The Warrant, Nature, and Duties, of the Office of the Ruling Elder, in the Presbyterian Church

Chapter I

Introductory Remarks — Nature of the Church — Visible and Invisible Church — Unity of the Church — A fonn of govern- ment for the Church appointed by Christ — Nature and limits of ecclesiastical power — Summary of the doctrine of Presby- terians on this subject — The proper classes of officers in a Church completely organized — Positions intended to be esta- blished, as affording a warrant for the office of Ruling Elders. — p. 1—16.

Chapter II

Testimony from the order of the Old Testament Church — Import of the term Elder — Specimen of the representations given of this class of officers — Elders of the Synagogue — Authorities in reference to the government of the Synagogue — The titles, duties, number, mode of sitting, &c., of the Elders of the Synagogue — Quotations from disting^shed writers on this subject — Burnet, Goodwin, Lightfoot, Stillingfleet, Grotius, Spencer, Clark, Neander. — ^p. 17 — 33.

Chapter III

Evidence from the New Testament Scriptures — Model of the Synagogue transferred to the Church — Specimen of the passages which speak of the New Testament Elders — Particular texts which establish the existence of this class of Elders in the Primitive Church — Objections to our construction of these passages — Answered. — p. 34 — 54.

■MMMiatfaMHi^

Chapter IV

Testimony of the Christian Fathers — Clemens Romanus, X^adus, Polycarp, Cyprian, Origen, Gesta Purgationis, &c., Optatus, Ambrose, Augustine, Apostolical Constitutions, Iso- <iore, Gregory — Facts incidentally stated by the Fathers con- ^ming some of the Elders — Syrian Christians. — ^p. 55-— 83.

Chapter V

Testimony of the Witnesses for the Truth in the Dark Ages — Waldenses, Albigenses — Bohemian Churches — Calvin deriyed this feature in his ecclesiastical system from the Bohemian Brethren. — ^p. 84 — 95.

Chapter VI

Testimony of the Reformers — Zuingle, Oecolampadius, Bucer, Peter Martyr, John A. Lasco, Calvin, Whitgift, Dean Newell, Ursinus, Confession of Saxony, Szegeden, Magdeburgh Centuriators, Junius, Zanchius, Paraeus, Piscator, Cartwright, Greenham, Estius, Whitaker — Ruling Elders generally estab- lished in the Reformed Churches. — ^p. 96—117.

Chapter VII

Testimony of eminent divines since the Reformation — Owen, Baxter — English Puritans— -of New England — Goodwin, Hooker, Cotton, Davenport, Thomdike, Cotton Mather, Edwards, Kro- mayer, Baldwin, Suicer, Whitby, Watts, Doddridge, Neander, Dwight.— p. 118—141.

Chapter VIII

Ruling Elders necessary in the Church — The importance of Discipline to the purity of the Church — Discipline cannot be maintained without this class of officers, or persons of equivalent powers — The Pastor alone cannot maintain it — The whole body of the church cannot conduct it in a wise and happy manner — Prelatists and Independents both obUged to provide substitutes for them. This provision, however, inadequate. — ^p. 142 — 159,

Chapter IX

Nature of the Ruling Elder's office — Analogy between their office and that of secular rulers — Their duties as members of the Church Session — Their more private and constant duties as " overseers ** of the Church — Their duties as members of highei judicatories — Question discussed whether they ought to be callec Lay Elders — Duties of the Church Members to their Elders-

Elders ought to have a particular seat assigned them. — ^p. 16Q —180.

Chapter X

Distinction between the office of Ruling Elder and Deacon— The persons whose appointment to take care of the poor is recorded in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, were the first deacons — The question discussed, whether they were Deacons at all — Whether the first Deacons were preachers and baptisers? — Deacons were never Ecclesiastical Rulers — The office of Deacon dropped by many Presbyterian churches — The offices of Ruling Elder and Deacon united in the same men, in Scotland and the United States — This not desirable — Reasons for this opinion. — ^p. 181 — 205.

Chapter XI

The qualifications proper for the office of Ruling Elder — It is not necessary that they be aged persons — It is of the utmost im- portance that they have unfeigned and approved piety — That they possess good sense and sound judgment — That they be or- thodox, and well informed in gospel truth — That they have emi- nent prudence — That they be of good report among them who are without — That they be men of public spirit — That they be men of ardent zeal and importunate prayer. — p. 206 — 220.

Chapter XII

Of the election of Ruling Elders — Who are proper Electors ? — Ought they to be elected for life, or only for a limited time ? — Of the number of Elders proper for each Church — Of those

xi

"who may be considered as eli^ble to this office — Whether a man may be a Ruling Elder in more than one Church at the same time.— p. 221—234.

Chapter XIII

Of the ordination of Ruling Elders — Ordination a necessary designation to office — Proofs from Scripture — The laying on of hands — Not always connected with the special gifts of the Spirit —This ceremony ought to be employed in the ordination of Ruling Elders — Probable reason of its falling into disuse — Authorities in favour of its restoration — Who ought to lay on hands in the ordination of Elders ? — Advantages of imposing hands in ordaining this class of officers. — ^p. 235—251.

Chapter XIV

On the resignation of Ruling Elders — Their removal from one Church to another — The method of conducting discipline against them. — ^p. 252 — 258.

Chapter V

The advantages of conducting ^scipline upon the Presby- terian plan — It is founded on the principle of Representation — It presents one of the best barriers against Clerical ambition and encroachments — Furnishes one of the best securities for preserving the rights of the people — Furnishes to Ministers efficient counsel and support — Favourable to dispatch and en- ergy — Accomplishes that which cannot be attained in any other way — Favourable to union and co-operation in enterprizes of Christian benevolence. — ^p. 259 — 277.

4

i INTRODUCTORY ESSAY

The prosperiiy of the kingdom of Christ is an object which the genuine Christian will ever assidu-* ously labour to promote. It is the prevalehce of the Christian faith alone which can effectually destroy the numberless evils which afflict society, and direct to a beneficial result the improvements and discoveries which are made in the arts and sciences. The great end for which the human race was first brought into existence, was to show forth the glory of God; and the highest perfection of which our nature is susceptible, consists in the entire devotion of our powers to the serwce of Heaven. The world in which we dwell may be viewed as one great temple^ in which adoration and praise are to be paid to the Sovereign Ruler; and those who busy themselves with the things which are seen and temporal, to the exclusion of those which are unseen and eternal, are chargeable with the folly of preferring the decorations of me building to the pre- siding Deity whose glory it illustrates. Love to God should be the paramount feeling in every human breast, and obedience to the sacred laws of Heaven the lofty object to which all our exertions are directed.

The object of the mission of Christ to this world was to restore the wretched sons of Adam to the ori-

IV

ginal dignity of their nature, and to place them in circumstances in which they might be enabled to fulfil the purposes of their being. In accomplishing this glorious end, the Saviour did not merely, like many of those who have aspired to be the teachers and guides of mankind, diffuse through society information re— specting the duties of life; but he appointed that all those persons, who should be brought to concur with the designs of God in the gospel, should be formed into one body or association; and his followers are required, by the love which he cherished towards them, and which his death so strikingly displayed, to regard each other with the tenderest sentiments of affection. Christians are forbidden by the very spirit of their religion to act as if they were isolated individuals, scat- tered through society, and, like particles of sand, held together by no bond of union : it is their duty to regard each other as all one in Christ, and they should be strongly united together by the cement of Christian affection. And though certainly the Church of God does not destroy our connection with other societies, such as families and kingdoms, yet, because its objects and the interests involved in it are immeasurably more important than those of any other connection, we are required in all cases of competition to give it the pre- ference. We must regard our union with the Cnris- tian church as the loftiest privilege which we possess; and we must cleave to it witn unyielding tenacity, what- ever sacrifices our perseverance in the service of Christ may require at our hands. " If any man come to me," says the Saviour, " and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple.'' Every earthly afiection must dwindle into nothing, when compared with the love which we cherish to the Son of God.

The Kingdom of Christ, then, comprehends under its sway all those persons who are renewed in the spirit of their minds, and united to the Saviour by faith.

Its subjects, though living among the men of the world, «nd united to them by the ties of kindred and country, are a separate people, invested with privileges to which ethers are strangers: they are mechanically, but not chemically combined with the rest of mankind. And their interest as a peculiar people requires that they should ever be carenil to keep themselves distinct from the world ; mingling in its scenes only so far as the business of life may require, and making all their intercourse with the wicked, subservient to the design of bringing them to a knowledge of the truth.

One of the means which Christ, the Head of the Church, has appointed for preserving his people from the corruptions which abound in the world, is the sys- tem of control or of government which he has esta- blished in his kingdom. Living in the midst of a crooked and perverse generation, even the saints them- selves are liable to be seduced into sin; and too fre- quently, besides, does it happen that persons who have never been truly converted, find their way into the communion of the church; and therefore it was indis- pensably necessary that means should be appointed for ensuring the expulsion of unworthy and irreclaimable members, and for restraining and confirming those whose conduct might be in any measure suspicious or wavering. It must, indeed, be evident to every per- son who reflects upon the subject, that government is as necessary to the prosperity of the church, as it is to the welfare of civil society. Numbers of men cannot act tc^ether, unless their proceedings be regulated by some known and acknowledged principles; and in all cases of co-operation the power must be vested some- where, of enforcing upon individuals compliance with the fundamental principles by which they are associated together.

There is a prejudice, we are aware, entertained by many against the very idea of the power of the church; and it must be acknowledged that some ground has been furnished for it, by the proceedings of persons

VI

wbo have borne the Christian name. During the period when the sway of the Papal power was undis^ted, the censures of the church were stript entirely oi thdr spiritual character, and instead of being employed to reclaim theerring and to confirm theunstable, they were prostituted to the advancement of worldly schemes. Frequently were even monarchs, when they opposed the will of the haughty Pontiff, made to tremble upon their thrones; and though they might persevere mr a time in asserting their independence, they were gene- rally compelled at last, with loss both of honour ^od of influence, to submit to the spiritual tyranny which they had rashly dared to encounter. Excommunication was one of the most dreadful calamities which could befU either prince or subject, for it excluded its unhappy victim from the most common offices of humanity, ana placed him beyond the protection of law. Nor were the rulers of the Romish church the only persons, who fell into the dangerous error, of connecting civil punislK ments with disobedience to spiritual authority: the Protestants followed the fatal example which the adhe* rents of Rome had set them, and for a long series of years their conduct was such as too clearly to show that they had deeply drunk of the cup whidi bigotry and intolerance had filled. The opinion indeed, it is manifest from history, universally pre- vailed at the period referred to, that penal statutes were the proper weapons by which uniformity of reli- gious belief should be secured; and as every party of course believed themselves to be in the right, and all who differed from them to be in the wrong, the first attempt of each, whenever the opportunity occurred, was to force others to confess their supposed errors, and publicly to recant them. The whole history of England teems with proofs of the justice of these ob- servations. Need we mention the long-continued and cruel persecutions carried on by the Protestant Church of England against the Puritans, which were more atrocious, if possible, than any of the Popish persecu*^

tioDs, inasmuch as the difference between the Church of England and the Puritans, in the first instance at least, was trifling compared with the difiPerence between both and the Church of Rome. Nor were the Puri- tans themselves free from the foul stain of persecuting for conscience* sake. Whatever opinion we may form of them from their early history, their conduct after the Great Rebellion makes it exceedingly manifest, that they had been slow to learn the lesson which the bit- ter experience of so many years might have taught them. Many were the complaints thrown out against the Government, especially by the Presbyterians, for the slowness with which they proceeded to bring the other parties to order, or, as the expression translated into modern English signifies, to compel them to re- nounce their religious opinions; and there can be no doubt, when the unsettled and excited state of the kingdom is duly considered, that, if Cromwell had not been a man of uncommon energy, and advanced far before the age in which he lived in his notions of religious liberty, there would have raged in England as fierce a persecution as any of which we read in his- tory. But though truth thus compels us to confess that the Puritans themselves were tainted with the spirit of persecution, justice at the same time requires us to state, that they have the signal honour of being the first who renounced the abominable and pernicious principle, that one man has a right to constitute him- self the judge of his neighbour's faith.

When these facts are considered, it will be readily acknowleged, that the prejudice which many enter- tain against the power of the church, is exceedingly natural. In the hands of worldly and designing men that power was converted into a weapon, which proved the bane alike of the temporal and of the spiritual interestsof mankind; and it need not excite our wonder, tliat men should dread the recurrence of similar scenes. But widely different is the view which we entertain of the power of the church: most unscriptural as well as

A 2

I

Vlll

most unreasonable, do we regard the slightest approach to the employment of civil pains and penalties for the defence or support of religion. The power which is vested in the office-bearers of the Christian church, is derived solely from the authority of Christ; and it is entirely of a spiritual nature, extending not to the persons, but simply to the consciences of men. When any member of a Christian society is walking in a dis- orderly manner, whatever may be the nature of his fault — whether a neglect of the ordinances of religioD, or impurity of conduct, or a refusal to contribute rf his substance for the support of the gospel — it is the duty of the office-bearers to wait upon him, and in a spirit of kindness to admonish him of his error, and to urge him to repentance and amendment of life; but should he refuse to listen to their reproof, should he despise their authority, yea, should he even proceed to the fearful extent of blaspheming the name of Christ, the utmost length to which they are warranted to go^ is to declare that ne can no longer be recognised as one of their body. No power on earth may legitimately add to this sentence. The excommunicated individual retains all his civil rights, enjoys his property without disturbance, and is as safe in his person as if he were sovereign of the world. No civil disabilities, or bodily inflictions, or loss of property should be connected with the sentence of excommunication: the punishment of spiritual offences is reserved by the Almighty in his own hands. We are members of civil society by the very condition of our birth; we become members of the Church by receiving Christ in faith — two condi- tions of membership which are fundamentally and ra- dically distinct; and, therefore, to make the privileges of the worldly community hinge upon the privileges of the spiritual, is to join together things which have no natural connection.

But here it will be said, that though the church has confessedly no right to inflict upon any of her mem- bers a greater punishment than exclusion from her

communion, yet the nation may, and ought to exclude fiom civil privileges all persons who fall under the dis- pleasure of the church. This is the old doctrine that dominion is founded in grace, a doctrine which has been the source of nearly cJl the persecutions that have happened in the world. The principle proposed bears a most striking resemblance to the principle upon which the church of Rome defends her conduct. That church, according to the pleading of her own friends, was never guilty of inflicting temporal punishments upon any whom she had declared heretics. She only pronounced the scriptural sentence of excommunication, and then handed the delinquents over to the secular arm of the law ; and it was the magistrate who kindled the flames, while the hypocritical priests with seeming earnestness im- plored him, upon their bended knees, to have mercy upon the wretched sufierers. But most people will be inclined to think that there is no difference of any I'eal importance between this representation of the case, and the view which is commonly received. If I am to be excluded from civil privileges and con- signed to the flames, it matters little to me whether it be by the direct sentence of the church, or by the state founding its proceedings upon the excommunica- tion previously pronounced by the church.

Do we then deny the right of a nation to fix the qualifications of its own rulers ? By no means. The principle which we uphold is, that every nation has a right to settle the form of its own government; yea, that the legitimacy of any government depends, not upon the length of time during which it may have existed, but simply upon the fact of its being in accordance with the national will ; and the principle opposed to this is, that dominion is founded in gi^ace, or that certain descriptions of persons have a right to rule indepen- dently of the nation's consent. The persons who have a right to sit in the legislative assembly of a nation are those who are fairly chosen by the electors, unre- stricted in their choice, and voting for whom they please. The character of Parliament must be deter-

mined by the character of the nation* Any attempt to regulate by previous law, independently of the national will, what the prevailing sentiments of the supreme assembly shall oe, must prove highly per- nicious : for infallibly it will either happen, tliat the resentment of the proscribed classes will be roused, and disorganization introduced into the framework df society; or the required oaths and tests will degenerate, by tacit agreement, into matters of mere form, and thus will the foundations of the public morals be destroyed, while at the same time the end for which this tremendous sacrifice is made is not attained. If there are any individuals who think that certain descriptions of per- sons alone are qualified to rule, the course which they should adopt is, not to advocate the enactment of laws confining political privileges to men of their views, but to labour with all their might for the difiusion oif what they esteem sound principles through society, that the electors may be converted to their opinions, and induced to support them. We are as deeply convinced as any persons can be, that genuine Evangelical Christians, men who have passed from death to life^ will always prove the most upright rulers, but we should regard, as utterly futile and unjust, every attempt which might be made to confine to them political privir leges by positive enactment. Such a system may be practicable under a despotic government, but where the elective franchise is enjoyed, the only course which remains, is to diffuse the principles of pureandundefiled religion throughout every corner of the land; and then it will infallibly happen, sooner or later, that the governing power will receive a large infusion of prac- tical Christianity. The electors are the fountain of Parliament : make the fountain pure and the stream will be pure also. And as it is only by the diffusion of correct principles through the mass of society, that a right government can be established ; so it is only by the preservation of a right tone of feeling among the electors, that the continued existence of such a govern-

ment can be secured. The favourite method to which parties, when they have risen to power, have ever been prone to resort, viz. the exclusion, by positive enact- ment, of all who difier from them, is wrong iti prin- ciple, seeking fruit where the seed has not been sown ; and it must prove utterly unavailing to stem the tor- rent which a constituency, altered by the lapse of time, will pour in upon the constitution. It is in vain that one generation of men endeavours, by the use of tests and prohibitions, to make any human institution bear the impress of their own sentiments to the end of time ; for each generation retains all the rights which any preceding generation ever possessed ; and therefore, whenever it happens that any institutions have ceased to be in unison with the spirit of the age, they must of necessity give way — brought down by the rude hand of violence, where exclusive laws enacted in their favour have been obstinately adhered to, or fading imper- ceptibly away, like the snow before the increasing power of the sun, where no test has prevented the governing body from gradually adapting itself to the changes of society.

Let those persons therefore, who are impressed with the importance of having the reins of government placed in the hands of genuine Christians, instead of deploring the want of exclusive laws to shut out Ca- tholics and Infidels, labour to leaven the mass of society with the knowledge of the truth. Christianity, in re- forming the institutions and manners of a country, does not begin with the government. It commences with individuals, generally in the lower ranks of life : its influence extends from one person to another: imperceptibly the number of its adherents increases ; the little leaven leaveneth at last the whole lump. Christians thus gradually acquire more extensive in- fluence, till at last their principles begin to control the measures of government. But all the while their power depends upon the hold which true religion has upon the affections of the inhabitants, and any attempt

xu

to build it upon the essentially different foundation of an exclusive test, destroys the moral influence of its charac- ter, and leads to the fatal idea that the Christianity of the statute book, may be r^arded as a sufficient sub- stitute for the Christianity of the country. The king- dom of Christ Cometh not with observation ; it is within men, and there is more or less of religion in a country — ^it is partly Christian and it is partly Infidel, whatever acts of Parliament may say, just according to the proportion which the genuine followers of the Redeemer bear to the rest of the inhabitants.

In perfect accordance with these principles, and leading indeed directly to them, is the doctrine of ex- communication as laid down in the word of God. It imports exclusion simply from the religious privileges of the society whose nindamental laws have been des- pised, but it does not imply any deprivation of civil or political rights, any loss of property, or any bodily suffering. The individual who has been expelled from the church, as well as the individual who has never been a member of it, retains every right which might belong to him as a member of the community ; and any evil or inconvenience which he may suffer, is alto- gether of an indirect kind, not forming part of his sentence, but resulting out of the diminished confidence which his fellow-men, if Christianity be widely dif!used, will naturally feel disposed to place in him.

