : ' How can I endure to see the evil that shall come unto my people ? How can I endure to see the destruction of my kindred ? ' * Woe is unto me if I preach not the gospel.' 6. Separatist Insinuations Fallacious. Seeing that this necessity exists, and that the Lord hath sup- plied it by an office of His own appointment till the end of time, no plea whatever will warrant either the rejection of the legiti- mate ministry, or its assumption by any one at his own discretion. This position is amply corroborated by an examination of separa- tist insinuations. 1. It is true that predictions of gospel times run in general terms thus : — 'All thy children shall be taught of the Lord^ (Isa. liv. 13). ' They shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man his brother, saying, Know the Lord : for they shall all know me, from the least of them unto the greatest of them ' (Jer. xxxi. 34; Heb. viii. 11). 'Ye need not that any man teach you' (1 John ii. 27). These statements show how much more clear the way of salvation is under the new than under the old dispensation ; and that the vail which covered the hearts of the Jews has been, and will be, more fully removed by the power- ful operation of the Holy Spirit with the Word of the gospel. But they do not prove that there is no necessity for the office of the ministry : for, first, the Bible and experience give proof of the necessity j and, secondly, the statements are comparative, not absolute. (1.) The quotation from Jeremiah, in the Epistle to the Hebrews, shows that Paul understood that the prophecy was fulfilled in his day ; and yet his writings and actions abundantly testify that the absolute necessity for the work of the ministry remained. Christ Himself and His apostles both taught pub- licly, and commanded specially appointed men to teach and preach, although that was a period of the special manifestation of the Spirit. How much more is the ministry necessary now ? 150 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. (2.) To regard these statements as absolute would not only- arrest the i3ublic preaching of the gospel by His commissioned servants, contrary to Christ's command, but would silence every gifted brother among separatists; aye, more than that, every private admonition and conference as sinful must be prohibited. How would that consort with such exhortations as ' teaching and admonishing one another in psalms,' (feci (Col. iii. 16); ' Warn them that are unruly, comfort the feeble-minded' (1 Thess. v. U). (3.) Manifestly the internal anointing of the Spirit, does not abolish the external teaching of the ministry. If so, there would be no necessity for the outward Word of inspiration. Nay, God, who can work without means or above them, is pleased ordinarily to employ the ministry for the very purpose of renewing and sanctifying souls. It is by pastors according to His own heart. He takes one of a city and two of a family, and brings them to Zion, thereby feeding them with knowledge and understanding (Jer. iii. 14, 15). These statements, then, must be understood comparatively, as other general texts. When Paul writes, * know- ing this that the law is not made for a righteous man,' the state- ment is so understood. The righteous man does not need the compulsive power of the law in order to obedience. He obeys cordially ; and yet the law of God is a light to his feet, a lamp to his path. Scripture and experience testify that the promise is not absolutely fulfilled on earth : ' For now we see through a glass darkly ; but then face to face : now know I in part ; but then shall I know even as also I am known' (1 Cor. xiii. 12). 2. The declarations of Peter and John can only be understood in this comparative sense when it is said, ' Ye are a royal priest- hood ; ' He that loved us ' hath made us kings and priests unto God' (1 Pet. ii. 5, 9 ; Eev. i. 6). Peter explains his meaning. He is speaking of priesthood, not as an office, but figuratively. Then he compares believers, first, to the stones of which the temple was composed ; and again, to the holy and royal priest- hood that ministered therein. His object was to impress them with a sense of their high calling, ' to offer up spiritual sacrifices,' and ' to show forth the praises ' of God as His chosen people. But there is no hint in his epistles, or in the similar figurative WHO AEE TO MINISTER ? 151 f langUcage of Jolm, that the office of tlie ministry was to be abolished. On the contrary, Peter expressly exhorts pastors to fidelity in the discharge of their duties towards this royal priest- hood, * the flock of God/ by feeding and taking the oversight of them until the chief Shepherd appear (1 Pet. v. 1-4). John also, describing the condition and prospects of the Church, recog- nises the ministry under the titles of angel and elder. Take the word ' priest ' here in its absolute sense ; then the absurd conse- quence would follow that — (1.) Every Christian offers a real sacrifice to God, as did the Jewish priests; and (2.) That they are as really temporal kings, being no longer subjects of earthly princes. Let it be remembered that the same thing was said of the Israelites : * Ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests ' (Exod. xix. 6). Were the ministers of God on that account set aside and denounced % On the contrary, the distinct ministry of Aaron with his sons, and the whole tribe of Levi, were set apart to minister in holy things. Not one of that kingdom of priests clared to enter into the tabernacle except the regularly appointed ministry. Yes, indeed, some did set aside and denounce that ministry. Korah and his company gathered themselves together against Moses and Aaron, and said unto them, as modern sepa- ratists to the ministers of Christ now : ' Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is among them : wherefore, then, lift ye up yourselves above the congregation of the Lord ? ' (Num. xvi. 1-35). When the earth opened, and they went down alive into the pit, the Lord by that signal judgment showed who were the ministering servants of His approbation. And yet Moses had proved whose spirit rested upon him in formerly refusing to forbid Eldad and Medad from prophesying in the camp ; and for the special reason that ' the Spirit rested on them.' So soon as Moses understood that they had the divine authority, he exclaimed to Joshua, * Enviest thou for my sake % Would God that all the Lord's people were prophets, and that the Lord would put His Spirit upon them ! ' (Num. xi. 26-29). As all true ministers, he desired that all the people might grow in grace, and that the Lord of the harvest would send forth labourers into His harvest. He acknowledged whom the Lord had sent. 152 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 3. Examples there are in tlie New Testament of private admo- nition, exhortation, reproof, and comfort, which is the duty and. privilege of every believer. These examples do not comitenance assumption of the ministry. To the man out of whom Jesus had cast the devils, He said, ' Eeturn to thine own house, and show how great things God hath done unto thee ' (Lukeviii. 39). His commission was to his friends at home ; and although he published throughout the whole city the fact of his miraculous healing, this was not commanded; and right though it might be, that was another thing than the public exposition and appli- cation of spiritual truth to souls. No Church would prevent,, but would rather encourage a man such as this, or the woman of Samaria, in telling all whom they can find : ' Come, see a man. which told me all things that ever I did' (John iv. 29). Such communications in their circumstances, or that of the lame man walking, leaping, and praising God in the temple, are not only allowable, but desirable. Such extraordinary manifestations of divine power and grace "will call forth corresponding feelings and actions that ought not to be repressed. But these are not proofs that the ministry must cease, and that all may assume the oflEice. Did Christ recall the seventy sent forth? or did Peter and John endeavour to abolish the ordinary pastorate and other ministerial agencies because of these cases 1 Nay ; the cordial, fraternal, humble employment of gifts and grace^ in every appropriate way, by all the membership of the Church, ever gives joy to the hearts of the true ministers of Jesus Christ. 4. Another instance frequently referred to as if giving authority to all publicly to preach, is that relating to the first persecution of the Church at Jerusalem : ' They that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the "Word ' (Acts viii. 4). The answer to two questions shows that this does not overthrow an ordinary settled ministry. First, Who ivere the scattered ? AVere they believers only, or chiefly ministers ? The first verse tells that ' there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem.' The word ' church ' comprehends both. Now and after, persecution was principally directed against pastors and other office-bearers. WHO AEE TO MINISTER ? 153 May not ' the Cliurch,' as represented by tliem, be understood ? That the entire membership were not scattered is very evident, not only from after details, but from the words ' except the apostles/ (a) If every professing Christian had left the city, there would have been no necessity for the presence of the apostles. (6) The particle ' except ' is used of the class de- scribed, (c) The word ' preaching' is an expression almost invariably used for an official act in the New Testament (Rom. X. 15). (d) The only one of these preachers mentioned is Philip. He was an official person, holding the offices of deacon and evangelist (Acts vi. 5, xxi. 8). (e) May not the words, ' they were all,' refer to all church officers, rather than to all church members ? The ' all ' must be restricted, unless every man, woman, and child, wore dispersed. Secondly, Is there not a difference between a constituted and a dissolved Church ? Suppose it certain, which it is not, that the entire membership, and not the ministers, are here described, this presents only a case of absolute necessity. There is no declaration that every church member preached in Jerusalem in their settled congregations. It was only in their scattered con- dition, isolated from organized communities. The warrant, if any, is here only for extraordinary seasons, and, specially, for the work of evangelization amongst a heathen population. In such an emergency as that of flight from persecution, thrown hopelessly destitute of ordinary pastors, a company of believers may be justified themselves, or by selection from their number, to engage in the work of preaching and administration of ordinances. And yet some of the best of Christians, as the pilgrim fathers of New England, have hesitated in following such a course. The Church being the fulness of Him who filleth all in all, must have within herself everything necessary for her being and well-being. To avoid the evil of the extinction of the ministry, those who have the inner call of Christ, proved by the possession and acceptable exercise of suitable gifts and grace, must be warranted to exer- cise the office without that ordination which has become impos- sible. Let the supposition of all the members of the Church scattered and preaching be allowed, and at most it yields the positions — (1.) That there is within the Church the power of re- 154 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. viving and reconstituting the lost ministerial office ; (2.) That in times of persecution Christian fugitives should embrace the call in providence to make Christ knoAvn to those destitute of the gospel ; and (3.) That every Christian should aid in evangelizing those outside the Church. But all this does not overthrow au ordinary authoritative ministry in settled churches. Long after this event, the apostles ' ordained them elders in every Church' (Acts xiv. 23), and commissioned Timothy and others by the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery. 5. Even that statement, ' Ye may all prophesy one by one ' (1 Cor. xiv. 31), properly understood, gives no authority for every one who supposes himself qualified to minister in the Church. For this universal word ' all ' must ever be restricted by the subject-matter. Immediately before, as throughout the entire passage, express mention is made of the particular subject treated of by the inspired apostle : ' Let the prophets speak, two or three, and let the other judge ' (ver. 29). It is as clear that the ' all ' who may prophesy are the prophets spoken of, as it is that the ' every man' to whom the manifestation of the Spirit is given is re- stricted to every man taught of the Spirit (1 Cor. xii. 7). Three views of the passage are advocated — First, That every gifted brother may minister in public assemblies of Christians. Secondly, That prophesying here refers to the ordinary ministra- tions of regularly appointed ministers. Thirdly, That it was mira- culous prophesying, peculiar to apostolic times. That this last is the only possible construction is evident from an examination of the context and of the analogy of Scripture. (1.) The prophesying was miraculous and peculiar. For — (a) All were to desire to be so illuminated as to speak with unknown tongues or in foreign languages, and to be able to interpret these for the edification of those to whom they were unknown (ver. 13-25). This was the miraculous gift of the Holy Spirit, bestowed on the day of Pentecost : ' They were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance ' (Acts ii. 4). As many in the Corin- thian Church were allowed to speak with tongues as to prophesy. If, then, all the members of the Church prophesied, they all spoke with tongues. If so, and this be a pattern for all members WHO ARE TO MINISTER ? 155 to 2^reach, it is also a pattern for all to speak with tlie gift of tongues. If tlie one is attainable and desirable, so is the other. But universal experience shows that this gift of tongues, however desirable, cannot presently be possessed by all ; therefore the gift of prophesying must also be unattainable. (h) Further, the gift of prophecy was that of miraculous in- spiration. Things otherwise unknown were thereby revealed. It is stated, not only that every one of you hath a psalm, a tongue, and an interpretation, but also 'a revelation' (ver. 2G). The primary idea of prophecy is to predict what shall be (croo^>jrs/a, from cr^oO^j^a/, to foretell). The frequent usage of Scripture is to indicate by that word that the message is extra- ordinary. It indicates the prophetic gift of inspiration imparted by the Holy Spirit : ' This charge I commit to thee, son Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee' (1 Tim. i. 18). One of the prophets of that time, Agabus, expressly foretold, ' Thus saith the Holy Ghost, So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle, and shall deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles ' (Acts xxi. 11). This Agabus, along with others, had previously foretold a great dearth through- out the Roman Empire (xi. 28). (c) That the office of prophet mentioned was an inspired ministry, is manifested by the manner in which it is distinguished from that of pastors and teachers. In the enumeration of public ministers given by Christ, prophets are set before evangelists and pastors and teachers (1 Cor. xii. 28 ; Eph. iv. 11). Also by the question, ' Are all prophets ? ' this office is shown to be distinct from all other ministrations, and, conse- quently, from the membership. The offices named are degrees comprehensive of each other downwards. The highest, that of the apostle, might and did perform the duty of all the lower. So the prophet might do the work of evangelist and pastor, as a ship-captain might that of the mate or steward. But every pastor and teacher might not, and did not, perform the work of the prophet or apostle, much less might the private member assume the office of a prophet. Suppose, for a moment, that the prophets enumerated do not refer to those inspired, then no proof exists that Christ has bestowed inspired prophets on the New Testament Church, The fact that Christ did raise up prophets, 156 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. and enable them both to speak and write by inspiration infal libly, for the good of the Church, proves that the office so enumerated was a miraculous and peculiar one. (d) That these prophesyings were to be judged of does not militate against this fact, for even the doctrine of apostles was tested. The Bereans were commended not only for receiving the word of Paul and Silas ' with all readiness of mind,' but because they * searched the Scriptures daily whether those things were so' (Acts xvii. 11). (e) And then to desire, if the will of God be so, the possession of such extraordinary gifts is legitimate for all members of the Church. x\s Elisha, they may each plead for a double portion of the Spirit. And wherever that is bestowed, there will be ample proof and warrant for its exercise. Those only, then, who possess the supernatural influence of the Holy Spirit can lay claim to be prophets. To prophesy is to act as Old Testament prophets did. (2.) This prophesying does not refer to preaching or ordinary ministrations of pastors and teachers. The office of prophet included, as noted, the office of preacher. Nowhere in the New Testament is the word ' prophet ' applied distinctly to ordinary ministers. In the Book of Kevelation it is only so applied by allusion : ' I will give power unto my two witnesses, and they shall prophesy ' (Rev. xi. 3). Three words are employed in the New Testament to describe the act and office of preaching. (1.) To preach, to teach publicly, as a herald officiated (xTj^vsaoS), is used sixty-one times, and is translated ' to preach' fifty-four times. (2.) To bring glad tidings, or announce good news {ilayyiXku), is used fifty-five times, and is translated * to preach ' forty-eight times. (3.) To bring word down to any one, to announce or set forth {TtaTayytWoi), is used seventeen times, and is translated * to preach ' ten times. But neither of these words are employed in the discourse in which it is stated that all may prophesy one by one. The word 'ZPo:pr}rsvu, to prophesy, is used twenty-eight times. In twenty-three of these instances there is a clear asser- tion or implication of the supernatural or miraculous gift, and so, though less clearly, in the remaining cases — once as to Philip's daughters, twice in Peter's quotation of Joel's prophecy, and twice in 1 Cor. xi. 4, 5, where it is conjoined with praying. WHO ARE TO MINISTER ? 157 The noun t^o^tjdj?, * prophet', used one hundred and forty-nine times, is always so translated. In no one passage in the New Testament can either verb or noun be referred to ordinary preaching. In each case the idea of supernatural influence is involved. The translators of our version of the Scriptures so understood the noun. Never is it translated by teacher or preacher, always by prophet. So of the verb. Never is it said to teach, preach, or speak, always to prophecy. Supernatural gifts are alwaj^s implied. (3.) Most unquestionably, therefore, that phrase, 'all may prophesy,' has no reference to any church member who pleaseth to assume the office of the ministry without a proper call. There is no one instance in Scripture in which the word ' prophet ' is applied to one out of office. The fact that an express gift of pastors and teachers has been bestowed, shows that such an as- sumption is not only unnecessary but presumptuous. Only by confounding ordinary ministrations with that spirit of prophecy can any appearance of plausibility be put forth in this pretended liberty. But a claim is set up for * an inspired ministry ' ' by the immediate impulses of the Holy Spirit.' Whether this claim is substantiated by actual facts remains to be tested : ' By their fruits ye shall know them ' (See Jus. Div. Min. Ev. Lon. 1654). Questions. 1. State five distinct arguments on behalf of a pennanent gospel 2. Explain predictions of gospel times consistent with the fore- going. 3. How would you dispose of the New Testament declarations quoted ? 4. Do the examples of the woman of Samaria and others warrant any one to assume the ministerial office? and if not, why ? 5. Explain the passage in Acts viii. Does it give express warrant ? G. Eevieio the statement ' cdl may prophesy.^ Give the three modes of interpreting the passage, and state the result 158 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. CHAPTER IV. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. "I suffer not a ■woman to teach." " If a man desire the office of a bishop." AEE PUBLIC MINISTEATIONS BY WOMEN LEGITIMATE ? Ought women to minister in mixed assemblies? The answer given by some is, that they ' believe it right freely and equally to allow the ministry of both sexes.' No question as to the regulation of the Church of Christ has received a clearer or more decided reply in the Divine Word. This practice of female ministrations had been introduced along with other gross irregularities into the Church of Corinth. It spread into others. To arrest this as unseemly and wrong, the most authoritative command was issued. For a woman publicly to minister in the Church was wrong on every ground. It was destitute of apostolical, ecclesiastical, scriptural, and rational sanction. On no account was it permitted. In these four aspects the law was distinctly laid down. 1. By Apostolical Authority women are forbidden publicly to minister : ' Let your women keep silence in the churches, for it is not permitted unto them to speak j but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law' (1 Cor. xiv. 33-40). This passage shows that the public exercise even of the gift of prophecy by women was expressly forbidden. This was in the Church of Corinth, where all the prophets might prophesy one by one. The widest and most comprehensive of all terms is employed when silence is here enjoined. To speak (XaXsw) in any way in the churches, by preaching, teaching, or conversing, is not permitted. Thus the objection is of no force that ' bawling or babbling only is forbidden, and that seemly discourse might be allowed them.' Of the two hundred and ninety-two times, besides this passage, in which the word is used, only once can it be rendered to babble, without any violence. Even there this translation is doubtful. AEE PUBLIC MINISTEATIONS BY WOMEN LEGITIMATE ? 159 ' When I was ca child, I spake (or babbled 1) as a cliild.' The command to keep silence covers all kinds of speech, seemly and unseemly, even to the putting of questions. Correction of abuses in the order of worship is the scope of the passage. Prophets were the persons whose conduct required regulation. They are to speak in order, two or three on a particular occasion. Pos- sessors of the gift of tongues, in the same order, if an interjDreter was present, not otherwise. It is in direct contrast with these gifted men that the command is given, ' Let your women keep silence.' j^o qualification is coupled with this command. Men only, who are prophets, are to speak. Women, though pro- phetesses, are to keep silence in the churches. The disorders of the men are met in one way, the disorders of the women in another. These disorders were the occasion, but they are not the reason of the prohibition. That this was not a local or temporary command is evident from the directions given through Timothy regarding pastoral work in general. This explicit deliverance is re-asserted, with the addition of the reason for the command by the Apostle Paul : ' I suffer not a woman to teach, but to be in silence ' (1 Tim. ii. 8—14). The w^ord used here cannot be referred to babbling or unseemly talk — it is always translated ' to teach, to instruct' (5/5acxco). The contrast between what is allowed to men, and what is for- bidden to women, is very striking in this passage. Having spoken of his apostolic authority under the ]\Iediator, Paul says, ' I will, therefore, that the men (rovg hd^ag) pray everywhere.' This word is ever used for men to the exclusion of women ; and this direction occurs in an exhortation to pray ' for all men ' by the use of a term (avd:o)~c^'j), that includes both m§n and women. Having made this distinction between those who are to be prayed for, and those who are to pray, the apostle counsels that, in like manner, 'women adorn themselves' suitably to their profession; the term employed for women (yumr/.ac), as expressly excluding men. Still, keeping the distinction in view, the apostle proceeded to give another injunction : ' Let the woman learn in silence with all subjection : but I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.' Woman here {yjyri) 160 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. means every woman, witliout exception. Men are, according to their calling, to take part in the prayers and instructions of the public assemblies of Christians : women are to be prayed for as well as men ; but the proper position of women in the house of God is to join in the worship silently, with modesty of dress and behaviour. Although prayer, an address to God, is dififerent from instruc- tion, and may not in itself indicate any usurpation of authority, yet even that is here forbidden to women in public. The entire connection of the passage demands this construction. Paul is not only giving directions that Timothy and other ministers may know how to behave themselves ' in the house of God, which is the church of the living God' (1 Tim. iii. 14, 15); but here very specially regarding the service of prayer, and nothing is said regarding private prayer. No contrast or statement could be more emphatic. An express limitation is enjoined upon women without regard to age, learning, talent, or position. Silence is commanded, not only as to public prophesying, but in all meet- ings where there is a mixture of sexes. It is a striking instance of the perversity of the human mind, that these distinct prohibitions should be explained away or set aside. This is as if the authority of the Apostle Paul were des- titute of weight, or his statement on this subject ambiguous. Now the formulas — ' Let not,' ' it is not permitted,' ' they are commanded,' ' I suffer not ' — manifest that Paul is not giving, in either passage, a mere personal human opinion, but a deliberate authoritative judgment. This he was authorized to do, being commissioned and inspired by the Lord to establish and regulate the Church. Not only every prophet, but every spiritual man is called upon to acknowledge that the words which he wrote to the Corinthians were written by the commandment of the Lord Jesus (ver. 37, 38). To refuse to do so is at the peril of every one. This command cannot be obviated by referring to the utter- ances of many women in Old and New Testament times ; for these were either inspired or acted in a private and legitimate capacity. Many of them are brilliant examples, showing how Christian women should glorify God. Thus Hannah praying AEE PUBLIC MINISTEATIOXS BY WOMEN LEGITIMATE ? 161 before the Lord, lier voice was not heard until she was filled with the Si^irit, and by inspiration moved to pour out thanks- givings to the Lord (1 Sam. i. 13, ii. 10). Thus Priscilla, the wife of Aquila, assisted in the more full and private instruc- tion of the eloquent Apollos, and prepared her house for the as- semblies of Christians in Ephesus and Kome. Thus women ' laboured ' with Paul ' in the gospel ' in Philippi (Phil. iv. 3). Most assuredly, if Paul suffered not a woman to teach in any church, that rule was not, by his sanction, broken in Philippi. Nor was this necessarj^, when there were so many ways in which women might labour in the gospel without usurping the office or work of the ministry. Such cases as ' Miriam, the prophetess ' (Exod. XV. 20); ' Deborah, a proiDhetess ' (Judges iv. 4) ; * Huldah, the prophetess' (2 Chron. xxxiv. 22); 'Anna, a prophetess' (Luke ii. 36) ; Mary and Elizabeth ' filled with the Holy Ghost' (Luke i. 35-41); Philip's 'four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy ' (Acts xxi. 9) ; ' All filled with the Holy Ghost,' that spoken by the prophet Joel ; * your sons and your daughters shall prophesy ' (Acts ii. 4, 1 7) ; — these, each and all, are instances of extraordinary inspiration. Consequently, they are not authori- tative examples for ordinary ministrations. The same authority that forbids female ministrations, declares that such extraordi- nary influences would not continually abide : ' ^Yhether there be prophecies, they shall fail ; w^hether there be tongues, they shall cease' (1 Cor. xiii. 8). Were the prophetical gift to return to the Church, and be possessed by women, would not its exercise be subject to this command, given in a discourse for the special regulation of the gifts of the Spirit ? There women are unequi- vocally and conclusively put to silence in the churches. Nor is there one instance of women publicly preaching or giving instruc- ^tion under either dispensation. ' If, then, the Word of God, and not the word, opinions, or desires of man, is to be the guide, apostolical authority has decided the question. 2. The Peactice of the Churches sustained this prohibition. This the apostle expressly affirms : *As in all the churches of the saints, let your women keep L 162 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. silence in the cliarclies,' This is acknowledged to be the correct:, punctuation of the passage. A general sense of propriety, along with the continual usage of the Church of God, have in all the churches prevented the introduction of this abuse. That general custom of the churches has a certain measure of authority ; at the least, it gives weight to the injunction issued. If no other church allowed the practice, it must be regarded as unchristian. The ISTew Testament Church was formed upon the model of the Jewish synagogue. Jewish canons ran thus : ' The men come to teach, the women to hear.' ' A woman may not read in the congregation or church.' In like manner, it must not be allowed that women should speak in an authoritative manner in the Church of Christ. ' What/ the apostle exclaims, ' came the Word of God out from you, or came it unto you only 1 ' Is the Church of Corinth the !Mother Church ? Is it the only one, that you must introduce new customs elsewhere unknown ? Nay ; the word came from Jerusalem. Surely, then, the general prac- tice of the churches of Judea ought to be considered, and in all these women keep silence. Churches among the Gentiles also have no such custom. To disregard their practices not only betrays an arrogant spirit, but tends to break wp the uniformity of the one Church of Jesus Christ. Even if you do not suffi- ciently regard apostolic authority in this decision, the authority of the Church universal should be regarded. Paul addressed a church which had allowed the utmost con- fusion in their conduct of divine worship. This arose from the Grecian fondness for speaking. This was a peculiarity of the women as much as of the men. To secure order, he issued two commands. One was that the prophets should speak only in turn, and for edification j the other, that women were to keep silent. And this is shown to be nothing peculiar to one Church or country. As in all churches, so there must be silence en- joined in Corinth. The phrase 'in the churches' takes in every assembly of Christians for worship, fellowship, and order, reaching even to ordinary prayer or conference meetings. That spoken of in Corinth, apart from supernatural gifts, most resembled ordinary fellowship meetings. Two, or at the most three, were to speak ARE PUBLIC MINISTEATIONS BYWOMEX LEGITIMATE ? 163 in turn at the assembly. The existence of such meetings does not disprove the fact of assemblies otherwise conducted. Not only, then, in assemblies conducted by the ministers of Christ, but in all church meetings of whatever kind, open to both sexes, females are to be in silence. Men possessed of the gift of tongues might speak conditionally, but the command is uncon- ditional with respect to women. The practice of Christ and His apostles illustrates and confirms this universal rule. When did either of them appoint women to be the public instructors of mankind ? Is there any trace of the committal of such a trust to females 1 The absence of any such commission or practice, with the express prohibition of w^omen in assemblies where several persons took an active part, w^here the control of the meeting was in the hands of the prophets, and where not only both sexes, but probably unbelievers also were present, settles the question for all time in every organized community. It may be other- wise where no churches exist. ' This rule we must understand as referring to ordinary service, or where there is a church in a regularly constituted state, for a necessity may occur of such a nature that a woman should speak in public ; but Paul has merely in view w^hat is becoming in a duly regulated assembly ' (Calvin). 3. The PpvInciples of Scriptuee are against the practice. The will of God, as revealed in the Old as in the New Testament, shows that this is contrary to woman's position of subjection. 'They are commanded to be under obedience, as saith also the law.' What saith it ? ' Thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee' (Gen. iii. 16). God's law for the whole animal kingdom is here ap- plied to the human race. The male has been constituted the natural protector of the female, being formed her superior in strength ; consequently by nature the female is subject to the male. Under the Old Testament economy the husband could utterly make void or establish the vows of his wife which he heard (Num. xxx. 10-13). And still Scripture maintains that ' the head of the woman is the man ' (1 Cor. xi. 3), and that ' the husband is the head of the w^ife,' so that wives are to be 164 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. subject ' to their OT^'n husbands in every thing ' right and not sinful (Eph. v. 23, 24). Throughout the Divine Word the re- lative positions of male and female, husband and wife, man and woman, are so contrasted as to indicate distinctly that the sphere of the woman is not co-extensive with that of the man. The principles of the Bible have elevated woman from degra- dation to the co-ordinate companionshijD of man. These require the prosecution of every right effort to redress the wrongs that have been inflicted upon her sex. But these efforts must agree with the law of her relationship. Her rights arise from and rest upon her relationship to man. That law that woman is not equal to man in all positions and pursuits must be honoured in whatever step is taken to ameliorate, elevate, dignify, and bless the daughters of Eve. Not otherwise can their rights be pro- moted than by having respect to that law of relationship. God has thus expressly commanded women to be under obedi- ence, but to preach or teach publicly is an act of power, autho- rity, rule, or government, and is contrary to the state of sub- jection which the Scriptures require. This appears by two reasons deduced from the scriptural account of the creation and fall of man. First, ' for Adam was first formed, then Eve.' Created in the image of God, placed in paradise, giving names to all creatures, Adam enjoyed fellowship with and authority from Jehovah before the woman was formed. Eve was then made out of man, and for man. From the first, and before the fall, woman's position was one of subjection by divine appointment. Secondly, that fall proclaimed the same truth : ' Adam was not deceived.' This declaration states, that neither by the serpent, nor by Eve, was Adam deceived. His mind was stronger. He knew what he was doing. It was under no such deception as that of Eve that he took of the fruit and did eat. He did not vainly imagine, as she, that they should not die but be as gods. Knowing that the consequence would be death, yet giving place to sin, and out of affection to Eve, that she alone might not die, he accepted and ate of the proffered fruit. Wilfully against light and knowledge without such deception Adam sinned j and so death passed upon all. In him all thus sinned. This fact of the woman's deception to the injury of the entire race is AEE PUBLIC MINISTRATIONS BY AVOMEN LEGITIMATE ? 165 proof of the weaker capacity of the constitution of her mind. Consequently by the will of God women are unfit for the position of public or authoritative teaching. The proper sphere of the female sex is neither as public in- structors, nor as nuns sworn to perpetual virginity. By the law of their existence silence is imposed upon women during much of their lives. This law they must obey if they would discharge their appointed functions as wives and mothers. The apostle only makes universal the law that nature has made partial. Public speaking by them is not always proper or possible. * I will, therefore, that the younger women marry, bear children, guide the house, give none occasion to the adversary to speak reproachfully' (1 Tim. v. 14). The prohibition is not founded upon any transient exigency or local custom. If such had been the reason why it was issued, the command would long ago have ceased, ^ay? the reasons are permanent. They are the relation of the sexes, and the fact of the transgression. Paul acted differently in other cases. He gave directions regarding marriage suited for his time. He de- clared that it was good for a man not to marry. But even then he is careful to state — first, that this was good for the present distress ; and secondly, that all who desired notwithstanding to marry were at liberty so to act (1 Cor. vii. 1-10, 26-28). But no such limitations are given as to this command. Whatever changes arise in nations, customs, churches, times — so long as man is male and female, the reason exists in full force. And further, so long as this fact of the transgression is believed, and the priority of woman therein, so long this prohibition has full force. These reasons are genuine, explicit, uncontradicted. If these principles are doubtful or equivocal, then no others given in Scripture are certain and clear. Consequently, this command cannot be affected by any change of custom in any country or time. 4. Beason Protests against ministrations by women. This emphatic and additional reason is given, ' For it is a shame for women to speak in the 166 THE GOVEENMEKT OF THE KINGDOM. Chiircli.' The power and usefulness of "women depend upon their being cadmired and loved. But such acts, in the estimation of all reasonable men, are ugly and deformed. The indelicacy- manifested in a woman authoritatively teaching in a mixed pub- lic assembly, must excite disgust towards her. It is a shame to herself — contrary to the natural modesty of the sex — betray- ing pride, vanity, unnatural boldness. It is a shame to the Church — particularly to the experienced eldership, to be so taught and directed. They cannot but instinctively ask, What ! is there not one wise man amongst us ? Has God bestowed no gifts or grace upon any one of our number, that women rule over us? If Paul meant no more than that women should be modest, obedient, and not usurp authority, why does he say so much more than this 1 He gives command, and now, as in another connection, he may be heard demanding, * Judge in yourselves, is it comely ' that a woman should teach in the church ? Nay, he himself answers — It is a shame. The statement, 'Every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoureth her head,' in 1 Cor. xi. 5, refers simply to the custom of covering or uncovering the head during the time of worship. Whether the worship is public or private, and whether women spoke in public assemblies or not, are matters that are neither discussed nor settled in that passage. The one thing taught is, that, consistently with her sense of pro- priety, a woman in Eastern lands ought to be covered at worship. No express allowance is there given to pray, much less to preach in public. Supposing it were allowed, as contended, that this states a fact — viz., that women both prayed and spoke in the public services of the Church — still it is but a statement of what had formerly been done in the Corinthian Church. Even if so, that practice was afterwards put a stop to by apostolic authority. If there was public speaking by women — (1.) That speaking is limited to prophesying or divine predictions ; therefore, it gives no authority for ordinary teaching by women. And then (2.) Even that kind of public utterance was afterwards expressly prohibited ; consequently the practice is unwarrantable. A brief statement of a cifstom cannot have equal authority with an express com- AKE PUBLIC MINISTRATIONS BY WOMEN LEGITIMATE? 167 Tiiand. By its letter and its spirit that command destroys all right on the part of woman to continue the practice either in praying or in teaching. When a historian mentions the fact of a rebellion, he cannot be said to favour it, even though he did not then and there condemn it ; especially if further on in his work he expressly denounces it. The previous bare allusion to a fact cannot reverse a clear and unlimited prohibition. Even in the 11th chapter, Paul lays down one principle on "vvhich his after prohibition is founded. That principle is subor- dination. This pervades our race — ' the head of the woman is the man ' — ' the man is not of the woman, but the woman of the man : neither was the man created for the woman, but the woman for the man' (1 Cor. xi. 3, 8, 9). This principle also pervades the Christian Church — ' the head of every man is Christ.' Let this principle be applied to costume in worship. To cover the head is a sign of subjection. ' The woman is the -glory of the man ; ' therefore, if she worship * with her head un- covered, she dishonoureth her head.' Thus women are rebuked who would claim equality with men. Still the desire for knowledge in women is not to be repressed. Facilities are to be provided at home. And if they are to ask for a solution of difficulties from their husbands, then husbands ought to study to be able and ready always to give them an answer. If failing to have satisfaction thus, by other private means female inquiries may be solved ; not only by reading and conversation, — instruction can be had from pastors and Christian friends. Nor are women to be excluded from labouring in the gospel. Cannot women help the ministers of Christ otherwise than by public speaking 1 Women there are highly gifted, gracious, zealous. If possessed of the grace of Christian humility, w^hile owning that they are excluded from this department, they may £nd in* schools, visitations, and other labours of love, as well as in their own households, ample scope for all their time and talents. So labouring, they may each one at last merit the -award, ' She hath done what she could.' If nature itself taught that it was an indecent thing for a woman publicly to prophesy, much more must it be ordinarily to preach. As all things ought 168 THE GOVERNMENT OP THE KINGDOM. to be done decently and in order, tins must be regarded as a rule that cannot be broken — suffering not a woman to teach in the Church. What avails it to urge that the voice of woman adds interest to the service, or that good may result 1 The reply of the "Word of God is, ' It is not permitted.' A clear prohibition cannot be set aside to promote interest or probable good. That passage also, ' There is neither male nor female ' (Gal. iii. 28), is entirely irrelevant. The object of the apostle is to show that there is but one way of salvation for every one alike. Now, it is certain that God does not contradict in providence what He has revealed ; hence few females have edified the Churches dur- ing the past eighteen hundred years. Methodism and revivals generally have been without this agency. Where there appcc^rs. to be a seeming blessing, this must be ascribed to sovereign grace, which cannot be restrained, and because God may regard, the fault rather as one of ignorance than of intention. Besides, no experiment can be conclusive until the influences and results- are fully known. And as this is impossible to man, how can a seeming good be warrant for a rule which the Word of God expressly condemns ? This prohibition is given not to repress- zeal in Christian women. But this is the Lord's gracious method by which He would hedge in female disciples to other and more suitable labours of love. Three and only three methods are open to the Churches ia this matter. First, Do PauVs reasons for this py^ohihition no longer exist ? Dare any deny either the creation of man male and female, or the circumstances of the fall 1 If not, then — Secondly, Were these utterances of Paul uninspired ? If so, let this be proved. But remember that this is truly dangerous- ground. All that may be argued to prove them so will apply equally in setting aside every other Bible utterance. From such sowing what harvest can follow ? Is this position alsa untenable ? Then — Thirdly, Conform to the inspired direction : ' As in all the churches of the saints, let your women keep silence in the- churches.' IS A MINISTERIAL INCOME UNLAWFUL ? 169 Questions. 1. State the four ivaijs in wliich the law is declared forhidding women to minister. 2. Give the loords of the apostolical prohibition in 1 Cor. xiv., and prove that this is ap'plicable to ordinary ministrations. 3. State the text in 1 Tim. ii, and shoiu hoiu that also applies. 4. Why may not Paul he understood^ in each case^ to speah as a mere man ? 5. In ivhat ivay does the practice of other Churches hear on this matter ? 6. Prove that the pirohihition extends to mixed prayer or con- ference meetings. 7. What natural laiv, embodied and set forth in Scripture^ claims regard ? 8. Shoio in what way the accounts of the creation and the fall are proper reasons for the prohibition. 9. May not the prohibition have had respect merely to the times of Paul? 10. In what ivay does right reason protest against this prac- tice ? 11. Prove that 1 Cor. xi. does not sanction it. . 12. Will not this pirohibition repress the hioioledge and active usefulness of Christian ivomen ? 13. State some other objections, and dispose of them. 14. Mention the only three methods open to the Church, and what is, therefore, the inevitable conclusion. CHAPTER y. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. ' They should live of the gospel.' IS A SETTLED MINISTEEIAL INCOME UNLAWFUL ? Is it in accordance with or contrary to the law of the kingdom of Christ, that His ministering servants be sustained by a suitable temporal provision % When denounced by separatists as ' a hire- 170 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ling ministry/ inspiration proclaims in reply, 'Even so hath the Lord ordained, that they who preach the gospel should live of the gospel' (1 Cor. ix. 14). This is no casual statement. It is one well chosen as the result of lengthened and forcible reasoning. ' Have we not power to eat and to drink 1 ' asks the Apostle Paul of the Corinthians. Soldiers don't prosecute war and support themselves ; the husbandman certainly eats of the fruits of his fields ; the herd has the benefit of the flock he tends. As in natural so in spiritual things. As God has provided in His law that oxen treading out the corn should feed freely, so those who ministered about holy things at the altar in the Temple partook and lived of the holy things offered. Even so still this is the institution of Christ. Preachers of the gospel are to live by their preaching. ' If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things'?' As by divine appointment the Jewish priests shared of the altar sacri- fices, so by the same authority those who at the call of the Lord have separated themselves from secular business, and have given themselves wholly to the service of Christ, are entitled to temporal maintenance. And this is not a mere apostolic arrangement, although that might be sufficient. It is by the ordination of the Lord. In sending forth the twelve at first, He counselled them not to provide for their own maintenance, ' for the workman is worthy of his meat' (Matt. x. 10). So in sending forth the seventy, ' for the labourer is worthy of his hire ' (Luke x. 7, 8). In consideration of sowing spiritual blessing, it is by the Lord's appointment that preachers be provided with the proper neces- saries of life. If righteousness alone exalteth a nation, and the servants of Christ are * the salt of the earth,' then every true am- bassador of Christ is a pillar of the commonwealth. Even for the promotion of the temporal interests of a community the proper suj^port of the ministry is desirable, as well as a direct homage to God. Take from a nation its gospel ministrations, and no surer method could be devised to bring about that nation's ruin. Much more, when the eternal interests of generations of men are contemplated, it is truly not a great but a small matter that a sufficient temporal provision should be made for the gospel ministry ' Let it not be thought that what is given to a minister IS A MINISTERIAL INCOME UNLAWFUL ? 171 is a charitable donation; it is the payment of a just debt. It is what Christ claims for His faithful servants, and which cannot be withheld without robbery ' (Rev. J, A. James). By divine ap- pointment the ministry is to be sustained as befits its importance and influence, to allow of entire dedication to the work of God. * Let him that is taught in the word, communicate unto him that teacheth in all good things ' (Gal. vi. 6). * Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine, for the Scripture saith, Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the corn, and the labourer is worthy of his reward ' (1 Tim. v. 17, 18). Proper temporal support is thus the right and the privilege of the mini- sters of religion. There may be circumstances, as in the case of Paul and the Corinthians, w^hen it may be necessary to forego this right. Where people are too poor, too prejudiced, too worldly and grasping, or too deeply steeped in crime, provision from without is necessary. Still the right remains, and ought to be yielded so soon as circumstances admit. In such a case, ministers may say with Paul — ^ I robbed other churches, taking wages of them to do you service.' ' What is it wherein ye were inferior to other churches, except that I myself was not burden- some to you ; forgive me this wrong ' (2 Cor. xi. 7, 9 ; xii. 1 3). With separatists the refusal of a stated income is termed in their cant phraseology — 'living by faith.' This savours of hypocrisy, for it seems as if they wished to have an air of sanctity given to their conduct. In several instances it is found that this mode of living has proved more lucrative than by the settled in- comes renounced. There may be cases, as in the Australian Bush, where no other method is possible than by the occasional offerings of those among whom the minister moves. In settled districts, and amongst a people with settled incomes, no mode could be more delusive, unsatisfactory, and unscriptural. In all His operations God generally works by means. The office of the ministry is no exception. The apostolic command, as has been stated, is that systematic and continual provision be made. *Upon the first day of the week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as God hath prospered him ' (1 Cor. xvi. 2). One great illustration of dependence upon the providence of God for 172 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. temporal provision lias been given for many years by Mr Miiller of Bristol. But tliis instance of ' living by faith ' has been not for his own support, but for the hundreds of orphans cast upon him for protection and training. Notwithstanding he dissuades others from following what must ever prove an exceptional case. And the annual reports published are means employed by him of circulating information amongst the wealthy and benevolent re- garding that necessity. Some, following out the separatist theory, build a chapel and labour as ministers, free of the material sup- port, which they do not rec[uire. May not the applause they receive from the poor they minister unto prove a reward as truly carnal as would a settled income ? Suppose another with- out private means devoting his life to the same end. If a rich man meets him on the street, and says, ' John, I am glad to hear you are busy preaching ; here is a fifty-pound note to you,' is the man to say, ' Get behind me, Satan ? ' Is he to pray for pecuniary help and then to refuse it because it comes in a direct form ? Will its receipt through the post-office, without intimation of the source, be more from God than if paid openly '? ' To my mind,' says Dr Carson, ' the one plan would be an evidence of manly principle, the other an indication of a low disposition.' The hints given not only in private, but in public addresses, not to speak of personal canvassing, for their own remuneration, are in several instances, indicative of a similar disposition, and are destructive of all respect and influence. N"ay, to live of the gospel not secretly nor by stealth, but openly, and so as all the more freely to preach the gospel, is not a human ordinance but the express institution of the Lord. Those claiming this right most fully must still say with the apostle, * I have nothii;^ to glory of, for necessity is laid upon me ; yea, woe is untc^me, if I preach not the gospel.' Questions. 