From the account which we have given of the nature of ecclesiastical authority, and of the limits beyond which it is never permitted to go, it must be apparent, that the prejudices which many have entertained against it, are altogether unfounded. The power of the church 18 indeed nothing more than the right which every voluntary society possesses, of excluding from its membership those persons who despise and trample upon its fundamental laws. It is the power of enforcing, not by carnal weapons, but by the sanctions of the spiritual world, by the prospect of a future judgment, by the terrors of the Lord, the laws which Christ has

laid down for the regulation of the conduct of Christians. And though some persons might be dis- posed to think that the addition of a little temporal suffering, either in person, or property, or rights, could not hinder, but might rather tend to aid the effect of the sentence of the church, yet the very nature of the case stamps the seal of folly upon such an idea. The value of the sentence of excommunication depends upon the preservation of its spiritual character. If any ingredients of an earthly kind are thrown into the cup which the offender is required to drink, the con- sequence inevitably is that a wrong motive is brought to bear upon his mind ; and for the sake of avoiding the temporal suffering, he may be strongly tempted to mak^ {Ht)fessions of a sorrow of which there is no trace in his heart. But when the power of the church, shorn of all those base and earthly accompaniments which the wisdom of man has added to it, rises in ample majesty, and addresses the conscience of the offender, appealing to the future world, and to that God who though unseen by us yet sees us aU, it is eminently calculated to produce a deep impression upon the mind; and the manner in which the final decision is received, will furnish an excellent criterion by which the spiritual state of the individual may be determined. Every person who is brought under discipline by the church, should be made to feel, and if visited with the sentence of excommunication, should be sent away with the impression upon his mind, that it is not his degradation or temporal ruin which is sought, but solely the welfare of his immortal soul. Temporal suffering, it is true, if it comes in the course of God's providence, associated with the sentence of excommunication, may produce the happiest results; but if it is inflicted by the hand of man, and forms part of the sentence pronounced by the rulers of the church, it will either lead to hjrpocrisy, or to increased open profanity.

Such is the nature of the authority which Christ has

XIV

estaUisbed in his diurcb, and sudi are the cxilj sanctions which men are permitted to employ for the pmrpoee of securing attention to the institutions d religion. In Presbyterian diurches the power ct carrying these laws into effect, and of bringing these sanctions to bear upon the consciences of men, is vested in the sessions of particular congr^ations, and in the associated office-bearers of all the congr^ations <^ a district*

The Presbyterian form of Church govemm^it appears to us to be founded in scripture, and to be admirably calculated to promote the prosperity of the body of Christ. The pastoral equalilj wnich it estabr lishes, the representative character of its elders, aod the subordination of its courts, are excellent * safer guards against injustice and tyranny ; and fumi^ the best means of preserving from encroachment the rights of all the parties concerned. Presbytery differs from Episcopacy in this, that while the latter recognises different orders of teachers, the inferior deriving their power from the superior, and placed under their con- trol, the former places ail Christian ministers upcm a level, and requires the designation to the sacred office to be made by those who have themselves been pre- viously appointed to it. The difference, again, between the Presbyterian and the Independent forms of church government is this, that among the Independents there is no association of neighbouring churches for the purposes of government, but each congregation is the ultimate tribunal with reference to all the disputes which originate in itself ; while among the Presbyterians all the churdies of a neighbourhood are associated toge- ther, and their office-bearers or representatives are formed into a judicature, to which there lies an appeal from the decision of each particular church.

But there is another feature peculiar to Presbytery, which distinguishes it, both from Episcopacy on the one hand, and from Independency on the other, and which is indeed the most remarkable characteristic of that

XV

form of government, we refer to the office of the ruling elder. Among the Episcopalians, the ordinary mem- bers of the church have no share in its government : die bishop is the fountain of all power in his own diocese, and the inferior clergy derive their authority from him. Among the Independents, on the other hand, the government of the church is vested in the members themselves; and there is no distinction between the rulers and the i-uled: they are identically the same body. But the Presbyterians take a middle and wiser course. They avoid the dangerous extreme of investing any one man with uncontrolled authority', ^^d they avoid the no less hazardous measure of ^evating all to the rank of rulers. They place the government of the church not in the pastor alone, nor y^tin the members indiscriminately, but in persons olsosen by the members, and acting as their represen- t«fctives. Episcopacy is a system of despotic tyranny : Independency is a pure democracy, while Presbytery is that happy medium, which places the management €>€ affiiirs, in which all have an interest, in the hands of ••^presentatives, in whose election all have a voice. I^esbytery, in a word, is founded upon that very {>raiciple, viz. the principle of representation, which is *Jow universally regarded as the comer-stone of free- <J<Mn, and which experience has shown to be the only piinciple which can enable bodies of men to act, at once with promptitude and in accordance with the nnind of the majority.

But whatever might be the advantages of the Pres- l>yterian form of church government, and however gireat the analogy between it and the principles which <*xperience has shown to be the best in conducting the civil affairs of a nation, we at once acknowledge that, unless it .could be shown from scripture that a {^andation existed for it there, all such considerations *oiild be insufficient to prove its propriety, or its law- fulness in the Church of Christ. The constitution ^ laws of the Redeemer's kingdom are laid down in

XVI

the sacred writings, and nothing is binding upon Christians which cannot be deduced from the precepts of the gospel. In all controversies, the appeal most ' be made to the law and to the testimony : die srrand inouiry must fcver be. What saith the Scripture?

The distinguishing features, then, of die Presbyterian form of church government, are the equality of its teachers, and the existence of a separate class, styled ruling elders, whose office it is to manage the spiritual affairs of the church.

In maintaining the equality of Christian teachers,, it is with the Episcopalians alone that we have any^ controversy ; for the Independents allow, as well ass- the Presbyterians, that there is only one penaanentiri order of religious teachers authorized by the Scriptures ; but the Episcopalians have several viz. archbishops, bishops, arch-deacons, rectors, &c. It is proper however to remark, th a^M the Episcopalians tbetnselves do not maintain ^»t aE£ their diflFerent orders are to be found in the BiUe :^ there are only two which they pretend to find there -^ viz. bishops and presbyters, though they imagine, th^T' when once the princple of subordination is estabhidied^-^ there is no harm in carrying it out to a further extent«r=: and creating as many different orders as the circum— - stances of the case may seem to require. Is it Uu^ then that there were two classes of Christian teacher^^ appointed by Christ to exist permanently in the dhnrdi m the one subordinate to the other? We believe th^^ very reverse to be the case. A small d^ree of ex- — amination will make it apparent that the bishop of th^^ word of God is the pastor of a single congregadon^ and not, like the bishop of the Church of England^ the superintendent of all the teachers residing in 1^2 large district of country. The main argument whid^^ the Episcopalians employ in defence of their views, v^ founded upon the fact that the ministers appointed bj^ the apostles, are styled in scripture, somedmes bish — ops, and somedmes presbyters ; whence they hasdiy —

xvu

infer tbatj since these names are different, they were inttt^ded to designate two different classes^ or orders of teadiers. But every person who has read the sacred mtinga with care, must be sensible that the names in qaesdoQ are applied in numerous passages to the very sune individuals, and are frequently interchanged ^thoQt any restriction ; whence it plainly follows mat they were intended to designate not two different daases, but one and the same class of religious in- structors. It is sufficient to refer to the portions of scripture whidi contain the evidence of uiese state- ments. The following may be consulted : Acts xx. l7--a& Titus i. 5t--7. 1 Peter v. 1, 2. Phil. i. 1. 1 Tim. iii. 1 : in which passages the attentive reader will find, in the first place, that the very same ^pdividusJs who are styled presbyters or elders, are likewise styled bishops or overseers, or persons taking ^e oversight of the church, which latter phrases are ^U translations of the same original term ; and secondly, ^]hat when exhortations are given to persons holding c^dficQ in the church, bishops and deacons alone are ^t^cientioned, making it clear beyond reach of doubt, ^^liat the teaching elders, or the pastors of single con- secutions, are either addressed as bbhops, or have ^ot been supposed by the apostles to stand in need ^>f any charge at all.

The second characteristic of Presbytery, which ^distinguishes it equally from Episcopacy, and from Independency, is its recognition of a class styled ruling ^Iden^ whose office it is, not to preach the word 1>iiblicly, but to aid the preaching elder in conducting ^he spiritual affairs of the church. There was a time ^hen this class of office-bearers was very extensively ^knowledged to be scriptural, both by the Episcopa- lians and by the Independents, but it is now confined to the Presbyterians; and experience has amply shown ^t it is of immense importance to the welmre of the ^Suistian community. But it is unnecessary that we sltould enter into any discussion respecting the office

XVIU

of the ruling elder ; for this is the very subject to the consideration of which the following treatise is devoted Overlooking the first branch of the general questioD, of which we have taken a hasty view, the author con- fines his attention entirely to the second branch, viz. the office of the ruling elder: and the scriptural war- rant for this office, and its vast utility he establishes, in our estimation, with a variety and force of evidence which it is impossible to resist. The whole treatise^ indeed, is excellent, and it cannot fail to be of essential service to the Christian world. The men especiall}i= who have been ordained to the office of the eldership should be familiar with its contents: the perusal of its pages would greatly elevate their views of the sacref office to which they have been called, and lead tc: increased conscientiousness in the discharge of its duties.

Such is the system or framework of government* which Christ has appointed, as the means of dispensing and applying that power of the church, whose pur- poses we have described, and whose nature and limits we have endeavoured to define. The elders, botlK teaching and ruling associated together, are the persons whom the Redeemer has invested with the power cr- carrying into effect the laws of his kingdom. . Or" them is devolved the task of preserving the purity az the church : to them are given the opportunity an£ the means of exerting a salutary control over aC professing Christians ; their duty it is to instruct th^ ignorant, to reclaim the backsliding, to confirm the unstable, and to console the afflicted ; and according to their decision are persons both to be received intcc membership with the church, and expelled fi*om heia communion. The highest sentence which the Scrip- ture warrants, together with all the inferior steps ofl discipline, the Head of the Church has placed in their: hands, as the means of counteracting and expelling any* leaven of wickedness whose presence may be observed,^

XIX

Und whose unchecked growth might endanger the wel- fiire of the whole body.

These are duties, the bare enumeration of which is sufficient to demonstrate, the vast importance of the office of the eldership, and the hi^n responsibility irhich devolves upon those who undertake to act as the spiritual overseers of the church. On their fidelity, under God, depends the purity of the body of Christ: on the right discharge of their duties is suspended the fete of thousands. If they are negligent of the spiritual fijnctions which devolve upon tnem, and careless of their own private conduct, they may be the means of ^^troducing a total degeneracy of manners into the church, both by the aomission of improper members, ^Jid by the malign influence of their own example : sind thus the very name of Jesus may be brought into ciiscredit, and the prevalence of the principles of in- fidelity be greatly accelerated. There can be no question that the improper conduct of professing Christians is the means of inflicting a deeper wound ^^:ipon Christianity, than all the malice and opposition of ^w most powernil avowed enemies; and that wound, ^Y is as litUe to be doubted, will be much more deadly ^nd severe, if the very hands which should be prompt tjo apply to it the healing balsam, lend their assistance tjo urge forward the weapon which inflicts it. How ^5an the office-bearers of the church expect that, if they, 'V^ho should be patterns to others, live in carelessness Qnd folly, the ordinary professors of Christianity will l^e distinguished for piety, and a diligent and faithful clischarge of their religious duties ? Is it not a fact that ^11 who make a profession of religion, are strictly "^vatched by the world ? Is it not a fact that those T^ersons who take office in the church are made the objects of a scrutiny peculiarly close and searching ? Are not all their actions observed? Is not their ^sxample appealed to in every house? Is not their misconduct employed by the dissolute to encourage ^ach other in their evil courses ? Yes, their sins are

XX

seeds peculiarly quick to grow, which, falling upon a soil entirely congenial to their nature^ produce a most abundant harvest While they themselves are quietly reposing upon their pillows at home, their example sleeps not with them. Their inconsistencies may be filling the bowl of madness, around which the mid* night revellers sit ; or they may be employed to give point to the argument with whidi the unbeliever asaaih Christianity. It is generally allowed that the low state to which religion was reduced in Franoe, by the n^li* genoe and errors of the Popish establishment^ was the main cause of that extensive and fatal triumph wjhidi infidelity enjoyed for so long a period in that kingdom : and every corruption of Christianity, and every inoooo^ sistency of its adherents, tends in a greater or lesi degree to produce the very same results.

But, on the other hand, let the oiBce-bearers of the church be sedulous and faithful in the discharge of theii important duties, admitting members with caution, and counselling with unremitting watchfulness andaffiectioo those who are already in communion ; and how salutar}! and enduring may the results of their labours be ! A high tone of moral feeling will be produced and sustained in the church: a holy emulation will be excited in the bosoms of the faithful : the self-denial and devotion of the office-bearers will transfiise themselves into the breasts of the members : heavenly sympathy will bind together the hearts of all; and when at any time the rulers of the church may be driven to the dire necessity of exerting the full stretch of their authority, their hands will be strengthened by the countenance and approbation of those who are under their care : and even in cases of difficulty and doubt, where there may be room for misconstruction, the experience which the members have had of their former prudence and zeal, will inspire them with con- fidence in the wisdom and integrity of their present pro- ceedings. The elders indeed of a Presbyterian church, occupy a peculiarly favourable position for exerting a

XXI

salutary influence over the minds of their fellow- Ohrisdans, and form an admirable instrument for preserving the parity of the church, and administering its hiws. Chosen by the communicants on account of triieir superior worth and attainments, they enjoy the ccttifidence of those over whom they preside, and are ineoarded by them with that powerful sympathy which ^noluntary dioioe, unless the objects of it are guilty of esgregious misconduct, never fSdls to inspire.

Is it not then apparent that elders are men in whose

hands t^ere b placed a moral instrument of powerful

efficiency, and should they not therefore make it their

claily ^tdeavour to wield that instrument in such a

xxianner, that it may be productive of good to the

CDhurch of Christ ? Should they not labour to cultivate

personal religion, and to exhibit a walk and conversa-

t:i(Hi becoming the gospel, that others seeing their good

^^orks, may be stimulated to the cultivation of similar

graces ? In vain will they reprove the backsliding, if

t'lieir own piety be of a questionable kind. Should

^liey not study to acquire an accurate and extensive

Icnowledge of the sacred writings, that they may be

ctlsle to instruct the ignorant, and to resolve the doubts

<^i those who are involved in perplexity ? ' Should they

^ot take a deep interest in the diffusion of Christian

knowledge, and the enlargement of the Redeemer's

IciBgdom, giving their countenance to every plan of

^^laerahiess, both that they themselves may be the

honoured instruments of increasing the glory of the

Redeemer's name, and that the energies of those who

^Te committed to their care may be directed aright, and

prevented from sinking into a state of listless inactivity?

Should they not strive to act with prudence, and dr-

^Timspection in all the affairs which come under their

oonsideration, ever looking with a single eye to the

of their Master's name, that they may acquire a

jer share of the confidence of the Christian people,

be enabled to exert over them the greater moral

influence ? Should they not labour to avoid even the

xxu

appearance of evil, living in all godliness and honesty^ lest any actions of theirs, however innocent in them- selves, should, in consequence of unfavourable circum- stances, be converted by the wicked, who are ever prone to judge harshly of the conduct of professing Christians, into weapons of attack against the pure and holy reli- gion of Christ ? Should they not, in a word, regard themselves as the guides of the people of God, stationed over them for the purpose of exciting them, both by precept and example, to the diligent and faithful dis- charge of their duties, and responsible therefore in a certain degree for their improvement, as well as foi their own ? To them indeed, as well as to the preach- ing elders, may be applied most justly that striking passage in the book of Ezekiel iii. 17 : " Son of man. I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, thoL shalt surely die ; and thou givest him not warning, noa speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, tc save his life, the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thine hand- Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul."

Such are the duties which the very nature of the case demonstrates to be binding upon those who have assumed the office of the eldership ; and such are the fatal, and such the salutary results which the careless or the diligent discharge of these duties is calculated to produce. What ground then for serious reflection- and what motives to unsparing self-examination dc these considerations suggest ! How fervent should be the prayers which the elder of the church presents tc God, for strength to enable him to walk uprightly, anc for grace to guard him from every course which might prove a stumbling-block to others ! Should not the duty which he owes to Christ, and to the members or the church be ever present to his mind ? The man

XXUl

who knows that he is wielding a weapon which may prove fatal to the lives of others, should certainly give es})ecial heed to his movements : and the servant of Jesus who knows that the gospel is a double-edged sword, with the one edge powerful to heal, but where its beaUng virtue is depised, powerful with the other to destroy, should use his utmost efforts to bring its s&lutary edge into contact with the consciences of men. It it an awful responsibility which rests upon the heads of those who undertake the spiritual oversight of the Church of Christ. Stewards of the mysteries of God, tbey are engaged in a task of the most momentous kind ; ^nd their labours are productive of consequences which ^^tend through the duration of eternity. Their ^Knployments have reference not to the fleeting interests ^>f this world, but to the immortal destinies of the soul ; ^xid when they neglect or abuse their spiritual func- tions, they are pursuing a course which may involve thousands in a ruin beyond the reach of remedy. T'beirs is not the negligence of the men who bring ixiisery upon themselves alone. Theirs is the negli- S^^ce of the guide, whose dying groans are mingled "^^ith the groans of the victims whom he has led astray. X^ike the general whose unskilfulness or folly has con- signed his men to the sword of the foe, their blood they ooinmingle with the blood of otliers ; and the sting of their own deatli must carry the concentrated venom of a thousand dissolutions.

W. L.

I4lk November, 1834.

XIV

established in his church, and such are the only sanctions which men are permitted to employ for tl^ purpose of securing attention to the institutions o£ religion. In Presbyterian churches the power of carrying these laws into effect, and of bringing these sanctions to bear upon the consciences of men, is vested in the sessions of particular con^egations, and in the associated office-bearers of all the congregations of a district.

The Presbyterian form of Church government appears to us to be founded in scripture, and to be admirably calculated to promote the prosperity of the body of Christ. The pastoral equality which it estabr lishes, the representative character of its elders, and the subordination of its courts, are excellent * safer guards against injustice and tyranny ; and furnish the best means of preserving from encroachment the rights of all the parties concerned. Presbytery differs mun Episcopacy in this, that while the latter recognises different orders of teachers, the inferior deriving their power from the superior, and placed under their con- trol, the former places all Christian ministers upon a level, and requires the designation to the sacred office to be made by those who have themselves been pre- viously appointed to it. The difference, again, between the Presbyterian and the Independent forms of church government is this, that among the Independents there is no association of neighbouring churches for the purposes of government, but each congregation is the ultimate tribunal with reference to all the disputes which originate in itself ; while among the Presbyterians all the churdies of a neighbourhood are associated toge- ther, and their office-bearers or representatives are formed into a judicature, to which there lies an appeal from the decision of each particular church.

But diere is another feature f)eculiar to Presbytery, which distinguishes it, both from Episcopacy on the one hand, and from Independency on the other, and which is indeed the most remarkable characteristic of that

XV

form of government, we refer to the office of the ruling elder. Among the Episcopalians, the ordinary mem- bers of the church have no share in its government : the bislu^ is the fountain of all power in his own diocese, and the inferior clergy derive their authority from him. Among the Independents, on the other band, the government of the church is vested in the members themselves; and there is no distinction between the rulers and the i*uled: they are identically the same body. But the Presbyterians take a middle and wiser course. They avoid the dangerous extreme of investing any one man with uncontrolled authority', and they avoid the no less hazardous measure of elevating all to the rank of rulers. They place the government of the church not in the pastor alone, nor yet in the members indiscriminately, but in persons chosen by the members, and acting as their represen- tatives. Episcopacy is a system of despotic tyranny : Independency is a pure democracy, while Presbytery is tbat happy medium, which places the management of a&irs, in which all have an interest, in the hands of representatives, in whose election all have a voice. Presbytery, in a word, is founded upon that verj' principle, viz. the principle of representation, which is now universally regarded as the comer-stone of free- dom, and which "experience has shown to be the only principle which can enable bodies of men to act, at once with promptitude and in accordance with the mind of the majority.

But whatever might be the advantages of the Pres- byterian form of church government, and however great the analogy between it and the principles which <*xperience has shown to be the best in conducting the civil affairs of a nation, we at once acknowledge that, unless it .could be shown from scripture that a foundation existed for it there, all such considerations "^d be insufficient to prove its propriety, or its law- fulness in the Church of Christ. The constitution ^d laws of the Redeemer's kingdom are laid down in

i

XVI

the sacred writings, and nothing is binding npon Christians which cannot be deduced from the precepts of the gospd. In all controversies, the appeal must be made to the law and to the testimony : the grand inouiry must fcver be. What saith the Scripture r

The distinguishing features, then,of diePresbytman form of church government, are the equality of its teachers, and the existence of a separate class, styled ruling elders, whose office it is to manage the spiritual affairs of the church.

In maintaining the equality of Christian teachers, it is with the Episcopalians alone that we have any controversy ; for the Independents allow, as well as the Presbyterians, that there is only one permaneot order of reli^ous teachers authorized by the sacred Scriptures ; but the Episcopalians have several orders, viz. archbishops, bishops, arch-deacons, deans, rectors, &c. It is proper however to remark, that the Episcopalians themselves do not maintain that aS their diflFerent orders are to be found in the Bible : there are only two which they pretend to find thei^ viz. bishops and presbyters, though they imagine, that when once the princple of subordmation is established, there is no harm in carrying it out to a further extent, and creating as many different orders as the circum- stances of the case may seem to require. Is it true then that there were two classes of Christian teachers appointed by Christ to exist permanently in the diurch, the one subordinate to the other? We believe the very reverse to be the case. A small d^ee of ex- amination will make it apparent that the bishop of the word of God is the pastor of a single congregation, and not, like the bishop of the Church of England, the superintendent of all the teachers residing in a large district of countiy. The main argument which the Episcopalians employ in defence of their views, is founded upon the fact that the ministers appointed by the apostles, are styled in scripture, sometimes bish- ops, and sometimes presbyters ; whence they hastily

xvu

infer tbatj since these names are different, they were intoided to designate two different classes^ or orders of teadiers. But every person who has read the sacred writings with care, must be sensible that the names in questacm are applied in numerous passages to the very same individuals, and are frequently Interchanged without any restriction ; whence it plainly follows that they were intended to designate not two different classes, but one and the same class of religious in- structors. It is sufficient to refer to the portions of scripture whidi contain the evidence of these state- ments. The following may be consulted : Acts xx. IT—aS, Titus i. 5r-T. 1 Peter v. 1, 2. PhiL i. 1. 1 Tim. iii. 1 : in which passages the attentive reader will find, in the first place, that the very same individuaJs who are styled presbyters or elders, are likewise styled bishops or overseers, or persons talcing the over^ght of the church, which latter phrases are all translations of the same original term ; and secondly, that when exhortations are given to persons holding cffice in the dmrch, bishops and deacons alone are mentioned, making it clear beyond reach of doubt, that tlie teaching elders, or the pastors of single con- gregations, are either addressed as bishops, or have not been supposed by the apostles to stand in need of any charge at all.

The second characteristic of Presbytery, which ^Ustinguishes it equally firom Episcopacy, and from Independency, is its recognition of a class styled ruling elders, whose office it is, not to preach the word publicly, but to aid the preaching elder in conducting the spiritual affairs of the church. There was a time vhen this class of office-bearers was very extensively acknowledged to be scriptural, both by the Episcopa- lians and by the Independents, but it is now confined tX) the Presoyterians; and experience has amply shown tlbat it is of immense importance to the wel&re of the i^uistian community. But it is unnecessary that we ^uld enter into any discussion respecting the office

XVlll

of the ruling elder ; for this is the very subject to the consideration of which the following treatise is devoted. Overlooking the first branch of the general question, of which we have taken a hasty view, the author coo- fines his attention entirely to the second branch, viz. the office of the ruling elder: and the scriptural war- rant for this office, and its vast utility he establishes, in our estimation, with a variety and force of evidence which it is impossible to resist. The whole treatise, indeed, is excellent, and it cannot fail to be of essential service to the Christian world. The men especially who have been ordained to the office of the eldership should be familiar with its contents: the perusal of its pages would greatly elevate their views of the sacred office to which they have been called, and lead to increased conscientiousness in the discharge of its duties.

Such is the system or framework of government, which Christ has appointed, as the means of dispensing and applying that power of the church, whose pur- poses we have described, and whose nature and limits we have endeavoured to define. The elders, both teaching and ruling associated together, are the persons whom the Redeemer has invested with the power of carrying into effect the laws of his kingdom. On them is devolved the task of preserving the purity of the church : to them are given the opportunity and the means of exerting a salutary control over all professing Christians ; their duty it is to instruct the ignorant, to reclaim the backsliding, to confirm the unstable, and to console the afflicted ; and according to their decision are persons both to be received into membership with the church, and expelled from her communion. The highest sentence which the Scrip- ture warrants, together with all the inferior steps <rf discipline, the Head of the Church has placed in their hands, as the means of counteracting and expelling any leaven of wickedness whose presence may be observed.

XIX

and whose unchecked growth might endanger the wel- fare of the whole body.

These are duties, the bare enumeration of which is sufficient to demonstrate, the vast importance of the office of the eldership, and the hi^h responsibility which devolves upon those who undertake to act as the spiritual overseers of the church. On their fidelity, under God, depends the purity of the body of Christ: on the right discharge of their duties is suspended the fate of thousands. If they are negligent of the spiritual functions which devolve upon them, and careless of their own private conduct, they may be the means of introducing a total degeneracy of manners into the church, both by the aomission of improper members, and by the malign influence of their own example : and thus the very name of Jesus may be brought into discredit, and the prevalence of the principles of in- fidelity be greatly accelerated. There can be no question that the improper conduct of professing Christians is the means of inflicting a deeper wound upon Christianity, than all the malice and opposition of the most powerful avowed enemies ; and that wound, it is as little to be doubted, will be much more deadly and severe, if the very hands which should be prompt to apply to it the healing balsam, lend their assistance to urge forward the weapon which inflicts it. How can the office-bearers of the church expect that, if they, who should be patterns to others, live in carelessness and folly, the ordinary professors of Christianity will be distinguished for piety, and a diligent and faithful discharge of their religious duties ? Is it not a fact that all who make a profession of religion, are strictly watched by the world ? Is it not a fact that those persons wfio take office in the church are made the objects of a scrutiny peculiarly close and searching ? Are not all their actions observed? Is not their example appealed to in every house? Is not their ifiisconduct employed by the dissolute to encourage ^h other in their evil courses ? Yes, their sins are

XX

seeds peculiarly quick to grow, which, falling upon a soil entirely congenial to their nature, produce a most abundant harvest* While they themsdves are quietly reposing upon their pillows at home, their exftinple sleeps not with them. Their inconsistencies may he filling the bowl of madness, around which the mid- night revellers sit ; or they may be employed to give point to the argument with which the unbeliever a^iils Christianity. It is generally allowed that the low state to which religion was reduced in France, by the negli- gence and errors of the Popish establishment^ was the main cause of that extensive and fatal triumph wfaidi infidelity enjoyed for so long a period in that kin^om ; and every corruption of Cfajristianity, and every incon- sistency of its adherents, tends in a greater or less degree to produce the very same results.

But, on the other hand, let the office-bearers of the church be sedulous and faithful in the discharge of th^ important duties, admitting members with caution, and counselling with unremitting watchfulness andajBGection those who are already in communion ; and how salutary and enduring may the results of their labours be ! A high tone of moral feeling will be produced and sustained in the church: a holy emulation will be excited in the bosoms of the feithfiil: the self-denial and devotion of the office-bearers will transfuse themselves into the breasts of the members : heavenly sympathy will bind together the hearts of all ; and when at any time the rulers of the church may be driven to the dire necessity of exerting the full stretch of their authority, their hands wUl be strengthened by the countenance and approbation of those who are under their care : and even in cases of difficulty and doubt, where there may be room for misconstruction, the experience which the members have had of their former prudence and zeal, will inspire them with con- fidence m the wisdom and integrity of their present pro- ceedings. The elders indeed of a Presbyterian church, occupy a peculiarly favourable position for exerting a

XXI

salutary influence over the minds of their fellow- Christians, and form an admirable instrument for preserving the purity of the church, and administering its laws. Chosen by the communicants on account of their superior worth and attainments, they enjoy the confidence of those over whom they preside, and are regarded by them with that powerful sjonpathy which voluntary dioioe, unless the objects of it are guilty of egregious misconduct, never &ils to inspire.

Is it not then apparent that elders are men in whose hands Aere is placed a moral instrument of powerful efficicoicy, and should they not therefore make it their daily ^ideavour to wield that instrument in such a manner, that it may be productive of good to the Church of Christ ? Should they not labour to cultivate personal religion, and to exhibit a walk and conversa- tion becoming the gospel, that othei*s seeing their good works, may be stimulated to the cultivation of similar graces ? In vain will they reprove the backsKding, if rheh" own piety be of a questionable kind. Should they not study to acquire an accurate and extensive knowledge of the sacred writings, that they may foe able to instruct the ignorant, and to resolve the doubts of tli06e who are involved in perplexity ? * Should they not take a deep interest in die diffusion of Christian knowledge, and the enlargemait of the Redeemer's kingdom, giving their countenance to every plan of isseralness, both that they themselves may be the koBOured instruments of increasing the glory of the Redeemer's name, and that the energies of those who are committed to their care may be directed aright, and prevented from sinking into a state of listless inactivity? Should they not strive to act with prudence, and dr- camspection in all the affairs which come under their consideration, ever looking with a single eye to the piory of their Master's name, that they may acquire a hrcer share of the confidence of the Christian people, •fid be enabled to exert over them the greater moral infiuence ? Should they not labour to avoid even the

XXll

appearance of evil, living in all godliness and honesty, lest any actions of theirs, however innocent in them- selves, should, in consequence of unfavourable circum- stances, be converted by the wicked, who are ever prone to judge harshly of the conduct of professing Christians, into weapons of attack against the pure and holy reli- gion of Christ ? Should they not, in a word, regard themselves as the guides of the people of God, stationed over them for the purpose of exciting them, both by precept and example, to the diligent and faithful dis- charge of their duties, and responsible therefore in a certain degree for their improvement, as well as for their own ? To them indeed, as well as to the preach- ing elders, may be applied most justly that striking fassage in the book of Ezekiel iii. 17 : " Son of man, have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel; therefore hear the word at my mouth, and give them warning from me. When I say unto the wicked, thou shalt surely die ; and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way, to save his life, the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked, and he turn not from his wickedness nor from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity; but thou hast delivered thy soul."

Such are the duties which the very nature of the case demonstrates to be binding upon those who have assumed the office of the eldership ; and such are the fatal, and such the salutary results which the careless or the diligent discharge of these duties is calculated to produce. What ground then for serious reflection, and what motives to unsparing self-examination do these considerations suggest ! How fervent should be the prayers which the elder of the church presents to God, for strength to enable him to walk uprightly, and for grace to guard him from every course which might prove a stumbling-block to others ! Should not the duty which he owes to Christ, and to the members of the church be ever present to his mind ? The man

XXUl

wlio knows that he is wielding a weapon which may prove fatal to the lives of others, should certainly give especial heed to his movements : and the servant of Jesus who knows that the gospel is a double-edged sword, with the one edge powerful to heal, but where its healing virtue is depised, powerful with the other to destroy, should use his utmost efforts to bring its salutary edge into contact with the consciences of men. It it an awful responsibility which rests upon the heads of those who undertake the spiritual oversight of the Church of Christ. Stewards of the mysteries of God, they are engaged in a task of the most momentous kind ; ana their labours are productive of consequences which extend through the duration of eternity. Their employments have reference not to the fleeting interests of this world, but to the immortal destinies of the soul; and when they neglect or abuse their spiritual func- tions, they are pursuing a course which may involve thousands in a ruin beyond the reach of remedy. Theirs is not the negligence of the men who bring misery upon themselves alone. Theirs is the negli- gence of the guide, whose dying groans are mingled with the groans of the victims whom he has led astray. Like the general whose unskilfulness or folly has con- signed his men to the sword of the foe, their blood they commingle with the blood of otliers ; and the sting of their own death must carry the concentrated venom of a thousand dissolutions.

W. L.

\4th November, 1834.

AN ESSAY, &c.

Chapter I INTRODUCTORY

Our once crucified, but now exalted Redeemer, has erected in this world a kingdom which is his church. This church is either visible or invisible.

By the invisible church, we mean the whole body

of sincere believers, of every age and nation, " that

have been, are, or shall be garnered into one, under

Christ, the glorious Head thereof." Part of these

are already made perfect in heaven. Another portion

are at present scattered over the earth in different

denominations of professing Christians, though not

certainly distinguishable from others by the human

eye. And the remainder are in future to be gathered

in by the grace of God; — ^when the whole number of

the " redeemed from among men," will be united in

one holy assembly, which is the " spouse," the " body

of Christ, the fulness of Him that filleth all in all."

By the visible church is meant the body of those ^ho profess the true religion, together with their ^Hildren. It is that body which is called out of the "^orld, and united under the authority of Christ, the l^ead, for the purpose of maintaining Gospel Truth ^nd Order, and promoting the knowledge, purity, <^omfort, and edification of all the members. When

2

we use the term churchy as expressive of a visible, professing body, we either mean the whole visible church of God throughout the world, or a particular congregation of professing Christians, who have agreed to unite together for the purpose of nmtual instruction^ inspection, and edification.*

The word church is also employed in Scripture to designate a church judicatory; that is, the church assembled and acting by her representatives, the elders, chosen to inspect, and bear rule over the whole body. This, it is believed, will be evident to those who impartially consult Matthew xviii. 15 — 18; and compare the language of the original here, with that of the original, and the Greek translation of the Sevent}', of Deuteronomy xxxi. 28 — 30.

The visible church is a spiritual body. That is, it is not secular or worldly, either in its nature or objects. The kingdom of Christ " is not of this world." Its Head, laws, ordinances, discipline, penalties, and end, are all spiritual. There can be no departure from this principle; in other words, there can be no con- nection between the Church and the State; no en- foi'cement of ecclesiastical la^'s by the power of the

* It has been asserted by some, that the term Church not only means, strictly, a religions assembly — a body of professing people; but that it cannot be applied, with propriety, to any thing else; and that it is altogether improper to apply it, as is often done, to the building in which Uie assembly is wont to convene for worship. This is, undoubtedly, a groundless scruple. Under the Old Testament economy, it is plain that the word synagogue was indiscriminately applied both to the public assembly, and to the edifice in which they worshipped. Besides, the word Church is evidently derived from the Greek words, Kv^fu Mx«f, ** the house of the Lord ;** and therefore, may be con- sidered as pointing quite as distinctly to the edifice as to the worshippers. Nay, it is highly probable that the word in its original use, had a primary reference to the house rather than to the assembly. And even if it were not so, still the under- standing and use of the word in thii double sense, if once agreed upon, cannot be considered as liable, 80 far as is perceived, to any particular objection or abuse.

•ecular arm, or by " carnal weapons," without depart- rig from "the simplicity that is in Christ," and nvading both the purity and safety of his sacred body.

This great visible church is one, in all ages, and hroughout the world. From its first formation in lie family of Adam, through all the changes of the Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian dispensations, it las been one and the same ; having the same divine Head, the same ground of hope, the same essential iharacters, and the same great design. Diversity of lenomination does not destroy this unity. All who profess the true religion, together with their offspring, lowever divided by place, by names, or by forms, are JO be considered as equally belonging to that great Family denominated the church. The Presbyterian, the Episcopalian, the Methodist, the Baptist, and the Independent, who hold the fundamentals of our holy religion, in whatever part of the globe they may reside, are all equally members of the same visible community; and, if they be sincere, will all finally be made partakers of its eternal blessings. They cannot, indeed, all worship together in the same solemn assembly, even if they were disposed to do so :— and the sin and folly o 'men have separated into different bodies those who ought to " walk together." Still the visible church is one. All who " hold the Head," of course, belong to the body of Christ. " We, being many," says the inspired apostle, " are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another." Those who are united by a sound profession to the same Almighty Head ; who embrace the same "precious faith;" who are sanctified by the same Spirit; who eat the same spiritual meat, who drink the same spiritual drink; who repose and rejoice in the same promises ; and who are travelling to the same eternal rest, are surely one BODY, — in a sense more richly significant than can be ascribed to millions who sustain a mere nominal unity.

This unity is very distinctly recognized, and very happily expressed by Cyprian, a distinguished Chris-

tian father of the third century. " The church,'' say^ he, " is one, which, by its fruitful increase, is enlarged into a multitude. As the rays of the sun, thoi^l:^ many, are vet one luminary; as the branches oi 9 tree, though numerous, are all established on one firmly rooted trunk ; and as many streams springing from the same fountain, though apparently dispersed abroad by their overflowing abundance, yet have their unity preserved by one common origin; — ^so the church, though it extends its rays throughout the world, is one light. Though every where diffused, its unity is not broken. By the abundance of its increase, it extends its branches through the whole earth. It spreads far and wide its flowing streams; yet it has one Head, one Fountain, one Parent, and is enriched and enlarged by the issues of its own fruitfulness."*

It is ever also to be borne in mind that the church is not a mere voluntary association, with which men are at liberty to connect themselves or not, as they please. For, although the service which God requires of us is throughout a voluntary one : although no one can properly come into the church but as a matter of voluntary choice : although the idea of either secular or ecclesiastical compulsion is, here, at once im- reasonable and contrary to Scripture : yet as the church is Christ's institution, and not men's ; and as the same divine authority which requires us to repent of sin, and believe in Christ, also requires us to " confess him before men," and to join ourselves to his professing people ; it is evident that no one is at liberty, in the sight of God, to neglect uniting himself with the church. Man cannot, and ought not, to compel him; but if he refuse to fulfil this duty, when it is in his power, he rejects the authority of God. He, of course, refuses at his peril.

Of this body, Christ alone, as before intimated, is the Head. He only has a right to give laws to his

* De Unitate Ecdesice, Sect iy.

'^Hurch, or to institute rites and ordinances for her ^Vjservance. His will is the supreme guide of his pro- ^^ssing people ; his word their code of laws ; and his Slory their ultimate end. The authority of church officers is not original, but subordinate and delegated : that is, as they are his servants, and act under his Commission, and in his name, they have power only to declare what the Scriptures reveal as his will, and to pronounce sentence accordingly. If they attempt to establish any other terms of communion than those which his word warrants-; or to undertake to exer- cise authority in a manner which he has not authorised, they incur guilt, and have no right to exact obedience. In this sacred community, government is absolutely necessary. Even in the perfect holy and harmonious society of heaven, there is government ; that is, there is law and authority, under which the whole celestial family is united in perfect love, and unmingled enjoy- ment. Much more important and indispensable is government among fallen depraved men, among whom *' it is impossible but that offences will come," and to whom the discipline of scriptural and pure ecclesiastical rule, is one of the most precious means of grace. To think of maintaining any society, ecclesiastical or civil, without government, in this depraved world, would be to contradict every principle of reason and experience, as well as of Scripture : and to think of supporting government without officers, to whom its functions may be intrusted, would be to embrace the absurd hope of obtaining an end without the requisite means.

The question. Whether any particular form of church government is so laid down in Scripture, as that the claim of divine right may be advanced on its behalf, and that, of consequence, the church is bound, in all ages, to adopt and act upon it; — will not now be formally discussed. It has been made the subject of too much extended and ardent controversy, to be brought within the compass of a few sentences, or even a few pages. It may not be improper, however, briefly

a2

i

to say, that it would, indeed, have been singular, if t^ community, called out of the world, and organizec^ under the peculiar authority of the all-wise Redeemer^ had been left entirely without any direction as t(F its government: — That the Scriptures, undoubtedly, exhibit to us a form of ecclesiastical organization and rule, which was, in fact, instituted by the apostles, under the direction of infinite wisdom: — That this form was evidently taken, with very little alteration, from the preceding economy, thus giving additional presumption in its favour: — That we find the same plan closely copied by the churches for a considerable time after the apostolic age : — That it continued to be in substance the chosen and universal form of govern- ment in the church, until corruption, both in doctrine and practice, had, through the ambition and de- generacy of ecclesiastics, gained a melancholy preva- lence: — And, that the same form was also substantially maintained by the most faithful witnesses for the truth, during the dark ages, — until the great body of the Reformers took it from their hands, and established it in their respective ecclesiastical connections.