1. State and refute hy Scripture separatist assertions that a settled income is wrong for ministers. 2. Exjyose their cant phraseology on this point. 3. Why may not such cases as that of Mr Miiller of Bristol he imitated ? WHO IS THE PEESIDENT OR OUTWARD GUIDE? 173 CHAPTER VI. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. * I marvel that ye are so soon removed unto another gospel : which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.' WHO IS THE PEESIDENT OE OUTWARD GUIDE? The Language of separatists is self-confident and unintelligible. For example : ' We search in vain for any church government, except the sovereign guidance of the Holy Ghost.' ' The divine competency of the saints to carry out the discipline of the assembly.' ^ The Holy Ghost is practically displayed in that assembly to rule, judge, guide, bless, teach, build up,' &c. ' Praying for the Spirit,' one writes to the author, ' is a denial that He is present, and that He abides. An erroneous thought is connected with the approved habit in systems of praying to the Holy Ghost.' ' It is not sobriety to overlook or deny the present direct guidance by the Lord through the Spirit.' The Holy Spirit is thus regarded as the alone outward guide or pre- sident for the guidance and government of Christian assemblies. This language is unscriptural, and it is meaningless, as is practically evident in their own assemblies : their proceedings must be guided more or less by some one, who, for that time, presides. It is therefore best to allow themselves to refute their own pretensions. Were the Holy Ghost the sole president and guide, no divisions, contradictions, or errors would appear. It is far otherwise. Professedly repudiating sects and systems, their ' leaders ' do all they can by WTiting and promulgating their views to lay down rules how their meetings should be con- ducted. By writing and acting a few active human spirits are presidents and outward guides ; to the utmost of their power they are thus constituting a system or party distinct from others. Nay, this intense sectarianism has already developed itself, as noted, into numerous sects. Thus, in the city of Gloucester they have sj^lit into two sections, as intensely oj^posed to each other as possible. In Edinburgh they are also divided. There are found, in various places, followers of distinct leaders in 174? THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. peculiar views and practices, as the Darbyites, Miillerites, New- tonians, Mackintoshites, &c., &c., who hold that they severally possess fundamental truth ignored by the rest. ' I have no sympathy/ exclaims a MuUerite, 'with Mr Darby's peculiar tenets, ecclesiastical, doctrinal, or prophetic' How can it be otherwise, when every one does what is right in his own eyes ; and when, consequently, the froward man assumes at discretion command of the ship ? Instead of the infallible guidance of the Holy Ghost, instructive glimpses are occasionally had of the 'human' conduct of these meetings. 'I confess to you, my brethren,' says one of them, ' when, some time ago, we had five or six chapters read, and as many hymns sung, around the Lord's table, and, perhaps, not more than one prayer or giving of thanks, it did occur to me whether we had met to improve ourselves in reading and singing, or to show forth the Lord's death.' Another writes, ' Suffice it to say, that the whole of this shameful pro- cedure was got up by a faction, fed and fostered into an exagge- rated form by dissimulation, and for a well-understood purpose.' ' Is it come to this, Brother Darby, that injustice, banished from the bosom of the slaveholders of America, has found an asylum in the bosom of the Brethren 1 ' Mr Culverhouse states regard- ing Jersey, &c., that ' it is impracticable to describe the true state of things either in the gatherings or at the conference. Every remonstrance is unheeded. Insinuations, slanders, insolence, threats and violence are resorted to. I designate it an inquisi- tion.' ' Our brethren, Mr Darby, Mr Wigram, Dr Cronin, and Mr Lean are the chief and ruling members. Was not the Priory reduced to a mere theatre V ' I am extremely glad,' says another, ' that I have been delivered from the worst sect that a Christian man can meet with. They pretend to be wholly led by the Holy Spirit, whereas all things are arranged beforehand, who shall lecture, who shall pray, who shall give out hymns.' Such occa- sional glimpses of their proceedings are a sufficient refutation of their assertion that they are gathered, guided, and presided over only by the Holy Ghost. Besides, these assertions and doings are a practical denial to the Lord Jesus Christ of His right to reign in and over His Church and people. He is declared by His Word to be ' always with His ministering servants, Head of the WHO IS THE PRESIDENT OE OUTWAED GUIDE ? 175 Cliurcb, which is His body.' ' I am sure,' says Mr Fergusson, ' that an individual gifted with wisdom may be used of the Lord to guide the conscience of the assembly in cases requiring such, or in cases where an assembly might have acted mistakenly, and needs to correct its action, but this without even doing more than guiding the conscience aright.' Here is a confession, first, of the necessity of a human guide, and secondly, that their actions are sometimes wrong, which were impossible if the Holy Ghost alone were the guide. ' It is the habit of individuals too,' he says, ' at times of passing judgment upon the acts of an assembly.' Then these acts must be ftillible. 'How solemn is the position of those who have attempted to set up another table claiming to be the Lord's (sad to say, this has in som^e cases been done), and gather together another assembly in a place where an assembly has been already gathered.' This is a confession to actual schism. How can that be if the Holy Ghost is the president or outward and sovereign guide ? One of these brethren thus laments — ' May I now mention what among ourselves has made me very sad ? I mean the confusion between the persons of the Godhead which is often made in prayer. When a brother has commenced by addressing God the Father, and has gone on to speak as though it were He that had died and risen again ; or, addressing Jesus, has given thanks to Him for sending His only- begotten Son into the world, I confess, to you, I have said to myself, Can it be the Spirit of God who leads to such prayers as these 1 ' ' The idea of half-a-dozen looking through their Bibles and hymn-books to find chapters and hymns suitable to read, or give out, is as subversive of the real character of a meeting for mutual edification in dependence on the Holy Ghost as can well be conceived.' So most people who are acquainted with their Bibles must feel. It is little wonder that even these sectaries, who so loudly denounce a properly called gospel ministry, and claim a liberty for the Holy Ghost to speak by whom He will, in reality restrict this liberty. * In every assembly those who are gifted of God to speak to edification will be both limited in number and known to the rest.' Confessions are made that show that their system is a failure. ' To address God in the name of the assembly requires great discernment, or else a most im- 176 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. mediate guidance from God.' ^ Familiarity with Scripture, under- standing of its contents, is surely essential to the ministry of the Word.' Is this giving ' the fullest scope and liberty to the Lord the Spirit ? ' Being thus unscriptural, meaningless, practically refuted by their own proceedings, and involving a direct denial of the actual government of the Lord the King, this plausible assertion of the alone presidency or guidance of the Holy Spirit must be repudiated as a most dangerous error. It is not wonder- ful that some who have had long experience of these ' brethren,' are found returnincj heart-sick to the Church of their fathers. ' A few years ago there was a kind of slur cast upon the visible Church by many enthusiastic but mistaken persons, who dreamed that the time was come for doing away with organized efifort, for irregular agencies outside were to do all the work. Certain men sprung up, whose ferocious censures almost amounted to attacks upon the recognized Churches. Their efforts were apart from the regular ministry, and in some cases in opposition to it. It was as much their aim to pull do^\Ti the existing Church as to bring in converts. I ask any man who has fairly watched these efforts what they have come to? I never condemned them, nor will I j but I do venture to say to-day in the light of their history, that they have not superseded regular church work, and never will. The masses w^ere to be aroused; but where are the boasted results 1 Those who have w^orked in connection with a Church of God have achieved permanent usefulness ; those who acted as separatist agencies, though they blazed for a while with spiritual puffery, are now either altogether or almost extinct. AYliere are the victories which were to be won by these freeshooters ? Echo answers, AYhere? We have to fall back on the old dis- ciplined troops. God means to bless the Church still, and it is through the Church that He will continue to send a benediction upon the sons of men' (Rev. C. H. Spurgeon, January 15, 1871). ' The spirit of Antichrist is high, hot, furious, usurping, an in- fallibility of judgment, and unchurching all that differ from him. Do not you unsaint all persons, and unchurch all societies dis- senting from you? May not this arise from a spirit of de- lusion which worketh strong in the children of disobedience ? ' (Anthony Burgess, — See Dr Carson's ' Heresies of Ply. Br.') EKASTIANISM. 177 Questions. 1. What do separatists assert as to the guidance or governance of Christian assemblies? 2. Give some practical refutations to these assertions. 3. State in substance the Rev. Mr Spurgeon^s experience, and the question put from Anthony Burgess. CHAPTER VII. THE GOVEKNMENT DEVISED. * And hath put all things under His feet, and gave Him to be the Head over all things to the Church, ■which is His body.' Eeastianism. Eeastianism denies that there is a government in the hand of church officers, by yielding the rule of Christ's house, either wholly or partially, into the hand of the civil magistrate. This opinion, although discussed from the fourth century, was brought into prominence in modern times by Thomas Erastus, doctor of medicine at Heidelberg, in Germany. Beza was his great opponent. Erastus had incurred the discipline of the Church, and refused to submit. He then wrote a book, in which he endeavoured to prove — (1.) That the Church has no right to decide on the character of its members, in order to their ad- mission or exclusion from sealing ordinances ; and (2.) That all government, civil and ecclesiastical, is, by Divine authority, vested in the civil magistrate. In 1568 this opinion was maintained in a public disputation at Heidelberg by Dr George Withers, an Englishman. Erastus did not go so far as his followers. He made two im- portant admissions — First, That all persons ought not to be admitted to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper — as idolaters, apostates, the ignorant, heretics and sectaries, non-conformists to Christ's institution, defenders of wickedness, and the unrepent- M 178 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ant j Secondly, That admission ought to be according to the rule of the Church. Now, that rule at Heidelberg was the suspension of the scandalous, and the excommunication of the obstinate. Erastus seems to have taken exception to the Presbytery in judging of the sincerity of the repentance professed, by the known actions of the person. He yielded the rule which a Church pro- posed to itself for guidance, but denied that Christ had given ta it this explicit power of rule. These views were speedily adopted, and extended by — (a) Magistrates and people, who desired to have the outward ordi- nances of religion, and yet live as they pleased. They were also cordially embraced and acted upon (h) by errorists, as the fol- lowers of Arminius, and (c) the advocates of absolute despotism, or ' the royal prerogative.' Thus, a Senator of the College of Justice in Scotland argued that there was — (1.) No distinction between the laws of Church and State; (2.) That synods had no power of censure ; and (3.) That the supreme civil governor has the power both of framing laws for the Church and of correcting transgressors. ' Many great changes would have been made if princes had deemed it for the public good to regulate ecclesias- tical matters according to the prescriptions of certain great and excellent men, who, near the close of the seventeenth century, led on by Christian Thomasius, attempted a reformation of our system of ecclesiastical law. These famous jurists, in the first place, set up a new fundamental principle of church polity, namely, the supreme authority and power of the civil magistrate ; and then, after establishing with great care and subtlety this basis, they founded upon it a great mass of precepts which, in the judgment of many, were considered, and not without reason, as tending to this point — (1.) That the sovereign of a country is also sovereign of the religion of its citizens, or is their supreme pontiflf; and (2.) That ministers of religion are not to be ac- counted ambassadors of God, but vicegerents of the civil magis- trate' (Mosheim, Eccl. Hist. p. 792). This theory w^as embraced by the infidel Hobbes. It was also favoured by most of the State Churches of Europe. Scotland happily contended continu- ously against it. Expressly by statutes, Scotland has been found repudiating and casting out of her constitution all claim of the ERASTIANISM. 179 sovereign to be considered supreme governor in causes ecclesias- tical and spiritual. This Erastian theory was, however, embodied in the English Constitution, in the Act of Supremacy of Henry VIII., renewed by Edward VI. and Elizabeth, and is still the law of that country. The principle of Erastianism is threefold : — First, That there is no government of the Church independent of the State ; the Church being merely one of its general functions, everything in the Church must be subject to the civil power. Secondly, Every subject of the State is thus a member of the Church, and entitled to all its privileges. Thirdly, Ministers of religion have simply power to preach and administer sacraments. They have no power of discipline, since to exclude from ordinances would deprive men of their civil rights. This extreme Erastianism is not generally avowed at the pre- sent day. A modification is plausibly presented thus : — There must be a power in a nation to regulate all other powers. It is then assumed that the civil alone is entitled to this supremacy ; and it is maintained that, consequently, civil courts of law are entitled to review and control the proceedings of ecclesiastical courts, whether their decisions respect spiritual matters only, or affect temporal possessions. That these Erastian opinions are unscriptural, and that * the Lord Jesus, as King and Head of His Church, hath therein ap- pointed a governm^ent in the hand of church officers distinct from the civil magistrate' (C. of F. 30, § 1), is manifest when the Divine Word is examined. 1. The Government of the Jewish Chuech was distinct from that of the State. The laws given by Jehovah, their King, consisted not only of moral and ceremonial precepts suitable for the Jews as a religious body, but also of judicial determinations as to their conduct as a nation. Pdtes abundant were engaged in as a Church, and rules carried out as to admis- sion or exclusion from these, whilst crimes were punished by the State. Priests and Levites were officers of the Church, whilst judges were ministers of State. A supreme council or Sanhedrim 180 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. was appointed for the Church, as well as another for the State. Jehovah said unto Moses, * Come up unto the Lord, thou, and Aaron, and Nadab, and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel ' (Exod. xxiv. 1). 'Also, they saw God, and did eat and drink.' This constitution of a court in reference to spiritual things was different from that for deciding matters between man and man. The spiritual was instituted shortly after coming out of Egypt at Mount Sinai. Judges were not chosen for civil government, acting on the advice of Jetliro, until the beginning of the second year or end of the first (Exod. xviii.) ; whereas the law was given to Moses and the spiritual court constituted on the third day after their arrival at Sinai. These seventy, for judicial purposes, are only mentioned as chosen when they departed from Sinai to Paran, in the second year and twentieth day of the second month (Num. x. 11, 12). It was thus, after the seventy were called up regarding the worship of God and the tabernacle ser- vice, that Jethro beheld Moses exhausting himself, sitting from morning to evening in the decision of civil causes without any assistance. Traces of this distinction of courts are found in all the after history of Israel. David divided the Levites to set forward the work of the house of the Lord ; six thousand of them were made, some officers, some judges (1 Chron. xxiii. 4). *Je- hoshaphat set of the Levites, and of the priests, and of chief of the fathers of Israel, for the judgment of the Lord' in church matters, and for controversies between man and man (2 Chron. xix. 8-11). The ecclesiastical court continued to the apostolic period. Herod * gathered all the chief priests and scribes of the peoj^le together, and demanded of them where Christ should be born ' (Matt. ii. 4). When Jesus ' was come into the Temple, the chief l^riests and elders of the people ' demanded, ' By what authority doest thou these things? and who gave thee this authority?' (xxi. 23). He was at length ' led away to Caiaphas, the high priest, where the scribes and the elders were assembled,' who pronounced Him guilty of blasphemy (xxvi. 57—65). This Luke terms Hhe presbytery' (cr^scr/Syrr^/oi/) of the people (Luke xxii. 66). This their Sanhedrim or Council examined Jesus of His disi;ourses and doctrine, as also the testimony of witnesses, and ERASTIANISM. 181 pronounced judgment. So tlie apostles were examined. In every case it was something relative to religion that was tried, whether actions or matter of controversy. Things relative to natural relationship were judged by the other court. The Romans took away the Jewish state and civil government, but the Jewish Church in the exercises of religion remained. The Jewish State differed somewhat in its constitution when under Moses, Joshua, the judges, the kings, and after the captivity ; while the Church remained the same. There were some persons proselytes, who were admitted as members of the Church, who were excluded from certain privileges of the State. No doubt most of the indi- viduals were members both of the Church and the State, but this did not destroy the distinction there, any more than in another land. Even if no distinction were traceable, the theocracy of the Jews would not prove a sufficient precedent for Erastians, unless it be allowed that the ministers of religion are still to have as large a share in the civil government of the nation, and that parliament itself is to sit in judgment in regard to all that is true or false, and to determine in cases of conscience. 2. Some Actions of Jewish Magistrates were extraordinary and typical, by the special appointment of God. Thus, by the call of God, Moses acted as head both of the civil and ecclesiastical jurisdictions. * David, the man of God, commanded ' as a prophet rather than as king in the ministra- tions of the Levites' (2 Chron. viii. 14). The deposition of Abiathar was for the civil crime of treason ; and Zadok was chosen to be priest by the congregation before Ijis appointment by King Solomon (1 Chron. xxix. 22). Hezekiah exhorted and set in order only according to the divine appointment ; ' for so was the commandment of the Lord by His prophets ' (2 Chron. xxix. 25). Such extraordinary actions can only prove examples for extraordinary occasions. The judgments on Korah and his company, and upon Uzza, are solemn warnings to all to beware of meddling with sacred things without the express sanction of the Lord. 182 THE GOVEENMEKT OF THE KINGDOM. 3. Actions of Peophets and Apostles also testify to tlie distinction. Jeremiah denounced judgments according to the Word of the Lord against Jerusalem. Then not only the priests and the prophets, but ' all the people took him, saying, Thou shalt surely die.' This was not a spiritual, but a civil sentence, and of a riotous assembly. And * when the princes of Judah heard these things,' they came up, sat down, and de- clared ' This man is worthy to die,' because he had prophesied of temporal judgments. Jeremiah did not appeal from a spiritual to a civil tribunal. He was taken out of the hands of a tumul- tuous gathering to be judged by a civil court as one accused of things worthy of death. The Apostle Paul, it is true, said, ^ I appeal unto Coesar ; ' but this was also in civil things. ' If I be an offender,' said he, ' or have committed anything worthy of death, I refuse not to die : but if there be none of these things whereof these accuse me, no man may deliver me unto them' (Acts xxv. 11). It was not from an ecclesiastical to a civil court that Paul appealed : it was from the inferior civil court of Festus to the superior in a matter of life and death. Festus, a corrupt judge, willing to do the Jews a pleasure, would have sent Paul to be judged before him- self at Jerusalem, when no accusation had been proved against him. This was falling in with the intention of the Jews to kill Paul by the way; hence that appeal. The ecclesiastical San- hedrim at Jerusalem were not proper judges in this civil cause. There was a clear sense of the distinction of causes in Paul's mind and action. The ecclesiastical had to do with religion and conscience, without power to inflict civil punishment : the civil, relating to person, character, and property, had power of fine, imprisonment, and death. That distinction was not destroyed by the assumption of such j)owers in apostolic times. It was by a sudden gust of passion those cut to the heart by Stephen's address were impelled to rush upon him and to stone him to death. So in all their persecuting actions, the high priests and elders of the Jews (as Josephus re- lates) proceeded in that degenerate age without just or lawful ERASTIANISM. 183 power. Assumption cannot prove authority. That this was assumed is proved by other circumstances. Thus, w^hen Gallio understood that the insurrection against Paul in Corinth was regarding the worship of God, he said, ' If it were a matter of wrong or of wicked lewdness, 0 ye Jews, reason would that I should bear with you ; but if it be a question of your law, look je to it ; for I will be no judge in such matters ' (Acts xviii. 12-15). So Claudius Lysias, in his letter to Felix regarding Paul, declared, ' Whom I perceived to be accused of questions of their law, but to have nothing laid to his charge worthy of death or of bonds ' (xxiii. 29). The Jewish Sanhedrim might accuse, but they could not judge in civil matters, as is evident not only in these instances, but in the condemnation of the Saviour. 4. A Distinct Government of the Church, apart from the civil magistrate, is demonstrated by actual facts : — 1. It is of Christ's appointment. He is Mediator— King of this His theocratic kingdom. He has given apostles, prophets, evangelists, who, by writings and examples, still yield direction. Pastors and teachers also act by His authoritative commission, defining and executing what He has commanded, according to His will and in His name. 2. It is independent of civil autliority. Both being ordinances of God, promoting man's good, though in different spheres, the ecclesiastical as well as the civil is independent therein. They may .and ought to act in friendly alliance. Confining herself to her own peculiar work, the Church must, in all her spiritual acts, be independent of civil authority. In other words, the Church of Christ is free. Practically it is found that a subordination of persons, and a co-ordination of powers, work harmoniously with- out the collision which is dreaded.— (See ' Aaron's Rod.') Questions. 1. Who originated the Erastian theory ? when and ivJiere ? and what is it ? 2. Who readily adopted this vieiv, and how far did they extend it 7 184 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 3. Give some refutation to their arguments from the Jewish Church. 4. Show that Jewish magistrates were not Erastians. 5. Explain ivhat they urge as to 'prophets and apostles. 6. Prove that the government of Church and State is distinct. CHAPTER VIII. THE GOVERNMENT DEVISED. * Show them the form of the house, and the fashion thereof, anJ all the- ordinances thereof, and all the forms thereof, and all the laws thereof : and write it in their sight, that they may keep the whole form thereof,, and all the ordinances thereof, and do them.' Libertinism. Libertinism claims the right to choose or to reject any form of government for the Church. It is contended that ' Christ lias not enjoined any form, and that He lias left each Church to de- termine for herself, under Him, what form may be most suitable to her genius and circumstances.' * Christianity,' it is plausibly said, ' is a living principle, not a fixed institution, and is thus capable of adapting itself to the necessities of its outward posi- tion, and to promote its development.' It is maintained, first, that there are not sufficient materials presented in Scripture for determining a form of Church government ; and secondly, that expediency, or a regard to the particular advantages or necessities- of the Church, must determine its outward organization. To test these assertions, let us put a few questions. 1. Is THIS Kingdom to be Managed according to the Discretion or Judgment of Men 1 The nature of the kingdom ought to settle this question. It is spiritual, divine. Everything essential to this kingdom is of heavenly origin. Every privilege possessed by the members of the Church has been bestowed. Not one thing that is essential is originated by the members themselves, singly or collectively- LIBERTINISM, 185 This is not a linman society, existing solely by the consent of its members. No doubt it is composed of men and Vvomen, and they do give their consent in entering the Church ; but it ori- ginated not in man's mind, and it is not maintained by the will of men. This kingdom is the creation of the King. Its organi- zation, order, and privileges are all of His appointment. Men cannot, as in societies of their own origination, give to it that form of organization that pleaseth them. K'ay ; all is settled al- ready by sovereign authority. It is at their peril for them to add to or detract from .what has been appointed. Divine authority excludes all fancied right of men to frame or alter. No power of man is equal to the task of framing a constitution for this kingdom, for it is the kingdom of God and of heaven : Christ saith, * My kingdom.' Where, in all the Divine Word, is there proof, by clear state- ment or logical inference, that ' Christ has left each Church to determine for herself?' This would be absolute, not ministerial, authority. Implicit and unquestioning submission there cannot be to determinations originating solely from the Church. These could never bind the consciences of men. The power of the Church is delegated. It can be carried out only in applying and explaining the laws of Christ. In all respects — in worship, doc- trine, government, and discipline, inner life and outward organi- zation— in everything essential, the Church is divine. Only wherein the Church has anything similar to other societies has no pattern been received. Prescription of what is common was unnecessary. Whatever is circumstantial, requiring alteration and accommodation for time and place — what cannot be deter- mined by the Word of God — whatever for good reasons is par- ticularly required, are matters common to all societies, and must be regulated by the light of nature, and the general rules of Scripture. Everything essential has been provided. 2. Has the Monaech ceased Peesonally to caee for His Subjects ? The government was laid upon His shoulder. When or how has it been thrown off 1 Nay ; there is a grand distinction be- 186 THE GOVERNMENT 0¥ THE KINGDOM. tween this and the kingdoms of eartli. Their monarchs die, change, or are dethroned; Christ Jesus ever lives and reigns the King of Zion. Personally He disjDenses its ordinances and laws. Ever living and reigning, ever near, powerful, and gracious, all authority flows immediately from Him into every department, subject, officer, and court. There is no room left for a vicegerent or a partner. The moment officers cease to minister they usurp His position and power. Human arrange- ment or expediency in essentials is inadmissible as treason. The Church dare not determine ' what form is suitable to genius and circumstances/ for this is another rule than the law of the King. Either instead of Scri^^ture, or in addition to it, ' genius and circumstances' dare not prescribe. The ever- varying tastes, caprices, positions of men — that is, expediency — is a rule that is human, not divine. That theory fully carried out has already culminated in the Antichrist of Kome. Further, a systematic or scientific delineation of government would be inconsistent with His plan of revelation. Doctrine no more than government can be found there in matured logical exhibition. Nevertheless, grand essential principles can, by the aid of His promised Spirit, be educed from Scripture. This is possible in the one, as in the other department, for the guidance of the Church. And after setting aside all that is manifestly of a temporary nature, sufficient materials are left explicitly to show the form of the house, that it and all ordinances of the King may be duly observed. This is the essential difference between w^rit- ings that are human and those that are divine. Consequences may sometimes be drawn from man's words which he never intended to put into them. The Most High is not thus blind. He has foreseen all that is implied in His words. Even when the words by themselves, or in separate sentences, do not seem to convey a certain meaning, yet that meaning has been put into the state- ment, taken as a whole, and in the relation of the words to each other. Therefore, that meaning which flows by good and necessary consequence is as truly divine as if it were given by an express statement. The meaning forces itself upon the reasonable and unprejudiced mind, as one that is inevitable. It is contained so in the statement, that a clear apprehension must LIBERTINISM. 187 embrace it. No laboured process of refined argument is needful. Consequently men are blamable if tliat inference is not drawn. ' As toucbing the dead, that they rise, have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob ? He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living. Ye therefore do greatly err ' (Mark xii. 26, 27). The Great Teacher charged these Pharisees with sin for not drawing this inference of the resurrection, and believing it as certainly as if given in an express assertion. So also He blamed the disciples for not drawing conclusions regarding His own redemption work. * 0 fools, and slow of heart to believe all that the prophets have spoken ! Ought not Christ to have suffered these things, and to enter into His gloryl' (Luke xxiv. 25-27.) So in all the apos- tolical writings, inferences are drawn with freedom and effect from the statements of Scripture. ' For unto which of the angels said He at any time. Thou art my Son, this day have I begotten thee?' Nothing can rightly follow from a truth but that which is of the same nature with that from which it is drawn. ^ This is that on which the whole ordinance of preaching is founded, which makes that which is derived out of the Word to have the power, authority, and efficacy of the Word accompanying it. . . . Though it be the work and effect of the Word of God to quicken, regener- ate, sanctify, and purify, ... all these effects are produced in, and by the preaching of the Word ; . . . because whatsoever is directly deduced, and delivered according to the mind and appointment of God from the Word, is the Word of God ' (Owen). It may be observed, that it is the same process of the human mind that is involved in any intelligent interpretation of Scripture. If, therefore, necessary consequences are rejected as authoritative, then no recorded communication of the will of God can be re- ceived as obligatory. It \vas the plausible argument of Arians and Socinians, and other errorists, ' Give us an express text ; we refuse to submit to a mere human inference.' Under cover of an appeal to the letter of Scripture, its real meaning is thus denied. A moment's consideration shows that the demand is absurd. If no inference is to be received as authoritative, then most of the beliefs and practices of Christians are destitute of 188 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. authority. That this or that Church is a true Church of Christ — that this or that individual is a possessor of an interest in Christ — that females should be allowed to partake of the Sup- per of the Lord — that infants may be baptized, and without im- mersion— all must be yielded as without a sure foundation. These, and other matters, are f ally proved by necessary conse- quences, though not by express declarations. In as full measure, and by the same method, is there proof of the government of the Church. Again, not only by precepts and assured inferences, scriptural examples are furnished by Christ for the perpetual guidance of His Church. These lay under the same obligation in every case to which they legitimately apply as explicit commands. If the example set by inspired men is evidently founded upon moral grounds, common to man at all times and in all circumstances, then it is perpetually binding. The law of marriage in Eden, the Ten Commandments given at Sinai, the observance of the Supper at Jerusalem, are all thus binding. Scripture com- mands and examples rest on the same basis. The mere circum- stance that legislative enactments are characteristic of the old dispensation, while a record of facts is the distinguishing peculi- arity of the new, in no wise alters the case. Has the Spirit of God revealed the divine will how men should act in certain cir- cumstances ? An affirmative reply reveals the path of duty. This tests whether even Scripture precepts are still binding. The civil and ceremonial laws of Israel, the decrees issued from the assembly at Jerusalem, having only particular and local appli- cations, were manifestly inapplicable in every age and place. So the circumstances attending the giving of the moral law to Moses, or those at the institution of the Supper, celebrated in a private dwelling, in the evening, with unleavened bread and the pascal cup, partaken of only by men, these did not rest on moral grounds common to men everywhere. Let deduction be made of whatever was peculiar and temporary, and all other apostolic practice in establishing and arranging the Church remains as a binding obligation for guidance. By what the apostles did, as much as by what they said or wrote, the King of Zion personally directs and superintends. LIBEKTINISM. 189 The Church, then, is not left at liberty to determine what is suitable, even though it be asserted ' under Him.' This small particle of truth is overlaid and destroyed by the erroneous assertion. The denial that Christ has prescribed, the claim to determine, and the new rule of * genius and circumstances,' all IDroclaim that ' under Him ' simply means disregard of Christ's authority in the matter. The Church that so acts is to that extent no longer under Christ, but is walking after the counsel of her own heart, breaking His bands and casting His cords away. Such action is an insinuation that the Head of the Church is wanting in knowledge, wisdom, judgment, and gracious care-; that He has ceased to think, determine, and act for His body. The position of Libertinism is thus inconceivable, unscriptural, dangerous. 3. May the Goveritmen-t be Altered oe Dispensed with AS Men feel oe think suitable foe the Times 1 Kay ; as the heavens are covered with stars, so is the Divine Word with brilliant examples and guiding principles. The plan is there, whether it be observed or disregarded. For centuries astronomers read the book of the heavens. Only by a patient induction of the facts observed was the true system at length unfolded to the mind of man. So is it here. The Bible-student must carefully observe, note, re-examine, and generalize. The more full and accurate his knowledge, the more clear will the divine plan of government be unfolded to his mind. Once pos- sessed, it must as the true astronomy be firmly held. No in- crease or diminution for accommodation of human opinions can be allowed. The plan is all divine. Adapted in infinite wisdom and goodness to man's thoughts, feelings, and actions, it cannot be imj)roved. Truth and fidelity require that the plan be recog- nized, acted up to, adhered to, proclaimed. Ascertained essential principles of government according to the mind of the King can- not be cast aside without in so far casting off His authority. — (See, Geo. Gillespie's Mis. Ques., and III. Propositions.) 190 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Questions. 1. What is meant here hy '•Libertinism V 2. Shoiv that the Church is not left to the discretion of man. 3. Frove that the Lord is presently caring for the Church. 4. Bow tvill youjprove that the government 'prescrihed is neither to he altered nor set aside ? CHAPTER IX. THE GOVERNMENT LOCALIZED. ' The Church, which is His body.' ' Is Christ divided ? ' Independency. Societies of Christians hold — (1.) That they are independent of each other, church organization being complete in each -worship- ping assembly ; and (2.) That church members are entitled to regulate church affairs, the governing power resting solely in the brotherhood. These are the two leading ideas of the Indepen- dent or Congregational form of church government. The first Independent congregation was formed in England in the year 1616 by the efforts of Henry Jacob. He embraced and improved the plan proposed by Brown of Norwich, which was very much a reaction from the prelatic persecutions of the period. This view was first broached by Morely of the French Reformed Church in 1561. In England it became a subject of contro- versial discussion. A considerable number of Christians have since embraced the Independent or Congregational plan, and con- tend that it was prescribed by Christ and His apostles. Not only is this held by those bearing the name of Independents, but also by branches of the Church having other designations. As the peculiarities of this scheme are not laid down in any common formula, creed, or confession, and as each congregation, isolated from all others, may differ widely in important ^points, INDEPENDENCY. 191 their general principles alone can be gathered from the writings of particular advocates, and the practices of these Churches. The designation ' Independent ' arises from the assertion that each congregation is intrusted with its own local government, being in that respect complete and isolated from every other. Their fundamental position is, that there are only two senses in which the word 'church' is used in the New Testament — (1.) Either a single congregation, or (2.) The whole collective body of Christians. It is then maintained that New Testament churches were local, isolated, and independent in government, unless for advice under difficulties. This is not a full statement of the matter. It is true that congregations had then equal rights. No one congregation had a right of control over any other. The question necessary to be discussed properly is, whether the churches had a common government ? This is denied by Independents. The affirmative is provable by two propositions : — First, The Church is one body, possessing a common government. The object of the apostles' care was not isolated churches, but parts of a whole — the one body of Christ. Paul authoritatively wrote to Eome before he had seen that church. So Peter to others. Constantly, as far as circumstances permitted, they acted together as one governing body for that one Church. And that not merely as apostles, but as elders ; for they associated the elders with them in acts of government, and commanded the elders so to act together. It is true that New Testament churches met in one place for divine worship, or, at least, for discipline and govern- ment. These churches are spoken of in the plural number ; for every several assembly having legally constituted officers is a rightly constituted church. Still, it must be inquired whether, in particular localities, there were more Christians than one place could accommodate for divine worship, having a plurality of ministers, governed by one association of officers, and yet termed one Church ? The affirmative of this fourfold question has been amply substantiated from Scripture in the previous inquiry. A brief glance at the evidence alone is necessary here. 192 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 1. In many places there were more Christians than one particular place could accommodate for religious purposes. In other places the number would not be greater. In some it is impossible to suppose this. In Jerusalem, in a short time, three thousand, then five thousand, and afterwards whole multitudes, were added to the Church. Could up- wards of eight thousand, at the lowest computation, properly assemble together for fellowship 1 If so, in what place ? The historian Mosheim, whose leanings are not in the direc- tion of Presbytery, ventures his reputation upon this impres- sion : ' Either I perceive nothing, or this is certain, and most amply confirmed, that the apostles gathered together in Jerusalem the multitudes of Christians, and had them divided into many small communities, and that to each of these were appointed its own place of sacred fellowshijD, its own minis- ters, and its own presbyters' (Com. p. 116). The' expression 'in one place' (I-/ ro avro) must be confronted with that other, ' from house to house ' (xar' ohov). While they were permitted, the temple was the general place of resort. But that was only for a brief period. For celebrating the Supper, for instruction, acts of worship and discii^line, they were distributed from house to house. So expressions employed to describe the success of the gospel in Samaria, Antioch, Iconium, Lydda, Corinth, and other places, are incompatible with the idea that only one con- gregation was formed in each city. Thus, at Ephesus, Paul and others laboured long and successfully. Not only Jewish, but Gentile converts Avere very numerous. These would naturally form separate congregations. Various places are mentioned, as the school of Tyrannus, and the Church in the house of Aquila and Priscilla, as has been proved. There * mightily grew the Word of God, and prevailed.' 2. In these places the multitude of disciples had a numer- ous body of pastors, or spiritual instructors. Estimate tke number of ministers of the Word in Jerusalem, Antioch, Corinth, Philippi, Ephesus, &c., and the fact is necessarily established that a plurality of congregations must have existed. 3. That one association of officers governed these congre- gations in each locality is undoubted. The elders of Ephesus INDEPENDENCY. 193 -were togetiier exhorted by Paul, so to govern ' all the flock' •{•rai/r/ roD ';roifj.vluj). For the whole flock in Ephesus, this was the common council (Acts xx. 28). So Peter, writing to the strangers scattered in various places, calls them ' the flock,' not flocks, and commands the elders among them to feed and oversee that one flock, as accountable to Christ (1 Pet. v.) This union ■of those holding the same essential princij)les by subjection to a common government, was and is the outward evidence that these several congregations were one Church. Persecution, pes- tilence, the want of a suitable house of worship, and other causes, prevented them assembling together; notwithstanding, by one common government, their outward unity was attested. Single congregations possessed their own elders ; others were unitedly governed by associated elders as their representatives. Hence — Fou7'tlily, These associated congregations are addressed as the -one Church of that locality. This is no misuse of the word. Though composed of many parts in its essential conditions, the Church of Christ is one. All who are united to Christ by the powerful operation of the Holy Spirit, are portions of that one Church which He hath purchased with His blood. So the Church visible is one — one in a locality — one in a nation — one in the world. Gains is not only the host of Paul, but of * the whole Church' (Rom. xvi. 23). This Church is to be told of ofi'ences, and its decisions are to be heard (Matt, xviii. 17). Though scattered by persecution, its members are mutually addressed as the flock of Christ put under the care of shepherds. It is recognized in Jerusalem, in Corinth, in Ephesus, and else- where, as one Church, though embracing a plurality. The self- same decisions apply to that one Church, whether found in Jerusalem, in Antioch, in Derbe, in Lystra, in Iconium, through- out Phrygia, or the region of Galatia (Acts xv. xvi.) There are * churches ' in Judea, Samaria, Macedonia, for each separate con- gregation is still a Church. So several together are a Church, and the Churches of all countries are still the one Church of Jesus Christ, according to His Word : ' Other sheep I have which are not of this fold ; them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice, and there shall be one flock ' (not, as in our version, one fold, To/]ai;?j), *and one shepherd' (John x. 16). N 194 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. The Church of a nation is not less a proper and scriptural ex- pression. Stephen declared of Christ, ^ This is He that was in the Church (ly rrj l%-/XriGia) in the wilderness' (Acts vii. 38). This application of the word is to the entire nation of the Jews, which, in the wilderness, could not number less than two millions. The same term is also applied to that nation when settled in Canaan in the days of David, and numbering many millions : ' In the midst of the Church [b /xiffifj lz>iX7}aiug) will I sing praise unto thee' (Ps. xxii. 22—25; Heb. ii. 12). In the same manner the term ' church ' is applied to the Christians of Palestine in the time of the apostles : ' Then had the Church ' (not the Churches, as in our version), yj sx-AXTiffta, ' rest throughout all Judea and Samaria, and walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, was multiplied' (Acts ix. 31). This reading^ is now accepted by the most eminent critics, as Lachmann, Tischendorf, Tregelles, Bengel. The latest discovered MS., the Codex Sinaiticus, is in favour of this reading ; so also the MSS. A, B, and C. These four most ancient and valuable MSS., along with others, give this testimony. The singular form of the word ' church ' is thus applied to the society of believers in their col- lective capacity throughout all that land. The Church of all Judea, Galilee, and Samaria, had rest, and was multiplied. As correctly, then, may the entire Churches of any other land — sub- ject, as that of Palestine, to one common government — b.e desig- nated as ' the church ' of that country. And so the Church throughout the world. The one meaning, ' society of believers,' is in each case preserved. These explicit declarations of Scripture being unsuitable to the plan devised and adopted so recently as seventeen hundred years after Christ, special efforts are made to destroy their force. Thus it is asserted that there was no such Church in the house in the city of Ephesus. It is said that Ephesus stood within the Asia of the Scriptures, and that Paul's salutation from the Asiatic Churches included the Church in Ephesus. This is too forced to be ac- cepted. Continually that apostle is found sending salutations from Churches widely separated, and yet singling out individuals : ' The Churches of Christ salute you. . . . Gains mine host, and of the whole Church, saluteth you,' he wrote to the Eomans. So INDEPENDENCY. 195 in writing from Ephesus to the Church in Corinth, with one dash of his pen he sends the salutations of the Churches of Asia ; but he does not forget that small congregation assembling in the house of his friends, a beloved portion of the saints and faithful at Ephesus. Then it is maintained that their house and Church were not within the limits of Ephesus ; that, if so, the salutation was unnecessary. So Paul, inspired though you were, you are to submit to the correction of the uninspired of this nineteenth century ! You are, it seems, guilty of redundancy. And this is not enough. Aquila and Priscilla, it seems, never had a Church in Ephesus ! Paul is here made out to have erred. Who will believe this? Writing from Ephesus, and sending salutations to the Church of Corinth, he says, ' Aquila and Priscilla salute you much in the Lord, with the Church that is in their house.' That he speaks of a Church at Ephesus is evident : ' I am glad,' he says, ' of the coming of Stephanas, and Fortunatus, and Achaicus, for they have refreshed my spirit. . . . All the brethren greet you ' (1 Cor. xvi. 18-21). Can any one, realizing that Paul was then in Ephesus, understand that ' coming' as to any other place, or that these brethren were not the faithful in that city ? The other reference must, therefore, also be to Ephesus. This passage proves that, when the first Epistle to the Corinthians was written, there existed at least this Church in the house, as well as the larger Church in Ephesus. To whatever extent, then, that union of congregations under one government of associated elders can be carried, such a united body may be lawfully termed ' one church.^ Every emblem employed proclaims that the visible Church is one. It is ^ the kingdom of heaven,' * the olive-tree ' (Rom. xl, 17), ' one body' (1 Cor. xii. 13). And there must be no schism in this one Church of Christ. These declarations cannot refer to the Church invisible, for therein are found members good and bad, wise and foolish — gifts bestowed even upon those who are unbelieving — offices instituted for the instruction, conversion, sanctification of many, while others are cut ofi". These members are addressed by Christ and His apostles as genuine saints, for they are treated according to their profession. Even were it possible that the branches of the Church were composed of none 196 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. but saints, where were its unity if these were totally independent of each other? The term 'independent/ as applied to the Church, is unscriptural ; and the thing is both contrary to Scrip- ture and to right reason. It is impossible to regard a number of entirely different fractions, distinguished by a variety of different practices, as one. The body of Christ has members in particular, but that body manifests its oneness by one doctrine and one common government. Questions. 1. What are the tivo ideas hy which some localize this government? 