These premises would appear abundantly to warrant the conclusion, that the form of Government which answers this description, is the wisest and best ; that it is adapted to all ages and states of society ; and that it is agreeable to the will of Christ that it be universally received in his church. All this the writer of the following Essay fully believes may be established in favour of Presbyterianism. There seems no reason, however, to believe, with some zealous votaries of the hierarchy, that any particular form of goverment is in so rigorous a sense of divine right, as to be essential to the existence of the church ; so that where this form is wanting, there can be no church. To adopt this opinion, is to take a very narrow and unscriptural view of the covenant of grace. After yielding to the visible church and its ordinances, all the importance which the word of God warrants, still it cannot be doubted, that

^^^ the one handy men in regulai* external membership

^^ith the purest church on earth, may be hypocrites,

^^d perish; and on the other, that all who cordially

**^pent of sin, and receive the Saviour in spirit and in

^^uth, will assuredly obtain eternal life, although they

^^ever enjoyed the privilege of a connection with any

portion of the visible church on earth. The tenor of

the Gospel covenant is, " He that believeth on the Son

of God hath eternal life, and shall not come into

condemnation, but is passed from death unto life;

but he that believeth not the Son, shall not see life,

but the wrath of God abideth on him."

Still it is plain, from the word of God, as well as from unifoim experience, that the government of the church is a matter of great importance ; that the form as well as the administration of that government is more vitally connected with the peace, purity and edification of the church, than many Christians appear to believe ; and, of consequence, that it is no small part of fidelity to our Master in heaven to " hold fast " the form of ecclesiastical order, as well as the " form of sound words " which He has delivered to the saints.

The existence of ecclesiastical Rulers, presupposes the existence and exercise of ecclesiastical power. A few remarks on the nature, source and limits of this power, may not be irrelevant asa part of this preliminary discussion*

When we speak of ecclesiastical power, then, we speak of that which, much as it is misunderstood, and deplorably as ithas been perverted and abused, is plainly warranted, both by reason and Scripture. In fact, it is a prerogative which common sense assigns and secures to all organized society, from a family to a nation. The doctrine attempted to be maintained by the celebrated Erastus, in his work, " De Excommunicatione," viz : that the exercise of all church power, however modified, is to be rejected, as forming an imperium in imperioy is one of the most weak and untenable of all positions. The same argument would preclude all authority or

8

government subordinate to that of the State, whether domestic, academical, or financial. The truth is, there not only may 6e, but there actually are thousands of imperia in imperio^ in every civil community in the world; and all this witliout the least danger or inconvenience, as long as the smaller or subordinate governments maintain their proper place, and do not claim, or attempt to exercise, powers, which come in collision with those of the State.

Now the power exercised by the church is of thk character. Christ is the Sovereign. His kingdom is spiritual. It interferes not with civil government. It may exist and flourish under any form of political administration ; and always fares best when entirely left to itself, without the interference of the civil magistrate. Accordingly, it is notorious, that the power of which we speak, was exercised by the church in the days of the Apostles, and during the first three centuries of the Christian era, not only without any aid from the secular arm, but while all the civil governments of the world were firmly leagued against her, and following her with the bitterest persecution. But the moment the church became allied with the State, that moment the influence of each on the other became manifestly mischievous. The State enriched, pampered, and corrupted the church ; and the church, in her turn, gradually extended her power over the State, until she claimed, and in some instances gained, a haughty supremacy over all rulers and governments. This is an ecclesiastical power which the Bible no where recognizes or allows. It is the essence of spiritual usurpation ; and can never have a place but where the essential character of the religion of Jesus Christ is misapprehended or forgotten. This abominable tyranny, so long and so wickedly maintained in the name of the meek and lowly Saviour, who, instead of countenancing, always condemned it; — has prejudiced the minds of many against ecclesiastical power in any form. On account of this prej udice it is j udged proper

9

to State, with some degree of distinctness, what we mean when we speak of the church of Christ as being invested with power for the benefit of her members, and for the glory of her abnighty Head.

It is evident that even if the church were a mere voluntary association, which neither possessed nor claimed any divine warrant, it would have the same powers which are universally conceded to all other voluntary associations ; that is, the power of forming its own rules, of judging of the qualifications of its own members, and of admitting or excluding, as the essential principles and interests of the body might require; and all this as long as neither the rules themselves, nor the execution of them, infringed the laws of the State, or violated any public or private rights. When a literary, philosophical, or agricultural society claims and exercises powers of this kind, all reflecting people consider it as both reasonable and safe ; and would no more think of denying the right to do so, than they would think of den3dng that the father of a family had a right to govern his own household, as long as he neither transgressed any law of the State, nor invaded the peace of his neighbours.

But the Christian church is by no means to be con- sidered as a mere voluntary association. It is a body called out of the world, created by divine institution, and created, as its members believe, for the express purpose of bearing testimony for Christ, in the midst of a revolted and rebellious world, and maintaining in their purity the truth and ordinances which He has appointed. The members of this body, therefore, by the act of uniting themselves with it, profess to believe certain doctrines, to be under obligation to perform certain duties, and to be bound to possess a certain character. Of course, the very purpose for which, and the very terms on which the Master has formed this body, ai}d bound its members together, necessarily imply, not only the right, but the duty, of refusing to admit those who are manifestly hostile to the essential

10

principles of its institution, and of casting out those who, after their admission, as manifestly depart from those, principles. To suppose less than this, would be to suppose that a God of infinite wisdom has withheld from a body, formed for a certain purpose, that which is absolutely necessary for its defence against intrusion, insult, and perversion; in other words, for its own preservation.

Hence the Apostle Paul, after the New Testament church was erected, speaks (1 Cor. xii. 28.) of "go- vernments," as well as " teachers " being "set in it" by the authority of God. He expressly claims, (2 Cor. x. 8, ) an "authority" which God had given to his servants as rulers in the Church, " for edification, and not for destruction." And he exemplifies this authority by representing it as properly exercised in casting out of the church any one who was immoral or profane; ( 1 Cor. v.). Hence the officers of the church are spoken of as "guides" {nyevfctvct), "overseers" or "bishops" (i»-*r«d5rd*), and " rulers" {x^ct<rT«rt?) : — and it is declared to be their duty, not only to instruct, warn, and entreat; but also to " rebuke,'* or authoritatively to admonish and censure. They were commanded by the authority of the Head of the Church (1 Cor. v. Tit. iii. 10.) to " reject," to " put away from them," after using proper admonition, those who were grossly heretical or im- moral. In short, in that period of gospel simplicity and purity, the church claimed no authority over any but her own members; and even over them, no other authority than that which related to their character, duties, and interests as members, and was deemed essential to her own well-being.

And as this power of the church is not self-created or self-assumed, but derived from her gracious and almighty Head ; and as it is, and can, of right only be exercised over her own members, so it is merely spiritual in its nature; in other words, it qjiaims no right whatever to inflict temporal pains or penalties. It cannot touch the persons or property of those to

whom it is directed. It addresses itself only to their judgments and consciences. It includes only a right to instruct, warn, rebuke, censure, and cast out; that is, to exclude from the privileges of the body. This last step is the utmost length to which it can go. When the church has excluded from her pale those toward whom this power is directed ; in other words, when she has declared them out of her communion or fellowship, she has done every thing to which her power extends. All beyond this is usurpation and oppression. The- great end of church government, is not to employ physical force, but moral weapons only. It can never invade the right of private judgment. It can never exert its power over any but those who volun- tarily submit to it. And it prescribes no sanctions but those which have for their object the moral benefit of the body itself, and also of the individuals to whom they are awarded. The gospel knows nothing of delivering men over to the secular arm, to be punished for offences against the church. The church might, therefore, . exert her whole power, in its plenary extent, though all the governments of the world were arrayed against her in the bitterest hostility, as they have once been, and as they may again be found.

And, as all the power of the church is derived, not from the civil government, but from Christ, the almighty King of Zion ; and as it is purely spiritual in its nature and sanctions ; so the power of church officers is merely ministerial. They are, strictly, servants, who are to be governed in all things by the pleasure of their employer. They have only authority to announce what the Master has said, and to decide agreeably to that will which he has made known in his word. Like ambassadors at a foreign court, they cannot go one jot or tittle beyond their instructions. Of course, they have no right to set up a law of their own. The Bible is the great statute book of the body of which we speak ; tlie only infallible rule of faith and practice. And nothing can be rightfully inculcated

12

on the members of the church as trath, or demanded of them as duty, but that which is found in that great charter of the privileges as well as the obligations of Christians.

To complete the view of that ecclesiastical power which we consider as implied in church government, it is only necessary to add, that it is given solely for the benefit of the church, and not for the aggran(£zement of church oflScers. Tyrants in civil government have taught, and acted upon the principle, that the great end of all political establishments h the exaltation of a few at the expense of the many. And it is deeply to be deplored that the same principle has been too often apparently adopted by bodies calling themselves churches of Christ. Nothing can be more opposite than this, to the spirit and law of the Redeemer. The " authority " which the apostle claims as existing, and to be exercised in the church, he represents (2 Cor. x. 8.) as given " for edification, and hot for destruction." Not for the purpose of creating and pampering classes of *^ privileged orders," to " lord it over God's heritage;" not to build up a system of polity, which may minister to the pride or the cupidity of an ambitious priesthood ; not to form a body, under the title of clergy, with separate interests from the laity of the church. All this is as wicked at it is un- reasonable. No office, no power is appointed by Jesus Christ in his church, but that which is necessary to the instruction, the purity, and the happiness of the whole body. All legitimate government here, as well as elsewhere, is to be considered as a means, not an end ; and as no further resting on divine authority, than we can say in support of all its claims and acts, ** thus saith the Lord ; " than it is adapted to build up the great family of those who profess the true religion, in knowledge, peace, and holiness unto salvation.

The summary of the doctrine of Presbyterians, then, concerning ecclesiastical power, may be considered as comprehended in the following propositions: —

13

1. That the Lord Jesus Christ is the only King and Head of the church, the fountain of all power ; and that no man or set of men, have any right to con- sider themselves as holding the place of his vicar, or representative.

2. That the Bible contains the code of laws which Christ has enacted, and given for the government of his church ; and that it is the only infallible rule of faith and practice.

3. That his kingdom is not of this world ; and of course, that the church can take no cognizance of any other concerns than those which relate to the spiritual interests of ^en.

4. That the power of church officers is not original, or uiherent, but altogether derived and tninisterial. They have no other authority than, as his servants, and in his name, to proclaim the truth which he has declared, and to urge to the performance of those duties which he has commanded.

5. That nothing can be lawfully required of any one as a member of the church, excepting what is ex- pressly taught in scripture ; or by good and necessaiy consequence to be inferred from what is expressly taught there.

6. That the church being instituted by Christ for the chief purpose of maintaining in their purity the doctrines and ordinances of Christ, is authorized and bound by Him to refuse admission to her fellowship thofce who are known to be hostile to this purpose, and to exclude such as are found to offend against this purpose after admission.

7. That the discipline and penalties of the church are wholly of a moral kind, consisting of admonition, entreaty, warnings suspension, and excommunication ; and that exclusion from the fellowship of the body, is the highest penalty that can be inflicted on any delin- quent

8. That the apostolic church, though under the bitterest persecution, was instructed by the inspired

^

14

apostles, to excercise tlie power mentioned, and did actually exercise the same ; and is to be considered as therein exemplifying and teaching the principles which ought to regulate the church in all ages.

9. That the church can excercise no authority over any others than her own members.

10. That none can be compelled to be members, or to submit to her authority any longer than they choose to do so.

Jl. That the authority of the church cannot be lawfully exercised for any other purpose than to pro- mote the purity, order, and edification of the whole body; and that, of course, any exertion of church power, which has for its object the aggrandizement of ecclesiastics at the expense of the body of the church, is an unscriptural abuse. And,

12. Finally, that all civil establishments of religion, in any form, or under any denomination, are wrong; contrary to the spirit of Christianity ; injurious to the best interests of the church; and really more to be deprecated by the enlightened friends of piety, than the most sanguinary persecution that can be inflicted by the arm of power.

In every church completely organized, that is, fur- nished with all the oflScers which Christ has instituted, and which are necessary for carrying into full effect the laws of his kingdom, there ought to be three classes of officers, viz. at least one teaching elder, bishop, or pastor — a bench of ruling elders — and deacons. The first to "minister in the word and doctrine," and to dispense the sacraments ; the second to assist in the inspection and government of the church ; and the third to " serve tables ; " that is, to take care of the church's funds destined for the support of the poor, and sometimes to manage whatever relates to the tem- poral support of the gospel and its ministers.

The following essay will be devoted to the consid- eration of the second class of these officers, namely.

15

Ruling Elders ; and the points which it is proposed more particularly to discuss, are the following: — The church's warrant for this class of officers ; — The nature, design, and duties of the office itself; — The qualifications proper for those who bear it ; — The dis- tinction between this office, and that of deacons ; by whom ruling elders ought to be elected; in what manner they should be ordained; the principles which ought to regulate their withdrawing or being deposed from office, removing from one church to another, &c. ; and, finally, the- advantages attending this form of government in the church.

The question, whether the church has any warrant for this class of officers, will have diffigrent degrees of importance attached to it by different persons. Those who believe that no form of church government what- ever can justly claim to be, in any sense, of divine right, will, of course, consider this inquiry as of small moment. If the church be at perfect liberty, at all times, to adopt what form of government she pleases, and to modify, or entirely to change the same at plea- sure ; then no other warrant than her own convenience or will ought to be required. But if the writer of the following pages be correct in believing that there is a form of government for the family of God laid down in scripture, to which it is the duty of the church, in all ages, to conform ; then the inquiry which it is the purpose of several of the succeeding chapters to pur- sue, is plainly important, and demands our serious at- tention.

It is believed, then, that the following positions, in reference to the office now under consideration may be firmly maintained, viz. that under the Old Testament economy in general, and especially in the synagogue service, elders were invariably appointed to exercise authority and bear rule in ecclesiastical society ; that similar elders, afler the model of the synagogue, were appointed in the primitive church, under the direction of inspired apostles; that we find in the writings of

16

some of the early fathers, evident traces of the same office as existing in their times ; that the Waldenses, and other pious witnesses for the truth, during the dark ages, retained this class of officers in the church, as a divine institution ; that the reformers, with very few exceptions, when they separated from the corruptions of popery, restored this office to the church ; that a number of distinguished divines and churches, not otherwise presbyterian, wJio have flourished since the reformation, have remarkably concurred in declaring for the same office ; and, finally, that ruling elders, or officers of a similar kind, are indispensably necessary in every well ordered congregation. Each of these topics of argument is entitled to separate consideration.

Chapter 11 TESTIMONY FROM THE ORDER OF THE OLD TESTA- MENT CHURCH

It is impossible fully to understand either the spirit, the facts, or the nomenclature of the New Testament, without going back to the Old. The Christian religion is founded upon that of the Jews; or rather is the completion of it. The latter was the infancy and adolescence of that body of which the former is the manhood. And it is remarkable, that no class of theologians more strenuously contend for the connec- tion between the Jewish and Christian economies, and the impracticability of taking intelligent views of the one, without some previous knowledge of the other, than most of those who deny the apostolic origin of the class of officers now under consideration. With all such persons, then, we join issue. And, as a very large part of the titles and functions of ecclesiastical officers, were, evidently, transmitted from the cere- monial to the spiritual economy, it is indispensably necessary, in order fully to understand their character, to go back to their source.

The term Elder, corresponding with ^p^, in Heb- rew, and 9r^i(r/3i;Tie«5 in Greek, literally signifies a7i aged person. Among the Jews, and the eastern nations generally, persons advanced in life were conunonly selected to fill stations of dignity and authority, be- cause they were supposed to possess most wisdom, gravity, prudence, and experience. From this circum- stance, the term Elder, became, in process of time,

b2

18

and by a natural association of ideas, an established title of office.* Accordingly, the Jews gave this title to most of their offices, civil as well as ecclesiastical, long before synagogues were established. From the time of Moses, uiey had elders over the nation, as well as over every city and smaller community. These are repeatedly represented as inspectors and rulers of the people ; as " officers set over them ; *' and, indeed, throughout their history, there is every reason to believe that the body of the people never, themselves, exer- cised governmental acts; but chose their elders, to whom all the details of judicial and executive authority, under their divine Legislator and Sovereign, were constantly committed.

Tlie following specimen of the representation given on this subject, in various parts of the Old Testament, will suffice, at once, to illustrate and establish what is here advanced. Even while the children of Israel were in Egypt, they seem to have had elders, in the official sense of the word; for Jehovah, in sending Moses to deliver them, said, " Go, and gather the elders of Israel together, and say unto them, the Lord hath visited you, and hath seen what is done to you in Egypt;" (Exodus iii. 16.) In the wilderness, the elders of Israel are spoken of as called together by Moses, appealed to by Moses, and officidly acting under that divinely commissioned leader, on occasions almost innumerable. These elders appear to have

* It has been often remarked, that the ancient official use of this word, as implyingr wisdom and experience, is still preserved in manv modem languages, in which Seigneur, Signior, Senator, and other similar wor£, are used to express both dignity and authority. It is evident that all these words, and some others which might be mentioned, are deriyatiyes from the Latin word, senior. It is no less plain, that the title of the magistrates of cities and boroughs, who are called aldermen or eldermen, is from the same origin with our modem term elder. Many of the titles of respect, both in the eastern and western world, were it proper to take time for the purpose, might be traced, beyond all doubt, to a similar source.

19

been of diflFerent grades, and endowed, of course, with different powers; (Exod. xviL 5; xviii, 12; xxiv. 1, 9. Numbers xi. 16. Deut. xxv. 7 — 9; xxix. 10; xxxL 9, 28.) From these and other passages, it would seem, they had seventy elders over the nation ; and besides these, elders over thousands, over hundreds, over fifties, and over tens, who were all charged with insfiection and rule in their respective spheres. Again, we find inspectors and rulers of the people, under the name of elders, existing, and on all public occasions, acting in their official character, in the time of Joshua ; during the period of the judges; under the kings, especially during the most favoured and happy season of their kingly dominion, probably during the captivity in Babylon ; and, beyond all doubt, as soon as they returned from captivity, and became settled in their own land ; until the synagogue system was regularly established as the stated means of popular instruction and worship.

When the synagogue service was instituted, is a question which has been so much controverted, and is of so much real uncertainty, that the discussion of it will not be attempted in this place, especially as it is a question of no sort of importance in the inquiry now before us. All that it is necessary for us to assume is, that it existed at the time of our Lord's advent, and for a considerable time before, and that the Jews had been long accustomed to its order and worship, which no one, it is presumed, will think of questioning. Now, whatever might have been its origin, nothing can be more certain, than that, from the earliest notices we have of the institution, and through its whole history, its leading officers consisted of a bench of elders, who were appointed to bear rule in the congregation ; who formed a kind of consistory, or ecclesiastical judicatory ; — to receive applicants for admission into the church ; to watch over the people, as well in reference to their morals, as their obedience to ceremonial and ecclesiastical order; to administer

r I

20

discipline when necessary; add, in short, as the re- presentatives of the church or congregation, to act in their name and behalf; to " bind " and " loose,** and to see that every thing was " done decently and in order."

It is not forgotten that a few eminent writers, follow- ing the celebrated German errorist, Erastus, have contended that there was no ecclesiastical government among the Jews distinct from the civil ; and that, of course, there were no rulers of the synagogue, separate from the civil judges. Those who wish to see this error satisfactorily refuted, and the existence of a distinct ecclesiastical government among that people clearly established, may consult what has been written on the subject, by the learned Gillespie,* by Professor Rutherford, f by Bishop Stillingfleet, J and others; from whose writings they will be convinced, beyond all reasonable doubt, that the civil and ecclesiastical judicatories were really distinct; that the persons composing each, as well as their respective spheres of judgment were peculiar ; and that the latter existed long after the civil sovereignty of the Jewish people was taken away.

There has been, indeed, much diversity of opinion among learned men, concerning a variety of questions which arise in reference to these elders of the sjma- gogue. As, for example, whether there was a differ- ence of rank among them? Whether some were teachers as well as rulers, and others rulers only? Whether there was any diversity in their ordination, &c. &c.? But while eminent writers on Jewish an- tiquities have differed, and continue to differ, in relation to these points, they are all perfectly agreed in one point, namely, that in every synagogue there was a bench of elders, consisting of at least three persons, who

^ Aaron's Rod, &c.: Lond. 4to. 1646.

<f> Divine Ri^ht of Church Government, &c.: Lond. 4to. 1646«

% Irenicbm. Part 2, chapter 6.