2. Mention, generally, the origin, extent, and indejiniteness of Independency. 3. State the principle of Independency, and the proper question involved in this discussion. 4. Mention the first proposition tvhich, if p)roved, refutes their idea, 5. Enumerate the fourfold p)'i^oof p)resented. 6. Prove that the appellation, ' the church of a nation^ is scriptural, giviiig the proper reading of Acts ix. 31. 7. State and refute some objections urged. 8. What is the conclusion to which these facts conduct ? CHAPTER X. THE GOVEENMENT LOCALIZED. * Decrees ordained of the apostles and elders.' ChUECHES AVIDELY SCATTERED WEEE GOVEENED BY RePEE- SENTATIYE ASSOCIATED ElDERS. Tins is the second proposition requiring special attention. A common government, over those maintaining the same essential truth, being the outward bond of unity, this was exercised in apos- tolic times, and that not only where congregations were near each other, but over those far removed. The assembly or council of INDEPENDENCY. 197 tlie apostles and elders at Jerusalem is a sufficient example, applicable to all the exigencies of the Church in every place and period. Independents generally maintain that the 15th chapter of the Acts is either an example of an infallible decision, or of the ad- vice of one Church at the solicitation of another. The previous consideration of this important passage may assist in determining whether either of these positions are tenable — showing rather that it gives authority for representative associated government by the elders of the Church. It is important to note that this is — 1. Not an Example of an Infallible Decision. The Church at Antioch might have had a decision given with infallible certainty without any such assembly. The miraculous works of Paul were sufficient to prove that he was divinely appointed and inspired. He could have given an infallible deci- sion at once, had the will of God been so. It was solely because the matter was not so decided, after * no small dissension and disputation,' that Paul and Barnabas agreed, along with others, to go up as deputies. When they came to Jerusalem, and were met with the apostles and elders, there is no indication that they were solely guided by miraculous influence. The reference itself, the mode of procedure, and the express testimony recorded, all concur in disproving the supposition. It is unaccountable to think that now infallibility would be manifested, when it had been denied amidst the discussions at Antioch. That the question was referred at all — and then not to the apostles only, but to ' the apostles and elders,' to the ordinary as well as the extraordinary officers of the Church — proves that, up to its consideration by the assembly, an infallible decision had not been pronounced. The mode of procedure adopted cannot be reconciled with the supposition of miraculous inspiration. The ordinary elders are called together, are allowed to deliberate and to give judg- ment, on a footing of perfect equality with the apostles. But uninspired men cannot give any addition to the voice of inspira- 198 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. tioii. And notliing occurs to give an impression that these elders were inspired. Then, apostles and elders come together to consider the matter, and there was much disputing. All the ordinary appliances of evidence, reasoning and citation of Scrip- ture, were employed. But this is never the manner of inspiration. In all the reasonings of the apostles in the epistles, it is manifest that they were convinced that what they decided was the mind of God. Where is there one instance of a gathering, consulta- tion, and much disputing amongst the apostles by themselves, before any epistle was written? Do they not rather proclaim, as the Old Testament prophets — ' Thus saith the Lord ; ' ' I have the mind of Christ 1 ' The testimony of the divine record is no less express. James stated that his sentence or proposal was, that they should write indicating that the Gentiles should not be troubled with circumcision, but that other restrictions should be laid upon them. This proposal pleased the assembly, with this addition, that a deputation should communicate their decision. As * it seemed good unto us to send chosen men,' so, it is stated, that 'it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us,' thus to decide. These words, ' seemed to us,' are equivalent to this : Such is our opinion or judgment, after the most careful exami- nation. Could it be possible to use these expressions were this an inspired decision ? Did the Old Testament prophets, or the apostles, on other occasions, in giving infallible utterances say, * Thus saith the Lord and we 1 ' Manifestly, the apostles, in this case, acted, not as pronouncing an inspired and infallible judg- ment, but as ordinary ministers, so that the judgment of the elders might coincide with theirs, and for an example in the future government of the Church. The expression, 'seemed good to the Holy Ghost,' is appropriate to the decision, in accord- ance with the mind of the Spirit, in the passages of Scripture adduced. It indicates nothing more. Again, this example is — 2. Not that of Advice by one Chuech, given at the solicitation of another. First, The reference was not made to the Church ' or congregation ' of Jerusalem, as Independ- INDEPENDENCY. 199 cnts allege. The reference was not sent to a congregation; and tliere is no account that the members were summoned. Being sent to the apostles and elders, they only are said to have come together to consider the matter. These alone discuss and settle the question. ' The multitude/ ' the whole church/ ' brethren/ who kept silence, are mentioned as concurring in the decision And letter. This evidently indicates that many members of the Church were present. Allowing that this discussion proceeded in the hearing of those members who could be present, and that their concurrence was obtained — this is all that the words will bear. Without a violent wresting of Scripture, they cannot be made to mean that the entire membership of the Church at Jeru- salem were summoned, or that they were constituted judges in the case by apostolic authority. It was important to show to the Gentiles that the whole Church at Jerusalem agreed with the "decision, still that decision was come to by the apostles and ■elders, to whom alone the question had been submitted. Secondly, It was not a mere declaration or advice, but an authoritative decision. An advice was not sought, it was the decisive and authoritative settlement of this question affecting their salvation that was requested by the Church at Antioch. A simple advice was unsuitable, and was not given. It was a de- cree ordained, and which was implicitly obeyed. It is called a * decree ' in similar terms, and, consequently, was as authoritative as those of the Roman Emperor, or the commandments of the ceremonial law. It is styled a decree ' ordained.' This expresses as decided an exercise of authority, as the decision of the Persian court against Queen Vashti, or of the Jewish Sanhedrim in the condemnation of Christ. That decree ordained laid a necessary burden upon the Gentile Christians. On Independent principles, the members could not have been concerned in this transaction as judges. They were not entitled to lay a burden upon another congregation. The formula, * It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay,' &c., cannot be interpreted to mean anything €lse than a judicial decision. So it was received by the Churches at Antioch, and throughout Syria and Cilicia. When the decrees were delivered, the membership of the Churches were simjjly summoned to hear and obey, which joyfully they did. Were the 200 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDO:^!. Independent view taken, tliat, instead of an authoritative court,, this indicates how one Church may deal with another — then, fairly taken, the argument goes too far even for themselves. It will not only warrant one Church to sit in judgment upon another, but will authorize the continued authoritative super- vision of ' a mother Church ' over those that have arisen out of the missionary zeal of her members. Will it be allowed that the Church of Jerusalem held a universal episcopacy for some thirty years? Instead of these unsupported suppositions, the record proves that — 3. Vaeious Chueches weke Subordinate to this Assembly. A court, composed of representative officers, met at Jerusalem. They decided upon a particular case referred to them for that purpose, and that decision was uniformly binding on the Churches. Hence this is an example and authority, both for a reference from an inferior to a superior court, and for the review authoritatively of all Churches represented by such an assembly. Besides the deputies from Antioch, and the elders, who are named without limiting them to Jerusalem, the apostles acted, there on the same platform as elders, which elsewhere they claim to be. As they had a universal commission, they represented the entire Church, and, consequently, sent forth their decrees to Churches every\s^here (Acts xvi. 4, 5). The entire proceeding proves that the members of that assem- bly were not guided by miraculous influence, but by the common operations of the Holy Spirit, enabling them to perceive and apply the general principles of the Scriptures. If, then, ordinary^ presbyters will decree and determine nothing but what is autho- rized by the Divine Word, examining every question thereby, and will follow implicitly the voice of Scripture, under the guidance of the promised aid of the Holy Spirit, this example is for per- petual guidance. The assembly claimed and exercised the power of determining according to Scripture what was to be proclaimed, as the means of salvation. Had a decision been given at Antioch in which the Church. INDEPENDENCY. 201 could not concur, this reference warrants the belief that an appeal would, in like manner, have been taken. Had the decrees been disobeyed, their authoritative issue further supposes that an assembly might have again been constituted to inquire into and try such a case. Consequently, there is equal warrant here for courts of appeal and review, embracing all necessary jurisdiction. A governing body, comprehending in it many congregations, had authority over all those so comprehended. • Every congregation is equal in power, the smallest with the largest. Ko authority is given to any one to command another. But there is warrant in Scripture for the rule that what belongs to all, should be participated in by all. Consequently, as ordi- nary members are subject to their representative elders ; so con- gregations are subject to their representative elders, associated together in the name and by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. Were the apostles alive, they would, as then, meet and act along with the elders for the settlement of all difficulties, which would as certainly be referred to them for decision. Although dead, they yet speak. Personally absent, by their inspired writings, and the record of their actions, they are still in our midst. When, then, difficult matters are referred to the assembled elders — when they are guided by apostolic utterances and actions — when obedience is rendered to these decisions, this is to comply, in as far as it is possible, with the spirit and letter of the apostolic example. Such decisions are also to be received with reverence and submission, not only — (1.) For their agreement with the Word of God ; but (2.) Because of the power of this ordinance of God. These are the two grounds on which such decisions become binding upon the consciences of churches and members. Besides — 4. The Necessities of the Case are not met by the Independent System. Look at the practical working of this scheme, and it will be seen that it is defective — especially in cases of difficulty and of general interest. First, Individual cases do arise when a member or a minister 202 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. feels and declares that, by local judges, lie lias been grossly mis- understood, maligned, and injured. But there is no higher juris- diction to which he can appeal. The advice of a neighbouring congregation is not likely to have weight, and is not sought. Consequently, the tie must either be broken between that indivi- dual minister or member and the congregation and district, or he remains an injured man to his dying day. It is said. If he is right, and the congregation are in error, it is no longer to be held to be a Church of Christ by the person wronged. So, very probably, he will feel. But will the congregation cease to regard themselves as a Church ? or will his personal estimation at all rectify the evil? Were there a court of appeal to dispassionate judges, w^ould there not be hojDe for him that he would be justified? Secondly, Cases arise affecting the Clmrch at large. A pastor, it may be, becomes heretical or immoral. If the members are not entitled, in the first instance, to enter ujDon the case, and if no ofiicers are left who retain their integrity and authority, no cognisance can be taken of the evil. It must be allowed to spread, or the pastor resigns and goes elsewhere as if free from stain. Again, a congregation, it may be, departs from the faith, the great body of the members are contaminated. Who shall call them to account ? Or, if so, what power exists to pass cen- sure ? Is it so that our Lord has appointed the exercise of dis- cipline for the reclamation of individuals, and none for ofi'ending congregations ? The evil spreads. Other congregations are infected with the same leaven. Is this to go on without any power of arrest ? Are the least faults of members to be visited with penalties, and the greater of congregations to escape all condemnation ? Inattention to gross crimes is accounted one of the most radical defects of any government. Can it be so that an evil of such magnitude can be found in the kingdom of Him who is infinitely wise, just, and good ? No doubt advice and admonition may be tried. If, however, experience proves that mere advice without the power of punishment fails to reclaim individuals in extreme cases, w^hat hope is there that this ex- treme case in regard to congregations will prove an exception ? It is not sufficient to say that, in such cases, spiritual judgments INDEPENDENCY. 203 sooner or later will fall upon the offending. Such judgments may and do fall upon offending individuals, and yet a course of discipline is persevered in as absolutely necessary. Hence, a superior tribunal is required for the supervision and reclamation of congregations. Strength and energy sufficient for the preven- tion and suppression of such evils are most important, and are supplied in representative courts. Every reason that may be urged why a believer should submit to a particular church, requires that • the particular church should submit to the whole Church. No obligation can rest short of this. Thirdly, Local judges are ill fitted to secure an enlightened administration in every case. This arises from local prejudices and passions. If it is the case that where men of acknowledo-ed ability alone are selected, courts of review and appeal are still necessary. How can it be otherwise, when every individual member of the Church is admitted to be a judge] If it would be considered unwise to admit each one of these same persons to manage civil matters, why consider them capable, without super- vision, of managing all Church matters % Do no intricate cases ever come up in which every one is not fitted to judge ? Are there not matters of faith, worship, controversy, external order, or policy which require discrimination, and clear appreciation of the rules of Scripture applicable thereto ? These, in addition to matters of ordinary discipline and government, may surely suffer where power is unlimited. Suppose difficulties to exist between officers and people, or that the congregation is much divided, then no judgment can be arrived at. As it is professed that no vote ought to be taken, either the matter must remain unsettled, or some party must withdraw. In either case religion suffers. Would it not be more for the interests of truth and justice to remove the cause out of the region of local prejudices and party spirit ? This is provided for in representative associated action. Without this, testimony proclaims that, frequently. Independency degenerates into, either absolutism in the pastor, tyranny in the deacons, or anarchy and continual schism amongst the people. Of this, examples are not wanting — but we refrain. It is true that no form of government can be absolutely free from corruption ; for the carrying out is in the hands of men 204 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. naturally depraved and fallible, and at the best but partially sanctified. But if it is found that in this system there is practically no means of checking, or of rectifying acknowledged evils j and if, on the other hand, it is found that with acknow- ledged equality of pastors and congregations — ample scope for consultation, brotherly dealing, admonition, and persuasion — a further power is available authoritatively to deal with persons and congregations; surely right reason counsels the adoption of the latter method. Much more when it is found that Scripture sets forth that — (1.) The Church is one body, possessing a common government ; and (2.) That churches widely separated were go- verned by a body of representative associated elders — there is conclusive proof that the perfect condition of the visible Church cannot be found in churches totally independent, and possessed of absolute power in themselves. That is rather in the admini- stration of government by associated representative presbyters. It is impossible that any one portion of the Church should be independent of all the rest. The Church is one body, united to one Head, pervaded by one Spirit, governed by the same laws. An independent Church is therefore as great an absurdity as aa independent Christian. 5. The Earlier Independents acknowledged Scriptural Authority for Courts of Keview. The Westminster Independents declared that ' Synods are an: holy ordinance of God, and of great use for the finding out and declaring of truth in difficult cases, and for healing offences.' And ' that all the churches of a province being off"ended at a. particular congregation, may call that single congregation to ac- count ; yea, all the churches in a nation may call one or more congregations to an account ; that they may examine and ad- monish, and, in case of obstinacy, declare them to be subverters of the faith ; that they are of use to give advice to magistrates in matters of religion. . . . That they have authority to determine concerning controversies of faith j that their determinations af e to be received with great honour and conscientious respect and obligation as from Christ j that if an offending congregation re- INDEPENDENCY. 205 fuse to submit to their determinations, they may withdraw from them.' The Eev. Dr Thomas Goodwin says, *As we acknowledge elective occasional Synods of the elders of many Churches, as the Churches have need to refer cases of difference to them ; so in case of maladministration, or an unjust proceeding in the sentence of excommunication, and the like, we acknowledge ap- peals or complaints may be made to other Churches ; and the elders of those Churches met in a Synod, who being offended, may, as an ordinance of Christ, judge, and declare that sentence to be null, void, and unjust ; and that not simply as any com- pany of men may so judge, giving their judgments of a fact done, but as an ordinance of Christ in such cases, and for that end sanctified by Him to judge and declare in matters of difference,' The Eev. Dr John Owen declares, ^ No church, therefore, is so independent as that it can always, and in all cases observe the duties it owes unto the Lord Christ, and the Church Catholic, by all those powers which it is able in itself distinctly without con- junction with others. And the church that confines its duty unto the acts of its own assemblies, cuts itself off from the ex- ternal communion of the Church Catholic; nor will it be safe for any man to commit the conduct of his soul to such a church. Wherefore, this acting in Synods is an institution of Jesus Christ, not in an express command, but in the nature of the thing itself, fortified with apostolical example. That particular church which extends not its duty beyond its own assemblies and mem- bers is fallen off from the principal end of its institution. . . . Synods are consecrated unto the use of the Church in all ages by the example of the apostles in their guidance of the first Churches of Jews and Gentiles which hath the force of a divine institution, as being given by them under the infallible conduct of the Holy Ghost.' These specimens are sufficient to show how these learned and godly men understood the matter ; and although neither they nor any others are to be blindly followed, yet their views are worthy of consideration. AVere not such men as much qualified to declare what is the true sense of Scripture in this matter, as any Independents are in recent times ? 206 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Questions. 1. State the second proposition, and lohat circumstance is proof of it. 2. Mention the two ways in which Independents regard the as- sembly at Jerusalem. 3. How can it be shown that the decision ivas not by infallible inspiration ? 4. What facts demonstrate that this was not mere advice, ashed and obtained ? 5. Prove that this decision had a much wider orange. 6. Show that the Independent plan is deficient — {l.)In individual cases ; and (2.) In those affecting the Church generally. 7. Why cannot an enlightened administration be secured in every case in each congregation upon this plan ? 8. State generally the conclusions to which some of the earlier Independents were led as to courts of review and appeal. CHAPTER XI. THE GOVEENMENT LOCALIZED. * Obey them that have the rule over you.' Congregationalism. The other aspect of the independent form of church govern- ment is Congregationalism. It is maintained that in each con- gregation church members are equally entitled to regulate church affairs ; or, as some put it, the government is to be con- ducted by the officers and the congregation conjointly. The elders, it is contended, are merely presidents to preserve order. Three sections of inquiry present themselves : — Have the people authority to rule 1 AVho are to bear office ? and to what extent ? CONGREGATIONALISM. 207 § 1. Have the People Authority ? In civil government the people generally do not exercise authority. The power of ruling is intrusted to chosen repre- sentative officers for the good of the people. To suppose the contrary would be to indicate utter confusion and anarchy. Hence, it might be supposed, as the Divine Word is not in con- tradiction to the laws of God for other departments, that a similar order would be set forth for the regulation of the Church. It is, however, alleged that the kingdom of grace is totally distinct from the kingdoms of the earth, and that by the sanction of Scripture the people must exercise the power of rule. Christ's Rule for Offei^ces. The directions of our Lord — 'Tell it unto the Church j' 'if ye neglect to hear the Church ' (Matt, xviii. 15-17) — are thus declared to mean : Tell it to the whole congregation. Is this evident from the passage ? The law for the adjustment of private offences is here declared. Three stages are to be observed : — First, The offending brother is to be told his fault in private. Secondly, Again in the pre- sence of witnesses. Thirdly, The Church is to be informed, and is to deal with him. If all these proceedings fail, then he is to be no longer regarded as a Christian brother. The Church pos- sesses authority which is to be exercised as a last resort in deal- ing with members of a particular Church. All this is clear. The only difficulty is the word ' church.' "What is the meaning of this word in this particular passage ? It is evidently used in a general sense. There is nothing in the context specially to define it. Whether the power is to be exercised by the people in common, with the elders simply pre- siding, or by the elders alone, in whose judgment the people are to concur, is not stated. The fact of a judicial procedure is, however, proved. Evidently the witnesses of the former pro- ceeding must be called and examined. If not, their testimony were of no value. The offender must be heard for himself, then 208 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. judgment must be given. If conviction follows, exclusion from cliurcli fellowship is the necessary consequence. This much is established, but nothing more, namely, that the Church has a power of government over her members. Supposing that this power is vested in the entire membership, still it must be asked, by whom is it to be exercised 1 There are two sources of information that must be appealed to for an answer : — (1.) The procedure to which Christ referred ; and (2.) The practice of the apostolic Churches. In these cases, was the government exercised by the people, or by their officers alone ? 1. The Frocedure in Jeiuisli Courts was that to w^hich the Lord referred. * The allusion of Jesus,' says Dr Goodwiv, * is to the synagogues in every town which were the ecclesiastical state. ... To tell the Church, therefore, was to tell that particular synagogue of which they were mem- bers.' ' Let him be to thee as a heathen man and a publican,' imports the same thing as let him be cast out of the synagogue. The word (cuvayw/^j) 'synagogue,' and the word (ixxXjjc/a) 'church,' are, in many instances, all one in the Septuagint. The apostle James uses ' synagogue ' to denote the Christian congregation, or the place where they met : ' If there come into your synagogue ' (James ii. 2). The same term is used by Paul exhorting, ' For- sake not the assembling of yourselves together' {l-i cvvayojyTiv). When our Lord gave this law, no Christian congregation, as such, existed, if we except Himself and His disciples. They and He together conformed to the synagogue and temple worship. Presently, to practise His direction. His hearers could only tell the matter to the Jewish synagogue. What, then, was the prac- tice to which our Lord referred ? The rulers of the synagogue alone administered its affairs : ' The rulers of the synagogue sent unto Paul and his companions ' (Acts xiii. 15). These had a president : ' The ruler of the synagogue answered' (Luke xiii. 14). 'These rulers,' Goodwin says, ' were never less than three, that a major vote might cast it among them.' From their determination there was a right of appeal to the great Sanhedrim or council of seventy. In that CONGREGATIONALISM. 209 council tLe people were not allowed to be present. ' When tliey had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they con- ferred among themselves' (Acts iv. 15-17). Then they decided that, while the miracle could not be denied, preaching in the name of Jesus must be prohibited. 2. The Practice of Apostolic Churches. In the Church at Jerusalem the highest acts of government were performed by church officers alone. Three thousand mem- bers were admitted in one day. No meeting or deliberation of members is so much as hinted at. In Samaria very many, and on the way to Gaza the Ethiopian treasurer, were admitted by Philip, when he administered to them the ordinance of baptism. So in Damascus Paul was admitted to the same privilege of Christ's house by Ananias. So Lydia and the Philippian jailer hj Paul and Silas. Whether the Church was in course of formation, or already existed, no instance is on record of recep- tion to Christian fellowship after judgment asked and obtained of the membership generally. It is true that Paul was not recognized when first he came to Jerusalem, until his conversion and sincerity had been declared by Barnabas. This was because of his previous persecution, and because they had no knowledge of his discipleship. But this was not his first reception into the Church. That had already been consummated elsewhere. All that remained was, that he should be accredited in Jerusalem. In the same manner w^ould every Church of the present day act. The admission of the converted persecutor to sealing ordinances and fellowship on the spot, is one thing ; his recognition as a disciple in a Church that had not heard of the reality of his change, is another. The addition, then, of these converts to the Church by baptism was not by the general judgment of Church members, but by the responsible action of Church rulers. And so admitted. Scripture proves that they had at once the fullest fellowship. The ordination of ofiicers is another principal act of govern- ment, which, as recognized in our inquiry, was conducted solely by the hands of the Presbytery. 0 210 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. And so, in like manner, tlie exercise of discipline ; that is- specially committed to those in office in His Church. Jesus said, ' Peace be unto you : as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. Whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained' (John XX, 21-23). Such emphatic declarations were not only given to the apostles j they themselves give as emphatic direc- tions in the epistles for the guidance of the eldership in all places and times. * Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others may fear' (1 Tim. v. 19, 20). 'A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject' (Tit. iii. 10). No such exjDlicit directions are given indicating that the people are themselves to exercise these powers. In admission, ordination, discipline unto exclusion from fellow- ship, the elders are observed to govern in every Church. These facts, added to the practice of the Jewish synagogue, to which our Lord alluded, sufficiently explain in what sense the word ' church ' is here to be understood. To tell a matter ' to the church' — where judicial investigation, decision, and execution are all necessary — can only mean to bring it before the eldership of the congregation with which the parties are connected. It cannot mean tell it to the Church universal, for that were impossible. Neither can it be understood of one man as * the bishop of a diocese ;' one member cannot be the body. Nor of ' the Christian magistrate,' for this is not a civil matter of out- ward personal injury, but of scandal and spiritual offence. Further, it is not the entire membership of the congregation. Church power has its seat in the entire membership, but the exercise of judicial functions has not been committed to them promiscuously. It must therefore be, ' Tell it to the officers who represent and govern the Church.' This is a common form of speech, to give the name of the thing represented to that which represents it. The Lord said to Moses, ' Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel.' * Then Moses called for all tlie elders of Israel, and said unto them' (Exod. xx. 3, 21). So the congregation are directed to restore the manslayer ; and yet the thing commanded was done by the elders (Num. xxxv. ; Dent. xix.) As the eye is said to see, the ear to hear, while it is the CONGREGATIONALISM. 211 mind thcat sees and hears by these organs ; so the Church is said to be told and to be heard, while this is by means of the servants of Jesus Christ, and of the Church. Evidently, not to the multitude, but to selected officers, did Christ speak, at the same moment, ' Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and Avhatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.' This explanatory verse shows whose official actions Avere to be heard and obeyed. If it be contended that this belonged only to the apostles, then 'the church,' of whose power this is the definition, must also be restricted to them, and to their time. If ' the church ' extends to all time, the exercise of disciplinary power must also extend to the elder- ship. Discipline in the Coeinthiax Church is represented as favouring the views of Congregationalists. Four positions are stated. First, That the whole Church is blamed for not censuring the incestuous person (1 Cor. v.) The reproof of the apostle is not, however, because the members themselves had not judged and excluded him. It is because 'ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned ; ' while the result of this mournino- w^as awanting — namely, ' That he that hath done this deed might be taken aw^ay from among you.' This language does not neces- sarily imply that the members individually were to take part in the exclusion. The guilty one might be taken away as efi'ectually by the action of the ' prophets,' ' teachers,' ' governments,' God had set in the Church (chap. xii. 28, 29). And all were not prophets or teachers any more than apostles. Although the guilty should not be taken away by the officers, it is yet possible, and the part of all the membership, to mourn because of the ab- sence of effective discipline, and to stir themselves up to seek reformation. Secondly, It is asserted that they are all commanded, when they are gathered together, to proceed against him. But this does not expressly warrant every member of the Church to adjudicate. For— (1.) The language is in general terms ; — ' In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together to deliver such 212 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. an one unto Satan/ (fee. Will it be maintained that everything in this epistle was applicable to every member of that Church 1 It was addressed to the Church, and yet there is restriction. All might learn, but all v/ere not prophets, and, therefore, might not prophesy. All the prophets might prophesy, but their women must keep silence. They were not permitted to speak, for that would produce ' confusion.' All might partake of, but all might not dispense the Supper, of the Lord. Now, the gifts and office of ruling having been restricted to those on whom the Lord has bestowed them, this scriptural restriction ought to be taken as explanatory of this general statement ' to deliver.' That restric- tion would be inapplicable were the power of discipline extended so as to be exercised by every member. But there is no such express extension. (2.) This act * to deliver, for the destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord Jesus,' could be fully accomplished by the eldership. The Church could be gathered together, as many as could come, and the act of expul- sion in their presence be effected. Such a proceeding would be in harmony with the commanded subjection of the people to those over them in the Lord. The other supposition is entirely sub- versive of that position. The action of the elders, carried out openly in the face and with the concurrence of the assembled people, might most appropriately be termed ' a punishment in- flicted of many,' even if the interpretation 'many elders' be rejected. The public announcement of the sentence was necessary, but every member could not utter it ; and by whom more appro- priately could this be done than by the eldership ? So also his restoration (2 Cor. ii. 4-6). ' Ye ought rather to forgive him, that ye would confirm your love toward him.' Forgiveness and comfort would as appropriately be tendered to the penitent by the eldership, confirmed by the after-treatment of all who came in contact with him. This general exhortation does not make void, but rather strengthens the authority of the elders. (3.) The members were not called on to deliberate. This had been done already by the apostle : ' For I verily have judged already, as though I were present, concerning him that hath so done this deed.' To weigh evidence and to come to a finding CONGEEGATIONALISM. 21 3 were not the objects for which they were to be gathered together. To deliver unto Satan, and then again to forgive, and confirm love, were the alone objects, and, in order to this last duty, no assembling is ordered. (4.) Two duties are, nevertheless, applicable to all the Church. First, They are not to keep the company of fornicators. They are so to act as to confirm the decision and action come to in judging them that are within the Church, and so that the guilty might be ashamed and brought to repentance. Secondly, They are to set them to judge who ' are wise and able to judge between brethren' (1 Cor. v. 9, vi. 4, 5). This statement explains the general language employed. As the saints are here said to judge the world ; and as no one misunderstands this — as all will acqui- esce in the judgment gone into and pronounced by the King of Glory — so the members are to acquiesce in the authoritative decision of those able and wise men, even although they be lightly esteemed, whom the membership, by their own choice, have ' set to judge.' Were the judgment to be entered on and awarded by the whole body in common, there would have been no need for such a special selection. The appointment is the more important, as some are supposed unwise — unfit so to judge as to promote the ends of Church fellowship. Consequently, the fourth and fifth suppositions of Congregationalists — namely, that the action of the members is judicial, and that they only can restore him, are without any foundation. No distinct declaration is made of any judicial action of each member, and general state- ments must always be explained by those that are more particular. The object was not to proceed to a judicial investigation at all. Thus sole or conjoint government of the congregation receives here no warrant. That is rather to be carried on by a few well- selected officers. Questions. 1. What questions force consideration in the Congregational aspect ? 2. State their view of Matt, xviii.^ and how the word * churcW is to he determined. 214^ THE GOVEENMEKT OF THE KINGDOM. 3. Why slioukl the iJvocedure in Jewish courts he adduced ? 4. Mention some features of apostolical Churches. 5. How can the passage in 1 Oor. v. he satisfactorily ex- plained ? CHAPTER XII. § 2. Who aee to Bear Office ? ' The bishops and deacons.' Who are to bear office in the Church is an essential question. In this particular, Congregational Churches practically diverge from the apostolic plan. This arises from a reluctance to recog- nize the office of ruling elder, and also in elevating the deacon- ship to the position of the eldership. 1, The Ruling Elder only is refused. In this Congregationalism keeps company with Prelatic Episcopacy. It is acknowledged that the office of pastor, — that is, of the elder who both teaches and rules — is scriptural. But, in general, Congregational Churches have only one elder or bishop, and frequently but one deacon. This is very inconsistent in those who profess to have express declarations, to which they strenuously adhere in the government of the Church. Paul could not now write to many of these Churches, as to that of the Philij^pians, saluting ' the bishops and deacons.' If the Church of Ephesus Avas but one congregation, as they maintain, it certainly differed from Congregationalist Churches. Paul sent for the elders — not one, but several. Where is there an example in the New Testament of a single pastor, with deacons only, and so constituted by apostolic authority? This want is confessed and lamented even by some modern Congregationalists. The want of ability to support more than one only shows more for- cibly the disparity. The least and poorest Apostolic Church had a plurality. The largest and wealthiest Congregationalist now has generally but one elder. COXGREGATIONALISM. 215 Of that plurality of elders, some ruled only, while others both taught aud ruled. It is this distinct branch of the eldership, set apart specially for rule, to which Congregationalists by their system are forced to object. Manifestly, if every member is to exercise this power, there is no necessity to have men selected and specially 'set to judge.' Consequently, as to establish the authority of the ruling elder is to demolish this opposing theory, a glance must again be taken at the evidence. In the exhortation contained in 1 Tim. v. 17, all who ruled well are declared to be worthy of abundant honour. But those .are especially w^orthy who, in addition, laboured in the Word and doctrine. Hence only some perform this last branch of duty. Dr Wardlaw's explanation may be accepted, ' Those in the latter part of the verse are comprehended under the more general de- scription in the former. They are not a distinct class of persons, but a select portion of the same class, distinguished by a special peculiarity. ■* (1.) Generally they are rulers ; (2.) Specially they labour in Word and doctrine. (3.) This peculiarity distinguishes the select portion from the whole. ' This,' says Dr Davidson, ' is a position too manifest to be called in question. Other parts of the New Testament would warrant that conclusion had the Epistle to Timothy been wanting.' He contends that, though some only ruled, yet they were entitled to preach ; and that ' the nature of the distinction is merely such as arises from the possession of various talents directed to the discharge of different duties, w^hile all have equal right to perform the same functions.' Dissever the last part of this sentence, and we say, Exactly so. Could they possess the right if they wanted the talents 1 Would they be appointed by inspired men to the par- ticular duties of an office for which they had not been qualified by God ? Would such a proceeding be in accordance even with human wisdom ? Did they recede from a portion of the duties to which they were appointed, because of failure competently to discharge these ? If men were chosen for general management in the synagogue who were not called to instruct, can it be .shown that no necessity exists for a similar division of labour in the Church ? Now let it be fully allowed that all elders are bishoj^s. They 216 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. have essentially the same office and the same rights. All might preach, administer ordinances, ordain, rule; but, practically, all are not qualified for the efficient discharge of every duty. If eminently fitted for another branch, is it not the part of wisdom to confine his attention to that department ? One may possess the wider qualifications, the others the more limited, though not less important. In addition to management and rule by visitations of the sick, prayer-meetings, Sabbath-classes and schools, the ruling elder finds ample scope for natural and gracious qualifications. In these he may rule well, and be counted worthy of double honour in this spiritual office. Dr Owen says, ' That the text is of uncontrollable evidence if it had anything to conflict withal but prejudices and interest.' ' It is the peculiar and perpetual error of the human under- standing, says Lord Bacon, to be more moved and excited by affirmatives than negatives, whereas it ought duly and regularly to be impartial ; nay, in establishing any true axiom, the nega- tive instance is the most powerful. It is a false induction, therefore, to collect together a bundle of passages in which pres> byters are mentioned who were unquestionably preachers, and then, without pausing to inquire w^hether these may not be negative instances, or whether the real ground has been discovered by the application of the term, to lay it down as an indisputable axiom that the scriptural presbyter is a minister of the Word. As the negative instance is most powerful, one such instance ia sufficient to overthrow, to establish the logical contradictory of the universal conclusion deduced from a host of affirmatives. . . . That passage (1 Tim. v. 17) furnishing the powerful negative in- stance of Lord Bacon, contains the logical contradictory of the proposition that presbyter is the title of ordinary ministers of the Word. To affirm, in the face of this Scripture, that all elders are teachers, is no less preposterous than to affirm, in the face of experience and of fact, that all that are mortal are men ' (Dr Thornwell). Even in Christian and philanthropic associations the dis- tinction is fully recognized. On the list of the committee all stand alike. In the practical working the labour is divided ac- cording to ability. Some eloquent Apollos advocates the cause CONGREGATIONALISM. 217 upon the platform. Others gifted more ^vitll wisdom in practical details assist with counsel and management. So the Christian minister must be 'apt to teach/ both wise and able, but to others with less capacity for exposition it belongs to rule. The ruling elder ought not to be termed lay elder. No in- sinuation should be permitted that this office is more secular then that of the pastorate. Both are branches of one spiritual office — that of overseeing the flock of God. It is an office in a spiritual house, with spiritual duties, to be discharged adequately- only by spiritual men. The one object is to feed the flock. Therein all must be ensamples. The ruling elder must be the true yoke-fellow of the pastor in the vineyard of the Lord. 2. The Deacons ought not then to be substituted in place of ruling elders. The particular duty of the deaconship was * to serve tables,' as dis- tinguished from prayer and the ministry of the Word. Thus widows were no longer to be neglected in the daily ministrations, and murmuring was to be allayed. It had reference evidently to the temporal concerns of the Church. In Congregational Churches this office is extended and ele- vated. This is confessed by some. The late Rev. Mr James says, ' By the usage of our Churches many things have been added to the duties of the office beyond its original design, but this is matter of expediency.' So Dr Campbell, ' This scheme is with- out any express Scripture authority. They permit if they do not require an arrangement somewhat different.' Another explains wherein this office has been added to. 'Among Congregationalists, the deacons, besides attending to the temporal concerns of the Church, assist the minister with their advice, take the lead at prayer-meetings when he is absent, and preach occasionally to smaller congregations.' This addition of counsel, leading of prayers, occasional exhortation, is all spiritual. These are the very duties that are prescribed by the Divine Word to therulino- elder. This usage of Congregational Churches being destitute of scriptural authority, and founded only on expediency, ought 218 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. surely to be reconsidered and reformed. Tlie ruling elder lias by authority of Scripture that position which the Congregationalist deacon claims merely from human expediency. A much firmer footing is thus obtained, and much more abundant may be the blessing expected. This acknowledged defect manifests that the entire Congregationalist scheme is defective. Faithful and be- loved brethren in Congregational Churches may well weigh this matter. Is it not a substituting of ^ genius and circumstances ' — a determining for themselves — rather than an implicit follow- ins; of the Word and will of Christ 1 The ruling eldership cannot be dispensed with. The allocation of spiritual duties to the deacon proves that the necessity is felt. If the means of comfortable assistance to the poor are to be accompanied with words of consolation, encouragement, admoni- tion, prayer, and thanksgiving ; if he is to prepare matters of judgment for the final sentence, examine applicants for admis- sion to fellowship, announce the hour of meeting, give out hymns in public worship, as Dr Bradlaw declares, — the work of a ruling elder is confessedly allocated. The description given, that the deacons are worthy of the confidence of the pastor, and also of the people, more strongly confesses that these deacons are but ruling elders under another name. Why then deprive them of the title and authority which Scripture awards ? 3. Eminent Independents contend for the scriptural usage. Dr Thomas Goodwin says — ' Though to rule is a pastor's ofiice as well as an elder's, yet the elder is more especially said to rule, because he is wholly set apart to it. It is his proper calling, which he is wholly appointed to mind.' Dr John Owen — 'Elders not called to teach ordi- narily, or administer the sacraments, but to assist and help in the rule and government of the Church, are mentioned in Scrip- ture Eom. xil 8 ; 1 Cor. xii. 28, and 1 Tim. v. 17.' ' Differing gifts are required unto the differing works of pastoral teaching on the one hand, and practical rule on the other, is evident — (1.) From the light of reason, the nature of the works themselves CONGREGATIONALISM. 219 being so different; and (2.) From experience. Some men are fitted for the dis^Densation of the Word and doctrine who have no ability for the worlc of rule, and some are fitted for rule who have no gifts for the discharge of the pastoral work in preaching. Yea, it is very seldom that both these sorts of gifts do concur in any eminency in the same person, or without some notable defect. Those who are ready to assume all things unto them- selves are, for the most part, fit for nothing at all.' * The nature of the work requires that there should be more elders than one.' The Monarch of this kingdom claims the service of His subjects according to capacity. If no wise men are to be found among the members, then the office cannot be filled, and the congrega- tion must be indebted to the assistance of others. If there are men able to judge between brethren, noted for wisdom, prudence, sanctified ability — surely these gifts of God ought to be employed. There must be some niche in the great spiritual Temple which they might profitably occupy. If cases constantly occur requiring the united exercise of wise counsel and judgment — if the pastor is not to be overburdened, harassed, and hindered in the work of the ministry, — then this want ought to be supplied out of the material prepared and suited for the purpose. The voice of reason echoes the voice of God — ' Set them to judge,' that they may ' rule with diligence/ and, ruling well, ' be counted worthy of double honour.' Well may Congregationalists, in view of these facts, declare with Dr Vaughan — ' The existence of such a practice in all the early Churches whose usage in this respect has become known to us, is a remarkable fact, and enough to justify suspicion as to the wisdom of our own prevalent usage.' Questions. 1. What opposing parties agree in rejecting the ruling elder ? 2. Wherein do the Gongregatioiialist and the Apostolic Churches diverge ? 3. Prove that riding elders who did not preach existed in N'ew Testament times. 220 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 4. What officers are suhstituted hy Congregationalists in the 'place of elders ? Prove this. 5. Name some eminent Independent ivriters ivho contend for the scriptural usage, and say what is the force of this. CHAPTER XIIL § 3. The Extent of Official Power. * With all authority.' Do the elders possess any more authority than the people ? Are they simply presidents to preserve order, having no more autho- rity than any member of the congregation 1 or, being the repre- sentatives of the people, are they alone entitled to administer the government 1 The latter alternative is established, if it is found that authority to rule is committed solely to the elders, and if the exercise of that authority is incompatible with rule by all the members in common. I. The Elders alone are Authorized to Pvule. The power committed to them is not absolute. They have no power to enact whatever laws they wish. The laws of Christ, the King, alone can bind the consciences and conduct of His subjects. The duty of the elders is rather to explain and enforce the execution of the laws of Christ : ' One is your blaster, even Christ, and all ye are brethren ' (Matt, xxiii. 8). They are com- manded to feed, and to take the oversight of the flock of God ; but ' not as being lords over God's heritage' (1 Pet. v. 2, 3). And this, as accountable to the Chief Shepherd, at His appearing in His kingdom. This delegated power is compared to that of a parent over his CONGEEGATIONALISM. 221 family. A bishop must be ' one who ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity ; for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the Church of God?' (1 Tim. iii. 4, 5). That power is not only persuasive, it is also strictly authoritative, guided by judgment and prudence. It would be absurd for a parent to wait for the opinions of his children, and merely to exercise what their wishes allowed. The reasoning of the apostle is only conclusive ii bishops are clothed with equal authority. Elders are overseers or bishops. They not only preside and advise, but authorita- tively direct (Acts xx. 28). Such a superintendence entitles them to prescribe acts of service and obedience without waiting for the opinion of the members. The word is used in the Sep- tuagint to denote the authoritative superintendence of military officers. They did not merely give advice, or wait for the con- sent of their soldiers. The very name elder or presbyter, given to the officers of the Church, shows that, as the ancient elder who judged Israel in the gates, so they are not to be destitute of power to rule. Thrice over are they described as rulers {riyiiMovzc) in one chapter (Heb. xiii. 7, 17, 24). Though originally signifying guides, almost uniformly in the New Testament the word is put for authoritative governors (Matt. x. 18 ; 1 Pet. ii. 14). Besides, a stronger term is employed to point out the elders as rulers, who are placed over Christians by the Holy Ghost (■Tr^o'/ffru/xivot) (Rom. xii. 8 ; 1 Thess. v. 12 ; 1 Tim. iii. 4, 5, and v. 17). This term is used for civil magistrates and governors, and also for the command which a Christian should have over himself. Most express are the injunctions laid upon the people to yield obedience. Not only are terms employed which signify both yielding to persuasion and submission to power [itsi&iGk, Heb. xiii. 1 7) ; others also are used which imply obedience with sub- missive respect (6t£/xw); and further, entire subjection (vTroraffmf 1 Cor. xvi. 16). As children to their parents, servants to their masters, subjects to civil governors, do not simply yield acqui- escence in their counsels, but subjection to their authority, so are Christians called to yield, not only to the advice, but .also to the authoritative regulation of the elders who are set over them in the Lord. 222 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 1. Eule Exercised in Admission. Admission, discipline, ordination — every act of government, as already noted — was performed by the elders without any con- joint act on the part of the people. In no case of baptism recorded was the consent of the people stated as a condition. The same authority by which the elders are commissioned to preach, entitles them to baptize disciples, and to show forth the Lord's death in the ordinance of the Supper. No meeting is called, no authority besought from Church members. The mini- sters, in admitting to sealing ordinances, act upon a higher authority. The profession of faith in Christ entitles, and then none may forbid that they should be added to the Church. 2. The Power of Discipline is intrusted solely to the elders. Christ spoke, not to Peter only, but to all the twelve, when He said — ' I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven' (Matt. xvi. 19). The same power was expressly bestowed upon all under similar figurative language after the resurrection : ' He breathed on them, and saith unto them. Receive ye the Holy Ghost j whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained' (John xx. 21, 23). As Mediator, Jesus commissioned them, by authority received from His Father. They were to go and act for Him in a public capacity. Power was necessary to carry out His purposes. Keys denote power. When Queen Victoria first visited Edinburgh, the Lord Provost presented her with the keys of the city. The Queen then returned tliem to his safe keeping. If that ceremony had a meaning, it was that Victoria possessed the right of supreme power, and that by her authority the local magistrate held the subordinate and delegated power to rule over the inhabitants of that city. Supreme power over the Church is inherent in the Lord Jesus Christ. The subordinate power was intrusted to the apostles to govern the Church visible. Binding and loosing are CONGREGATIONALISM. 223 as figurative expressions as that of the keys. To bind subjects is to deprive them of their privileges and liberty. To loose the cap- tives is to restore to them the enjoyment of liberty. When, then, the keys are used, or the government is exercised, the subjects of Zion are either deprived of or restored to their outward spi- ritual privileges. That liberty to which they are entitled is by the King put under the control of his officers. The conduct of the apostles shows that they did not understand this power literally as that of removing or retaining the guilt of sin in the consciences of men. Christ alone hath the key of David. He openeth, and no man shutteth. He shutteth, and no man open- eth. Power as to the spiritual destiny of souls belongs to Christ alone. On the day of Pentecost, at Caesarea, the keys were employed in the admission of converted Jews and Gentiles to Church privileges. At the assembly at Jerusalem, they were also used in loosing the consciences of Gentile Christians from cere- monial observances, and in binding upon them other necessary duties. In all such instances, officers of the Church alone are found considering, deciding, acting. All believers are living stones of Christ's spiritual temple. They are built upon the one foundation Eock, and become thenceforth His subjects. Not, however, on that account are they advanced to the position of stewards of the kingdom. If all were stewards, where would be the governed ? The direc- tions— ;* Tell the Church, hear the Church' — ' Whatsoever ye shall bind, &c,' have been found to mean — ' Tell the officers or elders of the Church, hear their decisions.' As, then, the power of discipline is bestowed upon Church officers only, and as the binding and loosing denote, not an extraordinary but an ordinary power, that authority was evidently committed to all succeeding elders of the Church. For every period and place where disci- pline is requisite for the glory of God and the good of souls, there the elders are empowered to exercise it authoritatively in the name of the Lord. Open sins are as scandalous now as in the apostolic age. They must be adjudicated upon as utterly inconsistent Avith the enjoy- ment of Church fellowship. Sentence must be pronounced, ac- cording to evidence produced, upon those requiring to be censured 224 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. or separated. So to declare who have given proof of repentance and reformation, and thus to deliver from the outward scandal of their sin, is by the authority of the King intrusted to officers of His own appointment. 3. The Act of Ordination belongs alone to the elders. This is practically granted by some Congregationalists. But when their ministers of sister Churches are brought to ordain a pastor, this is a practical renunciation of the principle that all congregations are thoroughly independent of each other. Then the particular pastor and Church are sub- jected to the ministers of different Churches in one of the most important acts of Church government. This action involves all others. If it is their prerogative to set the pastor apart to his work, it must also be to examine whether he be fit for that sphere. If no such examination precede, and the congregation in this matter have erred, then this action confirms that Church in its error. If they have a right to ordain, they must also have authority to call pastor and people to account, and, on cause shown, to dissolve the pastoral tie. This act, in reality, invests those ministers with the authority of a court of review. And in some cases, as in that of the late Rev. Mr Cranbrook of Edin- burgh, this has been practically carried out — the ministers of the district calling him to account, and pronouncing adversely upon his case. Having withdrawn their countenance from him, he resigned his charge, thus virtually acknowledging their authority. This inconsistency is a practical confession that the Independent theory is defective. A superior authority is allowed or assumed, without the actual safeguards of properly constituted courts of appeal and review. Others, however, altogether deny that the act of ordination is binding. ' Those who think it right to omit the custom of laying on of hands are liable to no censure. They act wisely in following the suggestions of conscience or the dictates of judg- ment.' In this counsel of Dr Campbell, a new rule — human suggestions and dictates — is put instead of the law of Christ. In scriptural practice a plurality of elders instructed the people in their choice, examined those selected, and by prayer, solemn CONGREGATIONALISM. 225 imposition of hands, and exhortation, set apart officers to the work to which they had been called. The members were allowed their full rights in choosing out men whom they judged appro- priate. But the admission and recognition, by this solemn act, belonged to and was exercised by the elders alone. This duty is still necessary, and must be discharged. The Church does not confer the office. The question to be decided is, Has this man been called of God ? Examination and the rules of the Word give the reply. * The same commit thou to faithful men, able to teach others also ; ' ' Lay hands suddenly on no man.' This laying on of hands is a first principle of the oracles of God. Like all the others mentioned in the same passage, this first principle must be important in every age (Heb. vi. 2). When Christ confers authority by the bestowal of gifts — when these are re- cognized by free election — when inner and outer qualifications are manifest to the elders, then effect must be given to the appointment of the Lord by this solemn act of ordination, induct- ing the chosen to his special office. These officers, thus inducted, are then the servants of the Church. But they are so, not as receiving appointment from the members as their masters. They are solely the servants of Christ. He from whom they have received authority is the only Master to whom they are responsible. They are the ser- vants of the Church, in the sense of conveying to them spiritual good — labouring continually for their benefit. Never is the trial, judgment, investment, or ordination of officers, found exer- cised by the people. The majority of the people are totally unfit to examine as to qualifications, and cannot ordain to office. Ordination, according to the New Testament, is the act of the presbytery — that is, of a Church court composed of presbyters. It is not a several power that may be employed by any one of these without the concurrence or co-operation of the others. It is a joint power. It can only be exercised in conjunction with the other associated presbyters. Ordination is not analogous to preaching, administration of sacraments, or other functions proper to individual ministers. Consequently, that act pertains, not to those members only who possess the office to which the person is to be ordained, but to every member of that court. P 226 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Owing to tlie consequences attached to ordination by some Cliurclies, and indistinct views in others, it is important to note particularly what the act implies. It is not a sort of spiritual generation of spiritual teachers — certain men bestowing upon others an office which they possess. It is not a sacrament by ■which special grace, or an indelible character, is conveyed or impressed upon the soul. This makes ordination and the minis- terial commission one and the same. As God alone, through His Spirit, imparts the ministerial commission, conveying the right to discharge its duties, com- municating the distinctive qualifications of the order, this act is only a solemn acknowledgment of the fact. Ordination recognizes him whom the Lord has sent as His minister, and that he is therefore entitled to teach and rule. Ordination does not communicate a divine w^arrant. The Church simply receives and seals the credentials bestowed by the King. Neither character, power, grace, or privilege are bestowed. Ordination is neither a charm nor a commission. It is the divinely appointed public recognition by the Church of rights already conferred by a higher power. As a right, comparatively, is w^orthless, unless recognized by others, it is of consequence to success in the ministry that the divine commission be publicly admitted. Consequently, (1.) The evidence of its possession must be inves- tigated ; and (2.) Judgment must be formally rendered. This is an act of government, belonging not to the people, but to the jurisdiction of associated presbyters. Ordination is the judicial decision, the formal rendering of judgment. Both parts of this work are by the Lord intrusted not to one, but to the body of presbyters. Most justly may it be declared that ' every other doctrine makes ordination the commission of the ministry, and that the mystical jargon about the transmission of authority, the communication of power, the delegation of office, is essentially prelatic' II. Rule by All in Common Impossible. Several admirable Independent authors have, with seeming inconsistency, allowed the authority of elders to rule. ' There is authority belonging to the pastor ; for office without authority CONGREGATIONALISM. 227 is a solecism. Inspired injunctions enjoin obedience and sub- mission of Christian Churches to their pastors' (James). 'The titles of ruler and president imply that the pastors or elders of a Church govern, rule, or exercise authority over it ; which is further evident, because the people are required to obey, to sub- mit themselves to them that have the rule' (Davidson). These admissions seem to imply acquiescence in the apostolic judg- ment, tliat authority to rule is committed solely to the elders. How it can still be contended that all members in common are entitled to exercise conjoint government with their elders, is in- comprehensible. Can the pastor or elder maintain his authority when the people also authoritatively rule ? Would such a plan work in any of our large mercantile establishments 1 Give to every one of the employed a conjoint authority : let not only the most experienced and trustworthy, but every one, to the workman admitted yesterday, have equal rule with the em- ployer : let him simply preside and preserve order at the meet- ings held for deliberation : let the conduct of the entire concern — admission, dismission, buying, selling, the varied operations, divisions of profit and loss, ^partnerships, dissolutions — let all be regulated by the conjoint voice of the work-people, even to the discharge of his duties by the head of the establishment ! Will any man possessed of ordinary common sense say that such a plan could possibly be. wrought without the greatest confusion, disadvantage, destruction ? Employers do take into their con- fidence some of the employed, but only some, and that merely for advice. Judgment is never intrusted to these in all matters. And those selected for this confidential advice are the trusted, wise, and able men of the establishment — men of years and ripe experience. Those thus possessing the confidence of their em- ployer, while not elected by the people, yet virtually represent their fellow-workmen in giving counsel, as do ruling elders in the Church. In the family, there must be authority in the parent or master. This is an absolute principle of nature, adopted and sanctified in the Church of Christ. Eulers of the Church must be accustomed to rule well, and have their own houses in subjection. So trained, they are, with like authority, here to act. Conjoint rule 228 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. in the family and in the Cliurch would be alike absurd, and in- volve disorganization. Congregationalists explain that 'the proper business of the pastor is to expound, apply, and execute the laws of Christ.' ' The law of Christ is to be pointed out ; and, with the con- current judgment and voice of the Church, is to be carried into execution.' Concurrent judgment and voice imply that every one is to be a judge. He must decide whether the law has been correctly laid down. He ought, then, to be qualified to vindi- cate his view of the law, as well as of the evidence — to state the conclusion and his reasons for giving it. But will it be asserted that every ordinary member of a Church is equally so qualified ? Then the pastor is to apply and execute. "When the people generally concur in his views, there will be no difHculty. If otherwise, his authority is at an end. Suppose they take a different view, both of the law and of the evidence, and come to another conclusion, how is the pastor now to apply and carry the law into execution? If each takes an independent view of the case as a hona fide judge, governor or ruler amongst them, there can be none. Where all these * governors ' agree con- jointly, the pastor is degraded to the position of a mere president or chairman. He is no longer their overseer ruling over them, in the Lord. To call him a ruler would be a perversion of lan- guage, for that relative term implies that some are the ruled. But how can he — the mere president — rule over conjoint governors ? It is government only in appearance, not in reality. Disagreeing, the matter is plainer. The m.ajority of governors virtually depose their so-called governor from all authority in the case. To avoid this difficulty — All real i^ower is actually withheld from these conjoint governors. ' All the proceedings at a Church meeting should either emanate directly from the pastor, or from others by his previous knowledge and consent.' * No member should presume to bring forward a candidate in opposition to the opinion of the pastor ' (James). ' In addition, the whole matter CONGREGATIONALISM. 229 of admission rests with himself ' (Campbell). The pastor is thus clothed with irresponsible power. To the deacons, also, very extraordinary powers are allowed. * When additions are made to office in Churches already organized, considerations of peace and prudence require that the nomination should lie with the existing officers, with the privity of the pastor. They are the fittest persons to select appropriate colleagues. They know the duty. They know the people. They know the talents, tempers, and, in some measure, the characters of the individuals. They know the men who will be likely to work in efficient harmony with the pastor, and with themselves. They will generally be able to anticipate the proper choice, and to fix on whom the people would fix ; while their more extended and accurate know- ledge will enable them occasionally to avoid fixing upon any whom the people might fix upon unwisely and unsafely ' (Camp- bell). Put all this into simple language, and the deacons are resolved into dictators. In name, the people have conjoint authority. The system being unworkable, they are left nothing but the name. Much greater freedom and security for their rights are be- stowed by the scriptural plan. That strips not the elder of his authority. It does not make him an irresponsible ruler. It does not reduce him to be a mere chairman that may be chosen or rejected. It nowhere restricts him to mere statement of busi- ness, exposition of the law, preservation of order, putting of questions, or execution of the will of others. He is not only to speak, exhort, and rebuke, but to rule with all authority, so that no man may despise his government. The end of good government is not simply to fulfil the will of the people. That will should only be accomplished when it accords with what is right. That will otherwise would prove intolerable despotism. A check is necessary. By the repre- sentation, that will is restrained within the limits of an autho- rity which must be respected. Kepresentation must not be confounded with democracy. ' We, the people, are not absent from the legislative halls because, for local reasons, we cannot be there, but because we ought not to be there as people, as a mass ; for the same reason that, in monarchies, the king is not 230 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. allowed to be present in the halls of justice, or as the legislators cannot debate in the presence of the monarch' (Dr Lieber's " Ethics "). The administration is not by the members generally or con- jointly with their pastor, but by chosen elders. They alone are to take heed to all the flock over the which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers ; and this all the more, because not only grievous wolves will enter in among them, but also of themselves men shall arise speaking perverse things to draw away disciples after them. Therefore they must watch. From all this the following conclusions are clearly warrantable : First, The elders alone pos-sess administrative judicial power. Secondly, Assemblies of elders exercise authoritative control over congregations, singly and unitedly, which they represent in the determination of questions of administration. Still — Thirdly^ The rights of the people must be fully guarded — (1.) In the election of their own church officers ; while (2.) In ques- tions radically affecting the constitution, or in important actions of the Church, opportunity for information, consultation must be given, and acquiescence should be secured ; as also (3.) By liberty of appeal and protest, so as to maintain the unity of the Sx^irit in the bond of peace. Because — Fourthly, The body of believers has been invested by Christ with full capacity for the promotion of its own welfare and ends, so that, in extraordinary emergencies, it is entitled to do anything, however ordinarily irregular, that may be necessary to secure these results. (See Brown's "Vindication," and Carson's " Eeply.") * Questions. 1. By what illustration is the authority of elders defined? 2. Mention some of the injunctions of Scrii^ture to elders and 3. Prove that elders, and not the people, admitted memhers into the felloivship of the Church. 4. Prove from the hestoival of the heys that elders are authorized to exercise discipline, and not the peopAe. PRELATIC EPISCOPACY. 231 5. Why contend that this luas not some extraordinary i^ower, hut that which is ordinary^ and for all time ? 6. Prove that elders and not the people ordained. 7. State the conflicting vieivs of Independents on this p)oint, and what these several courses prove. 8. Shoiu that ride by all is impossible, and give some admis- sions. 9. Hoio is all reed poiver ivithdraivn from Church members by this scheme ? 10. Hoiv, then J can the rights of the people be fully guarded ? CHAPTER XIV. GOVERNMENT CENTEALIZED — PEELATIC EPISCOPACY. ' Not as being lords over God's heritage.' The Question and the Threefold Ministry. Prelatic Episcopacy maintains the connection of its communities through an order of high rank and power. This system assumes the perpetuity of the apostleship as the governing power, and that the Church consists only of those who are subject to apostle-bishops. This is termed the High Church theory. An order of bishops, pos- sessed of lordly power, of which other ministers are declared to be destitute, is its chief peculiarity. Government is thus centralized in an ecclesiastical hierarchy of archbishops and bishops, who have priests, deans, deacons, and other ministers dependent thereon. In the case of England, the entire prelacy is placed under the authority of the reigning monarch, in whom the supremacy is vested. These prelates claim not only a lordly rank, but sole authority to rule. Presbyters, styled priests and deacons, are ordained by the bishops as ministers of the Word. They may preach and administer the sacraments, but have no power of jurisdiction, ordination, and confirmation. Presbyters who have not received this prelatic ordination are generally regarded by them as destitute of the authority of Christ. Without prelatic 252 THE GOVEKNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. bishops — in their estimation — there is ' no priest, no ordination, no consecration of the sacraments ; while no absolution, no rite or sacrament can be legitimately employed in order to eternity ' (Dr Taylor). There were in the Apostolic Church, say they, certain officers superior to ordinary ministers, who were intended to be perpetual. This class of officers still exists, and are alone em- powered to ordain ; and without their ordination there can be no valid ministry, no Christian ordinances, church, or covenanted mercy. To establish this position two things ought to be very clearly discovered in the Word of God — viz., First, That such an order actually existed ; and, secondly. That this order is essential con- tinually to the Church. But another question is frequently and dexterously substituted and discussed — viz., Whether there was any distinction of orders amongst church officers ? This is first of all paraded as the grand point of difference from other Churches. After plausibly supporting that assertion — evading the real ques- tion— an unwarrantable conclusion is proclaimed — viz., That prelatic or diocesan bishops are by divine right. A distinction amongst church officers cannot be the difference; for (1.) Presbyterian and other Churches observe such a distinc- tion. There are deacons, ruling elders, pastors, missionaries, teachers or doctors, although all are classed under the two orders of presbyters and deacons. Besides, the real question ap- pears from the fact that (2.) Presbyters in prelatic Churches are denied the power of jurisdiction, they being ruled over by their bishops. The prelatic or diocesan bishop is, they tell us, ' one having authority to govern many churches and clergy.' They alone have power, derived from divine institution, to set apart men to preach the Word, and to dispense the ordinances of God. * Others,' they declare, ' within the last three centuries have embraced the opinion, never before sanctioned, that presby- ters have that power.' The grand distinguishing question is this — Was there a dis- tinct PERMANENT ORDER, HIGHER IN RANK AND POWER THAN PRESBYTERS, HAVING SOLE AUTHORITY TO PERFORM ACTS ESSEN- TIAL TO THE PRESERVATION AND REGULATION OF THE ChURCH ? Or briefly — First, Have prelatic bishops the authoritative com- PRELATIC EPISCOPACY. 233 mission of the King of saints ? And secondlj, Is apostolical succession an essential reality 1 Peelatic Bishops — Have they the Commission of Cheist 1 The afiBrmative of this question is supported by three distinct lines of argument — viz., Scripture, antiquity, expediency. § 1. Suppoet IX Scripture. The only formal definition given by the Church of England in favour of prelacy is very ambiguous. In the preface to the Ordinal for Ordination, it is stated, that ' it is evident unto all men diligently reading Holy Scriptures and ancient authors, that from the apostles' time there have been these orders of ministers in Christ's Church — bishops, priests, and deacons.' This declaration is not that these orders existed in the apostles' times hut fro?n that time. The reason why such an ambiguous deliverance alone is given by that Church is, that the leading Beformers in England did not believe that prelacy was ordained of God. They took similar ground as in the defence of rites and ceremonies, that it implied nothing unlawful or sinful ; and that being established by the proper authorities in the Church and land, submission to it w^as a duty. The Articles of the Church of England do not put forth a claim for the divine right of prelacy; but the 36th says — 'The Book of Consecration of archbishops and bishops, and ordering of priests and deacons, doth contain all things necessary to such consecration and ordering ; neither hath it anything that of itself is superstitious and ungodly.' Those consecrated according to that book are therefore declared ' to be rightly, orderly, and lawfully consecrated and ordered.' In the 20th article it is de- clared, that ' The Church hath pow^r to decree rites and cere- monies, and authority in controversies of faith : and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written.' The first clause of this article is not found in the MS. Avhich was ratified by Parliament. It is an interpolation. This doctrine gives the loophole for error to 234 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. creep in. Scripture maintains that it is not only essential to have nothing contrary to the Word in operation in the Church, but that everything should be conformed to or expressly sanc- tioned by the Word. ' If they speak not according to this Word, it is because there is no light in them.' Notwithstanding these loose declarations, prelacy is held to be the only govern- ment of the Church that is divinely authorized. Prelatic appeals to Scripture are shifting as the sands of ocean. Sometimes the title of bishop is given in proof, quietly assum- ing that presbyters are priests, and that deacons are ministers of the AVord. Arrangements during our Lord's personal ministry — the apostles themselves, and James in particular, Timothy, Titus, the angels of the Churches, even angels above, and the Jewish hierarchy — are produced as evidence. Here let it be noted that 'prelacy' is a more proper word than * episcopacy' in this discussion. As lordly rank and power is claimed, 'prelacy' is adopted by those who do so as a suitable term. Episcopacy ought not to be yielded wholly to this system of ministerial castes. The meaning of the word is superintendence or oversight ; but this is the duty of every presbyter. The term (^I-igx.ctto;) 'bishop,' shows that this officer is the pastor or shepherd of the flock. Every case of spiritual oversight is there- fore an episcopacy. Presbyterial episcopacy is one thing ; pre- latic episcopacy another. It is with the latter — this lordship or overruling — that discussion must be held. It is, however, im- portant to observe, that what is termed the Low Church theory, contends merely for the threefold order of ministers, without altogether affirming that mode of organization to be essential. 1. Were New Testament Bishops Peelates? Prelatic Episcopalians reason thus : — ' There were bishops in the Apostolic Church, therefore there ought still to be (diocesan) bishops.' The thing to be proved is here taken for granted — viz., that these early bishops w^ere prelates, possessing exclusive and essential power of rule over churches and presbyters. It is asserted that ' these bishops from the first w^ere prelatical bishops, having presbyters under them ' (Dr Wordsworth). WEEE BISHOPS PEELATES ? 235 The Xew Testament disproves this assertion, showing that Bisliops and Presbyters were identical. These titles were given to the same officers, and the extent of their dioceses were their congregations. Oversight was over the particular flock. It was not of one bishop over many churches and ministers, although many presbyters were associated in the oversight of a flock composed of many congregations, {a) The presbyters of Ephesus were bishops. These elders were enjoined to take heed to all the flock over or in which they were, by the Holy Ghost's appointment, bishops or overseers. (6) The elders ordained by Titus were bishops. The presbyters of verse 5th, in Titus i. 5, 7, are the bishops of verse 7th, The office and character described identify the presbyter-bishop as the same individual. In Syriac, as Dr Owen testifies, the reading of the passages in Timothy and Titus is — ' Ordain elders for an elder;' ' the office of an elder ;' that in Philippians, 'elders and deacons/ When that translation w^as formed, evidently diocesan or prelatic bishops were unknown, (c) Peter also exhorts presbyters to exercise their office of bishops (1 Pet. v. 1, 2). {d) Bishops and deacons are distinguished from each other (Phil. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 1-8), as apostles and elders are also distinguished (Acts xv.) Nowhere in the New Testament are bishops and elders coupled and distinguished as separate classes of officers, {e) Five times the word ' bishop ' is employed. It always means oversight of the flock. Now, if the bishop had been a diocesan, why were there more than one in Philippi % Why is he never distinguished from the presbyter % Why is the highest jurisdiction awarded to the presbyter % Why is no such collocation found as bishop and presbyter and deacon % The matter may be referred to the decision of the ablest critics in the Church of England. These all acknowledge that the terms 'bishop' and 'presbyter' are used interchangeably, and that the office is one and the same. ' Those called elders or presbyters of the Church are also denominated overseers or bishops' (Dr Skinner). More decisively, Dr Onderdunk re- marks, that ' the name bishop, which now designates the highest 236 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KIXGDOM. grade of the ministry, is not appropriated to that office in Scripture.' Dr Wliately says — ' The plan pursued by the apostles seems to have been to establish a great number of small (in comparison with most modern Churches) distinct, and independent commu- nities, each governed by its own single bishop, consulting, no doubt, "with his own presbyters, and accustomed to act in con- currence with them.' Commenting on Paul's address to the Ephesian elders, Dean Alford says — ' This circumstance began very early to contradict the growing views of the apostolic institution, and the necessity of prelatical episcopacy. Thus Irenceus (ii. 14, 2) states that, in Miletus were convocated bishops and presbyters, who came from Ephesus and from the rest of the neighbouring places. Here we see — (1.) The two, bishops and presbyters, distinguished, as if hoth were sent for, in order that the titles might not seem to belong to the same persons; and (2.) Other neighbouring churches also brought in, in order that there might not seem to be bishops in one church only. That neither of these was the case, is clearly shown by the plain words of this verse (17); so early did interested and disingenuous interpretations begin to cloud the light which Scripture might have thrown on ecclesiastical questions. The English version has hardly dealt fairly in this case with the sacred text in rendering verse 28 gT/ffxoTouj, " over- seers;" whereas it ought there, as in all other places, to have been " bishops," that the fact of elders and bishops having been origi- nally and apostolically synonymous might be apparent to the ordinary English reader, w^hich now it is not.' Bishop Ellicot, another eminent Biblical critic, makes this statement — ' AVithout entering into any description of the origin of episcopacy generally, it seems proper to remark, that we must fairly acknowledge with Jerome that, in the pastoral epistles, the terms episcoioos and preshuteros are applied indifferently to the same person.' In his annotations on Phil. i. 1, he tells that the two titles (bishop and elder) are ' perfectly interchangeable.' Dr T. S. Bloomfield, a most distinguished scholar, says — *I have fully shown in the notes on Acts xi. 30, xx. 17, Phil. i. 1, that originally the terms episcopos, here rendered " bishop," and WERE BISHOPS PRELATES ? 237 presbuteros (the word in the original rendered " elder," in verses 1, 17, and 19 of the fifth chapter of this epistle, as well as in any other instance in w^hich it occurs) denoted the same ofEcers of the Church/ Dr Hind says — 'It is obvious that the terms bishop and presbyter w^ere applied to the same order. ... At the period of Paul's summons to the Church of Ephesus, no such order of prelates could have existed there, and, if not in so large and important a church, probably nowhere. The title (of bishop) cannot imply it, for it is one used for all the presbyters of Ephesus j and their number proves that he was not addressing bishops (that is, prelatical bishops), for they came from one church. Again, although the word elsewhere occurs in Paul's epistles, it cannot intend one chief governor of any church, be- cause his epistles are addressed to the churches as to assemblies in whom all authority is vested (" Early Progress of Christianity," vol. i. p. 347-350). It cannot, then, be wondered at, that ISTeander says — ' I can discover no other difference between the terms ' 'z-Pi(j[3vrspoi^ and ' s'TTiff-AOTToi ' (presbyters and bishops) in the apostolic age, than that the first signifies rank, the second the duties of the oSice.' ' Of how much more majesty ! ' exclaimed Lord Brooke, ' is the term presbyter, which signifies senior ; . . . whereas episcopos signifies nothing but an overseer.' The only difference is thus in favour of the greater dignity of presbyter. Eminent Biblical students, many of whom are prelatists, candidly own that, by the most diligent reading, they can find no such distinction as is alleged. That diocesan or prelatic bishops are the same as the bishops of the New Testament is, therefore, a most groundless assumption. If the office of prelatic bishop had been so essential that no blessing for eternal life could be had but through his instru- mentality, that office would certainly have been specified as dis- tinct and superior. But it is not found in any of the enumera- tions in the New Testament. ' Where the Spirit recounteth by name all the sorts of ministry, ordinary and extraordinary, of his own appointment (Eph. iv. 11), there is not one word of such a lordling ministry, which the Spirit would not have con- 238 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. cealed, but undoubtedly set tliem out witli all their titles and prerogatives, if there had been any such superior offices of His appointment and appro\ing. Is it a likely thing that God, who appointed the temple and the tabernacle, should be so punctual in every particular of His service under the law, and that He would conceal His more especial officers and their offices under the gospel ? Would He remember the bars of the ark, and pass by the pillars of His Church ? Would He appoint the least pious of the house, and forget the master-builders 1 Would He there mention the snuffers of the lights, and here pass by the great lights themselves ? Or would He there remember the besoms and ash-pans, and here not once mention bishops and arch- bishops 1 ' ' From the same place of the Ephesians, it will appear that such bishops and their dependencies are superfluous, therefore they should have no place in God's house. The conse- quence is clear, because there is a necessary use of everything that hath any use in God's house.' ' It is cleared thus : — Those officers, without which the Church of God is fully built u]3 and brought to complete perfection of unity, are not of any use in God's house ; but, without the function of lord bishops, arch- bishops, &c., the Church of God is brought to complete perfection of unity, witness Ej^h. iv. 11-13 ; 'therefore, lord bishops, arch- bishops, &c., are of no use in God's Church. ... It cannot be said of those bishops, as the Lord said of the ass, the Lord hath need of them' (" Zion's Plea*'). Prelatists maintain that ordination and confirmation alone can be legitimately conferred by a prelatic bishop. As confirmation is a rite destitute of the sanction of God's Word, and introduced to suit the genius and circumstances of prelacy, no further notice need be taken regarding it. Ordination is a divine ordinance, that may not be neglected wherever practicable. The adminis- tration of that ordinance is intrusted to a plurality of presbyters by scriptural warrant. Prelatists have no authority to ordain alone. In every case recorded of ordination, a plurality of elders is found engaged. There is but one exception — viz., The ordi- nation of the twelve by Christ Himself. If ordination by a diocesan bishop be essential, the ministry of Paul, of Apollos (Acts xviii. 27), of Timothy, and many others, WERE BISHOPS PRELATES ? 239 must be pronounced invalid. Examination of their commis- sion and work sliows tliat presbyters received, not only the rigbt to preach, but to discharge all other necessary duty, which includes ordination. Preaching is ever put as the highest function of the Church. Those invested with this, the highest authoritative duty, cannot be excluded from the lower. To abate the force of the presbyterial ordination of Timothy, prelatists allege (1.) That while the council of presbyters were present consenting, the act of ordination was by Paul alone. The two passages (1 Tim. iv. 14; 2 Tim. i. 6) are held to refer to the same thing. This cannot be, for — First, The different expres- sions point out distinct gifts. ' ISTeglect not the gift ' is most appropriate in relation to an office. An office cannot be stirred up, but heed may be taken not to neglect the duties which it implies. Secondly, The context points out the difference. In 1 Tim. iv. 14, the statement is given in connection with official acts. In the other passage personal and private character is the subject. This, therefore, refers to an endowment or grace. The laying on of hands was not only employed for ordination — it was used when imparting spiritual gifts. To do so required no con- sent of presbyters. But, thirdly. Supposing that these passages refer to the same thing, the presbyters had an equal share in the ordination. It has further been alleged, (2.) That Presbytery here (vpsfflSvTi^iov) denotes the office of presbyter, not the council of presbyters, and should read ' neglect not the gift of the presby- terate.' This assertion also is inadmissible. Any term must be interpreted according to analogy in other instances. This is an admitted rule. The word occurs in Luke xxii. 6Q, ' The presby- tery of the people ; ' in Acts xxii. 5, it is translated ' All the estate of the elders.' This place (1 Tim. iv. 14) is the only other occasion on which it is used. Kobinson states that it means ' an assembly of aged men, council of elders, senate, whence U?2gl. presbytery.' In the two former passages the word is given for the Jewish senate or Sanhedrim, as is explained in the first pas- sage (ffvvsdpiov). It must, therefore, have the same meaning when applied to the Christian Church. Presbytery thus designates the council and not the office of the presbyters. This prelatic sense 240 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. mars tlie natural construction. Even if granted, nothing would be gained. Timothy would, in that case, simply be a presbyter, not a prelatic bishop. This action of the presbytery is fully illustrated in the ordina- tion of Paul and Barnabas (Acts xiii. 1-4). Certain prophets and teachers were commanded by the Holy Ghost to separate these two men for the work to which the Spirit had called them. ' And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their hands on them, they sent them away.' By the associated presbyters (a) these two — one of them an apostle — were recognized and so- lemnly designated; {b) by imposition of hands and devotional services ; (c) and then only did they go forth to perform the duty imposed. Ordination by simple presbyters has thus the express .sanction of the Holy Spirit; and bishops having sole power of ordination are unknown to the New Testament Scriptures. 2. Did Cheist Appoint Ppjests undejr the Gospel ? This question, and those respecting ruling elders and deacons, are subordinate to the special subject controverted, but they must not be altogether passed by. Ruling elders are rejected by prelatic Episcopalians, but this defect has already been discussed under localized government. That presbyters are priests in the only proper sense is a gross misrepresentation. A priest is one whose office requires the offering of sacrifice, and of intercession founded upon that atone- ment. The one only Priest under the gospel is the Lord Jesus Christ. He is the High Priest of our profession. He offered Himself, and He ever liveth to make intercession. Only in a subsidiary sense is a Christian described as a priest. ' He hath made us kings and priests unto God and His Father.' The Christian is called to present himself unto God ' a living sacri- fice.' His life is to be a continual dedication for the service of God. Not his lips only ; all powers and means conferred are to be employed in praise of the God of his salvation. In that subsidiary sense every minister is a priest. He is a consecrated vessel set apart for the Master's use. He is an exponent of the living service of the Church, offering sacrifices of praise and WERE DEACONS MINISTERS? 241 prayer continually. Bat the minister is not * a priest,' as dis- tinguished from any Christian. It is a remarkable fact, that the term ' priest ' is never applied in the New Testament to minis- ters of the gospel. This shows that it should not be so employed, and that such a use might involve the most serious error. 'Priest' indicates a sacrificial character; the position and power of making atonement, and so of securing blessings through that means. Properly and constantly applied to the Levitical priest- hood, never either by Christ or His apostles is the name given to gospel ministers. In the Epistle to the Hebrews no analogy is jDointed out between that priesthood and gospel ministers. On the contrary, a striking and designed contrast is unfolded. The economy of the priesthood is removed, the institutions of Christ remain. This use of the term 'priest' as applied to presbyters by prelatists, is, therefore, wholly unauthorized and dangerous. It is dangerous to ministers, lest they usurp a power they do not possess. It is dangerous to souls if thereby they are led to trust in a refuge of lies ; and it is dangerous doctrinally, inasmuch as it imparts a sacrificial character to the ordinance of the Lord's Supper. 3. Weee Deacons Constituted Ministers op the Woed ? The word 'deacon,' as that of 'apostle,' is used in a general sense. It indicates any service for Christ. In its special meaning it is applied to a particular officer of the Church. Prelatists affirm that there have been not only bishops and priests but deacons, who are a third order of ministers of the Word. Has any such order been appointed by Christ for preaching, baptizing, and other ministerial duties 1 Deacons are mentioned as a distinct class of officers not only in the Church at Jerusalem, but also at Philippi (Phil. i. 1). They are spoken of further in the Epistle to Timothy (1 Tim. iii. 8-13), showing that they were to be appointed in every other organized Church. The origina- tion of the office, its nature, necessity, and manner of appoint- ment in the Church at Jerusalem is detailed at length for the guidance of all (Acts vi. 1-6). Other passages also seem to refer to the same office (Rom. xii. 6, 7, and 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11). Con- sequently, not only the character of suitable individuals, but the Q 242 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. nature and design of the office of deacon may be clearly ascer- tained. That design is put in exact contrast with the office of the ministry. It is not reasonable that the apostles should leave the Word of God and serve tables. Seven men were to be appointed to this business, but the apostles would give them- selves continually to prayer, and to the ministry of the Word. The qualifications described are those which are absolutely necessary for such a responsible office. Those who exercise it, as of the ability which God giveth, showing mercy while giving, thereby purchase to themselves a good degree. They will either be greatly honoured by the Church, or they will be all the better prepared to be intrusted, as Philip, with the care of souls, if called afterwards to the work of the ministry. This distinct office was therefore initiated both to meet a felt necessity, and to prove a sphere in which future ministers might be trained. But the office itself was not for ministering the Word. Even women might then be deaconesses, but women, according to apostolical authority, were commanded to be in silence, and were not suffered to teach in the Church. This prelatic position has been given up by many of them- selves. ' The office of deacons was not ministerial, or for the preaching of the Word, but for providing for the poor ' (Light- foot). ' It does not appear that they were appointed to the ministry of the Word, but rather the contrary may be inferred from verses 2d and 4th. They were not spiritual persons in the ecclesiastical sense of the term' (Riddle's " Antiquities"). * Can. it be imagined that an order instituted for the purpose of serving tables should, in the very infancy of its existence, have the office of the ministry committed to them?' (White). 'Whether this of deaconship be properly to be called an order or an office, I will not dispute, but certainly no spiritual order ; for their office was to serve tables, as the Scripture phrases it, which, in plain English, is nothing else but overseers of the poor, to distribute, justly and discreetly, the alms of the faithful, which the apostles would not trouble themselves withal, lest it should hinder them in the ministration of the Word and prayer' (Croft's "Naked Truth"). Some prelatists, however, deny that the institution mentioned in the Book of the Acts was the order of deacons. * That,' say they, "WERE DEACONS MINISTERS? 243 ' was simply for the management of the community of goods.' One of them, Stephen, addressed his ecclesiastical judges in a forcible speech; another, Philip, preached and baptized in Samaria, and on the way to Gaza. The first statement is a mere hypo- thesis, opposed by the fact that the office was instituted because of the neglect of widows in the daily ministrations, showing that the care of the destitute was the occasion of the office. The other statements, though plausible, are not conclusive. Stephen was full of the Holy Ghost before his appointment, and it is com- puted that it was fully two years before he made his public defence. If that defence proves that he was a minister of the "Word, he may have been meanwhile ordained, as other elders were, to that distinct office. Of this we are not informed. Even supposing he continued merely in the office of deacon, he was surely warranted to defend himself and the truth when that truth was denied, and himself accused of blasphemy by the Jewish Sanhedrim. Philip undoubtedly preached and baptized, bat he is expressly designated an evangelist (Acts viii. 5, xxi. 8). Two years also elapsed, and he was evidently advanced to this special office in the interval. Having used the office of a deacon well, he had purchased to himself this good degree. Besides, it was a time of persecution, when the Church was much dissolved, and when, in consequence, ' they that were scattered abroad went everywhere preaching the Word.' It is evident that, first. The special object for which deacons were appointed was the temporal concerns of the Church, or the serving of tables; and, secondly, That it is a permanent office. This appears from — (a) The solemnity of the appointment of the first deacons, with the particular record of it presented in Scripture ; (h) The identification of the office with the care of the poor, such deaconizing being always important ; (c) Also from the qualifi- cations pointed out — not aptness to teach, but consistency of character. Prelates may deem it expedient to hand over the proper duties of deacons to churchwardens, and institute this lower grade of ministers, who are eligible as chaplains, curates, or lecturers, though not to ecclesiastical promotion, for this gives greater scope to prelatic rule j but this is a ])erversion of scrip- tural statement and practice. (See Smyth on Presbytery.) 24i4< THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. The theory of Prelacy confessedly embraces these three orders of ministers. Each prop, tested by the Divine Word, shakes and falls. The house is built upon the sand. ' It cannot be brought hiU (out) that is not in the ben (within). But there was no such hierarchy, no such difference between a bishop and a presbyter, in the times of the apostles, and therefore it cannot hence be deduced, for I conceive it to be as clear as if it' weije written with a sunbeam, that presbyter and bishop are to the apostles one and the same thing ' (Alex. Henderson). This finding is in effect acknowledged by the Eev. E. B. Lit- ton, even while arguing for Prelatic Episcopacy. 'Appointments,' he says, ' which are so distinctly stated in Scripture to have proceeded from the apostles as to need no confirmation of testi- mony from other quarters, must be considered as more necessary to the Church than those which require extra-scriptural evidence to establish their claims. On this ground it should seem that presbyters and deacons — if a comparison is to be instituted be- tween the three orders — are more essential to the Church than bishops, inasmuch as Scripture records the apostolic institution of the former more distinctly than it does of the latter' ("Church of Christ,'' p. 433). Questions. 