SI

were charged with the whole inspection, government, and discipline of the synagogue, who, as a court or bench of rulers, received, judged, censured, excluded, and, in a word, performed every judicial act, necessary to the regularity and welfare of Uie congregation. In this general fact, Vitringa, Selden, Voetius, Marck, Grotius, Lightfoot, Blondel, Salmasius, and, indeed, so far as I can now recollect, all tlie writers on this subject, who deserve to be represented as high authori- ties, substantially agree. And in support of this fact, they quote Philo, Josephus, Maimonides, Benjamin of Tudela, and the great mass of other Jewish wit- nesses, who are considered as holding the first rank among Rabbinical authorities. Indeed, they speak of the fact as too unquestionable to demand any formal array of testimony for its confirmation.*

Accordingly, we find various passages in the New Testament history, which refer to these ruling elders, as belonging to the old economy, then drawing to a close, and which admit, it would appear, of no other interpretation than that which supposes their existence. The following specimen will suffice; Mark, v. 22, " And, behold, there cometh one of the rulers of the synagogue, Jairus by name ; and when he saw him, he fell at his feet;" Acts xiii. 15, " And after the reading of the law and the prophets, the rulers of the synagogue sent unto them, saying, ye men and brethren, if ye have any word of exhortation for the people, say on." On this latter passage. Dr. Gill, an eminent master of oriental, and especially of rabbinical learning, in his Commentary, writes thus : — " ^ The rulers of the synagogue sent unto them ; ' that is, those who were the principal men in the synagogue; the

* When the unanimous a^eement of these learned writers is asserted, it is not meant to be hedged that they all entertain the same views of the elders of the synagogue, as to all particu- lars; but simply that they all unite in maintaining that there was, in every synagogue, such a bench of elders, who conducted its discipline, and managed its affairs.

22

ruler of it, together with the elders ; for there was but one ruler in a synagogue, though there were more elders ; and so the Syriac version here renders it, * the elders of the synagogue/ " By this language, as I understand the Doctor, he does not mean to intimate that the other elders of whom he here speaks did not bear rule in the synagogue ; but there was only one, who, by way of eminence, was called, " the ruler of the synagogue ; " that is, who presided at their meetings for official business. It is plain, however, that, even in this assertion, he is in some degree in error ; for more than once we find a plurality of persons in single synagogues spoken of as " rulers/*

The learned Vitringa, who, undoubtedly, is entitled to a very high place in the list of authorities on this subject, is of the opinion, that all who occupied a place with the bench of Elders in the Synagogue, were of one and the same rank or order ; that they all received one and the same ordination ; and were, of course, equally authorised to preach, when duty or inclination called them to this part of the public service, as well as to rule. And in this opinion he is joined by some others, whose judgment is worthy of the highest respect. But, at the same time, this eminent man freely grants, that a majority of the Elders of the Synagogue were not, in fact, ordinarily employed in teaching or preaching; that this part of the public service was principally under- the direction of the chief ruler, or Head of each synagogue, who attended to it himself, or called on one= of the other elders, or even any other learned docto who might be present, and who was deemed capabl of addressing the people in an instructive and acceptabl manner ; and that the chief business of the mass of tb elders was to rule.* The correctness of this opinio has been questioned. A number of other writers, quit^^ his equals, both in talents and learning, and especial! quite as conversant with Jewish authorities, have main

* De Synagfoga Vetere. Lib. iii. par. i. cap. 7.

23

tained, that a majority of the elders in the synagogue, were neither chosen nor set apart to the function of teaching, but to that of ruling only. But, in the want of absolute certainty which exists on this subject, and for the sake of argument, I am willing to acquiesce in Vitringa's opinion. Suppose it to have been as he alleges : this is quite sufficient for our purpose. If it be conceded, that there was in every synagogue, a bench of elders, who, as a judicial body, were entrusted with the whole government and discipline of the con- gregation : — that a majority of these elders seldom or never preached, but were, in fact (whatever right they might have had) chiefly occupied as ecclesiastical rulers; and that all ecclesiastical matters, instead of being dis- cussed and decided by the congregation at large, were constantly committed to the judicial deliberation and decision of this eldership. If these things be granted — and they are granted, in substance, by every writer, entitled to be referred to as an authority, with whom I am acquainted — it is all that can be considered as rnaterial to the purpose of our argument. This will appeal' more fully in the sequel.

These officers of the Synagogue were called by ciifferent names, as we learn from the New Testament, snd from the most respectable Jewish authorities. The most common and familiar name, perhaps, was that of elders, as before stated at large. They were also called rulers of the s)magogue, — a title of frequent occurrence in the New Testament, as applied to the 3vhole bench of the elders in question ; but which would seem, from some passages, to have been, at least, some- times applied, by way of eminence, to the principal ruler in each synagogue, which principal ruler appears, however, to have been of the same general rank, or order, with the rest, and to have had no other precedence than that which consisted in presiding and taking the lead in the public service. These officers were, further called heads of the synagogue; overseers, or bishops ; presidents ; orderers, or regulators, of the

24

afikirs of the sjmagogue; guides, &c, &c. These titles are given at length by Vitringa,* Selden,! and others, with the original vouchers and exemplifica- tions of each ; showing tnat they all imply bearing rule, as well as the enjoyment of pre-eminence and dignity. And, as these elders were distinguished from the common members of the synagogue by appropriate titles, indicating official honour and power ; so they had also distinct and honourable seats assigned them, when the congregation over which they ruled was convened. The place of sitting usually appropriated to them, was a semi-circular bench, in the middle of which the chief ruler was placed, and his colleagues on each side of him, with their faces toward the assembly, and in a certain position with respect to the ark, tne principal door, and the cardinal points of the compass. Tnis statement is confirmed by the learned Thorndike, a distinguished episcopal divine, of the 17th century. In speaking of the consistory, or bench of elders, in the synagogue, and describing their manner of sitting in public worship, he makes the following statement, in the form of a quotation fi'omMaimonides, and confirms it abundantly from other sources. " How sit the people in the synagogue? The elders sit with their faces towards the people, and their backs towards the Hecall (the place where they lay the copy of the law ;) and all the people sit rank before rank, the face of every rank towards the back of the rank before it ; so the feces of all the people are towards the sanctuary, and towards the elders, and towards the ark : and when the minister of the synagogue standeth up to prayer, he standeth on the ground before the ark, with his face toward the sanctuary, as the rest of the people." f

* De Synagoga Vctere, lib. iii. par. i. cap. 1, 2, 3. f De Sjo^driis — passim.

% Discourse on the service of God in religious assemblies. Chap. 3. p. 56,

25

The number of the elders in each synagogue was not governed by any absolute rule. In large cities, according to certain Jewish authorities quoted by Vitringa, the number was frequently very large. But even in the smallest synagc^es, we are assured, as mentioned in a former page, that there were never less than three, that the judicatory might never be equally divided.

Such were the arrangements for maintaining purity and order in the synagogues, or parish churches of the old economy, anterior to the advent of the Messiah. It would seem to be impossible for any one to contem- plate this statement, so amply supported by all sound authority, without recognising a striking likeness to the arrangements afterwards adopted in the New Testament church. That this likeness is real, and has been maintained by some of the ablest writers on the subject, the following short extracts will sufficiently establiidi.

The first quotation shall be taken from Bishop Burnet. " Among the Jews," says he, " he who was the chief of the synagogue was called Chazan Hake^ neseih, that is, the bishop of the congregation^ and Shdiach Tsibbor^ the angel of the church. And the Christian church being modelled as near the form of the synagogue as could be, as they retained many of the rites, so the form of their government was con- tinued, and the names remained the same." And again ; ^^ in the synagogues there was, first, one that was called the bishop of the congregation. Next the three orders, and judges of every thing about the synagogue, who were called Tsekenim, and by the Greeks, ^r^urt^ or y*^f»nt. These ordered and de- termined every thing that concerned the synagogue, or the persons in it Next to them, were the three Pamassin, or deacons, whose charge was to gather the collections of the rich, and to distribute them to the poor. The term elder was generally given to all their judges, but chiefly to those of the great sanhedrim.

26

So we have it, Matthew xvi. 21 ; Marie viii. 81 ; xhr. 43 ; and xv. 1 ; and Acts xxiiu 14." ** A great deal might be said to prove that the apostles, in their first constitutions, took things as they had been nuxieUed to their hand in the synagc^ue. And this they did, both because it was not their design to innovate, ex- cept where the nature of the gospel dispensatiim obliged them to do it : as also, because they took all means possible to gain the Jews, who, we find, weie zealous adherers to the traditions of their fathers, and not easily weaned from those precepts of Moses, whidi by Christ's death were evacuated. And if the aposdes went so great a length in complying with them in greater matters, as circumcision and other l^al ob- servances, (which appears from the Acts and Epistles,) we have good grounds to suppose that th^ would have yielded to them in what was more innocent and less important. Besides, there appears, both in our Lord himself, and in his apostles, a great inclination to symbolize with them as far as was possible. Now, the nature of the Christian worship shows evidently^ that it came in the room of the synagogue, which was moral, and not of the temple worship, which was typical and ceremonial. Likewise this parity of customs betwixt the Jews and Christians, was such, that it made them taken by the Romans, and other more overly observers, for one sect of religion. And, finally, any that will impartially read the New Testament, will find that when the forms of government or worship are treated of, it is not done with such architectonal exactness, as was necessary, if a new thing had been instituted, which we find practised by Moses. Bat the apostles rather speak as those who give rules for the ordering and directing of what was already in being. From all which it seems well grounded and rational to assume, that the first constitution of the Christian churches was taken from the model of the synagogue, in which these elders were separated, for

ie discbarge of their employments, by an imposition ~ bands, as all Jewish writers do clearly witness," *

The second testimony shall be that of the Rev. Dr.

*irhomas Godwin, an English divine of great erudition,

^sspecially in oriental learning. In his well known

^^rork, entitled " Moses and Aaron," we find the follow-

iing passage : — " There were in Israel distinct courts,

^x>nsistixig of distinct persons ; the one principally for

^burch business, the other for affairs in the common-

^^¥ealtb : the one an ecclesiastical consistory, the other

s civil judicatory. The secular consistory was named

' 41 sanhedrim, or council ; the i^iritual, a synagogue.

The office of the ecclesiastical court was to put a

difference between things holy and unholy, and to

determine appeals in controversies of difficulty. It

was a representative church. Hence is that Die

Ecclesice ; Matthew xviii. 16. f

The next quotation shall be taken from Dr. Light- foot, another episcopal divine, still more distinguished for his oriental and rabbinical learning. ^^ The aposde," says he, ^^calleth the minister Episcopus^ or {Bishop^) fi*om the common and known title of the Chazan or Overseer in the synagogue." And again, — " Besides diese, there was the public minister of the synagogue, who prayed publicly, and took care about reading the law, and sometimes preached, if there were not some other to discharge this office. This person was called, *1W^ rpVtD? ^® angel of the church, and /noj^n |tn ^^ Chazatiy or bishop of the congregation. The Aruch gives the reason of the n^me. The Chazan says he, is ^^^^ rrbtD ^^ angel of the church, (or HoR public minister,) and the Targum renders the word XX^^ by the word ntin^ ^^^ ^^^ oversees. For it is incumbent on him to oversee how the reader reads, And whom he may call out to read in the law. The

* ObfterTations on the First and Second Canons, &c. pp. 2, 83, 84^ 85. Glasgow, 12mo. 1673.

f Moses and Aaron, book 5, chapter i.

28

f)ublic minister of the synagogue himself read not the aw publicly ; but eveiy Sabt^th he called out seven of the synagc^ue (on other days fewer) whom he judged fit to read. He stood by him that read, with great cart, observing that he read nothing either falsely or imprcv perly, and called him back, and corrected him, if he had failed in any thing. And hence he was called Chazan^ that is, iB.witrturH, Bishop^ or Overseer^ Ce^ tainly the signification of the words bishop and angel of the church, had been determined with less noise^ if recourse had been had to the proper fountains^ aud men had not vainly disputed about the signification of words taken I know not whence. The service and worship of the temple being abolished, as being cere* monial, God transplanted the worship and public adoration of God used in the synagogues, which was moral, into the Christian church, viz. the public ministry, public prayers, reading God's word, and preaching, &c. Hence the names of the ministers of the gospel were the very same, the angel of the church, and the bishop, which belonged to the ministers is the synagogues. " There was in every synago^e a bench oi three. This bench consisted of three dfders, rightly and by imposition of hands preferred to the eldership," " There were also three deacons, or almoners, on which was the care of the poor." *

In another place, the same learned orientalist, says, describing the worship in the Jewish synagogue:— " In the body of the church the congregation met^ and prayed and heard the law, and the manner of their sitting was this, — The elders sat near the chancel^ with their faces down the church ; and the people sat one form behind another, with their faces up the church, towards the chancel and the elders. Oi these elders there were some that had rule and ojffice in tlie synagogue, and some that had not. And this distinc- tion the apostle seemeth to allude unto, in that much

* Lightfoot's Works, Vol. I. p. 308. VoL II. pp. 183, 755.

29

disputed text, 1 Tim. v. 18, * The elders that rule well/ &c. ; where * the elders that ruled well ' are set not only in opposition to those that ruled t//, but to those that ruled not at all. We may see then, whence these titles and epithets in the New Testament are taken, namely, from the common platform and consti- tution of the synagogues, where Angelus EcclesicBj snd Episcopus were terms of so ordinary use and knowledge. And we may observe from whence the apostle taketh his expressions, when he speaketh of some elders ruling, and labouring in word and doctrine, and some not; namely, from the same platform and constitution of the synagogue, where * the ruler of the synagogue ' was more singularly for ruling the affairs of the synagogue, and * the minister of the congrega- tion,' labouring in the word, and reading the law, and in doctrine about the preaching of it. Both these together are sometimes called jointly, * the rulers of the synagogue;' Acts xiii. 15; Mark v. 22; being both elders that ruled ; but the title is more singularly given to the first of them." *

Again, he says : — " In all the Jews' synagogues there were Parnasin, deacons, or such as had care of the poor, whose work it was to gather alms for them from the congregation, and to distribute it to them. That needful office is here (Acts vi.) translated into the Christian church, f

The fourth quotation shall be taken from Dr. (after- wards Bishop) Stillingfleet, who, in his Irenicumj maintains a similar position with confidence and zeal. The following is a specimen of his language : — " That which we lay, then, as a foundation, whereby to clear what apostolical practice was, is that the apostles, in forming churches, did observe the customs of the Jewish synagogue." :|: And in support of this position,

* Lig^htfoot^'s Works, toL i. pp. 611, 612.

t Ibid, i. 279.

X Ireoicum. Part 2, chapter 6.

c2

i

30

particularly in reference to the eldership of the syna- gogue, he quotes a large number of the most distiiH- guished writers, both Jewish and Christian. It is due to candour, indeed, to state, that Stillingfleet does not admit that any of the elders, either of the synagoffoe^ or of the primitive church, were lay elders, but thinks they were all invested with some kind of clerical character. This, however, as before remarked, does not at all affect the value of his testimony to the general fact, that, in every synagogue there was a consistory, or judicatory of elders, and that the same class of officers was adopted, both name and thing, in the apostolic church, which he unequivocally asserts and proves.

In the same general doctrine, Grotius and Salma* sius of Holland, decisively concur. By Grotius, the following strong and unqualified language is used :— " The whole polity or order (regimen) of the churches of Christ, was conformed to the model of the JewiA synagogue." And, again, speaking of ordination by the imposition of hand[s, he says, — " This method was observed in setting apart the rulers and elders of the synagogue; and thence the custom passed into the Christian church."* Salmasius also, and other writers of equally profound learning, might be quoted as unequivocally deciding, that the synagogue had a bench of ruling elders, and that a similar bench, after that model, was constituted in the Christian church. Especially, he contends that the elders of the church were, beyond all doubt, taken from the eldership in the synagogue, f

The learned Spencer, a divine of the church of England, in the seventeenth centuiy, teaches the same general doctrine, when he says, — " The apostles also, that this reformation (the change from the Old to the

* Grotii Annotationes in Act. Apost. vi. xi. f De Primatu Papoe. cap. i.

New Testament dispensation) might proceed gently^ and without noise, received into uie Christian church many of those mstitutions which had been long in use among the Jews. Among the number of these may be reckoned, the imposition of hands, bishops, elders, and deacons, excommunication, ordination, and other things familiar to learned men,'**

Ine Rev. Dr. Adam Clarke, whose eminent learn- ing no competent judge will question, also bears testi- mony, that in every Jewish synagogue, at the time of the coming of Christ, and before, there was an ecclesiastical judicatory, or little court, whose duty it was to conduct the spiritual government of each con- gregation. Among several places in which he makes this statement, the following is decisive : — In his Com- mentary on James ii. 2, he says, — " In ancient times petty courts of judicature were held in the synagogues, as Vitringa has sufficiently proved, De Vet. Syn. 1. 3; and it is probable that the case here adduced was one of a judicial kind; where of the two parties, one was rich, and the other poor; and the master or ruler of the synagogue, or he who presided in this court, paid particular deference to the rich man, and neglected the poor person; though as plaintiflPand defendant, they were equal in the eye of justice."

I shall cite on this subject only one more authority, that of the celebrated Augustus Neander, professor in the university of Berlin, and generally considered as, perhaps, more profoundly skilled in Christian antiqui- ties, than any other man now living. He is, moreover, a minister of the Lutheran church, and, of course, has no sectarian spirit to gratify in vindicating Pres- byterianism. And, what is not unworthy of notice, being himself of Jewish extraction, he has enjoyfed the highest advantages for exploring the peculiar polity of that people. After showing at some length, that the government of the primitive church was not monar-

* De LegibuB Hebroeoram, Lib. iii. Dissert. 1. cap* 2. sect. 4.

S3

chical or prelatical, but dictated throughout by a spirit of mutual love, counsel, and prayer, he goes on to express himself thus : " We may suppose that where any thing could \)e found in the way of church forms-; which was consistent with this spirit, it would hm willingly appropriated by the Christian community^ Now there happened to be in the Jewish synagogue a system of government of this nature, not monarchical but rather aristocratical (or a government of th« most venerable and excellent) A council of elders Ca^3pT ^(i<rSurt^M, conducted all the affairs of that bod^r It seemed most natural that Christianity, developing itself from the Jewish religion, should take this foris of government. This form must also have appeared natural and appropriate to the Roman citizens, sinc^ their nation had, from the earliest times, been, to som^ extent, under the control of a senate, composed (w senators, or elders. When the church was placec under a council of elders, they did not always happei:] to be the oldest in reference to years; but the term expressive of age here, was, as in the Latin Senatus^ and in the Greek yif«c««, expressive of worth or merit Be- sides the common name of these overseers of the church, to wit, ^^KrSvrt^M, there were many other names given, according to the peculiar situation occupied by the individual, or rather his peculiar field of labour ; us ^oifimff shepherds ; nywfitvM leaders ; it^ot^rams rm e^ix^mt rulers of the brethren; and nr/f***-*/, overseers."*

Now, if in the ancient Jewish synagogue, the government of the congregation was not vested, either m the people at large, or m any single individual, but in a bench of elders; if this is acknowledged on all hands, as one of the clearest and most indubitable facts in Jewish antiquity; and if, in the judgment of the most learned and pious divines that ever lived, both episcopal and non-episcopal, the New Testament church was formed after the model of the Jewish synagogue, and not

* Kirchengeschichte, vol. i. pp. 283» 285.

33

after the pattern of the temple service ; we may, of course, expect to find some evidence of this in the history of the apostolic churches. How far this ex- pectation is realized, will be seen in the next chapter.