1. Give the High Church theory^ along with the Low Church view. 2. Distinguish hetiveen prelatic h{sho2os and iJreshjters. 3. What conseqiiences are supposed tofolloiu the loss of prelatic bishops ? 4. State the argument frequently substituted^ and show that it is beside the question, 5. Mention the proper subject to be discussed. 6. What are the three lines of argument employed in supptort of Prelacy ? 7. State tlve only definition presented by the Church of England, and its ambiguity. 8. Mention another loose affirmation in tlie Thirty-nine Articles^ DID CHEIST APPOINT PEELATES ? 245 9. Why should the ivord 'prelacy ' he used rather than ' epis- copacy ? ' 10. What assitmption is usually made regarding bishops, and how is it disjjelled ? 1 1 . Give Scripture proof that bishops and presbyters were equal. 12. Mention the names of distinguished critics ivho achioiuledge this. 13. Why is confirmation disregarded? Say also who are authorized to ordain. 14. Refute the allegations employed regarding Timothxjs ordi- nation. 15. Prove that the term 'priesf is inadmissible under the gospel. 16. What p>roof is there that deacons were not ministers of the Word ? 17. Mention the admission of a recent advocate of prelacy. CHAPTER XV. DID CHRIST APPOINT PEELATIC BISHOPS % ' One is your Master, even Cbriat ; and all ye are brethren.' Arrangemexts made by our Lord during His personal minis- try are brought forward as another prop to sustain Prelatic Episcopacy. At that time, it is said, there were three orders — the seventy disciples were subject to the twelve apostles, and both were subject to Christ Himself. Thus Christ is reckoned as one order of ministry ; the apostles and the seventy distinct orders nnder Him. This is so far plausible, were it only con- sistent with fact. Had the Twelve Authority over the Seventy ? They were appointed, both of them, during the transitionr- period, when the kingdom of heaven was at hand. Their com- mission being applicable solely to that time, there can be little 246 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. here for an example to future ages. Some difference may pos- sibly be discerned in the persons to whom they were severally sent — the twelve to the lost sheep of the house of Israel — the seventy to every city and place whither Christ Himself would come. But is there any foundation for the theory that the one party had authority over the other? Nay. Christ did not found particular orders of ministry in sending forth either the twelve or the seventy ; for, first, the New Testament Church was not established till the w^ork of redemption had been com- pleted. Till then, our Lord and His disciples conformed to the Jewish economy. These companies were employed merely as ministering disciples, to execute special and temporary commis- sions. There is no evidence that w^hen sent forth they were organized as separate and perpetual officers. The seventy are not heard of after they performed the specified duty. The twelve continued, being chosen witnesses in order to be trained as His apostles or extraordinary ambassadors. They were, so to speak, only at college. Not till after the resurrection were they fully commissioned. No doubt Christ named them apostles (Luke vi. 13.) As He did not then bestow upon them that full com- mission to go into all the world, this must have been in a non- official sense. The twelve were not only His learners, scholars, but also messengers in course of training. His ' twelve disciples * He called together. On these * twelve disciples ' He bestowed miraculous endowments. These ' twelve disciples ' He sent forth two by two (Matt, x.) Secondly^ Nothing in their commission showed that they were appointed as an order of prelates, or that they had power over the seventy. Their sole duty was to preach that men should repent, and that the kingdom of heaven was at hand, presenting miraculous attestations of the fact. That performed, the work w^as finished for which they were sent forth : ' They returned and told Jesus all that they had done' (Luke ix. 10). To prepare for the transactions of Jerusalem, our Lord sent them forth, that the eyes of all might be directed to Himself as the angel or messenger of the covenant. Moved with compassion, because the harvest was great and the labourers so few, He commissioned other seventy for the same purpose. DID CHRIST APPOINT PRELATES ? 247 The seventy differed in no respect from tlie twelve. (1.) They had the same designation, disciples ; ' other seventy also.' ' Sent forth the seventy ' might even be translated ' made seventy apostles.' (2.) They had the same appointment — that of the Lord Himself. The seventy were not ordained by the twelve. (3.) They differed not in their duties. These were, to precede the Messiah, to preach and work miracles. The nature, end, and object of their commission were alike in each case. Was Chpjst a Separate Ministerial Order 1 Suppose it were as asserted, and that in these two companies of ministers two distinct orders have been found, where is the third rank that is to complete the hierarchy 1 Christ, say they, presided over both. Christ, according to this view, was the j&rst prelate. Surely this is a rash assertion. Is it then to be under- stood that ' the Apostle and High Priest' of our profession can have successors or partners in His great work? Nay; He is * after the order of Melchisedec' He neither succeeded, nor can be succeeded by any in His mediatorial office. Carry out this prelatic suggestion, and centralized government is perfected in the Papacy, for it were incongruous to suppose His single order divided into twelve. But this is at the expense of the dethrone- ment of Him who is above every name that is named. It has been well said, that this whole theory is a fiction so absurd that it might excite laughter, if it were not so monstrously profane that indignation rather must predominate in the consideration of it. In this case, at least, boldness of assertion is in exact pro- portion to the weakness of the proof by which it is attempted to sustain it. The entire authority vested in the ministry is contained in the final commission of Christ. That is the comjDlete and permanent charter. Whatever power is claimed that is not found in this charter must be null and void. After the Lord had declared the plenitude of His own power as the reward of His work, He gave a summary of the laws of His Church for the guidance of His servants (Matt, xxviii. 19). First, The Church is to be increased. Go ye, teach, or make disciples of all nations. Se- 248 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. condly, Admit these to Christian fellowship, baptizing them, &c. Thirdly, Discipline them — teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you. And then to these direc- tions He added the grand encouragement to perseverance. * Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world.' The power of administering His laws by instruction, ordinances, and government, as the platform of His Church, was here conferred. Now, if there be superior and inferior orders of the ministry by the special appointment of Christ, why are no such dis- tinctions here laid down 1 ' Were an earthly king to issue a commission for the appointment of officers in perpetuity, and for the discharge of specific duties, and were a portion of these officers in after ages to combine, by their own enactment, to invest themselves as their peculiar prerogative with some presi- dential authority, would not the other officers justly require the production of the original charter, that, by its very wording, their claims might be either invalidated or confirmed ? ' Where, then, is the mention in this charter of an order of prelates or diocesan bishops 1 On the contrary, this commission addresses itself to all equally, who, by the inner and outer calls of the Spirit and the bride, are sent forth with the message of salva- tion. Was this commission not given to ordinary pastors 1 As they are commissioned to preach, so they are commissioned to baptize ; as they are authorized to baptize, so are they authorized to teach what is commanded — that is, by the Word and govern- ment to train the initiated disciples in obedience to the laws of the kingdom. ' 'No constitutional principle can be modified except by the party that ordained it.' Now, as no fuller or more authoritative commission was issued by Christ, and as the Acts of the Apostles is a commentary upon this commission, and as in neither of these documents is there any trace of prelatical bishops, they must be accounted destitute of the authoritative commission of the King. Instead of instituting prelacy or lordship amongst His minis- tering servants, that was singled out by our Lord for special rebuke. The sons of Zebedee evidently desired pre-eminence above their brethren. When this was sought, it was not only denied to them, but excluded from the Idngdom. In reply, WERE THE APOSTLES PRELATES ? 249 Christ allowed that in civil affairs there may be princes with subordination of oflScers, but that it must be otherwise in this spiritual kingdom. ' It shall not be so among you.' You are all of one order ; you have all equal authority. ' "Whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant.' This He enforced on another occasion, declaring — ' One is your ]Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren ' (Matt. xx. 20-28, xxiii. 8-12). It was not merely tyrannical rule which Christ thus condemned. That mother did not desire such a power for her sons, and Christ did not represent all the princes of earth as guilty of tyranny. It was the ordinary exercise of lordship to which Christ pointed, and which He expressly excluded. The after conduct of His disciples, and their reiteration of this in- junction (1 Pet. V. 3) is proof sufficient that they accepted this definite law of the Kins:. o* Questions. 1. What theory is advanced regarding the twelve and the seventy ? 2. Show that the twelve had no authority over the seventy. 3. What is to he said of the assertion that Christ ivas a separate order ? 4. Prove from the commission given hy Christ that no p^^elatic order was appointed hy Him. 5. State Christ's laio regarding Prelacy, and prove that not only tyranny^ hut lordship was expressly excluded. CHAPTER XVI. WERE THE APOSTLES DIOCESAN BISHOPS 1 * Ye shall be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.' Another plausible assertion is, that the apostles acted as dio- cesan prelates, having presbyters and deacons under them ; that. 250 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. on their decease, tlie office was transmitted to successors ; and that the term ' bishop ' was then appropriated to this the highest officer. In regard to this argument, it is noticeable that, while the apostles frequently call themselves presbyters, they nowhere appropriate the title of 'bishops.' Apart from the title, let us examine whether this highest grade be found, as asserted, * in those called apostles.' Were they confined to a particular diocese or district as their one peculiar field of labour 1 and had they, in this respect, successors with the title, rank, and power of modern bishops ? On the contrary, the apostles had a universal commission. They were confined to no locality in particular. As apostles they could have no successors; and there is not the slightest evidence that any such superior officers were appointed to suc- ceed them. The idea is contrary to the very nature and design of the apostolate. They could not act as the fixed officers or prelates of a particular sphere. Their commission was universal. They were to go into all the world, to all nations, to every crea- ture. Bearing that universal office, they taught, counselled, decided, admonished, reproved ; but nowhere are they beheld ruling with the limited official power of a diocesan bishop. Leaving the purpose for which they were appointed, the apostles disappeared. Suppose the assertion true. The apostles were diocesan bishops. Then during their lives there could be no others. Thus, by one blow, many prelatical arguments are destroyed. Poor Timothy and Titus, and ye most miserable stars ! Alas ! by this localization of the apostles your prelatic honours are removed almost before they are conferred. Why, then, you are but poor presbyters after all ! One of the last acts of the apostles was to intrust the entire episcopate into the hands, not of prelates, but of presbyters. Why ! how is this 1 Has Paul, has Peter, has John, each one alike, forgotten or overlooked the bishop 1 Yes, the prelatic, for he was non-existent ; but not the presbyter-bishop, who was actually in office. WEEE THE APOSTLES PEELATES ? 251 Was James Diocesan Bishop of Jeeusalem 1 When it is demanded wliere were the apostles severally located 1 this is the only partial reply. James was bishop of Jerusalem, Timothy of Ephesus. These and some others are typical of what generally prevailed. ' We have the fullest reason to be- lieve,' says Dr Wordsworth, ' that James was acting in Jerusalem as its bishop till his martyrdom, a.d. 67.' He admits, however, that there is 'no account of his consecration or appointment to the episcopate ' in existence. Every one will allow that James was a bishop, in the apostolic sense of the term. Was he, how- ever, a prelatic bishop, with the special diocese of Jerusalem allotted to him 1 That office implies a fixed charge, and its constant oversight, natural and spiritual. The first part of the proof is confessedly awanting — viz., his appointment to such a charge. On what grounds, then, can his prelatic episcopate be maintained 1 The conclusion is drawn from a few particulars : — Peter requested an account of his release to be given to James : therefore James was bishop of Jerusalem. Paul and his friends went to the house of James : therefore James was bishop of Jerusalem. James spoke last at the assembly or council at Jerusalem, and his opinion was acquiesced in : therefore James was bishop of that city. A most conclusive argument, is it not ? Apply it to any other person, and its force appears. A message is delivered from a persecuted brother, say to Dr Alexander of Edinburgh. Several brethren of note, on arriving in town, proceed to his house. Again, Dr Alexander is the last speaker upon a special case brought before an assembly or con- ference of presbyters, and his suggestion is adopted as the general finding : therefore Dr Alexander is the diocesan or prelatic bishop of the city of Edinburgh — that is to say, that gentleman has the sole power of supervision, ordination, con- firnMition, and rules over all the churches and ministers in the city of Edinburgh. Further, there is no legitimate ministry, Church, or covenanted mercy to be found, unless by submission to his position of rank and power ! Is it not contemptible that men of common judgment can profess to be satisfied with such childish prattle 1 Argument there is none. The whole matter 252 THE GOVEEITMENT OP THE KINGDOM. is calmly assumed, and tlien rational men are denounced for refusing as coolly to assent to the monstrous assumption. It may be asked whether the apostle James was not put to death before the council at Jerusalem 1 (Acts xii. 2). If not, nothing is gained here by prelacy. James was the diocesan bishop of Jerusalem. How does this accord with facts ? Why was the contribution for the poor brethren in time of dearth forwarded, not to this diocesan, but to the presbyters 1 Why were the deputies from Antioch sent not to this local prelate, but to the apostles and elders? and why were no bishops mentioned in that assembly ? Why was not the Epistle to the Hebrews addressed to this bishop ? Why does the apostle therein speak of elders only as the proper rulers of the Churches of Judea ? Why exhort the Hebrew Christians to give all respect and obedience to them, and not to this prelate 1 If this James were the apostle of that name, did he resign the apostleship 1 The two offices were incompatible. As an apostle, he dared not continually restrict himself to one locality. As a diocesan, he must. When, then ? Was the one office given up, and the other adopted ? James resided more at Jeru- salem than the other apostles, and may have exercised an apos- tolic supervision over the Churches of Judea, as Paul at Antioch and elsewhere ; but there is no proof that he exercised simply the functions of a diocesan bishop. Besides, there is full proof that the Church of Jerusalem was under presbyterial govern- ment. Some prelatists have admitted that the apostles governed that Church for twelve years as a presbytery, in conjunction with the elders. Amongst the apostles there was common concert. The assertion that the apostles were diocesan bishops is con- trary to fact. Their diocese was the world to the uttermost parts. Their division of labour was not subject to their own arbitrary decision or other circumstances. All was arranged as the Spirit and providence of God indicated. Paul was recog- nized as the apostle of the Gentiles ; Peter, of the circumcision. Notwithstanding, Paul writes by inspiration of the Spirit to the Hebrews, and -Peter labours amongst the Gentiles. The sup- position of settled dioceses is contrary to the express design WAS TIMOTHY A PRELATE ? 253 and practice of the apostles. This prop also fails the pre- lacy. (See Jus Div. Keginiini Ecc. Lon. 1616, and Smec- tymnuus.) Questions. 1. What is asserted regarding the apostles ? 2. Row is this view disproved ? 3. If alloioedj what consequences would folloiv ? 4. Mention some instances adduced. 5. What is the nature of the evidence brought forward to show that James was bishop of Jerusalem f 6. Mention some facts that overthrow such a supposition. CHAPTER XVII. WERE TIMOTHY AND TITUS APOSTLE-BISHOPS ? ' Do the work of an evangelist.' The qualifications of an apostle are not found either in Timothy or Titus, although they were partakers of extraordinary gifts. Still, it is asserted, that they occupied an apostolical position. Timothy, it is said, was apostle-bishop of Ephesus ; Titus, of Crete. Some would even make Timothy archbishop of Asia Minor. Was Timothy Peelatic Bishop of Ephesus 1 Undoubtedly, it is replied ; for Paul wrote thus to Timothy, * I besought thee to abide still at Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some that they teach no other doctrine' (1 Tim. i. 3). Three reasons, amongst others, may be given why this asser- tion is not only doubted but disproved : — 1. The Ephesians had other bisho2:)s. These were presbyter- overseers, appointed by undoubted authority (Acts xx.) Why were these inferior bishops intrusted with the highest charge ? Did Paul forget himself in calling the elders bishops? And why did he give no directions how they were to conduct themselves 254 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM towards their diocesan 1 Where was Bishop Timothy then ? If absent, w^hy no hint of his return ? If yet to be installed, why this charge referring to the future without one word as to the essential officer ? ' Tychicus have I sent to Ephesus.' What ' Where was Timothy ? Was Tychicus another prelate of that See ? Manifestly Timothy was not diocesan bishop of Ephesus. Many titles are given him, but never this title of bishop. 2. Jf any one, ivas not Paul diocesan bishop of Epliesus7 'By the space of three years,' said he, ' I ceased not to warn every- one.' Why is Paul rejected and Timothy installed, after such long, anxious, and successful labours ? Or, were Paul and Timothy coadjutor-bishops? Nay ! 3. Timothy was sent thither as an evangelist. Having work elsewhere, he was besought to abide for the discharge of im- portant duties in the absence of and on the behalf of Paul. Otherwise, why beseech the bishop to remain ? Was he not bound to remain 1 He might more readily be besought to go elsewhere, if his prelatic services were absolutely essential. If not, to leave would be neglect of duty. Long after his supposed instalment, Paul exhorts him — ' Do the work of an evangelist ' (2 Tim. iv. 5). Again, after these Epistles to Timothy were written, Paul, a prisoner at Kome, about the year 61, wrote to the Ephesian Church. Why is it addressed, not to the bishop, but to the saints and faithful brethren 1 and why is there no mention of Timothy ? Why no instructions there to submit to his sole jurisdiction ? Surely this was needful, seeing he must have been absent when Paul gave his solemn charge to the elders of that Church. Was it not unfriendly, if not insulting, that Paul should thus interfere with his diocese, and not so much as notice his existence as diocesan 1 There is only one supposition that can render this conduct of Paul reasonable — viz., that Timothy was an extraordinary officer, and occupied no such pre- latic position. Timothy acted everywhere as commissioned by and under the immediate direction of an apostle. Ordained by presbyters, Timothy could only possess the rank of a presbyter. As justly might he be termed diocesan bisho|) of Corinth or of Thessalonica as of Ephesus. For a time the superintendence of these churches was committed to him. Was Timothy, on that WAS TITUS A PKELATE ? 2-35 account, bishop of all the three 1 When Paul wrote the first Epistle to the Corinthians, a.d. 67, from Ephesus, Timothy was absent on a mission to Macedonia and Achaia, and was then ex- pected at Corinth (1 Cor. xvi. 10). The year following, Paul wrote the second Epistle to the Corinthians from Macedonia. Timothy was then with the apostle, and Titus was one of the bearers of the epistle. Afterwards, when Paul at Corinth wrote the Epistle to the Piomans, Timothy was with him there. When the Epistles to the Thessalonians were written, Timothy was with Paul at Corinth. This typical instance of an apostle-bishop has also met with a decided negative from candid prelatists. ' It is most like that Timothy had the place and calling of an evangelist, whose office was to second the apostles in their ministry, and to water that which the apostles had planted ' (Willet). ' Many things prove that the office of Timothy was not fixed, but itinerary,' as ' his work as an evangelist ' (Dodwell). ' The same Philip was called an evangelist ; so was Timothy. Such was Titus, Silas, and many others ' (Bridges). Was Titus Phelatic Bishop op Crete 1 Most certainly, is the reply. Paul wrote thus to him — ' For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee ' (Tit. i. 5). Alas ! that word left. What more unfortunate word could be employed to prove a diocesan bishop 1 If the entire rule had already been allocated to Titus, why should he be left 1 That one little word shows that no such instalment had taken place. The only meaning is, that he was left for a season. Titus, by the appointment of Paul, was left at the island ' for this cause ' — to perform a particular piece of duty which was prescribed to him. Then, having performed it, Titus is enjoined to come to Paul to Nicopolis and elsewhere. Titus travelled too much to be a diocesan. The selection is very unfortunate. He went from Syria to Jerusalem (Gal. ii. 1), to Antioch again, to Syria and Cilicia, to Corinth, to Macedonia, to Crete and to Dalmatia. It is 2dQ the government of the kingdom. uncertain whether he ever returned to Crete. How then could he be diocesan prelate of that island 1 As Paul's assistant he was left to complete the organization of the Church, ordaining elders in every city. It has been too hastily assumed by prelatists that Titus per- formed this duty without the co-operation of others. In every other case recorded, ordination was by a plurality of elders. This epistle indicates that Zenas and Apollos were present with Titus. ' Bring Zenas the lawyer, and Apollos, on their journey diligently ' (Tit. iii. 1 3). That Titus was alone is a mere assump- tion. But if alone, the extraordinary circumstances of that period could not furnish an example for ordinary times. Paul was the master issuing his commands. Timothy and Titus were the servants rendering obedience. ' These things I write unto thee, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave thyself in the house of God.' 'Do thy diligence to come unto me.' ' Take Mark, and bring him with thee ' (1 Tim. iii. 15 j 2 Tim. iv. 9, 11). * Speak thou the things which become sound doctrine, showing thyself a pattern ' (Tit. ii. 1, 7). 'Put them in mind to be subject, to obey, to be ready to every good work, to speak evil of no man. When I shall send Artemas unto thee or Tychicus, be diligent to come unto him to Nicopolis' (iii. 1, 12). Remove from Timothy and Titus their subordination to and attendance upon the apostle in his work, and their office vanishes. They go forth and perform duties as they are directed. They rejoin him at his command, sharing in all his duties, privileges, and trials. When these instruc- tions were issued the foundations of the Church were being laid. It was only in the course of formation ; and these extraordinary officers were necessary until churches were fully constituted. So extraordinary superintendents were employed to plant and water in certain districts, until the Reformation in Scotland was fully established. Then, as a distinct office, they ceased to exist. The same thing must to some extent be carried out wherever Chris- tianity begins to take root. The postscripts to the epistles which give countenance to the prelatic theory, are mere interpolations, added centuries after these epistles were written. Let this be noted. They form no WAS TITUS A PEELATE ? 257 part of tlie sacred canon of Scripture. In the oldest versions they are not to be found. Dr Whitby expressly declares, in regard to the great contro- versy whether Timothy and Titus were indeed bishops, the one of Ephesus and the other of Crete, ' I can find nothing of that matter in any writer of the first three centuries, nor any intimation that they bore that name. . . . There is no satisfactory evidence of Timothy having resided longer at E^Dhesus than was necessary to execute a special and temporary mission to that Church' (Pref. to * Com. on Titus '). When the Eoman Commonwealth was in danger a dictator was appointed for six months with ab- solute powers, the only limitation being that he was to take care to preserve the Republic. That fact did not prove that the dicta- torship was a standing office. No more will the extraordinary duties of Timothy and Titus prove that their office was perpetual. All that the example warrants is that extraordinary circumstances should be met by extraordinary officers. The elders of Ephesus and of Crete were bishops, and so soon as ordained had authority to perform all the duties belonging to the office. Dr Whitby proves that the other was temporary. * As for Titus, he was only left at Crete to ordain elders in every city,', &c. Having, there- fore, done that work, he had done all that was assigned him in that station ] and therefore St Paul sends for him the very next year to Nicopolis (Tit. iii. 12).' Epaphroditus is also claimed as a prelate, because the term ' apostle,' in the unofficial sense of messenger, is applied to him, when he carried money from the Church at Philippi to Paul, who was in bonds (Phil. ii. 25, and iv. 18). This was the only errand on which Epaphroditus was sent. Did this constitute him an apostle in the peculiar sense of the term 1 and if so, will that constitute him a diocesan bishop ? The translators of the English version of the Bible, though prelatists, could not endorse such fallacious reasoning ; therefore they term Epaphroditus a messenger. This claim is a castle in the air. 258 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Questions. 1. Give the assertion made regarcVmg Timothy. 2. What circumstance in the history of the Ephesian Church disproves this 2 3. Who might more justly he held to have been bishop of Ep)hesus ? 4. Shoiu that Timothy was sent as an evangelist, and mention some who admit this. 5. What short method may be talcen in the matter about Titus ? 6. Who ivere with Titus in Crete ? 7. Give some statements showing that Timothy and Titus were under orders. 8. Why were such extraordinary officers employed ? 9. Are not the postscripts reliable evidence ? 10. What eminent tvriter repudiates the theory? 11. What is to he said as to E2:)aphroditus ? CHAPTER XVIII. THE ANGELIC AND OTHER THEORIES. ' Another angel, having the everlasting gospel to preach.' Were the Angels of the Seven Churches Diocesan Bishops ? The epistles to the seven Chnrclies in Asia Minor were addressed to the angels of these Churches. These angels, j^relatists assert, ■were diocesan prelates. This is not so plausible a theory as some others, and it becomes less evident the more carefully it is examined. The meaning of the word ' angel ' is the only basis on which the argument for Prelacy rests. Is, then, a mystical term sufficient foundation on which to rest the divine authority of an essential order of ministers 1 No book of Scripture is more difficult of interpretation. The THE ANGELS OF THE SEVEN CHURCHES. 259 Apocalypse or Revelation is throughout symbolical. It is not possible that its metaphors should be as easily understood as the distinct utterances of other parts of the Bible. Is it, then, the part of reason to apply these difficult metaphors for the explana- tion of that explicit language 1 Can the mystical word ' angel ' throw light upon the simple term 'bishop?' Would it not rather be reasonable to apply explicit terms to explain what is highly figurative 1 In all the narratives and doctrinal statements of the New Testament no trace of a prelatic bishop appears. Notwithstanding, say prelatists, it must be found in Scripture, seeing that Prelacy has been for a long period found in the Church. Ere the field of New Testament Scripture be forsaken, let us take a last look at the Apocalypse. Ah ! there it is, sure enough. There in these angels all men may evidently recognize diocesan bishops. Many distinguished commentators have had considerable diffi- culty in explaining this metaphor. Various interpretations have been given, as — guardian-angels of the Church, a collective body, a well-known individual. Christ Himself gives an explanation, but still in sjTiibolic language : ' The seven stars are the angels of the seven Churches.' It is not said the seven stars are the * seven angels,' but indefinitely 'angels.' In addition, John shows the position of these angels or stars. They are held in the right hand of the Son of ^lan. They have a relation to the several Churches ; and yet they are so easily separated from these, as to be associated together without inconvenience to these Churches. These declarations, along with the meaning of the term, consti- tute the key. Angel ("TpKbD ayysXog) signifies a messenger. Star, in prophetic language, means a ruler. Christ was called the Angel or Messenger of the covenant (Mai. iv. 1) as one of His peculiar titles of office. The spies in the wilderness are called angels or messengers (Heb. xi. 31 ; James ii. 5). The metaphor evidently speaks of a messenger who is a ruler in the Church. Nay, say prelatists, diocesan bishop must be meant, as each epistle is addressed to the angel. Unfortunately, this short method is not so evident to all men, ' stars giving light' applying more fully to presbyters than to modern bishops. Two modes of. solution may therefore be noticed. 2G0 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 1. A comioany of men. Thus tlie angel of tlie Cliiircli in Smyrna is addressed in the plural : ' The devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye maybe tried, and ye shall have tribu- lation ten days' (Rev. ii. 10). So in other instances. To employ the singular for the plural was common among the Jews. Jewish mothers are represented as ' Rachel weeping for her children.' The indefinite use of the word ' angel ' shows that it is not to be restricted singularly. If the one candlestick represented all the congregations in the city of Ephesus, the star or angel may well represent all the ministers collectively. The angel may here be the symbol of a human ministry, who, though spoken of as one, are very numerous ; for the term ' angel ' is so used in this same Book of Revelation : * I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach to them that dwell on the earth' (Rev. xiv. 6). By 'heaven' there is meant the Church on earth ; and ' angel ' must mean the multitude of those who are commissioned to carry glad tidings to every crea- ture. Ought not this certain use of the term, therefore, to be used as explanatory in the epistles also 1 2. One representative man. Some regard the term as appli- cable to the moderator or president, the secretary or clerk, of the presbytery — the analogy being taken from the presiding officer of the synagogue. Others hold that ' angel' applies to the messengers of the several Churches. Let it be remembered that the Apostle John was then a prisoner in the Isle of Patmos for the testimony of Jesus. Regarded with great veneration, as the last of the apostles, and possessing the special friendship of the Lord, inti- mate communion must have been maintained between him and these Churches. Frequent m^essengers would be despatched, not only to convey information and sympathy to him, but to receive his instructions and advice. Under bitter persecution, no mere carrier of an epistle would suffice. Only one of the highest wisdom, reputation, and energy would be selected. Much w^as to be said and heard that could not be written. The messengers must be persons well known to John, and who were esteemed capable of properly representing the Churches in these important interviews. This explanation is suitable to all the circumstances of the case, while it conforms to the meaning of the terms THE AKGELS OF THE SEVEN CHUECHES, 261 'angel' and 'star/ and to tlie position -u'liicli these officers occujiied ■ both in rehation to Christ and to each particular church. The circumstances demanded an elder worthy of double honour for this position. But here the conditions are fulfilled. No higher rank is necessary. The presbyter of influence and esteem selected for the dangerous and important position was the proper channel. He is, therefore, addressed as the medium of communication to the Church. If one representative man be the proper meaning of the sym- bolic term, this supposition is, of all others, the most probable and satisfactory. That ' angel ' means a prelatic diocesan bishop, having sole authority and exclusive jurisdiction, is simply an assumption of everything that requires to be proved. That this symbolic word is a stronghold of Prelacy, is evident from the Commentary of Dr Trench on the Seven Churches. He says — 'The argument for the existence of the episcopate in the later apostolic times, and that as a divinely-recognized institution, which may be drawn from the position of the angels of the seven Churches, and from the language in which they are addressed, is exceeding strong.' What, then, is the exceeding strength de- rived ? It lies simply in the supposition of Dr Trench. ' Who can he be but a bishop — a bishop, too, with the prerogatives which we ascribe to one V He denies that the angel can mean the pre- sident of the presbytery — '^:)ri?7i«s iiiter j^;a?T5, with only some authority and jurisdiction, as the others, his peers, may have lent him.' The reason alleged is the responsibility of the angel for the condition of the Church, which could not be charged unless he were possessed of power to prevent the evils. But has not a presbytery such power? He denies that a messenger can be the meaning, as men do not write to the messenger, but by him, and that there is no correspondence between a messenger and a star ; that as Christ held the stars in His right hand, and as stars are a symbol of authority, therefore none but a bishop with full pre- latic power can be meant. This is well put, and very plausible, but not conclusive. For, first of all, ' star' is not always emblematic of ruling power. They that turn many to righteousness by preaching are represented as stars. And, secondly, though in ordinary times men send a 262 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. letter only by a messenger, and the messenger may be inferior, tlie case is very different in times of persecution. TJiere is nothing strained in the supposition that the most distinguished man in the Church would be selected to proceed to Patmos ; and that being so, he might be the president of the presbytery ; and consequently, as the organ of the elders, he might be properly addressed, as responsible for the condition of the Churches. But, thirdly, unless Dr Trench sustains his theory by an apostolic example, the whole is but a theory, and he must betake himself to the later times, not of the apostolic age, but of the fourth century, for support. This argument is a mere begging of the question. . The one prelate is admirably answered by another : ' If many things in the epistles be directed to the angel, but yet so as to concern the whole body, then of necessity the angel must be taken as representative of the body, either of the whole Church, or, which is far more probable, of the consessus, or order of presbyters of that Church ' (Stilliiigfleet's ' Irenicum '). Do AxGELS Above Authorize Prelacy Below? This is another resort of the supporters of Prelacy. ' When God came to introduce His system of religion and government upon earth, Ave find His arrangements below analogous to those above.' As one star differeth from another star in glory, so do prelates, priests, and deacons differ from each other, though all are glorious. It would appear from the discoveries of prelatists that there is a hierarchy above composed of archangels, angels, and seraphim. As the observation of all this is a difficulty to presbyters, it cannot receive a positive denial. But it is unfor- tunate that the arrangement or classification is somehow contra- dictory of Scripture. There the angelic host is designated by eleven or twelve different titles. If all these are separate orders, and if arrangements in the Church must be analogous, the prelatic theory is sadly wanting. The only references to the order of the heavenly sanctuary unfortunately sets presbyters nearest the throne, as if an order of the highest rank. ' Round about the throne were four-and-twenty seats : and upon the seats I saw THE JEWISH PKIESTHOOD. 263 four and twenty elders sitting, clothed in white raiment ; they had on their heads crowns of gold ' (Rev. iv. 4, &c.) Does the Old Testament Priesthood Sanction a New Testament Peelacy 1 Jerome's statement — * That we may know that the ordinances of the apostles were drawn from the Old Testament, that which Aaron and his sons and the Levites were in the Temple, the same let bishops, presbyters, and deacons claim to be in the Church,' is turned into a corner-stone in support of Prelacy. This precedent fails by excess. It must prove the full develop- ment and authority of Prelacy in the Papacy. The high priest, being a single head of the Church, can only find his counterpart in the Pontiff. It establishes, if at all, the Eoman, and not the Anglican theory, unless indeed the reigning sovereign be elevated to that position. But is it thus applicable ? Is it not absurd to go to an abrogated priesthood to find authority for the Christian ministry? If these ancient orders may be introduced, then on the same grounds every Jewish rite and ceremony may. This proves far too much for the prelatist. ' Instead of three, he would require to bring back some thirty orders. The argument also fails by defects for the high priest w^as not a distinct order. He was himself of the order of the priesthood, and the Levites were no more a sacred order than are the modern beadles, sextons, or doorkeepers of our churches. And then, if three, and three orders only, were both proved and applicable, this is not the thing that requires to be proved; that is, that in the Christian Church there should be one siq:)e}^ior order of prelates having sole autho- rity to rule. In the Old Testament Church there was no higher ofiice than the priesthood, of which the presbyter is the antitype in the New. By examination of these several arguments put forth on its behalf, it may be evident to all, that — There is no Authority for Prelacy in the Word of God. The late Principal Cunningham felt impelled to speak thus of Prelacy : — 'I must briefly advert to what are the principal direct 2G4 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. charges wliich we liave to adduce against it, and wliicla, we think, we can fully establish. * First, It introduces a neio and unauthorized order of office- hearers into the Church. The Church is Christ's kingdom. He alone is its Sovereign. He has settled its constitution and esta- blished its laws, and He has revealed His whole will to us con- cerning all these matters in His written Word, l^o one is entitled to prescribe laws to the Churchy or to fix its office-bearers, ex- cept Him who has purchased it with His own blood ; and all its arrangements should be regulated by the constitution which He has prescribed. He has given us no intimation of His will that there should exist in His Church a distinct class of office-bearers superior to the ordinary pastors whom he has authorized and required to feed the flocks over which the Holy Ghost hath made them overseers. And if He has given no intimation of His will that His Church should have a superior order of office-bearers to pastors, then no such order ought to exist, and where it has crept in it ought to be expelled. It is an interference with His arrangements, a usurpation of His prerogative, for any one to introduce it. ' Secondli/y Another serious ground of charge against Prelacy, though, indeed, it is virtually the same charge in another form, is that it depy^ives the imstors of churches of the power and autho- rity which Christ has conferred upon them ' (' Hist. TheoL' vol. i. p. 264). Prelacy has failed to establish from Scripture any authoritative example. It has produced no legitimate conclusion as a just and necessary consequence. This fact candid prelatists have been forced to acknowledge. Thus Litton says — ' The question now before us is, Did Christ Himself deliver this form of ecclesiastical polity as that by which His Church was to be distinguished from other religious societies ? Difficult of proof as this may appear, it is in the last resort affirmed ; and the way in which it is made out is as follows : — Christ ordained the twelve — or eleven — apostles to be governors and teachers of His Church ; in their apostolic commission were comprised three distinct subordinate ones — the commission of bishop, presbyter, and deacon ; so that, in fact, though these offices are not found NO AUTIIOEITY FOR PKELACY. 265 to have been formally instituted by Clirist Himself, or even to have been formally in being until the Church had existed for some time in the world, yet they were present implicitly from the first, each of the apostles having in himself the polity of the Church in all its plenitude, and the apostolic college by degrees shedding the three orders, hitherto enveloped in their own per- sons, as need required ; first, the diaconate, then the presbyterate, and lastly, the episcopate. * Several difficulties here present themselves to the mind. In what passage of Scripture is Christ recorded to have delivered to the apostles three distinct commissions, with different powers attached to each ? . . . The apostolic office comprised in itself powers much more extensive than those which were afterwards distributed between bishops, priests, and deacons. But we search in vain for the formal union of the three orders in the persons of the apostles. And be it observed, the theory requires such a formal devolution of the orders. ... If we are to believe that the apostles evolved out of themselves, or out of their own com- mission, the three offices in question, proof must be given of their having themselves been formally invested with the offices. But of this no sufficient proof is offered. That the twelve were ap- pointed to be apostles of Christ is declared in Scripture, but when and where they were ordained bishops, priests, and deacons nowhere appears^ (' Church of Christ,' p. 245). Dr Onderdonk gives the conclusion — 'The claim of Episcopacy to be of divine institution, and therefore obligatory on the Church, rests fundamentally on the one question — Has it the authority of Scripture] If it has not, it is not necessarily binding.' QCESTIONS. 1. Shov) hoiv the term ' angel ' is the prelatic refuge. 2. How ought metaphorical terms to he interpreted ? 3. Show how the term may he applied to ministers of the gospel. 4. Mention representative men to whom it has heen applied^ and say which is most prohable. 5. What peculiarities reqiiired a man in whom all had con- fidence? 26Q THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 6. IIoiv may Dr Trenclis strong argument he met ? 7. Why may not angels above he a 2^cUte7'7i for Prelacy in the Church on earth ? 8. Give the suhstance of Jeromes stcUement, and say ivhat 2ise is made of it. 9. Show ivhat tvould he the legitimate inference if the jyTecedent were granted^ and how otherwise the theory fails. 1 0. Mention Principcd Cunninghams two charges. 1 1 . What achnowledgment has the Rev. Mr Litton made ? 12. To ivhat conclusion does cuiother ijrelatist guide ? CHAPTER XIX. * APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION ' — IS IT FACT OR FICTION ? * Built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ Himself being the chief corner-stone.' The claim of Prelacy is, that none are ministers of Christ but those who have been ordained by a bishop reguUrly ordained in an unbroken succession from the apostles. Without this aposto- lical succession there can be no spiritual blessing. All ordinances without that are valueless. This is especially maintained by High Church Episcopalians or Prelatists, who in this and other matters follow Laud, who first openly avowed this opinion in the Church of England. Dr Hook has thus expressed this view : — ' The prelates who, at this present time, rule the churches of these realms, were validly ordained by others who, by means of an unbroken spiritual descent of ordination, derived their mission from the apostles and from our Lord. This continual descent is evident to every one who chooses to investigate it. There is not a bishop, priest, or deacon among us who cannot, if he please, trace his own spiritual descent from St Peter or St Paul.' Two facts entirely overthrow this vast and presumptuous claim. First, The apostles themselves were not diocesan bishops, 'APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.' 267 and did not ordain any sucLi to office in the CLurcli. Secondly, SuiDposingtbat this had been the case, no uninterrupted succession can possibly be proved. Were history examined, many breaks in the chain might be discovered, and every broken link is fatal to the theory. Eusebius and others have acknowledged that they could not trace the succession in many of the early Churches ; others, again, that it cannot be traced in the Church of Rome, from which many ministers of the Church of England claim to derive their orders. This last fact has been fully established by many of the able and learned. But we hold by the first position, that, ' tried by the only ultimate standard, apostolical succession' never began. The whole is, therefore, a grand assumption, im- posed upon the credulity of men. The claim of succession to the apostles is surely made or believed in without consideration of what this implies. The term ' apostle ' was not merely given to the twelve because they were sent forth by Christ ; in its special or technical sense, the term distinguished them from all others. When they died, the office necessarily ceased. What prelatist now can pretend to produce the signs of an apostle? Has he been called imme- diately by Christ to the office 1 Has he been a personal eye- witness of His majesty 1 Has he been put into possession of the power of the Holy Spirit, enabling him not only to work miracles but to give forth truth infallibly 1 Has He the universal com- mission for organizing and establishing the Church 1 If, by some strange fatuity, such a profession is made, that profession, in the absence of such signs, is nothing and vanity. Dr Isaac Barrow, an Episcopal writer, whose sound judgment in the interpretation of Scripture has been generally acknowledged, proclaims this fact. ' The apostolical office, as such, was personal and tempo- rary; and, therefore, according to its nature and design, not successive or communicable to others in perpetual descendence (descent) from them. It was, as such, in all respects extraor- dinary, conferred in a special manner, designed for special pur- poses, discharged by special aids, endowed with special privileges, as was needful for the propagation of Christianity, and founding of churches. 268 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ' To tliat office it was requisite that the person should have an immediate designation and commission from God ; . . . that he should be able, according to his discretion, in a certain and con- spicuous manner, to impart spiritual gifts. . . , Apostles also governed in an absolute manner, according to discretion, as being guided by infallible assistance, to the which they might upon occasion appeal and affirm. . . . Now, such an office, consisting of so many extraordinary privileges and miraculous powers, which were requisite for the foundation of the Church, . . . was not designed to continue by derivation, for it contains in it divers things which apparently were not communicated, and which no man, without gross imposture and hypocrisy, could challenge to himself ('Supremacy,' p. 100). If any claim to be of the same standing as the apostles, they should be able to produce a similar commission, and such indis- pensable characteristics. The fact that the apostles appointed no successors to their extraordinary employments, while they manifest extreme care in providing other spiritual labourers, intimates that the apostleship, after serving the peculiar emer- gency, was not to continue in the Church. God can and does raise up men, from time to time, of a truly apostolic spirit. Who can deny that such men as Patrick Succat in Ireland, Columba and Knox in Scotland, Luther in Germany, Zwingle in Switzerland, Wicklyffe, Whitfield, and Wesley in England, Martyn, Edwards, Carey, Duff, and a host of others in various parts of the globe, were God-sent men, who, in some measure, might say of the fruits of their labours : ' The seal of mine apostleship are ye in the Lord ? ' Still the possession of that spirit is one thing, the possession of the special office is another. If the apostolic office is truly possessed by prelatic bishops, let them tell us when presbyter-bishops ceased, and diocesan bishops commenced. Where is there a single instance of the change alleged 1 Single out one successor of the apostles, in- heriting their qualifications, and receiving this new adaptation of the term * bishop ' instead of ' apostle.' From first to last the theory is unsupported. * This dogma of apostolical succession constitutes the very ' APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION.' 269 backbone of the hierarchical system — the vertebral column by which it is upheld. Down through the centre of this column the sacred ichor is supposed to run like the spinal marrow, im- parting mystical powers of a nameless but notable kind to the various points of which it is composed. The theory is, that these points or vertehrce are the bishops, who are said to be the suc- cessors of the apostles, descended from them in a direct and unbroken line, and inheriting the special gifts and official quali- fications which were originally conferred upon them. On this ground it is that the Papacy claims to be the only true " Apos- tolic Church ;" and it is on the same ground precisely that the Church of England, and her little Jacobite sister in Scotland, assert their right to share in that claim, although such right is very distinctly and even scornfully repudiated by the scarlet lady with whom they are so anxious, in this matter at least, to estab- lish a family relationship ' (Dr M'Gillivray). The mysterious virtue of the prelatic power of ordination and rule is held to have been transmitted in uninterrupted succession from the apostles. ' Even Episcopacy, without the succession, is nothing, and differs in nothing from Presbyterianism ; for it is the apostolically-derived succession which constitutes the Episco- pate' (Lawson, ' Hist, of Epis. Church of Scot.,' ch. iv. p. 112). This claim is as unfounded as it is preposterous. * What should we think of a man who should claim a dormant peerage on such pretences as those on which the Anglican clergy claim spiritual descent from the apostles, whose genealogy, when it came to be examined, was found to contain the names of persons who ap- parently never existed ; of persons of whom it was not known which was the father and which was the son ; one document averring that Ptichard was the son of John, and another that John was the son of Pdchard ; while a third omitted the name of PJchard altogether ? And yet it is just upon such evidence as this that successionists rest their claim to an official descent from the apostles, and demand for that shadowy eidolon which they have set up the religious homage of all people, nations, and languages ! ' (Dr W. L. Alexander). If any class of men claim to be apostles, asserting the right to exercise apostolic authority, then they claim the possession of 270 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. apostolic endowments. If tliey have the office, they must have the gifts. When the gifts cease, the organs for exercising the gifts also cease. The two are contemporary. An office to which such endowments are essential is not transmissible. An order of nobility without real superiority would be a mere sham. An apostle without the endowments of an apostle would no less be a mere pretender. If there cannot exist a man without a soul, no more can there be apostles apart from the possession of the gifts of apostles. If, then, the self-styled apostle-bishops have not apostolical endowments, their claim to the apostolic office is a usurpation and a pretence. This is so evident that a show is made of the possession of apostolic gifts. While not claiming to be inspired individually — the age of miracles having confessedly ceased — they do so col- lectively, or as a body. Though destitute of the power of working miracles, they claim to have the sole power of rule, and of con- ferring the grace of orders, as the only channel of gospel ordi- nances. Were bishops proved to be the substitutes of infallible apostles, submission to them would be essential to salvation. But this claim is at once presumptuous and contrary to fact. The prelates of one age have differed from those of another; those of one Church have anathematized those of another. As well might it be asserted that the sun never shines out of Britain as that no saving grace is to be found apart from the dispensa- tion of apostle-bishops. This is to pervert the very nature of religion. This theory is not a mere speculation, but a distinctive error. It is a terrific thing to put erring men in the place of infallible apostles, and to make fdlth in their teaching and sub- mission to their authority the conditions of salvation. Prelates not being apostles, are simply presbyters. They merely hold their pre-eminence by the authority of man. Prelacy, as such, is not of God. Questions. 1. What is the High Church claim.? and what facts over- throiv it ? 2. State the scriptiiral position that must he maintained, 3. What is implied in succession to the aj^ostles ? THE CHUECH OF THE FIEST THEEE CENTURIES. 271 4. Mention an eminent English divine that rejpudiates this. 5. Kanie some ivho may he said to have inherited the apostolic spirit, and shoiv the difference hetiveen this and the High Church claim. 6. State how Christ expressly condemned the prelatic position. 7. What ^« the nature of the succession evidence ? 8. What essential claim is implied a,nd maintained hy this theory ? 9. How is the claim to he regarded ? CHAPTEK XX. § 2. WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? * Notwithstanding all that is pretended from antiquity, a bishop having prime sole power of ordination and jurisdiction will never be found in antiquity.' — Alex. Henderson, Was the Church of the First Three Centuries Prelatic or Presbyterian 1 It is asserted tliat Prelacy prevailed in tlie Cliurcli for fifteen hundred years. It is then demanded — How can it be suj^posed that the early Church would depart from apostolic practice ? And if a departure had been made, bow could that have become so universal ? This universal practice — it is inferred — proves that Prelacy is the apostolical form of Church government. This argument is constantly proclaimed as a demonstration. But even this, the chief chosen stronghold, is found to be a poor support for j^relatic episcopacy, when it is discovered — First, That the Church of the first three centuries was essen- tially Presbyterian. Secondly, That the gradual introduction of Prelacy can be accounted for. Thirdly, That during most of the remaining twelve centuries, testimony was maintained against this corruption, within and without the Church of Piome ; and 272 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Foiirtldy, That the Keformers, almost without exception, rejected Prelacy as a Popish corruption. "Was the Church of the First Three Centuries Prelatic or Presbyterian 1 The argument from antiquity is put in this form : — It is found from the writings of the early Fathers that there were bishops in all Churches. They were recognized and obeyed as the highest ecclesiastical authority from the apostolic age on- wards. Hence this order could not have existed, unless intro- duced and established by the apostles. This argument is wholly hypothetical. It is based upon a supposition. Is the hypothesis substantiated by actual facf? The equivocal term 'bishop ' is here made to do much service. The apostolic and the modern meanings must be kept in view. The only evidence furnished are certain equivocal suggestions and allusions by several of the Fathers who wrote some four or five hundred years after Christ. Thus this statement made by Theodoret in the middle of the fifth century is much relied upon — ' The same persons were anciently called bishops and presbyters, and those whom we now call bishops were then called apostles. But in process of time the title of apostle was appropriated to those who were called apostles, in the strict sense, and the rest, who had formerly the name of apostles were styled bishops. In this sense Epaphroditus is called the apostle of the Philippians, Titus was the apostle of the Cretans, and Timothy of Asia.' (1.) Scripture is held by some prelatists to be insufficient to establish their cherished system. This fact is then adduced by them to show that the Bible is not a sufficient rule. Consequently they betake themselves to antiquity for support to their High Church views. This, then, is the argument on which they rest. Prelacy existed from the time of the apostles j it must, therefore, have been established by them. Not only is this beheld to be a mere hypothesis, it is amply refuted by a return to that funda- mental principle — God speaking in His Word is the only ultimate standard in religion. If Prelacy is not found there, it is nothing. The conclusion that Prelacy is of divine right is professedly WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 273 founded upon Scripture. Therefore, unless it is established by Scripture, it is manifest that God has revealed no such plan as a part of His will for the regulation of the Church. To build partly on Scripture and partly on antiquity is to lay the founda- tion upon the sand. (2.) Others conceive that Scripture is sufficient to establish Prelacy. They adduce the testimony of the Fathers simply to corroborate the fact. The alleged prevalence of Prelacy is to them a presumption that their mode of interpreting Scripture is legitimate. In this case, however, they ought to present us with the very Prelacy they contend for, and that as existing, not in the fourth or fifth centuries, but in the apostolic age itself. Some sort of distinction, however slight, between a bishop and a presbyter, and that only at the close of the second century, is not the confirmation required. Let the question be fairly met : Was there or not a distinct order in the apostolic age, possessing exclusive authority of ordination and rule, and without Avhich nothing in the Church was valid 1 Without swerving from our position that nothing but the Bible can determine the matter, this question may be briefly re- garded. Those termed 'apostolic fathers' lived before the last of the apostles passed away. Five persons are specially named — Bar- nabas, Hernias, Clemens, Polycarp, and Ignatius, The writings of the first two are valueless, and are held to be spurious. Those that are genuine add little to our knowledge. 'We cannot doubt that God has in mercy and wisdom withheld from us what there is too much reason to think would have been greatly abused. As matters stand, we have these two important points established — first, That we have no certain information, nothing on which, as a mere question of evidence, we can place firm reliance as to what the inspired apostles taught and ordained, but what is contained in or deduced from the canonical Scriptures ; and secondly, That there are no men, except the authors of the books of Scrip- ture, to whom there is anything like a plausible pretence for call- ingupon us to look up to as guides or oracles. . . . The apostolical Fathers hold an important place as witnesses to the genuineness, authenticity, and integrity of the Scriptures, but this is their 271 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. principal value. There is nothing about them that should tempt us to take them instead of, or even in addition to, the evangelists and apostles as our guides' ('Hist. TheoL' vol. i. pp. 95, 120). In examining antiquity, the only legitimate course is when corroboration of a fact already established by Scripture is sought. Then the writings of the Fathers may be adduced as witnesses of a practice or belief common in their own day. These ancients are of no more authority in themselves for the settlement of any important question than any learned and pious man of the pre- sent day. That in which alone we can rest satisfied is, ' Thus saith the Lord.' Clement of Eome, described in later ages as 'bishop,' died about the yearA.D. 101. Many works ascribed to him have been proved to be forgeries, but his first Epistle to the Corinthians is esteemed to be genuine. It is found in the writings of Eusebius. There is only one MS., and this was unknown until it was discovered in the Alexan- drinian MSS. It was probably written about the year a.d. 97. Then, at least, the ministry was not threefold. A spirit of in- subordination had prevailed in the Church of Corinth. That of Eome was anxious that harmony should be restored. Conse- quently a fraternal letter was drawn up by Clement, their pastor. That was as public and official a document as could be expected. The one Church exhorted the other to peaceful submission to their authorized officers. Clement inculcated order from the fact — (1.) That the Jewish rulers had their proper position in the Old Testament Church ; and also (2 .) That the apostles ' ap- pointed' the first-fruits of their ministry to be bishops and deacons. Clement wrote thus of the order of ministers in the Church (chap, xlii.) * The apostles have preached the gospel to us from the Lord Jesus Christ. . . , And thus preaching through countries and cities, they appointed the first-fruits (of their labours), having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons of those who should afterwards believe. Nor was WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 275 tliis any new tiling, since, indeed, many ages before it was written concerning bishops and deacons. For thus saitli the Scripture, in a certain place, " I will appoint tlieir bishops in righteousness, and their deacons in faith." ' Clement wrote also of the ordinance of the apostles, that there might be no contention respecting the priestly office (chap..xliv.) * Our apostles also knew, through our Lord Jesus Christ, that there would be a strife on account of the office of the epis- copate ' (literally, ' on account of the oversight '). ' For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they had obtained a perfect fore- knowledge of this, they appointed those (ministers) already men- tioned, and afterwards gave instructions, that w^hen these should fall asleep, other approved men should succeed them in their ministry. We are of opinion, therefore, that those appointed by them, or afterwards by other eminent men, with the consent of the whole Church, and who have blamelessly served the flock of Christ in a humble, peaceable, and disinterested spirit, and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all, cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties. Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their course before now, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure (from this world), for they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place now appointed them. But we see that ye have removed some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry, which they fulfilled blamelessly, and with honour' (' Apos. Fathers,' Clark's Ed., pp. 36-39). When prelatic advocates exclaim, ' It is idle to appeal to churches unsettled, or in course of settlement, as Philippi, Corinth, Antioch, or Kome,' it would be well to have regard to the settled organization of the Corinthian Church as here de- scribed. Let them produce anything so satisfactory from the first or second centuries as to their claims. From this epistle, universally acknowledged to be genuine, several important particulars may be noted — First, That there were only two classes of officers in the Churches of the first cen- tury— bishops and deacons, according to the appointment of the apostles. Secondly, That bishops and elders were identical. 276 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Sedition had been raised against those in the episcopate who were presbyters, and to whom submission was anew demanded. Thirdly, That these officers were settled with the consent of all the Church. This is the strong reason urged why they ought to submit to them. Their officers were elected with their consent. Fourthly, No prelate presided over these elders or bishops. If so, the exhortation would have been to submit to him, or that he should put the matter to rights. In this long important ecclesiastical document, treating specially of ruling and submis- sion, no such personage appears. If there, why is he over- looked 1 Clement in the Corinthian, as Paul in the Ephesian, Philippian, and other Churches, finds no such official. And then, fifthly, By implication these same features — of bishops and deacons only, bishops and elders identical, election by the people, and the absence of prelatic authority — prevailed at Kome as at Corinth. Had another state of things existed there, some hint must have been given in such a document. Instead of being a Pope, as he is styled by the modern Church of Piome, Clement is simply a presbyter-bishop. Some thirty years after the decease of the apostles, these Churches are found to have a government that is essentially presbyterial. This Clement was probably the same who, with other labourers at Philippi, were declared by Paul to have their names in the Book of Life. If so, his testimony is all the more to be valued, and especially as it w^as given three or four years before the close of the first century. POLYCAEP. The heathen burned the noble Polycarp about the year a.d. 167. ' He was instructed by the apostles, and was brought into contact with many who had seen Christ.' This is the testimony of his disciple Irenseus. His Epistle to the Philippians was written probably about the middle of the second century. It begins thus : — ' Polycarp, and the presbyters with him ' (or those who with him are presbyters) * to the Church of God sojourning at Philippi.' WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 277 In chap, v., on ' the duties of deacons, youtlis, and virgins,' lie writes : — ' In like manner should the deacons be blameless before the face of His righteousness, as being the servants of God and Christ, and not of men. They must not be slanderers, double-tongued, or lovers of money ; but temperate in all things, compassionate, industrious, walking according to the truth of the Lord, who was the servant of all.' The chapter closes thus : — ' Wherefore, it is needful to abstain from all these things, being subject to the presbyters and deacons, as unto God and Christ. The virgins must also walk in a blameless and pure conscience.' Chap, vi., on ' the duties of presbyters and others,' opens thus : — ' And let the presbyters be compassionate and merciful to all, bringing back those that wander,' &c. In chap. xi. he writes : — ' 1 am greatly grieved for Valens, who was once a pres- byter among you, because he so little understands the place that was given him' (in the Church). ' I am deeply grieved, there- fore, brethren, for him (Valens) and his wife, to whom may the Lord grant true repentance ' (' Apos. Fathers,' pp. 69-7.5). These are the only passages in this epistle where mention is made of ministers or office-bearers. The title bishop does not once occur. This epistle also contains some important testimony. It was sent from ' that blessed and apostolic presbyter,' the pastor of Smyrna, to the Philippian Church. It proclaims — First, That in the second century, as in the time of Paul, the only officers in the Church at Philippi were presbyters and deacons. None other are mentioned. Secondly, No prelate presided over them, for, otherwise, the omission were unaccountable. Thirdly, Other presbyters were associated with Polycarp in the government of the Church at Smyrna. And, fourthly, These Churches regarded themselves as parts of one whole. Therefore, the government of the Churches of the second, as of the first century, was essen- tially* Presbyterian. 278 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Ignatius is a favourite witness on behalf of Prelacy. This * bisliop ' of Antioch was exposed and perislied in tlie amphitheatre at Rome about A.D. 106. Only three of the fifteen epistles ascribed to him are regarded as genuine. Dr Killen, after careful examination, rejects the whole as spurious. Few will contend that the three are uncor- rupted. The spurious epistles are stuffed full of exhortations of implicit obedience to the bishop, without whom nothing is to be done. In the Epistle to Polycarp, considered genuine, it is said — ' If he become known apart from the bishoj), he has destroyed himself. It is becoming, therefore, to men and women who marry, that they marry with the counsel of the bishop.' In chap, vi., ' Look ye to the bishop, that God also may look upon you. I will be instead of the souls of those who are subject to the bishop, and the presbyters, and the deacons ; with them may I have a portion in the presence of God ' (' Apos. Fathers/ pp. 275, 276). What can be thought of the following passage 1 — ' I am the wheat of God, and by the teeth of the beasts I shall be ground, that I may be found the pure bread of God. Provoke ye greatly the wild beasts, that they may be for me a grave, and may leave nothing of my body, in order that, when I am fallen asleep, I may not be a burden upon any one. En- treat of our Lord, on my behalf, that through these instruments I may be found a sacrifice to God' (pp. 282, 283). ' The distinction between Ignatius, who lived in the beginning of the second century, on the one hand, and Irenseus, Tertullian, Clemens Alexandrinus, and Origen, who flourished from the middle of the second to the middle of the third century, on the other, is this — that he uniformly uses the words " bishops," "presbyters," and '-'deacons," as designating three different classes while they all sometimes distinguish them, and sometimes con- found them, or use them synonymously — thus clearly proving that, in their time, the distinction, though it existed, was neither very great in itself, nor very much regarded, nor very constantly WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 279 observed. There is no evidence that Irenseus, TertuUian, Clemens Alexandrihus, and Origen believed that bishops were, by divine appointment, a distinct class or order of office-bearers from pres- byters' ('Hist. Theol.,' vol. i. p. 250). Another noble witness is — Justin Martyr. That is the name by which Flavins Justinus is best known. He was born at Nablous, Samaria, a.d. 114, and was martyred about A.D. 165. This Christian martyr was very learned. He was an eminent philosopher, and had his attention directed to Christianity by the calm triumph of its professors over death. By the sea-shore an aged man pointed out to him where human philosophy had failed, and that the Bible was the one sure standard of truth, as well as the source of all necessary blessing. He sought and found mercy. Henceforth he gloried only in the cross of Christ, living only to proclaim and write of its glory. Before he suffered martyrdom, he declared — ' I am so sure of the grace which Jesus Christ hath obtained for me, that not a shadow of doubt can enter my mind.' Giving an account of the Church of the second century, Justin Martyr informs how its worship was conducted. One individual presided over each congregation, whether in city or country. It was under the supervision of brother elders. The prosperity of the community depended greatly on the piety and ability of the presiding elder. He was known as president, afterwards as bishop, but occupied the place of minister of the congregation. Where there was more than one preaching elder, there was a mutual service, and the president closed the exercise. Where several congregations and a plurality of preaching elders existed in the same city, they were affiliated, their united meetings being superintended by a president. Telesephorus was the president of the Roman Presbytery. That Church being disturbed by false teachers, additional power was given to the presiding pres- byter. Till then every teaching presbyter administered the sacraments. Thereafter j the sanction of the president was held to be necessary, he being regarded as the centre of unity. This transfer was not accomplished without a struggle. Prior to this 2S0 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE XIXGDOM. time tliey had succeeded eacli other according to seniority ; now by obtaining ' the lot of the episcopacy ' out of a leet of candi- dates. But although the senior presbyter presided at the meet- ings, and was soon known by the title ' bishop/ he possessed no superior power. He was simply president or moderator of the presbytery. Cyprian, about the middle of the third century, was Bishop of Carthage. He suffered martyrdom under the Emperor Valerian, a.d. 258. Then ' Africa lamented her apostle.' His works are the great battlefield of the prelatic controversy. ' Presbyterians, Prelatists, and Papists have all confidently appealed to Cyprian in support of their respective opinions.' ' The real and the whole truth upon the point . . . may be embodied in the three following propositions : — ' First, There is enough in the writings of Cyprian to prove that, down even till the middle of the third century, the substan- tial identity of bishops and presbyters was maintained ; and that the idea of the episcopate being, by divine appointment, a distinct, independent, higher office than the presbyterate, was not yet generally received. ' Secondly, There is enough to prove that in Cyprian's time, and in a great measure through his exertions, an important dis- tinction between bishops and presbyters, implying some superior- ity, not well defined, of the one over the other, became prevalent; and ' Thirdly^ That he has laid down, though very vaguely and obscurely, some principles which, when fully carried out and applied, lay a good foundation for maintaining that there should be one visible head of the whole Church, and for vesting some kind or degree of primacy or superiority in the Bishop of Eome ' ('Hist. Theol.,' vol. i. pp. 1G3-171). Cyprian held the divine right of the people to choose or to refuse their pastors. This scriptural position was professed and acted on long after a very large amount of error had taken possession of the Church. Blondell, one of the most learned writers on this subject, has, by evidence carefully collected, proved WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 281 that the people had a real and effective voice in the appointment of their ministers for a thousand years. In every ordination the people were consulted, and none admitted into the pastorate with- out their approbation. A bishopric then was but a single congre- gation. This has been conclusively established by Sir Peter King in his ' Enquiry into the Constitution, Discipline, Unity, and Wor- ship of the Primitive Church.' This inquiry was first published in 1691 (Cornish, Lond. 1839, pp. 45-47). The testimony of this Lord High Chancellor of England, from an impartial view of the writings of the Fathers of the first three centuries, ought to have some weight with students of Episcopacy. ' Then,' he says, ' the primitive apostolic bishops resided with their flocks.' His defi- nition of a presbyter is this — ' A person in holy orders, having thereby an inherent right to perform the whole office of a bishop ; but being possessed of no place or parish, nor actually discharging it, without the permission and consent of the bishop.' It is easy to perceive that the latter restriction was an encroachment upon the former inherent right.' For he declares further — (1.) 'That the presbyters were different from the bishops in gradii, or in degree; but yet, (2.) They were equal to them in ordine, or in order.' ' The presbyters ruled in those Churches to which they belonged.' He shows not only that they ruled, but that presbyters ' did perform ' ' every particular act of the bishop's office.' Thus Cyprian of Carthage, when exiled, wrote the pres- byters to discharge his office : ' I exhort and command you that in my stead you perform those offices, that nothing might be wanting either to discipline or to diligence.' In his absence they discharged all his functions, A bishop excommunicated, ab- solved, ordained; so did a presbyter. Whatever a bishop did, the same did a presbyter. There was only a difference in degree. Sir Peter goes on to prove the equality of the order of bishops and presbyters by other reasons : — ' Originally they had one and the same name.' ' It is ex- pressly said by the ancients that there were but two distinct ecclesiastical orders — viz., bishops and deacons; and if there were but these two, presbyters cannot be distinct from bishops, for then there would be three.' 282 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. As to deacons Sir Peter writes — ' Their original institution was to serve tables, wliicli included these two things — a looking after the poor, and an attendance at the Lord's table' (pp. 69, 70). As to the relation of Churches to each other, he says — ^ Every Church was in a sense independent, but yet in another sense it was dependent, as considered with other Churches as part of the Church universal.' ' There is but one Church of Christ,' saith Cyprian, ' divided through the whole world into many members ' (p. 118). Again, as to the method of government, he states — .,' That which chiefly deserves our consideration was their in- tercourse and government by synodical assemblies.' ' Within my prescribed time ' (the first three centuries), there were ' pro- vincial synods — that is, as many particular Churches as could conveniently and orderly associate themselves together, and, by their common consent and authority, dispose and regulate all things that related to their polity, unity, peace, and order ' (pp. 119-121). * So far, then, as concerns the "only" two apostolic men (Clement and Polycarp), of whom it is generally admitted that we have their remains genuine and uncorrupted, it is evident that their testimony upon this point entirely concurs with that of Scripture — that they furnish no evidence whatever of the exist- ence of Prelacy, and that their testimony runs clearly and de- cidedly in favour of presbyterial government ; and, if so, then this is a blow struck at the root or foundation of the whole alleged prelatic testimony from antiquity ' (' Hist. Theol.,' vol. i. p. 248). That the prelatic argument rests mainly on antiquity, and is thus without divine sanction, is evident from confessions made. ' There is reason to believe (!) that it is an apostolic appoint- ment; meanwhile, it cannot be denied that Scripture alone furnishes but slender data for our pronouncing it to be so. And this, be it observed, may be admitted without weakening the evidence for its apostolicity. Timothy and Titus may (!) have been bishops of Ephesus and Crete respectively, and yet it may be impossible to prove from Scripture alone that they were so.' WHAT SAITH ANTIQUITY ? 283 *As long as the advocates of Episcopacy are content to rest their cause upon post-apostolic testimony, their position is im- pregnable : it is only when they attempt to prove it from iScrip- ture alone that the argument fiiils to convince. Better at once to acknowledge that the institution is traceable to the apostles chiefly through the channel of uninspired men, than, by insisting upon insuJSicient scriptural evidence, to bring discredit upon the whole argument.' ' If the " angels" of the Apocalypse and Dio- trephes were not of this order, it is more than probable that the New Testament does not present us with any instance of a formal bishop' (' Church of Christ,' Rev. E. A. Litton, pp. 411-436). Again, ' If the provision or institution in question is mani- festly opposed to the spirit of the apostolic regulations, as set forth in Scripture, we may know, however ancient it may profess to be, that it is not apostolic; in other words, that it has not really existed from the first' (p. 432). Nevertheless, Mr Litton thinks * that however difficult it may be to establish from Scripture alone the apostolicity of Episcopacy, we yet have the strongest ground for believing it to be an apostolic institution ; but the weight of the evidence rests upon uninspired testimony, or rather, upon that testimony confirmed with the precedents furnished by Scripture. By the aid of history and Scripture combined, it may be satisfactorily made out (!) that the apostles either insti- tuted or sanctioned the episcopal form of Church government.' Has this alleged fact been satisfactorily made out by any evidence, singly or combined, which prelatists have been able to produce ? Is it not rather most evident that — (1.) Prelacy finds no support in the Church of the first three centuries ; and (2.) Is, moreover, opposed to the spirit as well as to the letter of the apostolic regulations, and that, therefore, Prelacy is not apostolic ? The government throughout that period, although it was in pro- cess of corruption, was substantially Presbyterial. ' There is an unchangeable line of demarcation between the testimony of Scripture and all merely human authority.' ' We are bound to believe and to practise nothing as of divine authority, the proof and warrant of which cannot be deduced from the Word of God.' Alas for Prelacy ! Even this stronghold of primitive antiquity 284 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. crumbles before tlie eyes of every beholder. Only out of the rubbish of the corruptions of antiquity can it raise a buttress to sustain it for a time. Questions. 1. Give the vaunted demonsti^ation of the divine right of Prelacy, and state four things ivhich, if established, overthrow it. 2. Show that the argument from antiquity is purely hypotheti- cal, and in what manner it is supported. 3. Mention a writer of the fifth century often ciuoted. 4. What party amongst prelatists i^lace their chief reliance upon antiqidty ? and how do they regard the Scriptures? 5. Prove that their position is untenable. 6. What other view is held as to Scrip)ture and antiquity? 7. What is the chief vcdue of the apostolical fathers ? and ivhat is the legitimate use of their ivritings ? 8. Give some account of the, testimonies of (1.) Clement and of (2.) Poly carp. 9. What is to be said about the writings of Ignatius ? 10. Give some account also of the testimony of Justin Martyr. 11. Whose ivritings are the great battlefield? and what do they chiefly declare ? 1 2. Name an English Chancellor, and state genercdly the result of his inquiry. 13. Mention a prelatlc work confessing, in effect, that these findings are true. CHAPTER XXL Can the Inteoduction of Peelacy be Accounted for ? * Of your own selves men shall arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away disciples after them.' It is not absolutely necessary to account for the origin and growth of Prelacy. To find that the arguments and evidence CAN PRELACY BE ACCOUNTED FOR ? 285 adduced do not prove its existence, either in the apostolic period or in the Church of the first three centuries, is abundantly sufli- cient. And yet the explanation is not so difficult. It may be ascertained how that system was introduced, and grew into strength. The remains of depravity in the hearts of Christians, along with the cunning, malice, and continual efforts of Satan, are sufficient for that end. Declension from purity of doctrine and practice was expressly foretold. That corruption, as we have seen, revealed itself, and speedily developed within the Church. From small beginnings that declension at length grew into the great tree of the Papacy. First, There arose a slight distinction. Secondly, An increase of power. Thirdly, Prelacy proper. Fourthly, Its logical de- velopment in the Papacy. The history warns the Church against yielding to slight encroachments upon liberty. The change was gradual. Men, with the best intentions, introduced the slight change, and, as the letting out of water, the stream bore every- thing before it. A president was naturally chosen for assemblies of presbyters, possessed of weight of character and experience. His successful conduct of affairs led to his re-election. At length the elevation was during his lifetime. This is exemplified in the case of Calvin centuries thereafter. Add to this, ambition, by outward pomp, to give importance to the office, and the method is discovered by which Prelacy arose. Jerome testifies to this fact First, That bishops and presbyters were identical, and that thus Prelacy is not by divine right. Secondly, That government by presbyters continued till, for the avoidance of divisions, men thought it expedient to alter this method. Thirdly, That then the change was gradually effected. Fourthly, That by custom, as all acknowledged, the new order of things was established. And fifthly, That these early bishops, were so constituted by presbyters, and could only convey presby- terial authority. Prelacy arose, therefore, from human invention and custom, not from divine appointment. This custom arose long after the age of the apostles, for then presbyter and bishop were not two offices, but one. This custom prevailed in the time when Jerome wrote. 286 THE GOVEKNMENT OF TPIE KINGDOM. Writing in llie fourtli century, in his Commentary on Titus, lie says — ' A presbyter and a bishop is the same, and before there were, through the devil's instinct, divisions in religion, and the people began to say I am of Paul, (fee, the Churches were governed by the common council of the presbyters. But after that each man began to account those whom he had baptized his own and not Christ's, it was decreed through the whole world, that one of the presbyters should be set over the rest, to whom the care of all the Church doth belong, that the seeds of schism might be taken away. Thinks any, that this is my opinion, and not the opinion of the Scripture, that a bishop and an elder are the same, let him read the words of the Apostle to the Philippians, saying, Paul and Timothy, the servants of Jesus Christ, to them that are at Philippi with the bishops and deacons. Philippi is one city of Macedonia, and certainly in one city there could not be many bishops (as they are now called,' (fee). ' As the elders, there- fore, may know that they are subject to him that is over them by the custom of the Church, so let the bishops know that it is more from custom than from any true dispensation from. the Lord that they are above the presbyters, and that they ought to rule the Church in common.' It appears, therefore, indisputable that ' A bishop at his first erection was nothing else but Primus Presbyter, or Episcopus Prseses (as a Moderator in a Church Assembly, or a Speaker in Parliament), that governed the common council of the presbyters, and had neither power of ordination nor of jurisdiction but in common with his presbyters.' That 'Episcopal government universally prevailed presently after the apostles' times,' is not true, as it was not the prelatic government of essential and superior jurisdiction. Further, it is not true that, * between the apostles' times ' and this ' presently after,' there was not time nor possibility for so great an alteration ; for between these two points there were at least two centuries, in which the gradual alteration is clearly traceable. ' Episcopacy, indeed, did not present itself as the introduction of a new order of office-bearers to those who took the first steps that led to its establishment. It was at first merely conceding a CAN PEELACY BE ACCOUNTED FOR ? 287 somewhat superior measure of dignity and authority to one of the presbyters over the rest, without its being imagined that he thereby ceased to be a presbyter, -or that he became anything else. But this led gradually to the notion that he held a distinct office, and then the Word of God was perverted to get some countenance to the innovation. It was, as Jerome assures us, a device of men, who, in the exercise of their wisdom, thought it well fitted to guard against schism and faction, though at first it was far from assuming that aspect of palpable contrariety to God's Word which it afterwards presented.' * But no sooner was a distinction made between bishops and presbyters than the bishop gradually began to encroach upon the prerogatives of the presbyters. This led to an inversion of the scriptural view of the relative dignity and importance of the functions of teaching and ruling, and to a practical elevation of the latter above the former — Scripture always giving the first place, in point of dignity and importance, to the function of teaching.' Questions. 1. Why is it unnecessary to account for the rise of Prelacy? 2. What facts are sufficient to explain it ? 3. Name the period in which the change is tracealAe. 4. What writer in the fourth century attests this? CHAPTER XXII. § 3. THE ARGUMENT FEOM EXPEDIENCY. * Christ is truth, and not custom. Custom without truth is a mouldy error.' Does Peelacy Promote Public Utility] Many defend Prelacy solely on principles of public utility. Ap- parently forced to give up the divine right, not only on scriptural, but also on patristic grounds, expediency is the grand resort. 1^88 THE GOVEENMENT OE THE KINGDOM, (1.) Thus, Dr Paley says — ' These are all general directions, supposing, indeed, the existence of a regular ministry in the Church, bat describing no specific order of pre-eminence or dis- tribution of office and authority.' ' The apostolic writings which are preserved in the writings of the New Testament seem to exclude no ecclesiastical constitution which the experience and more instructed judgment of future ages might find it expedient to adopt.' ' We may be allowed to maintain the advantage of our own upon principles which all parties acknowledge — con- siderations of public utility' (Sermon, 1782). Dr Hooker, the great ecclesiastical jurist of the English Church, actually gives up the jus divinum of Episcopacy, with all its exclusive claims to the apostolical sanction and apostolical succession. His words are — ' The necessity of polity and regimen in all Churches may be believed, without holding any one certain form to be necessary in them all. And the general principles are such as do not particularly describe any one ; but sundry forms of discipline may be equally consistent with the general maxims of Scripture.' Dr Paley 's considerations of utility are these : — 1. Government is best managed by few. 2. There should be various orders, places, and ministers of religion in the various ranks of life. 3. Eespect is best secured by affluence and rank ; and 4. Eich and S23lendid situations are prizes held out to persons of good hopes and ingenious attainments. Then he comes, finally, to say — ' After all, these are but secondary objects.' Are Christians, then, to deny that the Word of God is a suffi- cient guide for the government of the Church ? Is expediency, or what men think right, ' according to genius and circum- stances,' to be added to the infallible written rule? If the prelatic or diocesan bishop is nowhere in the Bible, ought the office to be allowed in the Church? Can the finite mind of man devise a better plan than that appointed by her Infinite Head and King ? (2.) Some, in defending Prelacy, and calling themselves Epis- copalians, have employed an old distinction. They have con- tended that the distinction between presbyters and bishops is not one of order. These are of one order. They difi*er simply in THE ARGUMENT FKOM EXPEDIENCY. 289 degree. This position was held by the good Dr Usher. These parties have recognized the validity of Presbyterian orders, while holding that ordination by presbyters instead of a bishop was irregular. They have not, as others, denounced Presbyterian ministers as intruders and profaners of the Episcopal office. While this modification has been very useful in promoting har- mony of action between these two sections of the Church, it is obvious that the distinction is arbitrary, and is destitute of a solid foundation in Scripture. It must be regarded simply as an expedient fitted to promote co-operation without compelling the abandonment of prelatic authority. (3.) Others hold that Prelacy is warrantable as an arrange- ment which civil and ecclesiastical authorities may legitimately in- troduce. They hold that the Church may lawfully submit to the arrangement, although it is destitute of divine right, properly so called. Considering that it has long existed in the world, that it is in accordance with the civil constitution of the country, that there are social arrangements with which it is interwoven, and that its tendency is to promote the welfare of the community— they hold that Prelacy ought to be accepted and maintained. A similar position is taken as in vindicating rites and ceremonies. Established by the concurrence of the civil and ecclesiastical authorities, it is not unlawful or sinful, but right to submit to Prelacy. This was maintained by many early English theolo- gians, as Stillingfleet, &c. These arrangements of expediency must be tested by the will of the King of Zion. After the preceding examination of Scrip- ture, can it be maintained that He allows of essential offices and arrangements in His kingdom that have no warrant in the laws which He has prescribed 1 Are arrangements which He has prescribed to be lawfully cast aside as inferior or useless? Surely if others destitute of His authority are maintained as absolutely essential, this cannot but be regarded as a daring usurpation of His authority. Dr Whately declared that the proposition — ^The apostles estab- lished such a form of government in the Churches they founded ' is often sophistically or negligently confounded with this other — 'That they designed this form to be binding on all T 290 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Christians as an ordinance for ever' (' Ele. of Logic'). Dr Whately was top acute a reasoner not to perceive, and too lionest a man not to acknowledge, that Prelacy is destitute of authority in the Word of God, and that in the churches founded by the apostles they established such a form of government as is essen- tially presbyterial. But the archbishop, as was natural, was not quite prepared to lay aside his mitre, and even he shrunk from the logical conclusion, viz., that this apostolical example is binding. Surely the apostles were specially commissioned by Christ to establish and regulate His Church in accordance with His will, not for that age only, but for all succeeding times. This argument therefore is maintained : whatever form of govern- ment was established by the apostles must be binding perpetually upon the Church. The form of government they established was essentially presbyterial. Therefore government essentially presbyterial is perpetually binding. To deny that the form of government they established was designed as an ordinance for ever comes surely with a bad grace from those who insist that this prelatic form is perpetually binding, and who more or less hold that it is so essential, that no valid orders or spiritual bless- ino- can be had without it. There is no more sophistry or negli- gence in maintaining, by sound scriptural evidence and reasoning, that the last proposition Dr Whately names is true, as that the former is so. If not intended to be binding as a perpetual ordi- nance, why are these arrangements by principles and practice so prominently set forth in Scripture 1 Is it not rather proof of sophistry and negligence to set aside divinely authoritative pre- cepts and practice as destitute of value ? Their incapacity for being harmonized with the genius and circumstances of those having high notions of worldly rank and power, will not destroy their binding obligation as a part of the unchanging truth of God. Some may imagine that they are free from sophistry and negligence when they follow the leadership of a Paley or Whately — men of acknowledged ability and Christian zeal — who attained to high dignity of rank and power. But there is a lowlier and a safer path ; that is, simply to acknowledge the authority of God speaking in His Word. This is a lamp to the feet, a light unto this path. THE ARGUMENT FEOM EXPEDIENCY. 291 Peelacy is Inexpedient. Instead of Prelacy being expedient, the world's history is full of beacons warning the Church that no system is so highly in- expedient. 'The remedy against schism and faction proved worse than the disease. Prelacy was not attended with the divine blessing, and the wisdom of man continued to make progress in improving upon God's plans and arrangements, until the great body of the professing Church became an entire apos- tacy. Christ's authority was trampled under foot, and His great design in establishing the Church was in no small measure frustrated by men who professed to act in His name, and to be administering His laws. So dangerous is it to deviate from the path of Scripture, and to introduce the inventions of men into the government and worship of the Church of the living God.' There are, and there have been very many of the excellent of the earth in the communion of the Prelatico-Episcopal Church, both ministers and people. Even in times of haughtiest op- pression and bloodshed, some spirits, as that of Leighton, have very strangely, and to their own dismay, been found perched in the prelatic chair. Some of the most devoted labourers in the cause of Christ, at home and abroad, are found sheltering them- selves beneath prelatic shadows. Some of the ablest pens have been wielded there also on behalf of the cause of Christ. It is not of men the assertion is made. It is matter of rejoicing that there are many honoured and beloved who rise superior to Pre- lacy. Nevertheless the system has proved itself inexpedient. Mr Gladstone might be credited when he said — 'I think the Church of England enters into the natural life and purpose of the country — that she is associated in a great degree with the feelings, the traditions, as well as the history of England ; and there are in my opinion very many who do not formally belong to her communion who would with deep regret witness her down- fall' (Speecb, Aug. 1868). But the prelatic system in the ex- perience of men has failed as compared with other sections in promoting the extension, and the thorough beneficial regulatiou of the Church of Christ. 292 THE GOVEENMEKT OF THE KINGDOM. , Thus, the hulk of the commumty have heen left uriinstructed. Methodism, and other efforts outside the Church of England, have done more for the christianization of the people than this wealthy system. A better state of things prevails in many places, and noble efforts are put forth by heroic men ; but gene- rally where the Prelatic Church has undisputed possession, the rural population are sunk in ignorance, while the masses in cities have been left a prey to infidelity. Brotherly love has heen arrested. Ministers destitute of pre- latic ordination are regarded as no ministers of Christ — if Christians at all. Many prelatists will not ajDpear on the same platform with these to advocate Christian and philanthropic efforts. Discipline is disregarded. Fugitives from other Churches, though sinners exceedingly, are at once admitted to Church privileges. Midtitudes of ivorldly men have occuined prelatic pulpits, evi- dently regarding the ministry as a mere profession. This still continues. Pomp and luxury with degrading poverty range side hy side amongst prelatic ministei^s. Lordly dignity and wealth contrast sadly with the drudgery and poverty of poor curates. The bishop's cast-off clothes and forty pounds a-year may be an exaggeration, but the evil is too well known to be concealed. Chiefly, presbyters are deprived of privileges, and prevented from discharging duties which Christ has attached to their office. Preaching of the gospel, the highest honour and most important duty, is beneath the dignity of mitred heads. That must be left to the inferior clergy ! Consequently, not to speak of The persecuting spirit of the sy stein, as evinced in the past. Prelacy, as such, obstructs the progress of Christ's kingdom. Within the Church of England there have been many of the noblest champions of Protestant truth, and most zealous servants of our blessed Lord, but this has arisen not from their prelacy, it has been notwithstanding that obstructive influence. Let prelatic notions be acted upon, and harmonious action and co- operation in the evangelization of the world would be arrested. * Behold, then, a Church which acknowledges the sovereign as THE AEGUMENT FROM EXPEDIENCY. 293 her head on earth, supreme in all causes, ecclesiastical cvi well as civil — a Church whose supreme council, for we cannot call it a court, divided into an upper and lower house, as never council was before, can talk much, but can do nothing — a Church which, for the last two hundred years, has annually and publicly lamented its want of a godly discipline, and yet has done nothing to recover it ; which permits what discipline she has to be exe- cuted by laymen sitting in courts secular in everything but name — a Church w^ithin which some affirm that baptism is regeneration, and others as stoutly deny it, so that the question has to be settled by laymen of the law, who sapiently conclude that both opinions have been held in the Church from time immemorial — a Church where the ritualist, who trusts in candles lighted ^t noon-day, parti-coloured priestly vestments, and the unbloody sacrifice of the mass ; the evangelical, who holds by the puritan theology ; the moderately broad churchman, who doubts the reality of the atonement ; and the more advanced sceptic, who denies the inspiration of Scripture — where all these varieties are compelled to dwell together by the stern hand of the State, and if its pressure were lifted for a moment would fly wide as the poles asunder — a Church, one of whose bishops is a bold denier of the Word of God, and so thoroughly is she manacled, that she cannot cast him out. I have heard this Church compared to some ancient fortress built at various times, and having no coherence of design, but yet so beautiful in its irregularities that one could not wish to see it remodelled by the line and rule of modern architecture. It may be so, but the simile must be carried on to its results. Such a fortress is incapable of defence— can hardly offer a shelter — a useless thing altogether, but wonderfully picturesque ' (Rev. W. Wood, of Elie). In view of all the facts of the case, who can say that Prelacy is vindicated on the ground of expediency 1 What other conclusion from this entire discussion can be arrived at but this — (a) That, as the arguments from Scripture, antiquity, and expediency are beside the question, (6) Prelacy has been disproved ; and (c) by consequence, presbytery estab- lished as the scriptural form of church government. 