Chapter III EVIDENCE IN FAVOUR OF THE OFFICE FROM THE NEW TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES

In this chapter it is proposed to show, that the oflELoe in question is mentioned in the New Testament, as existing in the apostolic church ; that it was adopted from the synagogue, and that it occupied, in substance, the same place in the days of the aposdes, that it now occupies in our truly primitive and Scriptural church. The first assertion is, that this class of officers was adopted in the church of Christ, under its New Testa- ment form, after the model of the synagogue. Some have said, indeed, that the apostles adopted the model of the temple, and not of tne synagogue service, in the organization of the church. But the slightest im- partial attention to facts, will be sufficient, it is believed, to disprove this assertion. If we compare the titles, the powers, the duties, and the ordination of the officers of the Christian church, as well as the nature and order of its public service, as established by the apostles, with the temple and the synagogue systems respectively, we shall find the organization and service of the church to resemble the temple in scarcely any thing, while they resemble the synagogue in almost every thing. There were bishops, elders, and deacons, in the synagogue ; but no officers bearing these tides, or performing similar functions in the temple. There was ordination by the imposition of hands in the

^magogue; but no such ordination in the temple. There were reading the Scriptures, expounding them, and public prayers, even'^ Sabbath day in the syna- gogue, while the body of the people went up to the temple only three times a year, and even then to attend on a very different service. In the synagogue, there was a system established, which included a weekly provision, not only for the instruction and devotions of the people, but also for the maintenance of discipline, and the care of the poor ; while scarcely any thing of this kind was to be found in the temple. Now, in all these respects, and in many more which might be mentioned, the Christian church followed the synagogue model, and departed from that of the temple. Could we trace a resemblance only in one or a few points, it might be considered as accidental ; but the resemblance is so close, so striking, and extends to so matay particulars, as to arrest the attention of the most careless inquirer. It was, indeed, notoriously so great in the early ages, that the heathen frequently suspected Christian churches of being Jewish syna- gogues in disguise, and stigmatized them as such accordingly.

And when it is considered that all the first converts to Christianity were Jews ; that they had been accus- tomed to the offices and service of the s}niagogue during their whole lives; that they came into the churcn with all the feelings and habits connected with their old institutions strongly prevalent; and that the organization and service of the synagogue were of a moral nature, in all their leading characters, proper to be adopted under any dispensation ; while the typical and ceremonial service or the temple was then done away; when these things are considered, will it not appear perfectly natural that the apostles, themselves native Jews, should be disposed to make as little change in converting synagogues into Christian churches, as was consistent with the spirituality of the new dispen- sation ? That the synagogue model, therefore, should

36

be adopted, would seem beforehand, to be the nuMt probable of ail events,. Nor is this a new or sectarian notion. Whoever looks into the writings of some of the early fathers, of the reformers, and of a large portico of the most learned men who have adorned tiie churcb of Christ, subsequently to the reformation, will find « very remarkable concurrence of opinion that such was the model really adopted in the organization of the apostolic church. Most of the distinguislied writers whose names are mentioned in the preceding chapter, are, as we have seen, unanimous and zealous in main- taining this position.

Accordingly, as soon as we begin to read of the apostles organizing churches on the New Testament plan, we find them instituting ojfficers of precisely the same nature, and bestowing on them, for the most part, the very same titles to which they had been accustomed in the ordinary sabbatical service under the preceding economy. We find bishops, elders, and deacons, every where appointed. We find a plurality of eldan ordained in every church. And we find the elders represented as " overseers," or inspectors of the chmx;h; as " rulers " in the house of God, and the members d the church exhorted to " obey them," and " submit" to them, as to persons charged with their spiritual interests, and entitled to their affectionate and dutifiil reverence.

The following passages may be considered as a specimen of the New Testament representations on tliis subject. " And when they had ordained them elders in every church, and had prayed with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed ; " Acts xiv. 23. " And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders. And the apostles and elders came together to consider of this matter ;" Acts XV. 4, 6. " And from Miletus, he (Paul) sent to Ephesus, and called the elders of the church; and when they were come unto him, he said unto them.

37

take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers ;" Acts XX. 20, 28. ^^ Is any sick among you ? let him call .for the elders of the church, and let them pray over him," &c.; James v. 14, " The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory thac shall be revealed. Feed the flock of God that is among you, taking the oversight thereof , aot by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, ^ut of a ready mind; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but being ensamples to the flock;" 1 Peter v- 1, 2, 3. " 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 have q^pointed thee;" Titus i. 5. " Obey them that Aavc Ae rvle over you, and submit yourselves, for they watch for your souls as they that must give account;" Heb- rews xiii. 17. " And we beseech 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 works' sake ; " 1 Thessa- kmians v. 12.^ 13. ^^ Let the elders that rule well be accounted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine ; " 1 Timothy v. 17. To whatever church our attention is directed in the inspired history, we find in it a plurality of elders ; we find the mass of the church members spoken of as under their authority ; and while the people are ex- horted to submit to their rule, with all readiness and a&ction, these rulers are commanded, in the name rf Christ, to exercise the power vested in them by the great Head of the Church, with firmness and fidelity, and yet with disinterestedness and moderation, so as to promote most effectually, the purity and order of ^ flock.

The circumstance of our finding it so uniformly stated that there was a plurality of elders ordained in

D

38

every church, is certainly worthy of particular attentioo here. If there had been a plurality of these officers appointed only in some of the more populous cities, where there were probably several worshipping asssem*. blies; where the congregations may be supposed to have been unsually large, and where it was important, of course, to have more than a single preacher ; then we might consider this fact as very well reconcileable with the doctrine of those who assert, that all the elders in the apostolic church were official teachers. But as both the direction and the practice were to ordain elders, that is,' more than one, at least, in every church, small as well as great, there is, evidently, very strong presumption that it v/as intended to coniorm to the synagogue model ; and if so, that the whole of the number so ordained could not be necessary for the purpose of public instruction; but that some were rulers, who, as in the synagogue, formed a kind of congregational presbytery, or consistory, for the government of the church. The idea that it was considered as necessary, at such a time, that every church should have two, three, or four pastors, or ministers, in the modern popular sense of those terms, is manifestly altogether inadmissible. But if a majority of these elders, whatever their ordination or authority might be, were in fact employed, hot in teaching, but in ruhng, all difficulty vanishes at once.

Accordingly, the learned Vitringa, before mentioned, whose authority is much relied upon to disprove the existence of the office of ruling elder in the primitive church, explicitly acknowledges, not only that there was then a plurality of elders in every church, but that, as in the synagogue, the greater part of these were, in fact, employed in ruling only; and that although all of them were set apart to their office in the same manner, and were, ecclesiastically, of the same rank ; yet a majority of them, from want of suitable qualifications, were not fitted to be public

39

preachers, and seldom or never attempted this part of the service. *

But there are distinct passages of Scripture, which have been deemed, by some of the most impartial and competent interpreters, very plainly to point out the class of elders now under consideration.

In Romans xii. 6, 7, 8, die apostle exhorts as fol- lows: — " Having then gifts, differing according to the grace given to us ; whether prophecy, let us prophecy according to the proportion of faith ; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth, on teaching; or he that exhorteth, on exhortation; he that giveth, let him do it with simplicity ; he that rulethj with diligence; he that showeth mercy, with cheerful- ness." With this passage may be connected' another, of similar character, and to be interpreted on the same principles. In 1 Corinthians xii. 28, we are told, — ^* God hath sent some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." In both these passages there is a reference to the different ojffices and gifts bestowed on the church by her divine King and Head : in both of them there is a plain designation of an office for ruling or government, distinct from that of teaching ; and in both, also, this office evidently has a place assigned to it below that of pastors and teachers. Now, this office, by whatever name it may be called, or whatever doubts may be started as to some minor questions respecting its powers and investiture, is sub- stantially the same with that which Presbyterians distinguish by the title of ruling elder.

Some, indeed, have said that the apostle in 1 Cor- inthians xii. 28, is not speaking of distinct offices, but of different duties, devolving on the church as a body. But no one, it is believed, who impartially considers the whole passage, can adopt this opinion. In the

* Vitringa De Synagoga Vetere. Lib. ii. chap. ii.

I

40

whole of the context^ from the 12th Tene, the apostfe is speaking of the charch of God under the emblem of a body, and aflb-ms that, in this body, there is a variety of members adapted to the comfort and oon- venienoe of the whole body. *' For the body,** saj» he, ^^ is not one member, hot many. If the foot shali say. Because I am not the han^ I am not of the body, is it, therefore, not of the body ? And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body, is it, therefore, not of the body ? If Ac whole Dody were an ej-e, where were the hearm^? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? But now hath (rod set the members every one of them in the body as it hath pleased him. And if they were all one member, where were the body?** Plainlf implying that in every ecclesiastical, as well as in every natural nody, there are different functions and offices; that all cannot be teachers ; that all cannot be gove^ nors, or governments, but that to each and every functionary is assigned his proper work and duty.

Nor is this interpretation of^ the apostle confined to Presbyterians, reter Martyr, the learned Italian reformer^ interprets the passage before us just as we have done. In his Commentary on 1 Corinthians xii. Siy he speaks thus : " Governments. — Those who are lionotired with this function, are such as were fitted for the work of government, and who know bow to 60liduct every thing relating to discipline righteously m\d prudently. For the church of Christ had its gov@rntnent. And because a single pastor was not ftble to accomplish every thing himself, there were joined witli him, in the ancient church, certain elders, 4«ho)Hin from among the people, well-informed, and (>iklll§d in spiritual things, who formed a kind of |mmehial senate. These, with the pastor, deliberated dU rtV(3rv matter relating to the care and edification of ^\w ishurch. Which thing Ambrose makes mention of \\\ wrltluff on the epistle to Timothy, Among \\w^p <^ld<;)r» the pastor took the lead, not as a tyrant.

bot rather as a consul presiding in a council of senators.^' Many Episcopalians and otners find in the passage die same sense. The Reverend Herbert Thorndike^ before quoted, a learned divine of the church of Eng- land, who lived in the reign of Charles I., speaks thus (rf* the passage last cited. ^' There is no reason to doubt, that the men whom the apostle, 1 Cor. xii. 28, and Ephes. iv. II, called doctors, or teachers, are those of the presbyters, who had the abilities of preach- ing and teaching the people at their assemblies. That those of the presbyters who preached not, are called here by the apostle, governments; and the deacons, •MvAjp^f, that is, helps, or assistants to the govern- ment of presb3rters; so that it is not to be translated helps in governments, but helps, governments, &c. There were two parts of the presbyter's office, viz. teaching and governing, the one whereof some attained not, even in the apostles' times." *

But there is still more pointed reference to this class of elders in 1 Timothy v. 17, " Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." It would seem that every person of plain common sense, who had never heard of any diversity of c^inion on the subject, would, without hesitation, conclude, on reading this passage, that, at the period in which it was written, there were two kinds of elders, one whose duty it was to labour in the word and doctrine, and another who did not thus labour, but only ruled in the church. The apostle declares that elders who rule well are worthy of double honour, but especially those who labour in the word and doctrine. Now, if we suppose that there was only one class of elders then in the church, and that they were all teachers, or labourers in the word and doctrine, we make the in- spired apostle speak in a maimer utterly unworthy of his high character. There was, therefore, a class of

* Discourse of Religious Assemblies. Chap, i v. p. 117.

d2

4«

elders in the apostolic churcb, who did not, in fact, or at any rate ordinarily preach, or administer sacra- ments, but assisted in government; in other words^ ruling elders.

For this construction of the passage. Dr. Whitakcr, a zealous and learned Episcopal divine, and R^os Professor of Divinity in the University of Cambridge, of whom Bishop IibU remarks, that ** no man ever saw him without reverence, or heard him without wonder," very warmly contends, — " By these words," says he, ^^ the apostle evidently distinguishes betwe^ the bishops and the inspectors of the church. If all who rule well be worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine, it is plain that there were some who did not so labour; for if all had been of this description, the meaning would have been absurd ; but the word especially points out a difference. If I should say that all who study well at the University are worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the study of theology, I must either mean, that all do not apply themselves to the study of theology, or I should speak nonsense. Wherefore I confess that to be the most genuine sense by which pastors and teachers are distinguished from those who only governed : Romans xii. 8. Of this class of elders Ambrose speaks in his Commentary on 1 Tim. v. 1."*

The learned and venerable Dr. Owen, gives his opinion of the import of this passage, in still more pointed language. " This is a text," says he, " of in- controllable evidence, if it had any thing' to conflict withal but prejudice and interest. A rational man, who is unprejudiced, who never heard of the contro- versy about ruling elders, can hardly avoid an appre- hension that there are two sorts of elders, some who labour in the word and doctrine, and some who do not so do. The truth is, it was interest and prejudice

* Praelectiones, as quoted io Calderwood's Altare Damas- ceuum, p. 681.

43

which first caused some learned men to strain their wits to find out evasions from the evidence of this testimony. Being found out, some others of meaner abilities have been entangled by them. There are elderS) then, in the church. There are, or ought to be so in every church* With these elders the whole rule of the church is intrusted. All these, and only they, do rule in it" *

Equally to our purpose is the judgment of that acute and learned Episcopal divine. Dr. Whitby, in his Commentary on this passage : — ^^ The elders of the Jews," says he, " were of two sorts; 1st, such as governed in the sync^ogue, and ^dly, such as mini- stered in reading and expounding their scriptures and traditions, and from them, pronouncing what did bind or loose, or what was forbidden, and what was lawful to be done* For when, partly by their captivity, and partly through increase of traffic, they were dispersed in considerable bodies through divers regions of the world, it was necessary that they should have gover- nors^ or magistrates to keep them in their duty, and judge of criminal causes ; and also rabbins, to teach them the law, and the tradition of their fathers. The first were ordained ad judicandum, sed non ad docen- dum de Ileitis et vetitis^ i. e. to judge and govern, but not to teach. The second, ad docendum, sed non ad jueUcandum, i. e. to teach, but not to judge or govern." ^^ And these the apostle here declares to be the most honourable, and worthy of the chiefest reward. Ac- cordingly, the apostle, reckoning up the officers God had appointed in the church, places teachers before governments;" I Cor. xii. 28.

I am aware that a number of glosses have been adopted to set aside the testimony of this cogent text in &vour of ruling elders. To enumerate and show the invalidity of them all, would be inconsistent with

* True Nature of a Oospel Church. Chapter vii. pp. 141, 142, 143.

44

the limits to which this manual is restricted. But a few of the most plausible and popular may be deemed worthy of notice.

Some, for example, have said, that by the elders that rule well in this passage, civil magistrates are intended ; while, by those who labour in the word and doctrine, ministers of the gospel are pointed out. But it will occur to every reflecting reader, that at the time when the passage of Scripture under considera- tion was addressed to Timothy, and for several centuries afterwards, there were no Christian magis- strates in the Church ; and to suppose that the church is exhorted to choose heathen judges or magistrates, to compose differences, and maintain order among the followers of Christ, is in the highest degree im- probable, not to say altogether absurd.

Others have alleged that by the elders that rule well are meant deacons. It is enough to reply to this suggestion, that it has never been shown, or can be shown, that deacons are any where in the New Testament distinguished by the title of elders; and, further, that the function of ruling is no where repre- sented as belonging to their office. They were ap- pointed Ai«*wii» r^euetleus " to scrvc tablcs ;" Acts vi. 2, 3; but not to act as rulers in the house of God. Of this, however, more in a subsequent chapter.

A third class of objectors contend, that the word ftaxisret, which our translators have rendered " especially," ought to be translated " much. " That it is not to be considered as distinguishing one class of elders from another, but as marking intensity of degree : in other words, that it is meant to be exegetical of those who rule well ; viz. those who labour much, or with peculiar diligence, in the word and doctrine. On this plan, the verse in question would read thus : — Let the elders who rule well, that is, who labour much in the word and doctrine, be accounted worthy of double honour. If this were adopted as the meaning of the passage, it would* go to show, that it is for preaching alone,

and not for ruling well, that elders are entitled to honour. But is it rational or consistent with other parts of Scripture, to suppose that no honour is due to the latter? It has also been contended, by excellent Greek critics, that the structure of the sentence will not, naturally,^ bear this interpretation. It is not said, « ftrnxtsra n^unrts as would havc been the proper order of the words, if such had been the meaning intended to be conveyed; hnl fAuXtsra it »9m»iwt9'.— not those who labour with especial diligence and exertion, but es«- pecially those who labour, &c. But the most decisive consideration is, that not a single case can be found in the New Testament in which the word futxtsva, has the signification here attributed to it. It is so gene- rally used to distinguish one class of objects from another, that we may safely venture to say, it cannot possibly have a different meaning in the passage be- fore us. A few decisive examples will be sufficient. In the same chapter, from which the passage under consideration is taken, (1 Tim. v. 8,) it is said, — " If any man provide not for his own, and especially (^«ttifr«) for those of his own house, he hath denied the faithy" &c. Again, (Gal. iv. 10,) " Let us do good unto all men, but especially (futy.tsra) unto them who are the household of faith." Again, (Philip, iv. 22,) " All the saints salute you, chiefly (ftaXisra) they of Caesar's household." Thus also, (2 Tim. iv. 13,) " When thou comest, bring with thee the books, but specially (/»«Xifr«) the parchments." Further, (1 Hm. iv. 10,) " Who is the Saviour of all men, es- pecially (/tMBXifw) of those who believe." Again, (Titus i. 10,) " For there are many unruly and vain faJkers, especially (f*a,>^r») they of the circumcision." Now, in all these cases, there are two classes of objects uitended to be distinguished from each other. Some rf the saints were of Caesar's household, and others ''ere not. Good was to be done to all men ; but all ^re not believers. There were many vain and unruly

46

talkers alluded to, but they were not all of the cir* cumcision ; and so of the rest.

A fourth class of objectors to our construction of this passage, are certain prelatists, who allege, that by the elders that rule well, the apostle intends to designate superannuated bishops, who, though too old to labour in the word and doctrine, were still able to assist in ruling. To this it is sufficient to reply, that, whether we understand the " honour " («^»»f ) to which the apostle refei's, as intended to designate pecuniaiy support, or rank and dignity, it would seem contrary to every principle, both of reason and Scripture, that younger and more vigorous labourers in the word and doctrine, should have a portion of this honour awarded to them, superior to that which is yielded to those who have become worn out in the same kind of service. These aged, venerable, and exhausted dignitaries, according to this construction, are to be, indeed, much honoured, but less than their jimior brethren, whose strength for labour still continues.

A further objection made to our construction of this passage is, that when the apostle speaks of double honour (J^flrxw «^«) as due to those who rule well, he refers, not to respect and regard, but to temporal support.* Now, say this class of objectors, as Presby- terians never give salaries to their ruling elders, they

* It is worthy of notice, that Calvin, in his Commentary on this place, gives the following view of the apostle's meaning, when he speaks of double honour. '* When Chrysostom inter- prets the phrase double honour, as importing support and rever- ence, 1 do not impugn his opinion. Let those adopt it who think proper. But to me it appears more probable, that a com- parison is here intended between widows and elders. Paul had just before commanded to have widows in honour. But elders are still more worthy of honour than they. Wherefore to these double honour is to be given." This interpretation is natural and consistent. <* Honour widows," says the apostle, '* that are widows indeed;" but '* let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially those that labour in the word and doctrine." The same word is used to express honour, in both cases.

47

cannot be the kind of officers contemplated by the sacred writer in this place. But is it certain, that by the original term here translated, " honour," salary, or maintenance, is really intended? Why not assign to the word *tf*n its more common signification, viz, honour, high respect, reverence? It is common to say, that the illustration contained in the 18th verse, — ^^ Thou shalt not muzzle the ox that treadeth out the com ; and the labourer is worthy of his reward," seem to fix the meaning to temporal support. But those illustrations only carry witn them the general idea of reward; and surely a reward may be of the moral as well as of the pecuniary kind. But supposing the inspired apostle really to mean double, that is, Uberal maintenance, still this interpretation does not at all militate against our doctrine. It might have been very proper, in the days of Paul, to give all the elders a decent temporal support, as a reward for their services. But if any elders chose to decline receiving a regular stipend, as Paul himself seems to have done, he surely did not, by this disinterestedness, forfeit his office. It may be that ruling elders ought now to receive a compensation for their services, especially when they devote to the church a large part of their tome and talents. But if any are willing to render their services gratuitously, whether they be ruling or preaching elders, every one sees that this cannot des- to'oy, or even impair their official standing.

Accordingly, it will be seen in the sequel, that there is a concurrence of sentiment in favour of our con-, struction of this celebrated passage in Timothy, among the most distinguished divines of all denominations, Protestant and Catholic, Lutheran and Reformed, truly remarkable, and affording a very strong pre- sumptive argument in favour of its correctness.

Inere is another class of passages, already quoted in a former part of this chapter, which is entitled to iiK)re formal consideration. I mean such as that found in 1 Thessalonians v. 12, 13. " And we beseech

48

yon, brethren, to know them which labour among yon, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish you, and to esteem them very highly in love for their works' sake." Such also as that round in Hebrews xiii. 17. ^^ Obev them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for you souls as they that must give account," &c. Here the inspired writer is evidently speaking of particular churches. He repre- sents them as each having a body of rulers ** set over them in the Lord," who " watch over them," and whom they are bound to " obey." In short, we find a set of officers spoken of, who are not merely to instruct, and exhort, but to exercise official authority in the church. Now, tliis representation can be madb to agree with no other form of government than that of the Presbyterian church. Not with Prelacy, for that presents no ruler in any single church but the Rector only. It knows nothing of a parochial council or senate, who conduct discipline, and perform all the duties of spiritual rule. Not with Independency, for according to the essential principles of that system, the body of the communicants are all equally rulers, and even the pastor is only the chairman or president, not properly the ruler of the church. But with the Presbyterian form of church government, in which every congregation is furnished with a bench of spiri- tual rulers, whom the people are bound to reverence and obey, it agrees perfectly.

There is only one passage more which will be ad- duced in support of the class of elders before us. This is found in Matthew xviii. 15, 16, 17. Here it is believed that the 17th verse, which enjoins, — "Tell it to the church," has evidently a reference to the plan of discipline known to have been pursued in the Jewish synagogue ; and that the meaning is, " Tell it to that consistory or judicatory, which is the church acting by its representatives." It is true, indeed, that some Independents, of more zeal than caution, have confi- dently quoted this passage as making decisively in

49

favour of their scheme of popular government But when carefully examined, it will be found not only by no means to answer their purpose, but rather to sup-, port the Presbyterian cause. We must always inter- pret language agreeably to the well known under- standing and habit of the time and the country in which it is delivered. Now, it is perfectly certain that the phrase — " Tell it to the church," was con- stantly in use among the Jews to express the carrying a complaint to the eldership or representatives of the church. And it is quite as certain, that actual cases occur in the Old Testament in which the term church (t»»Xfnri») is applied to the body of elders. See, as an example of this, Deuteronomy xxxi. 28, 30, comparing our translation with that of the Seventy, as alluded to m a preceding chapter. We can scarcely avoid the conclusion, then, that our blessed Lord meant to teach his disciples, that as it had been in the Jewish syna- gogue, so it would be in the Christian church, that the sacred community should be governed by a bench of rulers regularly chosen and set apart for this purpose. In support of this construction of the passage before us, we have the concurring judgment of a large ma- jority of Protestant divines, of all denominations. We have not only the opinion of Calvin, Beza, Paraeus, and a great number of distinguished writers on the continent of Europe; but also of Lightfoot, Goodwin, and many others, both ministers of the Church of England, and the Independents of that country. It is worthy of ''remark, too, that Chrysos- tom, known to be an eminentlj^ learned and accom- plished father, of the fourth century, evidently under- stands this passage in the Gospel according to St. Matthew, as substantially agreeing with the views of Presbyterians ; or, at any rate, as totally rejecting the Independent doctrine. Zanchius, (in Quart. Proecept.) 8nd Junius (Controv. iii. lib. ii. cap. vi.) quote him 88 asserting, in his Commentary on this place, that hy the church to which the offence was to be told.

50

we are to understand the w^^i^ jmu wfm^rmrt of the church. I

It may not be impro[>er, before taking leave of the I scriptural testimony in favour of ruling elders, to take some notice of an objection whicii has been advanced with much confidence, but which, manifestly, when examined, will be found destitute of the small^ force. It has been said that great reliance is placed on the word ••^••^•»«j. found in 1 Timothy v. 17, as expressive of the ruling character of the o&ce ander consideration ; wliereas, say these objectors, this very word, as is universally known and acknowledged, is applied by several of the early fathers to teaching elders, to those who evidently bore the office of pastors of churches, and who were, of course, not mere rolerB, but also ^^ labourers in the word and doctrine." If) therefore, this title be applied to those who were con- fessedly teachers, what evidence have we that it is intended, in any case, to designate a different class? This objection is founded on a total misrepresentation of the argument which it is supposed to refute. The advocates of the office of ruling elder do not contend or believe that the function of ruling is confined to this class of officers. On the contrary, they suppose and teach that one class of elders both rule and teach, while the other class rule only. Both, according to the doctrine of the Presbyterian church, are ^r^i^-mi; but one only " labour in the word and docti'ine." ' When, therefore, cases are found in the early records of the church in which the presiding elder or pastor, is styled ^-^ot^rAK, the fact is in perfect harmony witJi the usual argument from 1 Tim. v. 17; the import of which we maintain to be this : — Let all the elders tha."* rule well, be counted worthy of double honour, es- pecially those of their number who, besides ruling besides acting as ^-^eKn-ttrts, in common with the others also labour in the word and doctrine.

It has also been contended that the whole doctrine of the ruling, as distinct from the teaching elder —

51

tends to weaken, if not wholly to destroy, the Presby- terian argument in favour of parity in the gospel ministry, drawn from the fact, that both Scripture and early Christian antiquity represent bishop and

?resbyter as convertible titles for the same office, ^resbyterians maintain, and I have no doubt, with perfect truth, that, in the language of the New Testa- ment, a bishop means the pastor, or overseer of a single church or parish; that bishop and presbyter are not titles which imply different grades of office; but that a presbyter or elder who has a pastoral charge, who is the overseer of a flock, is a scriptural bishop, and holds the highest office that Christ has instituted in his church. Now, it has been alledged by the opponents of ruling elders, that to represent the Scriptures as holding forth two classes of elders, one class as both teaching and ruling, and the other as ruling only, and, consequently, the latter as holding a station not exactly identical with the former, amounts to a virtual surrender of the argument derived from the identity of bishop and presbyter.

This objection, however, is totally groundless. If we suppose elder, as used in Scripture, to be a generic term, comprehending all who bore rule in the church ; and if we consider the tenn bishop, as also a generic term, including all who sustained the relation of official inspectors or overseers of a flock; then it is plain that all bishops were scriptural elders; and that all elders, whether both teachers and rulers, or rulers only, provided they were placed over a parish, as in- spectors or overseers, were scriptural bishops. Now this, I have no doubt, was the fact. When, therefore, the apostle Paul, in writing to the church at Philippi, addresses the bishops and deacons ; and when in his conference with the elders of the church of Ephesus^ at Miletus, he speaks of them all equally as overseers, or, as it is in the original, bishops (£«•<«'*««•»«*) of that church, 1 take for granted he included the rulers ^ well as the teachers, in both instances. In a word

52

I suppose that, in every truly primitive and apostdic churcn, there was a bench of elders, or overseers, who presided over all the spiritual interests of the con- gregation ; that, generally, a small part only of these, and perhaps seldom more than one, statedly preached; that the rest, though probably ordained in the same manner with their colleagues, very rarely, if ever, taught publicly, but were employed as inspectors and rulers, and it may be, also, in visiting, catechizing, and instructing from house to house. If this were the case, and every part of the New Testament his- tory favours the supposition, then nothing can be more natural than the language of the inspired writers in reference to this whole sutgect Then we readily understand why the apostle should say to Titus,— " For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee. If any be blameless, &c.; for a bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God," &c. We may then perceive why he speaks of a number of bishops at Philippi, and a number also at Ephesus; and, in the same breath, calls the latter alternately bishops and elders; and, on this principle, we may see no less plainly why the apostle Peter said : — " The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a par- taker of the glory that shall be revealed. Feed the flock of God that is among you, taking the oversight thereof, {tm^ftTowng) — acting as bishops among them, 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.*' And, accordmgly, it is remarkable that the word 5r<M|a«v«ri, uscd in the second verse of the last quotation, is derived from a word signifying a shepherd, and carries with it the ideas of guiding, protecting, and ruling, as well as feeding in appropriate spiritual pastures. (See Matthew ii. 6, and Kevelation ii. 27.)

53

This view of the subject takes away all embarrass- ment and difficulty in reference to the titles given to the primitive officers of the church. There is abun- dant evidence that every class of elders, as well those who commonly officiated as rulers only, as those who both ruled and taught, bore the names of bishops, inspectors, overseers, during the apostolic age, and for some time afterwards. This was a name most significantly expressive of their appropriate function, which was to overlook, direct, and rule each particular church, for its edification. How long this tide con- tinued to be applied to all the elders indiscriminately, it is not easy to say. It was probably in the church, as it was known to have been in the synagogue. All the rulers of the synagogue were popularly called archisynagogi, as is evident from several passages in the New Testament ; but sometimes, as we leani from the same source, this title was applied, by way of eminence, to the presiding or principal ruler of each synagogue. So with regard to the tide of inspector, overseer, or bishop, we know that all the elders of £phesus (Acts xx. 17, 28,) were indiscriminately called bishops by the inspired Paul, We know too, that the same apostle recognizes a plurality of bishops ^r overseers in the church at Philippi, (chapter i. 1,) "who could not possibly have been prelates, as Episco- palians themselves allow. We find, moreover, the ^same " chiefest of the apostles," giving the titles of bishop and elder, without d^crimination, to all the <;hurch rulers directed to be ordained in Ephesus and Crete, as the epistles to Timothy and Titus plainly evince. In those pure and simple times no difficulty arose from this general application of a plain and ex- pressive title. For more than a hundred years after the apostolic age, this tide continued to be frequently applied in the same manner, as the writings of Cle- mens Romanus, Hermas, Irenaeus, and others, amply testify. We find them not only speaking of the elders as bearing rule in each church, but also calling the

£2

54

same men alternately bishops and elders, as was evi- dently done in apostolic times. In process of tim^ however, this title which was originally considered as expressive of duty and labour, rather than of honour, became gradually appropriated to the' principal elder, who usually presided in preaching and ordering the course of the public service. Not only so, but as a worldly and ambitious spirit gained ground, he who bore this title began to advance certain peculiar claims; first, those of a stated chairman, president, or moder- ator ; and, finally, those of a new order, or grade of office. That there was an entire change in the appli- cation of the title of bishop, not long after the apostolic age, a majority of our Episcopal brethren themselves aUow. They grant, that in the New Testament this title is given indiscriminately to all who were intrusted with the instruction and care of the church. But that, in the succeeding period, it was gradually re- served to the highest order. In other words, they grant that the title bishop had a very different meaning in the second and third centuries, from that which it had borne in the first. Now, even conceding to them that this change took place earlier than the best records give us reason to believe, it may be asked, why make such a change at all ? Why not continue to get along with the language which the inspired apostles had authorised by tlieir use ? Why insidiously make an old title, which was familiar to the popular ear, signify something very different from what it had been wont to signify from the beginning; and thus

?alm a new oflSce with an old name on the people ? V^ere there no other fact established by the early writers than this, it would be quite suflScient to con- vince us that the apostolic government of the church was early corrupted by human ambition.

Chapter IV TESTIMONY OF THE CHRISTIAN FATHERS

^HAT which is not found in the Bible, however fully nd strongly it may be enjoined elsewhere, cannot be insidered as binding on the church. On the other and, what is plainly found in the word of God, though

be no where else taught, we are bound to receive, accordingly, if we find ruling elders in the New Tes- tment, as it is firmly believed we have done — it latters not, as to their substantial warrant, how soon Tter the apostolic age, they fell into disuse. Still if e can discover traces of them in the early uninspired ritings of the Christian church, it will certainly add >niething to the chain of proof which we possess in leir favour. It will add strong presumption to that 'hich is our decisive rule. Let us, then, see whether 16 early fathers say any thing which can be fairly onsidered as alluding to this class of church officers.

But before we proceed to examine these witnesses a detail, it may not be improper to make two general emarks, which ought to be kept steadily in view hrough the whole of this branch of our subject.

The first is, — that we must be on our guard against lie ambiguous use of the title elder, as it is expressed n different languages. When we look into the writ- ings of the Christian fathers who lived during the first Wo hundred years after Christ, all of whom, if we ■xcept TertuUian, wrote in Greek, we find them gen-

i

56

erally using the word ^^i^yn^ to designate an elder. Now this is precisely the same word which the advo- cates of Prelacy apply to the " second order," as they express it, of their " clergy," always called by them " presbyters," And when Presbyterians translate this word by the term elder j* and consider it as used, at least in many cases, to designate that class of officers which forms the subject of this essay, they are consid- ered and represented, by some illiterate and narrow minded persons, as chargeable with an unfair, if not a deceptive use of a term. This charge is manifesdy unjust. It will never be repeated by any candid individual, who is acquainted with the Greek language. This is the very word which is almost invariably used by the translators of the Septuagint, all through the Old Testament, to designate elders who confessedly had nothing to do with preaching. In truth, it was a general title of office among the Jews, and it was a general title of office among the early Christians, as any one will immediately perceive by a candid perusal of the New Testament. And the fact is, that if Pres- byterians wrote in Greek, they would of course, employ this very term to express their ruling elder. The word " elder " is the natural, literal, and, we may almost say, the only proper term by which to express the meaning of the Greek title n-^ts^un^as. And even when we meet in some of the early fathers with passa- ges in which the officers of the church are enumerated as consisting of £«•<«««•«, u^ta-SuTt^My km Ata»ofoit it may be said, with perfect truth, that if Presbyterians, at the present day, were called upon to enumerate the standing officers in all their churches, which are com- pletely organized agreeably to their public standards, they would, beyond all doubt, if they used the Greek

* It is worthy of notice that whenever the word ^^ttrSurtMr^ occurs in the New Testament, our translation, when an eccle- siastical officer is meant, always renders it elder. So far as is recollected, this is invariably done.

57

language, represent their regular ecclesiastical officers as every where consisting of E5rir»«r*<, n^irC^rf^w, »tu Atax»Mt ; meaning by nr/r***-** a parochial pastor or overseer, in which sense Prelatists themselves acknowledge the title to have been generally used in the apostolic age ; and meaning by the title T^trSurt^^s, a ruling elder, which we have no doubt has been shown, and will be yet further shown to be, in many cases, the proper interpretation of the word. When, therefore, we thus translate the word in some of the following quo- tations, let no one feel as if we were taking an unwarrantable liberty. No imputation of this kind, assuredly, will be made by any reader of competent learning to judge in the case.

The second preliminary remark is, that perhaps no class of church officers would be, on the whole, so likely to fall into disrepute after the apostolic age, and be discontinued, as that which is now under consideration. We know that the purity of the church began to decline immediately after the apostolic age, Nay, while the apostles were still alive, " the mystery of iniquity" had already begun " to work." Corruption, both in faith ^nd practice, had crept in, and, in some places, to an alarming and most distressing extent. And after their departure, it soon " came in like a flood." The disci- pline of the church became relaxed, and after a while, ■ n a great measure prostrated. The hints dropped by several writers in the second century, and the strongly ijoloured and revolting pictures given by Origen and Cyprian of the state of church in their own times, present a view of this subject which needs no comment. jJow, in such a state of diings, was it not natural that the office of those whose peculiar duty it was to inspect the members of the church, to take cognizance of all their aberrations, and to maintain a pure and scrip- tural discipline, should be unpopular, and finally as "much as possible crowded out of public view, discred- ited, and gradually laid aside.

But this is not all. Shortly after the apostolic age,

58

several ecclesiastical officers, as is confessed on all hand% were either invented or modified, so as to suit the declining spirituality of the times. To mention but a single example. 1 he deacons began to claim higher dignity and powers. Sub -deacons were introduced to perform some of those functions which had originally belonged to deacons, but which they had become too proud to perform. Was it either unnatural, then, or improbable — since things of a similar kind actually took place — that in the course of the undeniable degen- eracy which was now reigning, the ruling elders of the church should find the employment to which they had been originally destined, irksome both to themselves and others ; by no means adapted to gratify either the love of gain, or the love of pleasure which seemed to be the order of the day; — and that both parties grar dually united in droppmg the inspection and discipine once committed to their hands, and in turning their attention to objects more adapted to the taste or ambitious worldly minded churchmen. And this result would be, at once, niore likely to occur, and might have occured with less opposition and noise, if we suppose as some learned men have done, that rul- ing and teaching elders, from the beginning, not only both bore the general name of elders, but were both set apart to their office with the same formalities. If this were the case, then there was nothing to change, in virtually discarding the office of ruling elder, but gradually to neglect all their appropriate duties, and in an equally gradual manner to slide into the assump- tion of duties, and especially that of public preaching, which, in the primitive church, they had not been expected to perform.

Keeping these things in mind, let us examine whether some, both of the early and the late fathers, do not express themselves in a manner which renders it probable, or rather certain, that they had in view the class of elders of which we are speaking.

In the epistle of Clemens Romanus, who lived to-

59

ward the close of the first century, to the church at Cormth, we find the worthy father remonstrating with the members of the church for having risen up against their elders, and thrust them out of office — perhaps for the very reason just hinted at — that they found their inspection and rule uncomfortable. Accordingly Clemens addresses the Corinthian Christians in the following manner: — " It is a shame, my beloved, yea, a very great shame, to hear that the most firm and ancient church of the Corinthians should be led, by one or two persons, to rise up against their elders." — (a-^wfiw^e***. ) Again ; " Let the flock of Christ enjoy peace with the elders (^^tf^vrt^^v) that are set over it" Again ; " Do ye, therefore, who first laid the foundation of this sedi- tion, submit yourselves to your elders, and be instructed into repentance, bending the knee of your hearts ;" IKpist. 47, 54, 57.

In these extracts we find an entire coincidence with tlie language of the New Testament; a plain indication lil^at in every church there was a plurality of elders ; ^nd a distinct recognition of the idea that these elders %vere rulers, in other words, held a station of authority smd government over " the flock" of which they were ^^fficers.

In the epistles of Ignatius, who lived at the close of the first, and the beginning of the second century, we :find much said about elders, («'e«'f«'«e'") The follow- ing is a specimen of the manner in which he speaks of them, in connection with the other classes of church officers. " Obey your bishop and the presbytery (the eldership) with an entire affection ;" epistle to the Ephesians, 20. " I exhort you that you study to do all things in a divine concord : your bishop presiding in the place of God, your elders in the place of the council of the apostles, and your deacons, most dear to me, being entrusted with the ministry of Jesus Christ." Again, " Do nothing without your bishop and elders;" epistle to the Magnesians, 6, 7. " It is, therefore, necessary, that, as ye do, so without your

60

bishop you should do nothing ; also be ye subject to your elders, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope." Again, " Let all reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ, and the Bishop as the Father, and the elders as the sanhedrim of God, and the college of the apostles.'' Again, ^^ Fare ye well in Jesus Christ ; being subject to your bishop as to the command of God, and so likewise to the presbytery, (or eldership;") epistle to the Trallians, 2, 3, 13. " Which also I salute in the blood of Jesus Christ, which is our eternal and unde- filed joy; especially if they are at unity with the bishop and elders, who are with him, and the deacons appointed according to the mind of Jesus Christ Again, ^' There is one cup, and one altar, and also one bishop, together with his eldership, and the deacons, my fellow-servants." Again, " I cried whilst I was among you ; I spake with a loud voice, attend to the bishop, to the eldership, and to the deacons;" epistle to the Philadelphians, Pref. 4, 7. " See that ye all follow your bishop, as Jesus Christ the Fatlier, and the presbytery (or eldership) as the apostles; and reverence the deacons as the command of God." Again, " It is not lawful without the bishop either to baptize or to celebrate the holy communion." Again, "I salute your very worthy bishop ; and your venerable eldership, and your deacons, my fellow-servants;" epistle to the Smyrneans, 8, 12. " My soul be security for them who submit to their bishop, with their elders and deacons ;" epistle to Polycarp, 6.

The friends of Prelacy have long been in the habit of insisting much on these and similar quotations from Ignatius, as affording decisive support to their system. But I must think that their confidence in this witness has not the smallest solid ground.* For, let it be

* Intellig^ent readers are no doubt aware that the genuineness of the epistles of Ignatius has been called in question by a great majority of Protestant divines, and is not only really but deeply questionable. All inquiry, however, on this sulject is waived for the present.