29 4f THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. In the absence of the slightest evidence in favour of prelatic bishops, and their fancied apostolic succession, and in the face of the fact, that the majority of eminent Biblical critics and Church historians have decided against their claims ; the vast assumptions of Prelacy are at once ridiculous, presumptuous, and offensive to the whole household of faith. Most earnestly let all true subjects of the King long and pray that He would purify every Church in which Prelacy, nominally or practically, is found, ' casting down imaginations, and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ.' Questions. ^ 1. Why do Prelatists argue from Expediency ? 2. Name two distinguished men who have done so. 3. Mention four considerations of utility given. 4. State another distinction urged, the name of a great and good man who acted upon it, and its consequences. 5. Give another view also acted iipon. 6. Give and refute Dr Whatelyh disallowance. 7. 11 ow can it he shown that Prelacy is inexpedient. 8. What then is to he said regarding the many excellent men in connection with it ? 9. Give instances of the failure of Prelacy. 10. State the conclusion from this discussion in three particulars. 11. What then is to he said of prelatic claims ; and how is it to he regarded i THE PAPACY. 295 CHAPTER XXIII. GOVERNMENT CENTEALIZED. ' Who opposeth and exalteth himself so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple of God.' II. — The Papacy. Popery viewed as the subjection of bishops to tlie authority of a superior, is the climax of Prelacy. Let this last be fully de- veloped even apart from the claim of infallibility, and this is the natural and logical result. The idea of both is that all Church power rests in the clergy. This idea culminates in Popery. If a lordly ruler or bishop is absolutely necessary for many churches and clergymen, a higher ruler must be needful over many bishops. This is acknowledged in the appointment of arch- bishops. But these archbishops themselves require a higher ruler still The ascent once commenced must be proceeded with until the one supreme ruler is found in the Pontiff or Pope. The hierarchy must be complete in all its parts. Accordingly, the Church of Rome has consistently declared the universal and perpetual obligation of the completed system. ' If any one will assert that in the Catholic Church there is not a hierarchy, insti- tuted by divine ordination, which consists of bishops, presbyters, and deacons, let him be anathema.' * A more perfect and imposing system of external unity than that presented, the world has not seen ; exhibiting as it does a vast corporation, with its office-bearers and members, all under subjection to one visible head, and each holding his place in rela- tion to every other in the body ecclesiastical, in virtue of his subordination to the common source of unity and power ' (Bannerman, 'Ch. of Christ,' p. 291). The Papacy assumes that whilst Christ was on the earth. He constituted the Church by an organization which He designed to wntinue till the end of time. That organization comprised Christ Himself, the apostles, and believers. Further, that by 296 THE GOVEHNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. His special appointment Peter became tlie Yicar of Clirist, taking his place after the ascension as visible head of the Church, and that whilst the primacy of this universal bishop continues in the successors of Peter, who are bishops of Rome, the order of prelates perpetuates the apostleship. Further still, no prelate is legitimate who is not subject to the Pope, as no apostle could exist unless subject to Christ. And so, finally, for the same reason, no one can possibly be a Christian who is not subject to that Ptomish hierarchy. The whole Christian world are thus under the jurisdiction of the prelates and their supreme head. All else are outside the pale of the Christian Church. The grace of God cannot be possessed unless through the channel of this hierarchy. They therefore proclaim that it is absolutely necessary for salvation, that every individual be subject to the Pvoman pontiff. ' He who is not in due con- nection and subordination to the Pope and general councils must needs be dead, and cannot be accounted a member of the Church (Douay Cat. p. 20.) The government of the Church is thus held to be monarchical — - that by divine right one supreme ruler is invested with power over the whole Church. Whether this supreme ruler is an ab- solute or limited monarch until the promulgation of the recent Infallibility dogma was a matter of dispute amongst Romanists. One party — the Cis- Alpine — held that the Pope is subject to the decisions of a general council and the canons or constitution of the Church. This is still maintained by the Alt Catholic party. An- other— the Ultramontane — that his power of jurisdiction and legislation is unlimited, all officers being subject to his control as receiving their authority from him. Both parties have agreed in acknowledging the Pope as the supreme monarch of the Church and the world, the ordinary administration of particular Churches being committed to prelates under him. The Council of Trent, after strong discussion and much in- trigue, decided that (1.) there is a proper visible priesthood under the New Testament whose special characteristic is, that they have a right to consecrate and offer the true body and blood of the Lord, and of retaining or remitting sins ; (2.) that there are other orders of clergy in the Church, both major and minor, through the THE PAPACY. 297 latter of wliich men rise to tlie priesthood ; (3.) that there is a hiercarcLy appointed by divine ordination consisting of bishops, presbyters, and deacons ; and (4.) that bishops are superior to presbyters, and have the exclusive power of confirming and or- daining. This authorized doctrine of the Church of Rome contains an explicit assertion of the leading principles of prelatists. The views of prelatists are thus at a glance seen to be identical with those of the Church of Rome on this subject — all that is wanting is the supremacy of the Pope. The Romish theory is — a Vicar of Christ, a perpetual college of apostles, and the people subject to their infallible control. 1. The Supremacy. Matt. xvi. 18 is generally quoted by the advocates of Popery in proof that Peter occupied a position of supremacy over the other disciples. It is then assumed that he was Bishop of Rome, and that the present Pope is his legitimate successor in a direct line, and that unless men are subject to him as the Vicar of the Lord Jesus, they have no connection with Christ. It is, however, evident, that our Lord was on that occasion referring to the confession of Himself, which Peter had just made in ver. 16. And it was this Rock, Christ Himself, on which His Church was declared to be built (a). This is further evident from the circumstance mentioned in vers. 22, 23, where Peter is found altogether mistaken as to the great objects of Christ's mission, and is declared, instead of being the Head of the Church, to be an adversary (b). There- are, however, two or three pass- ages, in which the rock is most distinctly set forth : (1.) By Paul, * For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ ' (1 Cor. iii. 11); (2.) By Peter, ' This is the stone which was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the corner. Neither is there salvation in any other.' * Wherefore also it is contained in the Scripture, Behold, I lay in Zion a chief corner-stone, elect, precious : and he that believeth on Him shall not be confounded ' (Acts iv. 11, 12 ; 1 Peter ii. 9), (c). Such supremacy was never spoken of or manifested 298 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. amongst the apostles. Long after tlie declaration in Matt, xvi., and shortly before our Lord's crucifixion, there was a strife among them which of them should be greatest, and in our Lord's re- buke, both in Luke xxii. 24-27, and in other parallel passages, we see that no such thing as superiority was meant or was to be allowed to obtain among them. * One is your Master, even Christ, and all ye are brethren/ This is the law of His kingdom on the earth. Peter was not the first called^ as Andrew and others were called before him, nor is he always first named. He was but one of the favoured three on the mount of transfiguration, and in the garden of agony ; and he simply shared the govern- ment of the Church with the other apostles. This is very evi- dent on looking at Acts viii., where Peter is sent as a messenger ; and at xi., where an account is taken of his work ; in chap xv., where he neither presides nor jDroposes the determination of the question discussed ; and in Gal. ii., where he is spoken of along with his brethren, ver. 9 ; and as having been withstood by Paul for dissembling, in vers. 11-13. In ver. 7, it is expressly stated, that 'the gospel of the circumcision was given to Peter,' as that of the Gentiles was to Paul. All that Matt. xvi. 18, and similar pass- ages refer to, is abundantly explained by the facts recorded in Acts ii., X., and xv. There Peter and the other apostles used the key of preaching, and of admission by baptism, opening the door of the gospel to Jews and Gentiles. John xxi. 15-17 is also given in proof; but this office, we see in Acts XX. 28, is the ordinary duty of pastors, the very rank which Peter humbly claims for himself (1 Peter v. 1-4). To substantiate the supremacy of the Pope, Komanists would, in addition, require to prove : (1.) That Peter was ever bishop at Rome, as he is not mentioned by Paul either in writing to or from it ; (2.) That his office was transmissible, and has been actually transmitted ; and, (3.) That the present Pope is actually descended, in an unbroken succession of holy bishops, as his rightful successor. But this is impossible. Christ the Lord is the only Head of His body the Church. This emblem of a human body requires that the Church, though consisting of many members, have but one head. A visible head is unnecessary. ' There is no other head of the Church but the THE PAPACY. 299 Lord Jesus Christ ' (' West Conf.' cli. xxv. § 5). The Churcli is not a monster with two heads. It is a real body, with one living, life-giving Head. It is argued that Christ is acknowledged as the invisible Head of the Church, and that the Pope is only regarded as the visible head. But this distinction is altogether unwarranted by Scrip- ture, and is a daring usurpation of the prerogatives of Christ. "Were He dead and not alive — far off instead of nigh — had He withheld a complete revelation of His will, and continued the gift of inspiration, then necessity for a living, visible, and in- fallible head might be argued. Nay, the necessity is a fiction. Christ ever liveth — He is always present — His Word is perfect — His SjDirit ever applying it with power. Were the Pope of Pvome the vicar of Christ — the natural and visible head and ruler — he must be Christ. If he holds the prerogatives of Christ, he must have Christ's attributes. He cannot have the one without the other. If he has universal dominion, pronounces an infallible decision — if dissent from his authority forfeits salvation, then the Pope is heir to the gifts as well as to the oflBce of Christ. If he claims the office while he does not possess the gifts, he must be Antichrist. This principle is conceded by Romanists, and they ascribe to their Pontiff the attributes as well as the prerogatives of Christ. He is enthroned, his foot kissed in token of complete subjection, incense is offered, and he is addressed with blasphemous titles. Finally, anathema! are poured forth on all who decline to own his authority. This claim must therefore be opposed as a religious duty. A man might claim to rule the world, and yet the claim would not involve either his assumption of divine attributes, or apostacy from God on the part of those submitting to him. But this claim to be the vicar of Christ, is to rule the Church and the world as Christ. The prerogatives exercised, necessarily involve the claim to be possessed of divine attributes. The man virtually claims to be God. To submit to him is consequently apostacy. Fidelity to Christ, therefore, demands the most strenuous re- pudiation of this Papal claim. 300 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 2. The Popish View of the Nature of the Church affects THE Government. The Churcli of Rome asserts that the Christian Church must always hold a visible position amongst the institutions of the world, and that she has done so ; and, with an air of triumph, she asks, ' Where was your Church before Luther V This dogma proceeds on a misconception as to the real nature of the Church of Christ. That Church is either visible, embrac- ing all who profess to take Christ as their only Lord and Master ; or invisible, embracing all who are united to Christ by a living faith. This being the case, the Church visible may be large to human eyes, and yet very small in the eye of Him who seeth not as man seeth. On the otlier hand, there may be a very small visible Church, whilst in it there may be very many jewels of the Redeemer. Such a state of things as Rome contends for has never been the real state of matters either in regard to the Church generally, or in the Church of Rome particularly. 1. The history of the Church of Christ most clearly shows this, as in the following texts concerning the Old Testament Church : Judges ii. 1 0-1 3 ; 1 Kings xix. 10, 14. Only eight persons were in the ark, only seventy went dow^n to Egypt. Few waited for redemption in Israel when Christ appeared. Many went back, and w^alked no more with Him; and, persecuted to the cross by the visible Church, Jesus expired, while all His disciples forsook him and fied. Thereafter, the number of these was but one hundred and twenty ; and still it is not many wise, not many mighty, not many noble that are called (1 Cor. i. 26 ; Matt. vii. 13, 14; Lukexii. 32). 2. It is also far from true, when the prophetic and admonitory history of the Churcli of Rome is considered. This is sufficiently evident from Romans xi. 17-21, and in Rev. xiii. and other chapters. 3. The Ministry is by Popery corrupted — (1.) By making them sacrificing priests ; (2.) By forming them into a vast external organization of orders THE PAPACY. 301 for political purposes ; (3.) By conferring upon tliem power of confession and absolution. (See Beeclier's ^ Papal Conspiracy/) 1. In favour of confession to the priest, James v. 16 is re- ferred to ; but if tliis is in point, it is equally proof that the priest should confess to the people. The Word of God always shows that confession is made to Him alone of all sin ; thus, Ps. xxxii. 5 ; li. 1-4. Christ showed His approbation of the quotation, 'Who can forgive sins but God only?' If wanting in the power of forgiveness, vain is confession to man. The confessional is a great engine for obtaining family and political secrets, as could be abundantly proved ; and it acts, at the same time, as a fearful engine of corruption both to priests and people. How can a man listen continually to every species of sin, and yet remain pure 1 Continual catechizing in respect to every con- ceivable sin must tend at once to train the dupes of Popery in guilt, and to banish every appearance of shame in the avowal of it. 2. The doctrine of absolution is founded partly on an inference, and partly on texts of Scripture — (1.) Pome's ministers are said to be sacrificing priests, and therefore empowered to forgive sin. If the premise were granted, the conclusion is denied, for whilst the Jewish ministers were sacrificing priests, they never did or claimed to forgive sin (Isa. xliii. 25) ; (2.) John xx. 22, 23 is quoted, but the parallel texts show that Christ was speaking of preaching the gospel, and of the ordinary exercise of discipline in the Church. Accordingly, we never find the apostles, in all their practice, doing otherwise. This was their vocation, declar- ing the glad tidings of great joy, and watching over the flock of God (Acts ii. 38 ; xx. 20 j 1 Cor. v. 3-5). These are still found in the power of the ministers of the Lord Jesus, hxtt they cannot absolve from sin of the conscience : God only can. 4. The Standaed of Law to the Church is the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament. These are the only, but the infallible rule of faith to professing Chris- tians. With this standard Popery is not content. This divine rule is both corrupted and concealed by Pome. 802 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Admitting that a divine revelation is the sole rule of faith, Popery asserts that the Scriptures are insufficient, and adds to them the books of the Apocrypha, traditions, and the canons and decrees of the Church. It is the process of addition that enables Popery to have a show of authority for the supremacy and erroneous views of the Church and ministry. (See ' Hand-Book of Popery,' by the Kev. Dr Begg.) 5. Popery Coerupts the Worship and Sacraments of the New Testament. (1.) The divine worship is corrupted by sensual mummeries, and by hiding all that is intellectual and spiritual ; but especially, by making each house of prayer a sacrificing temple, and con- ducting the service in a dead language. (2.) The sacraments are corrupted, both by adding to their number, and by altering their character. Penance and confirma- tion and extreme unction have no countenance in the Scriptures ; orders is no sacrament, that being wanting in emblems ; marriage, ordained for man's good in Eden. The only two proper sacra- ments— Baptism, is corrupted into regeneration ; and the Lord's Supper, into the basest idolatry. (1.) Daniel. In chap. ii. 31, various mighty kingdoms are mentioned under the figure of the great compound image seen by Nebuchadnezzar, and explained by Daniel — viz., the gold head, the Babylonian ; breast and arms of silver, the Medo-Persian ; the belly and thighs of brass, the Alacedonian or Grecian ; and the legs, feet, and toes of iron, as the Roman, strong at first, and weak afterwards, divided into ten portions, till the Messiah's kingdom, the stone cut without hands, should break the whole in pieces. These several successive sovereignties are further described in chap. vii. 3-8, under the figure of beasts which, compared with the fore- going, would be — the lion, &c., the Babylonian; the bear, the Medo-Persian ; the leopard, with four heads, the Macedonian ; and the terrible, nameless beast, the Koman. This last had ten THE PAPACY. 303 horns, and there arose from amongst them a little horn. These are all interpreted in the verses succeeding (19-25) as kingdoms, the little horn being a kingdom altogether diverse from the others in its nature. And nothing in history can answer to the description but Popery. But this system fully does so, in its worldly pride, wisdom, and ambition, as well as in its usurpa- tion of the prerogatives of the Most High, and deadly hatred and persecution of the people of God. (2.) Paul. One of the most striking passages of the New Testament is that of 2 Thess. ii. 3-10, fully depicting the place, period, nature, and future overthrow of this power — the place being where that which let or hindered abode. History shows that this was the Koman secular empire. So the period was when this last was removed. The nature of that development was to be a mysteri- ous and wicked power, whose overthrow could only be effected by the power of God's Word and Spirit, and the coming of the Messiah. In 1 Tim. iv, 1-4, the nature of the coming Antichrist is fur- ther unfolded, showing that it was to arise in the latter or gospel times, being a total departure from the simplicity of the primi- tive faith, by giving attention to demon-worship, lying under the mask of religion, forbidding to marry, and commanding to abstain from meats. In each of these respects this system most exactly answers to the inspired description. Rome exclaims that this cannot be applied to her, as it speaks only of some departing ; but we find, by referring to Heb. iii. 16, that the very same word is employed by the Apostle to de- scribe not a portion, but an entire people. (3.) John. A similar and most vivid picture of this power is set before ti3 in Rev. xiii. 1-8, where a nondescript beast, embracing the peculiarities of all those enumerated by Daniel, is seen arising from the sea, or spiritual world, having seven heads and ten S04 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. horns, having a moutli uttering blasphemy, and a limited power allotted him. These horns are interpreted to mean kingdoms, and the heads to denote the seven mountains on vrhich the mys- tery is seated. In chap, xviii. this power is said to trade in the ' souls of men,' as well as in all other kinds of merchandise, and her final doom is emphatically portrayed. It is of little avail for the Church of Eome to say that such descriptions of Antichrist are not applicable to her, as many antichrists are spoken of in Scripture ; for she is set forth as pre- eminently the Antichrist, and the descriptions are so full and accurate that it is impossible to be mistaken, her whole external polity and internal workings fully filling up the divine predic- tions. Questions. 1. How can it he shown that Popery is the climax of Prelacy ? 2. State generally the Papal j^ositions. 3. By what Council were these claims enforced ? 4. State and refute some of the texts quoted on behalf of the supremacy. 5. Give some other reasons why it should he rejected. 6. State and refute the Popish idea of the Church. 7. In what way does this system corrupt the Christian ministry ? 8. State and refute the doctrine as to confession and ahso- lution ? 9. How does Popery treat the Word of God ? 10. State generally how the worship and sacraments of the New Testament are corrupAed hy this system. 11. Mention some of the p)leiees of Scripture in which the over- throiv of this system is predicted. PEESBYTERIAL EPISCOPACY. 805 CHAPTER XXIV. GOVERNMENT HARMONIZED. *' True freedom is where no restraint is known, That Scripture, justice, and good sense disown ; Where only vice and injury are tied. And all from shore to shore is free beside." — COWPER. Presbyterial Episcopacy. In order to good government, experience teaches that certain conditions must meet and harmonize. Of these the liberty of the people, the authority of the rulers, and the unity of the kingdom, are of great importance. Without freedom, order, and justice, good government is an impossibility. Let there be an equipoise of freedom and order throughout all its provinces, and not only justice, but the stability and unity of the kingdom, are mightily promoted. These features are conspicuously and harmoniously combined in this government which the King hath provided for His holy hill of Zion. I. Liberty is secured to every member of the Church, while that freedom is carefully restricted. This liberty is not lawless. All the power which Christ has bestowed upon His Church inheres in the entire membership, which includes private and official persons. It resides not in ' the clergy ^ or ministers alone. That idea has developed into prelatic and Popish tyranny. To all in whom the Holy Spirit dwells — all to whom Christ has given His commission for the evangelization of the world and the organization of His disciples — power is communicated. The entire membership are commanded to declare what truths they acknowledge to be the truths of God. They are to confess Christ's name, to testify and act for Him. Power, in regard to doctrine, discipline, worship, and government, is committed to 806 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. the whole Chiircli — ministers and people together. But this inherent power is not to be exercised indiscriminately. It is not to run riot licentiously. In orderly and well-appointed channels it is to flow, to the end that the body may be nourished and her living Head glorified. 1. Election is a principal channel in which this freedom flows. All the members of the Church have an equal voice in the selection of their officers. The poorest and weakest member of tlie flock has the right, as much as the wisest and most honoured presbyter, to act according to his judgment and conscience, in subordination to the directions of the Bible. This right is so fully declared in Scripture that it cannot be denied. This principle of the Church's constitution lies at the root of the tree of liberty. Let it in any way be removed or weakened, in that proportion is the entire freedom of the Church endangered or destroyed. In every case of election, whether by the congregation of suitable and necessary officers, or by the assembled eldership of other representatives, this law of the King demands the utmost free- dom of selection. Dictation, control by party-spirit, disallowance of this privilege, are alike opposed to that liberty which Christ has conferred. 2. Eepresentation is the spiscial organ by which that inherent power is applied. Apostolic commands are addressed to entire Churches. Such commands, however, do not decide how each member is to exer- cise his share in the government. These same epistles to JSTew Testament Churches show how these powers were applied. In each case, that was by representative associated presbyters. This is the guarantee for liberty. This orderly exercise is quite con- sistent with the inherent possession of the power. The Church is neither a democratic mob, nor a despotic autocracy. Even in republican governments the inherent power of the people, although most fully recognized, is not applied by mass meetings and votes on all and every point, but by orderly and free elec- tion of representatives. If the election be but free and faithful, PEESBYTEEIAL EPISCOPACY. S07 the principle of liberty is fully conserved. So in the Church. Not only the pastors; elders who are to rule well are selected by the free election of the members. These representatives are the special organs by whom the people act. By them the mind of the Church is carried into practice. If the laws of the kingdom are contravened, provision exists to call these representatives to account. If respected, obedience is rendered to those who have the rule as unto Christ. The members of the Church are never in Scripture regarded as a mob, to whom, in every case, appeal must be made. The power received from Christ is exercised by properly constituted officers. These being, on the one hand, freely elected by the people to act for them, and, on the other, restricted to act according to the revealed laws of Christ, the principles of liberty and order are harmonized. 3. Assent or Consent is another important channel. Representatives being elected to rule in ordinary administration, must, in extraordinary cases, obtain the assent or consent of those for whom they act. The apostles and elders at Jerusalem discussed and came to a finding on one of the greatest questions that could intimately concern all the membership. Before sending forth that authoritative deci- sion, the assent, if not the consent, of the brethren assembled was obtained. Then the decree went forth in the name, not only of the apostles and elders, but of the whole Church. That assent or consent must be equally important at all times in the settle- ment of great questions. An attempt was made to alter the con- stitution of the Church in one essential particular. The apostles alone or together might have decided the matter infallibly by inspiration. They did not without a deliberative assembly, asso- ciating themselves with the eldership. And even then the decree was not enacted until the matter had been put before the assembled brethren, and their assent obtained. The whole Church was consulted first through the administrative representative oflScers, second by placing the decision, with the grounds of it, before all the people that could be conveniently reached. The attempt 308 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. was thus resisted. In several particulars, steps were taken for the preservation of the essential principles of the Church. It has been well said — ^ The way in which they (the mem- bers) are here introduced, plainly implies that they did not stand upon the same platform in the matter with the apostles and elders. It does imply, however, that after the apostles and elders had made up their minds as to what was the mind and will of God in this matter, and what decision should be pronounced, the subject was brought before the people — that they were called upon to attend to it, to exercise their judgment ujDon it, and to make up their mind regarding it. It implies that all this was done, and that, as the result of it, the brethren were convinced of the justice and soundness of the decision, and exjDressed their concurrence in it, as well as in the practical step by which it was followed up, of sending chosen men of their company to Antioch' (' Hist. Theol.' vol. i. p. 55). That example is for all time. As the liberty of the member- ship depends upon the stability of the constitution, no radical change thereof can be effected without their assent or consent. Where no constitution or written charter exists, declaring the limitations and rights of rulers and ruled, liberty is ready to be sacrificed. This has been experienced by many groaning nations. It is not less the experience of the Church. There must be a known ground upon which men are united in Church fellowship. That ground, expressed or understood, is the charter or constitu- tion. Representative officers are elected by the membership to administer that constitution. They have no authority to change it. If that be attempted, not only are their powers exceeded, the attempt is that of revolution. The revolution may be necessary, but the constituency must in that case be appealed to. Unless in that particular the membership assent or consent, the revolu- tion is arbitrary and unrighteous. 4. Appeal and Protest are additional guarantees. Advice may be sought or tendered, so authoritative decision may be pronounced by the associated presbyters. PEESBYTERIAL EPISCOPACY. 309 Appeal may be also employed. Let any member think that the principles of election, of representation, or of other essential positions have been infringed, freedom is conserved by the right of appeal. Consciences that feel aggrieved or dissatisfied may not only refer the matter from the local to the more extended eldership; a decision supposed to be wrong may be appealed against. Thus injuries may be exposed to searching investiga- tion, and redress provided by other and more impartial judges. Protest is the final provision for the liberty of the members of the Church. This must ever be the last resort. When neither Scripture, reason, constitution, nor brotherly appeals are heeded — when, as has often happened, for instance, in the extrusion of the Erskines and Gillespie from the Church of Scotland — when men professedly Christian seem deaf to every consideration, and, having obtained power, abuse it, — and when redress is thus im- possible, the injured can still protest and appeal at once to a future Free, Faithful, and Reformed Assembly, and to the judg- ment of the great King. Free action is thus fully secured for the entire membership. By election, representation, assent and consent, appeal and pro- test— under the limitation and guidance of the Scriptures — liberty and liberal action are possessed. To preserve this precious boon, centralization of Church authority must be jealously guarded against. This free and orderly action of the entire membership ought to find full expression in the ruling elder. II. Authority is secured, anarchy and domination alike prevented, when the principles of scriptural government are carried out. The Church being a theocracy, of which Christ is the Head, all power is derived immediately from Him. The authority which presbyters have has been received, not from the people, but from Christ. The call of the people is but the outer expres- sion of the inner call by the Lord Himself. Each presbyter is the servant of, and responsible to Christ, through the Church that has recognized and given effect to His commission. * All Church power, in actu primo, or fundamentally, is in the 310 THE GOYEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Church itself; in actu secundo, or its exercise, in them that are especially called thereunto.' The Church ' doth not give unto such officers a power or authority that was formally and actually in the body of the community, by virtue of any grant or law of Christ, so as that they should receive and act the power of the Church by virtue of a delegation from them ; but only they de- sign, choose, set apart the individual persons who are intrusted with office-power by Christ Himself (Owen, ' Nat. of Gos. Ch.; see also Bannerman's ' Church of Christ '). The teaching elder is, by divine authority, empowered to make and associate disciples in worship and service. So long as the company is not fully organized, his duties must be discharged with what assistance from other officers may be possible. Organ- ization at once produces representatives of the people. These elders are then associated with the teaching elder in regulating all Church matters. This office of teaching elder may be regarded as the highest in the Church. In Scripture teaching is presented as a more impor- tant function than that of ruling. There is no elevation, however, as to any superiority of power and rank. The office of presbyter is one, although distinguished into these two branches. Special requisite gifts for teaching is the only superiority — the imparta- tion of the knowledge of salvation taking precedence of all else. Spiritual oversight as a bishop or pastor is more particularly charged upon the teaching elder, but the ruling elder as well is an overseer of the flock. These teaching elders are on a perfect equality. They hold virtually the same office, however they may be subdivided into pastors, missionaries, doctors, or professors of theology. All presbyters have authority from Christ to rule, but they have none to dominate or tyrannize. The spirit of domination is nowhere so decidedly manifest as amongst separatists, who may even disown a settled ministry. A small party profess themselves Christian, and then give us proof by conduct that reveals how unamiable and unheavenly are their dispositions. The exercise of that charity for which Paul pleads (1 Cor. xiii.), appears to be no part of their creed. Shut up as a city, walled up to heaven in spiritual pride, their delight- PEESBYTEKIAL EPISCOPACY. 311 ful exercise is to uncliiircli, if not to uncliristianize all others, be they who or what they may. To treat any other parties as be- longing to Christ would be to destroy the first principle of their polity. The voice of God proclaiming — ' Whom God hath cleansed, them call not thou unclean,' is not heard ; or, if so, is utterly disregarded. With Popery, they choose rather to utter only maledictions. Congregationalism frequently either excludes ministerial authority, or yields servility to domination. The power of the pastor is often most urgently required to enforce discipline or to maintain truth and morality, when suddenly the semblance of it which he is allowed is put out of existence. Caprice, lax de- sire, delinquency, and * purseocracy ' unite in expelling the would- be reformer. Those on whose support he depends for the means of living no longer desire his presence or his efforts. He must depart. Authority in such cases there is none. Where this is not the case, Congregationalism frequently yields absolute power to one man. Isaac Taylor, the son, I believe, of a Congregational minister, says — ' Considered in its relation to the pastors indi- vidually, the Congregational system is, in one word, the people's polity, framed or adhered to, for the purpose of circumscribing clerical power within the narrowest possible limits, and of ab- solutely excluding any exertions of authority, such as the high English temper could not brook. The minister of the meeting- house or chapel is one against alL . . . Feeling that the pre- rogatives formally assigned to him are altogether insufficient for the free and beneficial discharge of his functions, no alternative is left to him but either to succumb, and to sustain a mere mockery of authority, or to usurp (we must call it usurpation) such powers as he can; and by personal address, or by the force of his temper, or the momentum of his talents and character, to render himself absolute. Nothing tends so rapidly to despotism as pure democracy' ('Sp. Desp.' p. 389). Popish intolerance in the priesthood is somewhat understood ; that of Prelacy ought to be recognized as fully. The High Churcli theory is, that the entire efficacy of the gospel and saving virtue of the sacraments is bound up in that priesthood or. clergy that possesses prelatic ordination. Those who reject Prelacy, S12 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. therefore, reject the conditions of salvation. ' We dare not/ say prelatists, ' tell such persons that they can be saved.' ' Are we justified in denying salvation to those who are out of the Church, as we consider it was constituted by the apostles'? We are not their judges ' ('Fut. Church of Scot.' note on p. 36). The great argument employed in pleading on behalf of a Curates' Aid So- ciety, in the hearing of the writer, was that it sought to obviate the grand evils of Popery, infidelity, and dissent. Arrogant Churchmen do as much violence to common sense and good feeling, not to speak of Bible truth, in such utterances, as if they were to argue that the pillars of the Church are living creatures, and the worshippers in the pews are merely blocks of inanimate stone (See ' Sp. Desp.' ch. x.) This despotic intolerance cannot be concealed. It is part and parcel of the prelatic system. Nevertheless, some who are aware of all this, argue that in the Church there ought to be bishops of the prelatic type, securing only that they be placed under proper restrictions. Monarchy, it is contended, is not only the form into which the social system will spontaneously subside, it is the ideal of perfection in government; and further, that this form is only refrained from, because it is dififtcult to secure a race of absolute monarchs possessed of sufficient competency and disinterestedness. Now, were all this granted, the analogy must still be denied with respect to the government of the kingdom of Christ. For, first, This argument would involve not Prelacy alone, but its logical development in the Papacy. You cannot stop short by placing ' the supreme administrative power in the hands of a father and a shepherd' for each district; these fathers and shepherds necessarily require to be supremely governed by one living father and shepherd. The Christian world that studies the Divine Word has had enough of this fatherly oversight to yield again to his tender mercies. But supposing that Popery may be avoided, and that the absolutism of Prelacy may be re- strained— Secondly, The plan is contradicted by experience as well as by Scripture. Experience that has become matter of history is looked up to as a teacher. Well, what does the accumulated experience of the past three centuries teach as to the benefits of PEESBYTERIAL EPISCOPACY. 313 Prelacy 1 Has it pre-eminently advanced the interests of Christianity amongst the population of England, Wales, and Ireland above that of Scotland and the province of Ulster 1 Has it especially expelled unsound doctrine, and overtaken the spiritual destitution of the masses ? No impartial judge has hitherto decided in its favour as compared with that of Presbytery. But modify the system if you will. Remove, if you can the prelacy, and retain, as you say, the episcopacy, and, as on the Continent, have superintendents or bishops subject to synods and assemblies, with merely the standing of presbyters, what then saith experience ? Ask onward from Norway to Hungary, and observe whether — First, Spiritual religion has been more fully promoted ; secondly, False doctrine arrested ; or thirdly. Discipline more conscientiously and happily exercised, than in Churches where no such officers are tolerated ? Ah ! yes, it is said, * ecclesiastical business may be managed efficiently, economically, and equitably by a presbytery ; ' but where energy, promptitude, secrecy, and high sentiments are necessary, such management is deficient, and ' foregoes benefits of a refined sort.^ What these refined benefits consist in is not explained ; they seem, however, to belong rather to corporeal than spiritual interests. That Presbytery is inconsistent with energy and kindred qualities is quite a misrepresentation. He who stated this probably knew little of presbyterial history, of the Knox, Gillespie, Henderson, Erskine, or Chalmers type. Analogy, how- ever, might here call forth experience. In civil revolution it is not by monarchy that usually adventurous deeds are suddenly performed. That very provisional cor nittee having a president with delegated powers, which is compared to presbytery, is the form into which the spirit of energy, promptitude, secrecy, and high energy develops itself. That president of a committee, or, if you will, a presbytery, is found to be most effective, in a great national crisis ; and the Pvcformation from Popery, and all succes- sive reformations, give the same attestation. Again, it is said, you must provide a ' gradation of employ- ments and dignities,' because there is a diversity of gifts natural and gracious in religious persons. Historical experience may again be challenged to say whether the scriptural plan of 814 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. making tlie same officer a presbyter and a bishop is sucli a per- version of tlie exercise of these gifts as to ' affront reason and nature.' Has Presbytery found no field of labour and danger for the man of • bold and ardent zeal ? Has she no study or chair of theological, instruction for the man of intellectual pur- suits gifted with the faculty of acquisition 1 Has she no pulpit for one gifted with powers of utterance and flow of soul 1 Can she find no sphere in the personal cure of souls for the man of gentle spirit and placid skill ? Are these barriers so constructed by Presbytery that philanthropy and self-denying love are pre- vented from labouring amongst the poor and wretched ? Can Presbytery provide no platform where the soul qualified of Heaven by personal dignity, paternal sentiments, comprehensive judgment, and calm temper for the throne of government, may guide the assembled presbyters to a just and scriptural decision 1 Pieally, so to detract Presbytery to promote Prelacy is indeed to ' afi'ront reason and nature ' in an egregious manner. Scripture, to most Christians, will prove a higher authority than experience, whatever be her findings, There, not only by pre- cepts and apostolic examples. Presbytery finds her warrant in subordination to the continual government of the Lord Jesus Christ. Let it never be forgotten that the monarch of this kingdom is not a dead Christ. He is alive, nigh, and therefore accessible in His infinite wisdom and mighty power. He it is that calls, employs, directs, enables, by special providences and operations of His Spirit, every one of His ministering servants in the performance of allotted duty. And let it not be forgotten as well, that He, pointing to the princes of this world, and all their trappings and gradations of rank, has expressly laid down the law of His kingdom for every one of His officers — ' It shall not be so among you ; ' ' One is your master ; ' ' All ye are brethren.' It is well, therefore, to find those advocating a modi- fication of Prelacy arriving at even such a hypothetical conclusion as the following : — ' If a choice were to be made between two actual forms of Presbyterianism and of Episcopacy, whereof the first admits the laity to a just place in the management and ad- ministration of the Church, while the second absolutely rejects all such influence, and at the same time retains for, its bishops PRESCYTEEIAL EPISCOPACY. 815 the baronial dignities and the secular splendour usurped by the insolent hierarchs of the Middle Ages, then indeed the balance would be one of a difficult sort, and unless there ^vere room to hope for a correction and reform of political Prelacy, an honest and modest Christian mind would be fain to take refuge in the substantial benefits of Presbyterianism ' (' Sp. Desp.' p. 178). The only authority allowable in Christ's kingdom is that of presbyter-bishops. Their ' dignity rises and falls in proportion with their real merit and wise management. This puts them upon their good behaviour.' Doubtless men of acknowledged ability do exercise power amongst their brethren. If it be de- manded why the title and rank of bishop ought not to be given to these ? — it is replied, ' There was once a hen, in iEsop, which, upon a moderate proportion of barley, laid every day an egg. Her mistress enlarging her diet, in hopes she would proportion- ally increase her eggs, she grew so fat upon that addition, that she never laid any more. Dignities and preferments often turn men's heads, blunt their wits, or rebate the edge of their dili- gence. So long as they are equal in authority, they know it is only their superior wisdom and virtue that can entitle them to respect from or sway among their brethren. This first excites their spirits, and then keeps them on the bend' (Anderson's 'Defence,' pp. 63, 64). Is it said that it is unreasonable to allow an equal share of authority to the least known or wise with those who are most esteemed? The Eoman Senate may be referred to for answer. Parity reigned there in perfection, and yet it was the most venerable bench in the world. So in the Commons House of Parliament, and amongst the Senators of the College of Justice in Scotland. These have in their spheres equal authority, although they may never have equal abilities. Every presbyter being on the same platform with his brethren, the authority of the president of an assembly can only be deputed and temporary. Even amongst presbyters a balance of pov/er is necessary. This is provided in the organization of the congregation. That the people's interests are not submerged is secured by representative ruling elders. So in the association of presbyters in the several courts : any undue assumption is effectually counterbalanced ; 316 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. legitimate authority is sustained ; whilst clericism, priestlioodj or prelacy is destroyed. Any tendency to prelatic domination is or ought to be effectually checked. In every Church there are occasional tendencies towards Pre- latic Episcopacy, even where the name is repudiated. What is the divinely-prescribed remedy for this evil 1 Certainly it is not to throw off all legitimate authority. Is it not rather that members and officers attain to, hold fast, fully and freely exer- cise, Presbyterial Episcopacy 1 If that authority is in any way to be disregarded, all parties ' ought to be very sure that the decisions are opposed to the mind and will of Christ ; and that, therefore, they may confidently appeal from the decision of the office-bearers to the tribunal of the Head of the Church Himself.' This parity of presbyters ought to be maintained as the manifes- tation of the authoritative guidance and instruction of the sub- jects of the King. III. Unity. The Church of Christ is not a series of separate communities. It is one. The more fully unity of principle is maintained, the more will true unity disclose itself. The terms of Church fellow- ship being adherence to all known essential truth, the unity of the Church demands such government as will best promote thorough agreement of judgment, feeling, language, and practice. Common advantage and a common cause require agreement in essentials, and, consequently, united action. Presbytery is de- signed to present such a manifestation of unity in every locality and nation, and in all the world. 1. Locally, In each congregation and district, unity is to be manifested by Presbytery. Conjunct government by the presbyters, who are of equal rank, while engaged in dilierent departments of duty, gives practical demonstration of the harmonious unity of that one society of believers. In the sittings or sessions of these local presbyters, in which unanimous counsels prevail, strong testimony is given that PRESBYTEETAL EPISCOPACY. 317 the Churcli of Christ is one. So in the district ; presbyterial authority is extended so as to be commensurate with privileges and responsibilities. Every organized society of believers is placed on a footing of equality, and is associated, as far as pos- sible, with others. The presbyters of that congregation form the outstanding link of connection between it and the entire Church. The congregation is not only subject to its own presbyters, it takes rank with other congregations under common authority. Peculiar local privileges are still retained unimpaired, while other privileges of im.mense importance are thus secured. As there would be the essence of schism in denying that a congregation or church was Christian, whilst that character was clearly attested, this danger is now avoided by cordial connection and subjection under the common authority of the presbyters. There being no higher office than that of a teaching presbyter, and these spiritual rulers having equality of official position and power, they must of necessity assemble for consultation, determination, and united action. If all the presbyters of a Church cannot conveniently assemble, all must be fully repre- sented. In each case the government is carried on as steadily as the flowing of a river. The calm prosperity of the congregations so guided gives silent but emphatic testimony to the grand fact of the unity of that portion of the Church. That testimony is not removed by certain turns of smart disputation in presbyterial courts, the glory and security of which is that personal opinion may be freely and publicly expressed. As well might it be asserted that testimony to the unity of the river is removed when, passing out of sullen-looking pools, it obtains freedom and elasticity in the whirling eddies, swift and noisy currents, or deafening cataracts that are observable in its progress. Do not these occasional demonstrations rather summon attention to the fact of its living unity ? Such a manifestation is impossible when congregations refuse to unite under a common government. When, however, amongst those united the equal rights of presbyters, congregations, and presbyteries are severally most carefully respected, and when the governing power is recognized as a body of associated presbyters 318 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. from every congregation governed, this reluctance will gradually remove. The extent and regularity with which presbyters and con- gregations can be associated must depend upon the circum- stances in which the Church and the country are placed. Again, there are conceivable circumstances in which congrega- tions may be compelled to retain an independent position as when essential principles are violated. It is undoubted, as Dr Goold says, that ' a congregation has the power of jurisdiction and discipline within itself, so that, in the case of a congregation standing alone, when circumstances do not admit of connection with other congregations in the form of subjection to a common and superior jurisdiction, it has the free use of all its powers for the purpose of edification and extension' (Art. Presh. ' End. Brit.') This is also allowed by Dr Cunningham. *A congregation of professing Christians may be so placed in providence as to be warranted to organize itself in Inde- pendency without actual subjection to presbyterial govern- ment, and to provide within itself for the execution of all ecclesiastical functions, and for its own perpetuation ; and we do not dispute that such Churches or congregations existed in early times; but if the general principle of such association and organization is sanctioned by Scripture, and if some speci- mens of it are set before us there in apostolic practice, . . . then we are entitled to say that this associated and organized condition is the complete, normal, and perfect state of the Church, which ought ever to be aimed at, and, as far as circumstances and opportunities admit of it, be carried out and exhibited in practice' (' Hist. Theol.' vol. ii. p. 5oQ). 2. Rationally Unity is manifested by synods and assemblies. In a province a court is necessary, representing all the local cono-reo-ations and presbyteries. This higher and wider repre- sentative synod of presbyters takes heed to all the flocks repre- sented. In a nation the entire Church is represented in an assembly by the same principle. There supervision, authorita- PRESBYTEEIAL EPISCOPACY. 319 tive direction, decision — in ail cases that have failed of settlement in the less extended associations — must be secured. Whether the association be a provincial synod or a national assembly, a more extended sphere is found for the manifestation of unity. No action must be taken as to essential matters without the sanction of such an assembly, and that court itself, in extra- ordinary matters, cannot proceed without the consent of the Church. Scripture, confirmed by right reason and experience, teaches that government is possible and profitable when the smaller portion is subject to the larger, and the larger to the whole Church. Unity is manifested when united action is taken in all essential matters, and then unity expresses herself in uniformity. Then there is practical exemplification given to the world, that ' there is one body and one Spirit, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all' (Eph. iv. 4-6). As freedom ought to be embodied in the ruling elder, and order in the parity of presbyters, so presbyterial courts ought to maintain the uni- versal administration of justice, and thus to give the fullest dis- play in a nation of the unity of the Church. Presbytery exercised, according to the will of God, displays justice, order, freedom, or liberty, authority, and unity, fully har- monized, but that requires a continual association of teaching and ruling elders. ' No ecclesiastical judicatory or committee thereof can be lawful without consisting of both ministers and elders' (Pardovan, p. 68). The Scottish Assembly of 1638 annulled as utterly illegal, six preceding ' pretended assemblies,' those of 1606, 1608, 1610, 1616, 1617, and 1618; one reason being that, in five of these, no ruling elders sat — some being unlawfully commissioned. When the Commissioners to the Westminster Assembly were appointed, Baillie moved that some elders be sent. He says, '■ I got not a man to second me ; yet the absurdity and danger of such an omission pressing my mind, I drew up reasons for my judgment.' Accordingly, when he had stated that ' the excluding of ruling elders from a commission of this nature may call in question the validity of the commis- sion, may hazard the approbation of it,' &c., the principle was recognized and acted upon (Letters, vol. ii. p. 479). This prin- 320 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ciple of double representcation pervades presbyterial polity. Consequently, with reluctance can any meeting of session, or congregational elders, be held without the presence of a minis- ter. That principle is the safeguard of the Church's liberty. Eepresentative councils are now preferred to the ancient con- vocations in the forum or market-place, not because the people cannot so assemble, but because they ought not. There is a natural tendency to allow power to settle into despotism, whether that power be exercised by*One individual, a privileged class, or a multitude. To possess freedom and security, not only must the seat of authority be proper, but checks require to be pro- vided. Accordingly, the device of two chambers, as our House of Commons and House of Lords, has been regarded as a great safeguard or moral restraint fitly imposed by reason and truth upon representative government. To secure the largest amount of good for the people, it is not only necessary that representa- tives have a fixed purpose to aim at the benefit of the whole, but also an intimate acquaintance with the wants and circumstances of the represented. These two conditions are fulfilled by making the representative the organ of the whole community, while he is elected by a limited circle, and ought to know and express their requirements. Then the two chambers are checks, the one upon the other, against the sudden impulses of excited or hasty legislation. This principle has been acted upon in the freest modern states. No representative government would be re- garded as complete without such a provision. These principles — the glory of modern politics — were found embedded in Presbyterian Church government ages before a true representative commonwealth existed. These very doctrines, which, applied to civil government, have raised countries in the scale of national greatness, are presented in the apostolic govern- ment of the New Testament. If true liberty is extending her- self over the earth by their application in nations, the strongest demonstration is produced that only by their faithful applica- tion can the highest prosperity be attained in the kingdom of Christ. The cardinal principle to be guarded is, that the government of the Church is in the hands of free representative assemblies. PEESBYTEEIAL EPISCOPACY. 321 This is the characteristic that distinguishes Presbytery at once from Prelacy and Independency. The government is not by presbyters, but by Presbyteries. Associated representative pres- byters is essential. These representatives are all chosen by limited circles. Thus the circumstances and wants of every part of the Church ought to find expression. And yet the interests of the whole Church is a higher good, to which the mere desires of portions of the membership ought ever to yield. Presbyters are not mere delegates, they are representatives. The offices are radically and essentially distinct. A deputy or delegate is simply authorized to carry out certain instructions. He cannot go beyond these, being only a substitute to do for others what they cannot do in their own persons. A representa- tive is more than this. He is a confidential agent. He not only declares the will of his constituents, he deliberates and acts for them. The rej)resentative is chosen because the people have confidence in his ability to deliberate and act. He therefore feels bound to act in conformity with his convictions of what is right. He pursues the dictates of his own understanding on his own responsibility. * I did not obey your instructions,^ said Burke to his electors ; ' no, I conformed to the instructions of truth and nature, and maintained your interest, against your opinions, with a constancy that became me.' The power of civil representatives may be traced to the people, the plan originating generally with them. Then the office is created; its powers, duties, and rights are defined. The constitution is thus formed. That written charter is framed for the express purpose of re- straining the power or will of people and representatives, and to check the tendency of absolute authority to tyrannize. Let the constitution be once fixed, and that^ and not the will of the elec- tors, becomes the immediate source of authority to the representa- tives. To that alone they appeal as to privileges and duties. By that constitution they are bound continually to act. That binds electors and representatives alike. Consequently, repre- sentatives are not mere delegates to carry out specific directions as whim or expediency may demand. Eeason, and not the popular will, is to guide in accordance with the constitution. The analogy is complete, with two exceptions — First, Presby- o22 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. ters, although representatives, are not the creation of the people. They have the special call and direct appointment of the King of Zion. Secondly, The people have not framed or sanctioned by their authority the constitution. The only ultimate constitu- tion of the Church is the Word of God. That constitution is the creation of the King. Now, it is in that constitution the powers and duties of presbyters are to be found. That binds church officers and members alike. That constitution declares that they are not deputies or tools merely to carry out the wishes of the people, but rulers, who are intelligently to apprehend and apply the laws of Christ. They are not to bend to the caprices of the people in matters of administration ; but, as responsible officers, they are to care for the good of the entire kingdom of Christ. Presbyters do not occupy a position and exercise powers which belong to the members of the Church, were that possible. That the presbyter is termed the people's representative shows that he is their chosen ruler. The way in which the office is acquired, but not the source of its power, is designated by the title of representative. (See ' The Elder Question,' by Dr Thornwell.) Now, there is not only the divine constitution provided; a division of chambers, so to speak, is prescribed as a check upon the advance from authority to tyranny. These are pastors and ruling elders. Both are chosen by and are representatives of the people. But pastors are more prominently preachers than rulers. Their distinguishing title recognizes their prominent duty. * Re- presentative of the people' gives a complete description of the office of ruling elder. He is chosen simply as a ruler. The presence of both is essential to representative assemblies. 3. Universally Presbytery is the proper manifestation of the unity of the Church. Let these principles of associated representative government be logically and fully embraced, and its range must be commensurate with the entire Church. It cannot stop with nations, it must embrace the world. The visible Church can no more be restricted to nations, or partitioned among these as separate and independ- PEESYBTEPJAL EPISCOPACY. 823 ent portions, than may tlie congregations of a locality. The Church is one in all the earth. Universality of government is confessedly one of the most difficult matters in the present state of the Church and the world. Still the subject may be proposed in order to after-solution. The answers to two questions appear to give ground to hope that difficulties will all be eventually overcome, and that the unity of the kingdom will ultimately prevail. Is Universal Government by Presbytery Scriptural ? The commission of Christ and the actions of the apostles, as well as the predictions of the Divine Word, furnish the reply. Not only in all the world, and to every creature, is it to be preached — the gospel is to be everywhere acted out. Everything commanded by Christ is, in all the world, to be taught and prac- tised. Wherever persistent offences exist, believers are to tell and to hear the Church. Then the assembly at Jerusalem was not local, not even national — it was universal. Not only the Jewish nation, Syria, and other lands — yea, by the apostles, ' all nations ^ were repre- sented in that assembly. If that example be refused as a model for a universal assembly, it must also be refused as a model for any. Decline to entertain the question as to an assembly for the world, as there exemplified, and all authority for national and local synods is removed. If this be so, then this is the model to which the Church must ever seek to conform. When realized, the prophetic word will be literally fulfilled, when ' out of Zion shall go forth the law, and the Word of the Lord from Jerusalem : and He shall judge among the nations, and shall rebuke many people ' (Isa. ii. 3, 4). Has such Government been Beneficially Exemplified ? No doubt very many Councils have been oecumenical merely in name. Three at least will be generally acknowledged as bene- ficial. The Council of Nice was held in the year a.d. 325. It arose o2ii THE GOYEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. out of a discussion as to the mutual relations of the persons of the Godhead, and the nature of the difference between them. This was carried on, in the first instance, chiefly between Alex- ander, Bishop of Alexandria, and Arius, a presbyter. The ortho- dox held — (1.) That the generation of the Son of God was from eternity, so that he was coeval with the Father. The Arians be- lieved there was a time when the Son was not. (2.) Again, the orthodox held that the Son w\as derived of and from the Father, so that he was {o(j.oov6ir>g) of the same essence with the Father. The Arians believed that the Son w^as formed out of nothing by the creative power of God. They held that the Son w^as {6/j,otovfftoc,) like to the Father. One letter in the Greek word (/) made all the difference. At first the Emperor Constantine considered the discussion of little importance, admonishing the disputants to desist. When, however, the commotion had widely extended throughout the empire, he summoned the Church to meet in council. There assembled in the central hall of the imperial palace at Nice, in Bithynia, three hundred and eighteen members. The Emperor advanced to the upper end, and, on a signal from the bishops, he sat down upon a golden chair. After prelimi- nary speeches, he himself harangued the council ; threw into the fire all private petitions he had received, and bade them proceed to business. A free discussion ensued. Individuals of different opinions offered their sentiments, the Emperor commending or disapproving. Still he left them to decide all questions as to the faith uncontrolled, regarding the members as divinely- consti- tuted judges. He only wished them to come to some decision. When they had done so, he regarded both himself and others as bound thereby. ' What met the general approbation of the council was committed to writing, and confirmed by the subscrip- tion of each member.' After a feast, presents, and exhortations to peace and love, they returned as they came by the public con- veyances, having been meanwhile supported by the Emperor. This was the creed adopted : ' We believe in one God, the Father Almighty, the maker of all things, visible and invisible ; and in one Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, begotten of the Father, only- begotten (that is) of the substance of the Father, God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God j begotten, not made ; of PRESBYTEEIAL EPISCOPACY. S25 the same substance with the Father, by whom all things were made that are in heaven, and that are in earth ; who for us men, and for our salvation, descended, and was incarnate, and became man ; suffered, and rose again the third day, ascended into the heavens, and will come to judge the living and the dead, and in the Holy Spirit. But those who say that there was a time when He was not, and that He was not before He was begotten, and that He was made out of nothing, or affirm that He is of any other substance or essence, or that the Son of God is created, and mutable or changeable, the Catholic Church doth pronounce accursed.' Strong as this last assertion is, and extreme as were the measures by which this decision was enforced, few will declare that the decree arrived at and sent forth was not productive of extensive beneficial influence throughout the world. That influ- ence has not ceased to be felt at the present day. A doctrine, regarding which confused notions generally prevailed, was clearly defined, the belief of which is essential to salvation. The Synod of Bort was held in the year a.d. 1618. After violent contests, a controversy regarding the doctrines of sin and grace was submitted to the judgment of the whole Church. * The Synod convened to consider the question, " Whether the opinions of Arminius could be reconciled with the Scriptures, and with the confession of the Eeformed, and particularly with that of the Belgic Churches?" This was no provincial assembly. Such was the original intention ; but " at the request of James I., King of England, seconded by Maurice, Prince of Orange, it was determined to invite eminent divines from foreign Churches to sit and vote in the Synod. Accordingly, letters addressed to the King of Great Britain, to the deputies of the Reformed Churches of France, to the Electors of the Palatinate and Bran- denburg, to the Landgrave of Hesse, to the four Protestant cantons of Switzerland, and to the Republics of Geneva, Bremen and Embden, whom they entreated to delegate some of their most pious, learned, and prudent theologians, who, in conjunction with the deputies of the Belgic Churches, should labour to compose the difference and decide the controversies which had arisen in those Churches." In response to these letters of invi- 326 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. tation, all tlie Churclies addressed, excepting those of France, were represented in the Synod. " The delegates from Great Britain were five — viz., George Carleton, Bishop of Llandaff; Joseph Hall, Dean of Worcester, and afterwards Bishop of Exeter and Norwich ; John Davenant, Professor of Divinity in the Uni- versity of Cambridge, and afterwards Bishop of Salisbury; Samuel Ward, Archdeacon of Taunton, and Theological Pro- fessor in the University of Cambridge ; and Walter Balcanequal, of Scotland, representing the Established Church of North Britain." ' Here, then, was Protestant Christendom — the Churches of Great Britain and of the Continent — met to pronounce judgment in reference to the claims of Arminianism.' The subjects dis- cussed are usually known as the jfive points. As originally stated these were : — 1. Election or predestination. 2. The death of Christ, and extent of redemption, or the atonement. 3. The cause of faith, or the power or agency by which faith is pro- duced. 4. Conversion — the agency by which it is effected, and the mode of its operation, o. Perseverance. * What was their decision 1 Would that those who have bar- tered away the faith of the Eeformers for a humanitarian scheme, would ponder the reply. " The Synod examined the Arminian tenets, and condemned them as unscriptural and dan- gerous errors, and pronounced those who held and published them to be enemies of the faith and of the Belgic Churches, and corruptors of the true religion. In this they were unanimous." ' On their return from the Synod, the delegates of the Church of England, in defending themselves against the attacks of cer- tain writers, published a joint vindication, in which the following passage occurs : — " Whatsoever there was assented unto, and subscribed by us, concerning the Five Articles, either in the joint synodical judgment, or in our particular collegiate suffrage, is not only warrantable by the Holy Scriptures, but also conform- able to the received doctrine of our venerable mother, which we are ready to maintain and justify against all gainsayers." ' ' So harmonious was the Synod, that Bishop Hall, who was com- pelled to retire on account of ill-health, said, on taking leave of his brethren — " There was no place on earth so like heaven as PEESBYTEEIAL EPISCOrACY. 327 the Synod of Dort, and where he should be more willing to dwell.'" ' Nor did his elevation to the episcopate, or the lapse of twenty years, change his views in reference to the Reformed Churches. In his " Irenicum " he thanks God " there is no difference in any essential point between the Church of England and her sister Eeformed Churches. We unite in every article of Chris- tian doctrine, without the least variation, as the full and absolute agreement between their public confessions and ours testifies " ' (Dr Watts). This Synod also has confessedly been productive of very beneficial results. The Westminster Assembly, although not strictly speaking universal, was general in this respect, that it embraced learned divines of various Churches within the kingdom of Great Britain. There were few practical Presbyterians present. Of Independents there were several. The great majority of its members were men who held office in the Established Church of England. It was called by the Parliament, at the request of many divines of that Church, who desired agreement in one confession of faith, one directory of worship, one public catechism, and one form of government. The assembly was constituted in Westminster Abbey, by public worship, con- ducted by Dr Twisse, on the 1st July 1643, after which the business was prosecuted in Henry the Seventh's chapel. There were one hundred and fifty-one members. Of these, ten were lords, twenty were commoners, and one hundred and twenty- one were divines, only six of whom were from Scotland. Each solemnly promised that he would maintain nothing but what he believed to be agreeable to the Word of God, which protes- tation was read anew every Monday morning. The result was not only the Confession and Catechisms, &c., known by the title of Westminster, but an acknowledgment that presbyterial government is ' lawful and agreeable to the Word of God.' This assembly, which has been productive of universal benefit, partially illustrates what may be more fully carried out. Universal representative government being thus scriptural and practically beneficial, may it not yet obtain its proper place ? IMay not the very difficulties that present themselves — distance, expense, want of information, hesitation as to the result of ques- 328 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. tions submitted, lack of power to enforce decisions, &c. — may not every difficulty tend to promote the end in view 1 Manifestly only those great questions which concern all the Churches could come before such an assembly ; only at rare intervals could they be held, only those represented could share in the decision. Notwithstanding, would it not be a grand moral spectacle were representative associated presbyters from all the Presbyterian Churches of the world to meet in the name and by the authority of the King and Head of the Church, to consult and to deter- mine as to the best means of removing obstacles to, and of pro- moting the establishment of. His kingdom in every part of the world ? Were but one or two representative teaching and ruling elders from each branch of the Presbyterian Church to assemble, prayerfully and scripturally, to deliberate as to the promotion of God's glory in the earth, only once or twice in a century, would not the fact itself be a most emphatic testimony to the unity of the Church 1 Might not the very efibrt be a harbinger of the promised day of deliverance when the watchmen on Zion's towers shall see eye to eye. When meetings of the British Association, that for the ad- vancement of social science, or others, are held in some of our great cities, the attention of the community is awakened, and strangers from afar consider it a privilege to be present. Ought not the Church to take advantage of the same wondrous facili- ties of travel, using the opportunity for arresting attention upon the true unity and gracious power of the only association that has the seal of Heaven 1 However valuable and important others may be, surely the attention of the world should be claimed to this one grand remedy for all its maladies. All Christians hold that every right effort ought to be promoted that tends to the regeneration of the world, and the glory of God. Ought then this one to be indefinitely postponed because of its difficulty ? Already an approximation for Christians of various shades of opinion, even on some essential points, has been attempted in the meetings of the Evangelical Alliance. These are good in their own place^, and may tend to a better understanding. But something more definite is necessary if the nations of the earth are to be brought into subjection to the Kmg of kings. The PRESBYTERIAL EPISCOPACY. 329 Papacy lias held her so-called CEcumenical Council to proclaim her infallibility, and has shown thereby how utterly fallible and prostrate she has become. Cannot that Church — which believes not only that her doctrine is all divine, but that her polity is the only scriptural one, and that by which the essentials of good government can be effectually promoted — meet and give evidence of this to all the world. Not, indeed, until all the branches of the Presbyterian Church, by the power of the Holy Spirit, are brought into true unity of judgment, feeling, language, and action, can an assembly be held possessed of legislative autho- rity. That may, however, be promoted by a consultative as- sembly, composed of the representatives of all Presbyterian Churches in the world. Let such a conference be held, prayer- fully to state and consider how obstacles may be most effectually removed — say in Wittenberg, Geneva, Edinburgh, London, or New York j and this, through the divine blessing, might prove * The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness. Prepare ye the •way of the Lord ; make strait in the desert a highway for our God.' Let such a conference be held with a single eye to the glory of our King, while the earnest prayer is continually offered in all the Churches represented — ' Thy kingdom come,' and might there not be confidence of hope that soon ' Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low ; and the crooked shall be made strait, and the rough places plain ; and the glory of the Lord shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together 1 ' If not now, sooner or later, it shall be — 'for the mouth of the Lord hath spoken it.' What a blessed opportunity this might be of seeing many in the flesh, whom, having not seen, we love ! Might it not prove as that of Dort, a type of heaven ? This is no mere fancy of recent times. It is the large-hearted desire that was impressed by the study of the Scriptures upon the chief actors in the Reformation. In the ' Sacred Discipline of the Charch Described by the Word of God,' not only sessions composed of ministers and ruling elders chosen by the people, provincial and national synods are recommended; there is also a proposal for an CEcumenical Council, composed of repre- sentatives from every national synod. That book received the 830 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. approbation of five hundred ministers in England. The ' Second Book of Discipline of the Church of Scotland ' maintained that * assemblies are of four kinds ; for either are they of particular kirks and congregations, one or more, or of a province, or of one whole nation, or of all mid divers nations professing one Jesus Christ.' ' There was one great and even sublime idea brought somewhat indefinitely before the Westminster Assembly which has not yet been realized — the idea of a Protestant union through- out Christendom, not merely for the purpose of counterbalancing Popery, but in order to purify, strengthen, and unite all true Christian Churches. . . . This seems to have originated in the mind of that distinguished man, Alexander Henderson.' Dr Hetherington, who describes the efforts put forth in this direc- tion, adds — ' Let but the attempt be made in the spirit of sincerity and faith and prayer, and there may now be realized a Protestant, or rather a Presbyterian union embracing the world. We say a Presbyterian union, for the hope of the Christian world for resisting Popery and infidelity must now be placed in a Presbyterian union' ('Hist, of West. Ass.' pp. 362-371). Suppose this universal assembly possible, it is still the pres- bytery. In the most extended, as in the most circumscribed limits, in reality it is the same Church court. It is composed of the same elements. It is still the association of representative presbyters. Teaching and ruling elders there meet and act in the name and by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ. The glory of God and the good of the Church and the world are the fundamental aims. The Word of God is still the grand standard of law. No infallibility is there recognized, but that of in- spiration. One is their Master, even Christ, and all they are brethren. That form of government, in which harmony of essential prin- ciples can best be attained, may be recognized by placing the prevailing views of Popery, Prelacy, Independency, and Presby- tery along side of fifteen principles obtained by examination of the Scripture record. The following table gives such a vidimus of these principles and positions, that this harmony may be seen at a glance : — Table of Scriptural Principles— How Eegarded by the Churches. Scriptural Principles. Government Centralized. Government Localized. Government Harmonized. The Papacy. Prelacy. Independency. Presbytery. 1. The only King and Head of the Church is the Lord Jesus Christ. Repudiated by substitution of the Pope. Repudiated. In England the civil monarch sub- stituted. Accepted. Accepted. 2. The visible Church is the organized society of those pro- fessedly believing in and bearing testimony unto Christ. Repudiated by rejection of all not subject to the Pope. Repudiated by High Church. All rejected not subject to pre- lates. Accepted. Accepted. 3. The Scriptures are the only ultimate standard of law to the Church. Repudiated by adding to and subverting its teachings. Accepted, but power retained to decree rites and ceremonies. Accepted. Accepted. 4. Apostolic scriptural practice is of universal and perpetual obligation. Repudiated, pre- ferring patristic practices. Professedly ac- cepted, but patristic pre- ferred. Accepted. Accepted. 5. The office of elder is essen- tial and permanent in the visible Church. Practically re- pudiated. Practically re- pudiated. Teaching elder allowed. Accepted. 6. The office of the ministry is divinely authoritative and per- manent. Repudiated by changing to sacri- ficing priests. Accepted but in name changed to priests. Almost fully ac- cepted. Accepted. 7. The office of elder or bishop is identical. Repudiated. Repudiated. Accepted. Accepted. 8. Every congregation should have a plurality of elders, amoDg whom the duties of teaching and ruling are distributed. Repudiated. Repudiated. Partially ac- cepted. Ruling elder disallowed. Accepted. 9. The highest position is that of elder or bishop, whose rule is wholly ministerial. Repudiated. Repudiated. Accepted. Accepted. 10. E^ery church should have a plurality of deacons conjoined with the elders, specially in- tnisted with temporal affairs. Repudiated. Changed to in- ferior ministers. Repudiated. Changed to in- ferior ministers. Partially ac- cepted. Deacons elevated to the eldership. Accepted. Not carried out by some branches. 11. The election of all officers is an inherent right of the mem- bers of the Church. Repudiated in practice. Repudiated. Accepted. Accepted. Not carried out by some. ]2. Admission to office must be by prayer, and the imposition of the hands of the body of elders. Repudiated : pre- latic only valid. Repudiated : pre- latic only valid. Repudiated, or only partially ac- cepted. Accepted fully as to ministers. 13. The course of administra- tion in every congregation is by representative associated elders. Repudiated. Repudiated. Repudiated. People sub- stituted. Accepted. 14. The congregations of a lo- cality form one church, which is governed by their associated elders. Repudiated as to government. Repudiated as to government. Repudiated. Accepted. 15. Administration in difficult cases of doctrine, discipline, worship, and government, is au- 1 thoritatively effected by assem- blies of representative elders. Repudiated, giving power to prelates and the Pope. Repudiated. giving power to prelates. Repudiated. Accepted, and nationally ex- ercised. Summation, 7. Repudiated. ! 7. Repudiated. 8. Perverted, j 8. Perverted. 5. Repudiated. 3. Changed. 7. Accepted. All Accepted. 332 THE GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. The harmonious exercise of government by Presbytery arises from its essential feature — Representative Associated Preshyters. Presbytery provides the true medium between localization and centralization. Both features meet, and are so harmoniously blended as to reject the bitter and retain the sweet. This may be recognized in the points of agreement and of difference which Pres- bytery presents both to the Congregational and Prelatic forms. It harmonizes with Independency in opposition to Prelacy, and with Prelacy in opposition to Independency. With Congregationalism or Independency, Preshytery agrees — (1 . ) Holding that the apostles established only two classes of officers, jDresbyters and deacons ; and (2. ) That election is an inherent right of the membership. And it differs in holding that (a) presby- ters are divided, according to gifts, into those who teach and those who rule ; (5) that administration is by representative associated presbyters ', and (c) that a union of congregations, amenable to a common jurisdiction, is legitimate, denying that congregations possess an absolute independence in the regulation of all their affairs. With Prelatic Episcopacy, Preshytery agrees in maintaining that — (1.) The officers of the congregation have a measure of authoritative rule ; and that (2.) All the adherents, members, families, and officers of a church, form one whole. And it differs (a) in refusing to acknowledge that bishops are a separate autho- ritative order as successors of the apostles ; and (Ij) in main- taining that presbyters and deacons are the only ordinary officers of the Church, amply competent in the discharge of their respec- tive functions for all necessary purposes. Government by presbytery must necessarily be modified by circumstances peculiar to the Church and nation in which it is exercised. And yet, where its fundamental principles are prac- tically known, more valuable results follow than is possible under any other form. Considered as to its harmonious and beneficial exercise, as well as in its scriptural authority. Presby- tery commends itself as the plan which Christians are bound to adopt and extend. In the language of the late Principal Cunningham — ' Presbytery, in its substance, is the form in regard to which Christ has, with sufficient plainness, indicated that it is His mind and will that it, to the exclusion of all others, in so PRESBYTEEIAL EPISCOrACY. 333 far as they are inconsistent with it, should be the form of govern- ment adopted in His Church, and in all its branches ; in other words, that Presbyterianism, in its substance or fundamental principles, is binding jure divino, as the form of government by which the Church of Christ ought permanently and everywhere to be regulated' (' Hist. Theol.' vol. i. p. 77). Presbyterial courts, carried out as fully as is possible, manifest the unity of the Church. The parity of presbyters exhibits legitimate authority ; representative elders, the true liberty of the people. Where can these elements be as fully found? Not in Popery or Prelacy, for in each authority is centralized so as to rob the people of liberty. Not in Independency, for there imaginary liberty is so localized as to destroy effectually all real authority and unity. In the past and in the present this har- mony has been to some extent beheld. And when at length the Churches are heartily impelled to prophesy, ' Come from the four winds, O breath ;' then, as a mighty army, they shall stand to- gether in the valley of vision, far more fully possessing liberty, authority, unity in the practical working of government har- monized BY PRESBYTERY. Questions. 1. Mention three conditions of good government found in Pres- hytery. 2. Where does Church j^ower reside ? and ivhat does this prove ? 3. State four channels in which the lihertij of the membership ought to flow. 4. When a Church is organized, are preshyters merely the dele- gates of the 2^^ople, or have they higher authority ? 5. Hoiu does the spirit of domination shoio itself amongst separatists ? 6. Towards what extremes does Congregationalism frequently tendl 7. Give cm idea of the doininant spirit of Prelacy. 8. Wliy may not a modification of Prelacy he allowable ? oo4: GOVERNMENT OF THE KINGDOM. 9. 2feet the assertioiis that Preshytery is unsuited to special exigencies, and to diversity of gifts. 10. If however, some possess rightful authority amongst their brethren, why may they not as well receive the title of ' bishop ? ' 11. How then are tendencies towards Prelatic Episcopacy to be obviated ? 12. When is it that the unity of the Church fully manifests itself? 13. Illustrate the operation of that unity loccdly, and show how obstacles to it may be removed. 14. On what does the extent and regularity of associated govern- ment depend and when may Independency be a necessity ? 15. What ride does Scripture, reason, and experience give, in- volving provincial and 7iational assemblies ? 16. Mention two elements essential to these. 17. State principles by ivhich true liberty is maintained in Qiations, and show how this analogy is applicable to the Church. 18. State some scriptural positions in favour of universal assem- 19. Describe the occasion and proceedings of the Council of Nice. 20. Give some particulars regarding the Synod of Dort. 21. In what sense teas the Westminster Assembly universal, and what residts folloived ? 22. Give some reasons in favour of such an assembly, and say to 'what intent it coidd noiu convene. 23. Mention some parties favourable to this view. 24. If possible, of what ivould it be an illustration ? 25. How far does Presbytery agree with and differ from Pre- lacy and Independency respectively ? 26. In how far is Presbytery binding by divine right ? 27. Shoiu that the three conditions named are not harmonized by any other plan, and how alone they may most fully inPresbytery. THE GOVERNMENT KINGDOM OF CHRIST. PART III. THE PAST AND PRESENT CONDITION OF THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. A eisto'rical confirmation of the scriptural form of CHURCH GOVERNMENT. * He is the freeman whom the truth makes free, And all are slaves beside.' * The Lord shall be king over all the earth ; in that day shall there be one Lord, and His name one.' CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF THE FIEST FIVE CENTURIES. FIKST CENTURY. 4 B.C. The Saviour. 31 A.D. The 6?od-mau crucified, aud gloriously crowned, 64. iVero slays. The piteous wail of 1,000,000. 95. Tribulations aH-otted. 99. What is «h at to fhee? Jesus Chkist in Beth- lehem. Redemption accom- plished. The Christian Church or I. Persecution. (6S) Paul martyred. Apostolic Church gov- erned by presbyters. Jerusalem destroyed by Titus Vespasian, son of Emperor. II. Persecution. Domitian E. Death of John. SECOND CENTURY. 101. Clement lorote to the Corinthians. 104. Christians -wantonly sacrificed. 106. A 6ishop exposed in the amphitheatre. 119. Their 61ood calls for vengeance. 136. They testowed on it a Aeathen wame. 147. Courageous J'ustin's Ajjjlogy (written). 167. They turn the noble Polycarp. 196. He &ecame a -uiolent i/ontanist. 197. Cruelly itortured by 2>crsecutors. Clement of Rome. The Church essentially Presbyterian. III. Persecution. Trajan E. Ignatius of Antioch, to whom forged epistles ascribed. IV. Persecution. Adrian E. Jerusalem called iELiA Capitolixa. Justin Martyr. PoLYCARP of Smyrna. The Church essentially Presbyterian. Tertullian. V. Persecution. Severus E. Britain Christianized. THIRD CENTURY. 202. An Edict to exterminate the/aith. 202. The/irst writer in i^'rance (died). 218. A devout Christian i^hetoriciau (died). 235. The/uryof the Aeathen let loose. 249. By^ir their severest irial. 254. Z>eathof the Alexandrian (Scribe. 257. Aj^-ica laments her Apostle. 272. Designs of the perse- cutors /rustrated. Published by Severus. Ireneus of Lyons. Clement of Alexandria. VI. Persecution. MaximusE. Hippolytus banished. — A Presby- terian. Change of polity progressing. VII. Persecution. Decius E. Origen. Cyprian cf Carthage, Change marked VIII. Persecution. Valerian E. IX. Persecution. Aurelian E. FOURTH CENTURY. 802. A general extermination decreed. 312. He (/ave C^hrist his a/fections. 313. A f;rand change in Aistoi-y. (For 200 years) they dwelt in excavated ways. 325. They agrree in defining the iogos. 356. He fl^ained his Zaurels at iVice. 385. S'ebrew rendered into iatin. 395. A Aero of theological literature. 397. The f/reat Kalian Prelate. X. Persecution. Diocletian E. Constantine E. Prelacy confirmed. Edict of Milan. Christian liberty. Catacombs discovered. Council of Nice. Athanasius died. Jerome or Hieronymus of Palestine attested authority of Presbyterj'. Augustine of Hippo. Ambrose of Milan died. Rome protested again o world. . . . And thus it was that the world hated them ; and showed its hate, not only by persecutions . . . but by blasphemies — which even some more candid of their enemies have judged to be false. . . . They were indeed, according to the tenor of the Apocalyptic prefiguration, a line of true witnesses for the Lord Jesus.' Roused by their growing importance, the Greek emperor per- secuted the Paulicians for a hundred and fifty years. The blood of the martyrs was the seed of this Church. Numerous flocks and pastors arose. Sergius, one of their pastors, held for years a distinguished place. Image worship was then in high favour. Theodora, the Greek empress, was determined to have it univer- sally established. Beyond all her predecessors, Theodora pur- sued the Paulicians. By her blind zeal, and the rage of the multitude, they were devoted to destruction. Inquisitors per- vaded Asia Minor in the search. Not fewer than a hundred thousand are believed to have fallen by gibbet, fire, and sword. (Jones' 'Waldenses,' vol. i., p. 350.) A remnant were preserved. They went everywhere preaching the Word. Many a dark corner of Europe owed to this persecution the knowledge of salvation. Still exposed to intolerant severities as they retreated westward, many at length found shelter in the mountains in the north of Italy, and along the southern extremity of France. In the eighth century many were found settled in Thrace, and their existence was traceable in Mount Haemus on to the seventeenth century. This star thus shone throughout the gloom of the long dark ages, until the clouds had begun to break up, and the Sun of Righteousness had arisen upon Europe. From the circumstances mentioned, it is impossible to obtain information as to the polity maintained by the Paulicians. As, however, they kept close to the instructions and practices of Paul, and as they aimed at a return to apostolic practice, it is not difficult to infer what, in essentials, their views and actions were in the government of their Churches. In the Eighth Century appeared the Venerable Bede. Learning, abandoned on the Continent, retired amongst the British and Irish at this period. 344 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Next to the Emperor Cliarlemagne stood tlie Yenerable Bede, so-called because of his eminent virtues. Born and educated in County Durham, in England, Bede lived and died at Jarrow. His works filled eight folio volumes. Although never freed from the yoke of Rome, and honest, but credulous, still he lived as a presbyter to spt the people free. His studies, instructions, worship, and writings, must have had a powerful influence on his own and succeeding ages. The earliest translation of the New Testament into the language of the people — the Anglo- Saxon — was written by him. He referred the Archbishop of York to Timothy and Titus, for rules suitable for the ministry. In his last hour he was engaged in dictating to one of his dis- ciples the 20th chapter of John. * It is finished, master,' said the scribe. * It is finished,' replied the dying saint ; ' lift my head, let me sit in my cell, in the place where I have so often prayed ; and now, glory be to the Father, to the Son, and to the Holy Ghost.' And with these words his spirit fled. In Bavaria, government by presbyters prevailed from a.d. 540 to 740. Then the pontifiF Zachary, in a letter to Boniface Moyunt, aflarms that he had imposed Vivilo upon that province as its bishop, the presbyters not having received episcopal ordination. To him it was uncertain whether or by whom the pastors in Bavaria had been ordained. In the Ninth Century Claud of Turin flourished. He was born in Spain. Distinguished for his acquaintance with the Scriptures as chaplain at the court of Lewis, Claudius was, in a.d. 821, appointed Bishop of Turin. Most zealously he laboured to instruct the ignorant. Copiously he com- mented on the Book of Life. Setting himself against image worship, he removed and destroyed all pictures and images in his diocese. He denied that the cross was to be honoured, and condemned pilgrimages. The only work of his that has been published is his commentary on the Epistle to the Galatians. There he maintains that (a) every one of the apostles was on an equality with Peter, and (6) that Christ is the only Head of the Church. He further held (c) that bishops and presbyters originally were STARS IN THE NIGHT. S4o on a footing of perfect equality. Little wonder that his other works are still allowed to remain in manuscript. The specimen w^as more than enough for the Church of Rome. The pontifical supremacy had been opposed before. Even in Italy, Anglis- bertus, Bishop of Milan, had refused to acknowledge it. And now, in this ninth century, that opposition was placed on a scriptural basis, and the people taught to disown the usurper. This was all the more important, because of the preference given to human writings. The practice was to make the Scriptures speak only as the Fathers did. Claud taught the apostolic rule, to compare spiritual things with spiritual. His testimony was thus clear and full. Prevalent corruptions, superstitions, and evil practices, were fully exposed, until his death in a.d. 839. The labours of that reformer contributed mightily to preserve purity and independence in some churches. His instructions spread and were preserved. The valleys of Piedmont shared the privilege in the ninth and tenth centuries. In the Tenth, Eleventh, and Twelfth Centupjes, the terms Cathari and Albigenses appear to be different names given to the Paulicians, who were forced by persecution into other lands. They were, in the tenth century, very numerous in Thrace, Bulgaria, and Slavonia ; migrating also into Italy and France. A person opposing the worship of images, and power of the priesthood, is said, without good reason, to have originated the Albigenses. In Italy the Paulicians were termed Cathari ; in France they were called Albigenses, from Albi, a town of Aquitaine, where a council was held in a.d. 1176, who con- demned them. The name Albigenses appears to have been given to all who in that district were opposed to the views and practices of Home. Hence the Albigenses must not be con- founded with the Waldenses, although the remnant of them finally united with the Vaudois. In the eleventh century they came into prominence, chiefly in the south-east province of France. They held the purity of scripture doctrine, although their beliefs were traduced by the Church of Rome. Whether they held the false views ascribed to them regarding Christ, can- 24iQ THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. not be certainly known. They constantly denied that they were heretics, and this averment was accompanied by all that could give it weight. Against this inoffensive and Bible-loving com- munity the Pope issued his bull, commanding all men to take up arms to go against them, and ' to crush them like asps.^ In the twelfth and thirteenth centuries their extermination was almost wholly accomplished. ' They were slain for the Word of God, and the testimony which they held.' Their blood also still crieth, ^with a loud voice, How long, O Lord, holy and true, dost Thou not judge and avenge our blood on them that dwell upon the earth.' Those that escaped extermination took refuge in the ark of the Alps. Every effort to effect reforma- tion was arrested by the power of Rome. So far as can be ascertained, these Albigenses held by scrip- tural and essential principles in the arrangements of their com- munity. Their readiness to unite with the Waldenses, instead of forming a distinct community, is proof of this. In these Alpine vales they not only found a resting-place, but united in upholding the doctrines and practices of the apostolic Church. In the Thirteenth Century the corruptions and despotism of the Romish Church were very great. Then Cathari, Waldenses, and many others, were found all over Europe, especially in Italy, France, Germany, and Spain. Languedoc was much pervaded by these so-called ' here- tics,' the Earl of Toulouse affording them protection. To extir- pate them by all possible means the Inquisition was devised and set to work. In the Fourteenth Century arose John Wickcliffe, justly termed * the Morning Star of the Reformation.' This learned, faithful, and distinguished scholar, taught at Merton College, Oxford, from a.d. 1350 to 1371. His efforts were directed chiefly to recover the Church from her idolatry. This he did by upholding the doctrine of ' election by grace.' Wickcliffe also fearlessly exposed the evils incident to the orders :ind priests of Rome. He further contended against STAES IN THE NIGHT. 347 the supremacy of the pontiff, proclaiming that Peter had no superiority over the other apostles. He went further still in maintaining the essentials of scriptural government in the Church. ' One thing/ he declares, ' I boldly assert, 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 also say, that in the time of Paul a priest and a bishop were one and the same. In the Fifteenth Century several stars shone forth, as John Huss, Jerome of Prague, and the Lollards. John Huss was not only a minister, but also professor of theology in the university at Prague in Bohemia. The works of Wickcliffe had been brought into Bohemia in a.d. 1405. Then John Huss held Wickcliffe in contempt. Examination of his writings dispelled this prejudice, and led him more fully to study the Word of God. Thereafter he preached vehemently against the vices of the clergy, and strongly commended the writings of Wickcliffe. At Bethlehem his proclamation of the gospel was full of power. But in 1410 he was accused before John XXIII. By that pontiff he was excommunicated, his books denounced, and he forbidden to preach. Summoned to the Council of Constance in 1414, it is well-known that the plighted faith of a safe-con- duct in coming to be tried by the council was broken. The most solemn pledge for the security of his life and liberty had been given to John Huss. Notwithstanding, this safe-conduct was violated. Huss was delivered over to the secular power as one accursed of God and man — he was consumed by fire. Men have searched in vain for the cause of such cruelty, until the general verdict has been, that John Huss was most unjustly put to death. And yet it is easy to see how the members of, that council so readily gave their voice against him. For (1.) by discourse and writing he had excited the indignation of the people of Bohemia against bishops, priests, and monks. Their honours, influence, and emoluments, were in danger if he Avere again set free. No money or pains were spared to persuade his judges to condemn. 348 THE GOVEENMENT OF THE KINGDOM. Then (2.) lie had personal enemies in the council who rejoiced as partizans to crush their opponent, and that he was in their power. These causes operated strongly ; but (3.) the chief cause was the refusal to acknowledge his errors until his views were first proved to be erroneous. This was his great crime and intolerable heresy — refusal to submit to the dictation of the pontifical government. Jerome of Prague was the friend of Huss. He was a master of arts and student of the Word, and had greatly helped to carry on the work of reform in Bohemia. To obtain the precious writ- inp-s of Wickcliffe he had gone on special purpose to England. Thus aided, Jerome had disseminated divine truth far and wide. Summoned also to the council, his demand for a passport, or pledge of safety, was granted. The grant was worse than the refusal. It contained such a ' salvo to justice,' and to the interests of the faith, that it was worse than useless. Led at length in chains, he was cruelly maligned by the council. Through fear of death he yielded to their mandates, and renounced the opinions which the council condemned. Eetained in prison, he received stren