63

e body of elders, but also from the duties which presents as incumbent on the bishop with whom

elders were connected. It is represented as the of the bishop to be present with his flock when-

they came together, to conduct their prayers, :o preside in all their religious assemblies. He is jn of as the only person who was authorized, in lary cases, to administer Baptism and the Lord's ler ; as the person by whom all marriages among eople of his charge were celebrated ; whose duty 5 to be personally acquainted with all his flock ; was bound to take notice, with his own eye, of

who were absent from public worship ; to attend le wants of the widows and all the poor of his regation ; to seek out all by name, and not to ook even the servant men and maids under his . to instruct the children ; to reconcile differences, in short, to attend to all those objects in detail, h are considered as devolving on every faithful h minister. Now, all these representations so ly apply to the pastor of a single church, and

evidently impossible to be realized by any other ►n, that it would be a waste of time, and an insult •mmon sense, to attempt a more formal establish- : of the position.

at if the bishop of Ignatius be a simple parochial )p, in other words, the ordinary pastor of a con- ation; and if the presbytery or bench of elders hich he so frequently speaks, are to be considered

1 belonging to a single parish, then we can scarcely 1 the conclusion, that they were not all of them ioyed in public preaching, but that their principal loyment was, as assistants of the pastor, and in n with him, to discharge the duties of inspectors rulers of the church.

gain, Polycarp, writing to the church of Phillipi,

t evidently and unequivocally conveys the idea,

there was a plurality of presbyters (or elders,)

only in his own church, but also in that to which

62

assigned to them, they had only one altar to a churchy taking church for the company or corporation of the faithful, united under one bishop or pastor, and that was in the city or place where the bishop had his see and residence. Unless this were so, whence came it else, that a schismatical bishop was said, constituere^ or coUocare aliud altare ? And that a bishop and an altar are made correlatives?'**

The same fact is asserted by Bishop Stillingfleet, in his sermon against separation. " Though, when the churches increased," says he, " the occasional meet- ings were frequent in several places, yet still there was but one church, and one altar, and one baptistery, and one bishop, with many presbyters attending hira. Which is so plain in antiquity, as to the churches planted by the apostles themselves, that none but a great stranger to the history of the church can call it in question. It is true, after some time, in the great cities, they had distinct places allotted, and presbyters fixed among them ; and such allotments were called Tituli at Rome, Laurce at Alexandria, and parishes in other places. But these were never thought then to he new churches, or to have any independent govern- ment in themselves, but were all in subjection to the bishop and his college of presbyters, of which multi- tudes of examples might be brought from the most authentic testimonies of antiquity, if a thing so evident needed any proof at all. And yet this distribution, (into distinct Tituli) even in cities, was looked on as so uncommon in those elder times, that Epiphanius takes notice of it as an extraordinary thing at Alex- andria, and, therefore, it is probably supposed that there was no such thing in all the cities of Crete in his time.

That the elders spoken of so frequently by Ignatius, were all the officers of a single parish or congregation, is also evident, not only from the title which he gives

* Discourse on Church Government, p. 48.

63

to the body of elders, but also from the duties which he represents as incumbent on the bishop with whom these elders were connected. It is represented as the duty of the bishop to be present with his flock when- ever they came together, to conduct their prayers, and to preside in all their religious assemblies. He is spoken of as the only person who was authorized, in ordinary cases, to administer Baptism and the Lord's Supper ; as the person by whom all marriages among the people of his charge were celebrated ; whose duty it was to be personally acquainted with all his flock ; who was bound to take notice, with his own eye, of those who were absent from public worship ; to attend to the wants of the widows and all the poor of his congregation ; to seek out all by name, and not to overlook even the servant men and maids under his care ; to instruct the children ; to reconcile differences, and, in short, to attend to all those objects in detail, which are considered as devolving on every faithful parish minister. Now, all these representations so plainly apply to the pastor of a single church, and are so evidently impossible to be realized by any other person, that it would be a waste of time, and an insult to common sense, to attempt a more formal establish- ment of the position.

But if the bishop of Ignatius be a simple parochial bishop, in other words, the ordinary pastor of a con- gr^ation; and if the presbytery or bench of elders of which he so frequently speaks, are to be considered as all belonging to a single parish, then we can scarcely avoid the conclusion, that they were not all of them employed in public preaching, but that their principal employment was, as assistants of the pastor, and in union with him, to discharge the duties of inspectors and rulers of the church.

Again, Polycarp, writing to the church of Phillipi, most evidently and unequivocally conveys the idea, that there was a plurality of presbyters (or elders,) not only in his own church, but also in that to which

66

sition to every thing peculiarly Presbyterian ; yet, in his celebrated Dissertations on Cyprian, freely grants, that, in the days of that father there were elders or presbyters in the Christian church, who did not preach. He represents this fact as undoubtedly tai^ht by Cyprian in his epistles, and particularly re^rs for proof, to the first of the passages cited in a preceding page. Nay, he expresses a full persuasion that a similar fact existed in the apostolic church, and quotes 1 Timothy v. 17, as a decisive confirmation of his opinion.* The notion, then, that all testimony sup- posed to be derived from Cyprian in favour of non- preaching elders, is a dream of modern sectaries, for the purpose of carrying a favourite point in church government, is plainly not tenable. Some of the best talents and most mature learning in the Christian church, without any leaning to Presbyterian opinions, have decisively interpreted that father as setting forth such a class of elders.

Hippolytus, who was nearly contemporary with Cyprian, repeatedly speaks of these elders as existing, and as exercising authority in his day. In his tract " Against the Heresy of a certain Noetus," he states in the beginning of the work, that Noetus being charged with certain heretical opinions, the ** elders ^^^tirSvTi^ot) cited him to appear, and examined him in the presence of the church ; " that Noetus having at first denied, but afterwards openly avowed the opinions imputed to him, " the elders summoned him a second time, condemned him, and cast him out of the church." It seems, then, that in the third century, there were elders, whose duty it was to examine, try, and excom- municate such members of the church as were found delinquent with respect to either doctrine or morals. In this case, a part, at least, of the trial, seems to have been conducted " in the presence of the church.

* Dissertationes Cyprianicee, vi. sect. 4, 5, 6.

>y

of which they were rulers ; but still the trial, convic- tion, and excommunication were by the elders.

Origen who, it is well known, flourished a little more than two hundred years after Christ, in the following passage has a plain reference to the class of officers under consideration : — " There are some rulers aj^inted whose duty it is to inquire concerning the manners and conversation of those who are ad* mitted, that they may debar from the congregation such as commit filthiness." * This passage is replete with important and conclusive testimony. It not only proves diat, in the time of Origen, there were rulers in the Christian church, but that the chief and peculiar business of these rulers was precisely that which we assign to ruling elders, viz. inspecting the members of the church, watching over all its spiritual interests, admitting to its communion those who, on inquiry, were found worthy, and debarring those who were in any way immoral. It is perfectly evident from this passage alone, that, in the days of this learned father, the government and discipline of the church were not conducted by the body of the communicants at large, but by a bench of rulers.

The same important fact is also indubitably implied in the language of Origen in another place. In his seventh Homily on Joshua, he speaks of one who, ^^ having been thrice admonished, and being unwilling to repent, was cut off from the church by its rulers." Those who cut off then, from the communion of the church, and restored the penitent, in the time of Ori- gen, were not the body of the communicants, but a bench of elders. This great historical fact is, more- over, explicitly established, as having existed in the third century, (the age of Origen,) by the Magde- burgh Centuriators, a body of very learned Lutheran divines, contemporary with Melancthon, and whose authority as ecclesiastical historians, is deservedly

* Contra Celsom. Lib. iii. p. 142. Edit. Cantab. 1677.

I

68

high. " The right," say they, " of deciding respect- ing such as were to be excommunicated, or of receiv- ing upon their repentance, such as had fallen, was vested in the elders of the church.*

In the Gesta Purgationis CcBciliani et Felicis^ pre- served at the end of Optatus, and commonly referred to the beginning of the fourth century, we meet with the following enumeration of church oflScers: " Presbyteri^ Diaconi et Seniores^'* — i. e. " The pres- byters, the deacons and the elders." And a little after is added : — " Adhibite conclericos, et Seniores plebis^ ecclesiasticos viros^ et inquirant diligenter qu(B sint istce dissentiones^^^ — i, e, " Call the fellow- clergymen and elders of the people, ecclesiastical men, and let them inquire diligently what are these dissentions.'' In that assembly, likewise, several letters were produced and read ; one addressed, Clero et Senioribusy — i, e, " to the clergy and the elders ;'* and another, Clericis et Senioribus, — L e, "to the clergymen and the elders." Here, then, is a class of men expressly recognized as ecclesiastical men, or church officers ; who are styled elders ; who were constituent members of a solemn ecclesiastical assembly or judicatory ; who were expressly charged with in- quiring into matters connected with the discipline of the church; and yet carefully distinguished from the clergy, with whom they met, and officially united in the transaction of business. If these be not the elders of whom we are in search, we may give up all the rules of evidence.

Some, indeed, have said, that the phrase ecclesias- ticos viros^ in one of the passages last cited, was not intended to designate church officers at all ; that this phrase was early introduced to distinguish " men of the church," — L e. Christians from Pagans, and other enemies of Christ; and that it probably had some such meaning, and nothing more, in the ancient

* Cent. iii. Cap. vii. p. 151.

records from which the foregoing extracts are made. It is freely granted that the phrase, ecclesiastud viri, was for a time employed in the Christian church, as well as by the surrounding heathen, in the sense, and for the purpose just mentioned. That is, when Christians were spoken of, as distinguished from Jews, infidels, heretics, &c. they were called ecclesiastical men, importing that they did not belong to Jewish sjmagogues, or heathen temples, or to heretical sects ; but were adherents, or members of the church of Christ But it is well known that this language was never employed in this sense among Christians them- selves, when distinguishing one class of their own body from another. When used in this case, it always de- signated men in ecclssiastical office.* Besides, in the passage before us, there can be no doubt that the phrase under consideration was used in the latter sense, and not in the former. For the ecclesiastical men, in these passages are represented as joined with the clergy in ecclesiastical functions; especially as directed to investigate and settle ecclesiastical dissen- sions. Surely this could neither be required nor ex- pected of men who sustained no office, and were of course, invested with no authority in the church.

Another objection which has been confidently urged against that construction which we have put upon the extracts from the Gesta Purgationis, &c. is that the seniors or elders, of which they speak, are mentioned after deacons, and, therefore, are to be considered as inferior to them. " Now," say these objectors, ** the ruling elders of the presbyterian church are always considered and represented, by the advocates of that denomination, as above deacons, rather than below them, on the scale of ecclesiastical precedence. Of course, the senior here spoken of, cannot belong to the class of officers for which they contend." To this objection it is sufficient to reply, that the mere order

* Bingham's Origines Ecclesiasticse, Book i. chapter i. section 8.

70

in which titles are arranged, cannot be considered as decisive of the relative rank with which these titles are connected. At once to illustrate and confirm this re- mark, a single example will suffice. In the epistle of Ignatius, when he speaks of bishops, or pastors, elders and deacons, no intelligent reader supposes that he means to represent the second and third of these classes of offices as inferior to the first. Yet, in his epistle to the Trallians, he speaks thus: — ** Let all reverence the deacons as Jesus Christ; and the bishop as the Father ; and the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and the college of the apostles." This may argue carelessness or haste in writing; or it may argue a mind in the writer, less intent on ecclesiasti- cal precedence than on more important matters ; but it surely cannot be considered as deciding the relative standing of the different officers of whom he speaks.

Besides, let it be recollected, that the date of these Gesta was about the year of Christ 303, when the office of ruling elder, if we may credit the very ex- plicit testimony of Ambrose, which will be stated pre- sently, was going gradually out of use. If so, nothing was more natural than that the writers and speakers of that day should be disposed to throw it on the back ground, and rather degrade than advance its appro- priate rank in the scale of ecclesiastical honour.

There is also a passage in Optatus, of the African church, who flourished a little after the middle of the fourth century, which corroborates the foregoing quotations. It is as follows: — " The church had many ornaments of gold' and silver, which she could neither bury in the earth, nor carry away with her, which she committed to the elders, (Senioribus,) as to faithful persons*"* There can scarcely be a doubt that these were not mere aged persons, but official men ; and, especially as we know, from the writings of Cjrprian,

* Optat, Lib. i. p. 41. edit. Paris, 1631.

71

who resldted in the same country, that there were such officers in the African church, a few years before.

Ambrose who lived in the fourth century,* in his commentary on 1 Timothy v. 1, has the following passage : " For, indeed, among all nations old age is honourable. Hence it is that the synagogue, and afterwards the church, had elders, without whose counsel nothing was done in the church; which by what negligence it grew into disuse I know not, un- less, perhaps, by the sloth, or rather by the pride of the teachers, while they alone wished to appear some- thing." The great body of the Prelatists, as well as some others, have laboured hard to divest this passage of its plain and pointed testimony in favour of the office of ruling elder. They insist upon it that the pious father had no reference whatever to ecclesiastical officers, but only to aged persons, and that he meant to say nothing more than that, formerly, in the synagogue, and afterwards in the church, there were old men, whom it was customary to consult ; which practice, however, at the time in which he wrote, was generally laid aside. This perversion of an obvious meaning, is really so strange and. extravagant, that the formality of a serious refutation seems scarcely neces- sary. Can any reflecting man believe that Hilary designed only to inform his readers that in the Jewish synagogues there were actually persons who had attained a considerable age ; that this was also after-* wards the case in the Christian church; and that these aged persons were generally consulted ? This would have been a sage remark indeed ! Was there ever a community of any extent, either ecclesiastical or civil, which aid not include some aged persons? Or was there ever a state of society, or an age of the

* It is not forgotten that learned men have generally consi- dered the real name of this writer as Hilary. Yet as the name of Ambrose is more frequently ^ven to him, especiaUy by many writers hereafter to be quoted, the latter name wiU be more intelli^ble, and therefore, more convenient.

72

world, in which the practice of consulting the aged and experienced had fallen into disuse ? That think- ing, candid minds, should be able to satisfy themselves with such a gloss, is truly wonderful. It is certainly no argument in favour of this construction of the language of Ambrose, that he prefaces his statement respecting the synagogue and the church, by remark- ing, that '^ among all nations old age is honourable/' Surely no remark could be more natural or appropriate when he was about to state, that from the earliest period of the Christian church, and long before in the synagogue, all their affairs had been managed by colleges of elders, (a title importing a kind of homage to age and experience,) without whose council nothing was done.

But there is a clause in this extract from Ambrose, which precludes all doubt that he intended to allude to a class of church officers, and not merely to old age. It is this : — " Which by what negUgence it grew into disuse, I know not, unless, perhaps, by the sloth, or rather by the pride of the teachers, who wished alone to appear something." It is very con- ceivable and obvious that both the pride and the sloth of the teachers, or teaching elders, should render them willing to get rid of a bench of officers of equal power with themselves, as rulers in the church, and, con- sequently able to control their wishes in cases of dis- cipline. But it cannot easily be conceived why either sloth or pride should render any so particularly averse to all consultation with the aged and experienced, in preference to the young, on the affairs of the churdi: especially if these aged persons bore no office, and there was of course, no official obligation to be governed by their advice, as the gloss under considera- tion supposes. It being evident, then, that a class of officers was here intended, the question arises, what class of presbyters, or elders, was that which had grown into disuse in the fourth century ? Not teach- ing presbyters, surely; for every one knows that that

73

class of Presbyters had not become obsolete in Am- brose's time. His own writings amply attest the re- verse. And every one also knows that this class of church officers has never been laid aside, or even diminished in number, to the present day.

It is worthy of very particular notice here, also, as no small confirmation of the construction which we

J)ut upon the words of Ambrose, that all the most earned and able of the reformers, and a great num- ber of others, the most competent judges in such matters, from the reformation to the present time, have concurred in adopting the same construction, and have considered the worthy father as referring to a class of elders who held the place of inspectors and rulers in the church. Learned Lutherans, and Episcopalians, as well as Calvinists, almost without number, have united in the interpretation of this father, which we have given, with a degree of harmony truly wonderful, if that interpretation be entirely erroneous. Is it less likely that Luther, and Melanc- thon, and Bucer, and Whitgift, and Zanchius, and Peter Martyr, who had no sectarian or private views to serve, should be able correctly to read and under- stand Ambrose, than that modem and more superficial scholars should be betrayed into a mistaken construc- tion, on the side in favour of which their feelings were strongly enlisted ? No disrespect whatever is intend- ed to the latter ; but it cannot be doubted that a great preponderancy of testimony, both as to numbers and competency, is on the side of the former.

Augustine, bishop of Hippo, who also lived toward the close of the fourth century, often refers to this class of officers in his writings. Thus, in his work. Contra Cresconium Grammaticum^ lib. iii. cap. 56, he peaks of " Peregrinus^ Presbyter^ et Seniores Ec- iesuB MusticancB regionis ;^' — u 6. " Peregrine, the presbyter, and the elders of the church of the Musta- can district." And again, he addresses one of his epistles intended for his church at Hippo, in the

74

following manner : — " Dileciissimis Fratribus^ Clero^ Senioribus et universcB Plehi EcdeHtB Hipponensis f Epist. 137, — I. e. " To the beloved brethren, the clergy, the elders, and all the people of the church at Hippo." There were some elders then, in the time of Augustine, whom he distinguishes from other presby- ters, and whom he also distinguishes from the clergy. And, lest any should suppose that the elders here spoken of were not officers, but mere private members of the church, he distinguishes them from xhepUbi universa of the church. Augustine, also, in another place, {De Verb. Dom, Serm. 19,) speaks thus: — " Cum oh errorem aliquem a Senioribus arguuntur^ et vmputOr tur alicui de illisj cur ebrius fuerit ? cur res alienas pervaseritf' &c. — . i. e. "When they are reprehended for any error by the elders, and are upraided with having been drunk, or with having been guilty of theft, &c." Can any one doubt that Augustine is here speaking, not of mere aged persons, but of cbuFch officers, whose duty it was to inspect the morals of the members of the church, and to " upbraid," or reprove those who had been reprehensible in their deportment ? It would be easy to produce from the same father a number of other quotations equally to our purpose. But Bingham, in his Origines Ecclesiasticce Bishop Taylor, in his Episcopacy Asserted^ and other learned Prelatists, have rendered this unnecessary, by making an explicit acknowledgment, that Augustine repeatedly mentions these seniors or elders, as belonging to other churches as well as his own, in his time ; and that the same kind of elders are frequently referred to by other writers, both before and after Augustine, as then ex- isting in the church ; as holding in it some kind, of official station ; and yet as distinguished from clergy- men. It is true, indeed, that Bingham insists upon it that these were not ruling elders, in our sense of the word ; but that they held some kind of office in the church, and yet were not public preachers, he explicitly grants. We ask nothing more. This is quite sufficient tor our purpose.

75

The ancient work, entitled Apostolical G)nstitutions, although by no means, of Apostolical origin, was pro- bably composed sometime between the second and fifth centuries. The following significant and pointed rule, extracted from that work, will be considered by the intelligent reader as by no means equivocal in its aspect: — " To presbyters also, .when they labour assiduously in the word and doctrine, let a double por- tion be assigned."* Here is, obviously, a distinction between presbyters who are employed in teaching, and those who were not so employed. To what duties the other devoted themselves is not stated; but it is evident that teaching made no part of their ordinary occupation. We may take for granted that their duty was to assist in the other spiritual concerns of the church, viz. in maintaining good order and dis- cipline. This is precisely the distinction which pres- byterians make, and which they believe to have been made, in the primitive church. Accordingly the pres- bjrters, in the same relic of Christian antiquity, and in a subsequent part of the same chapter, are called ** the counsellors of the bishop, or pastor ; and the Sanhedrim or senate of the church :" expressions which entirely harmonize with our views of the office of elder in the ancient church.

To the same class of officers, Isodore of Hispala, who flourished in the sixth century, seems to allude, when^ in giving directions as to the manner in which pastors should conduct their official instructions, he says : — Prius docendi sunt Seniores pkbisy ut per eos infiraposiUfacilitisdoceantur i^ — i. e. " The elders of the people are first to be taught, that by them such as are placed under them, may be more easily instructed." Here again, these Seniores are evidently spoken of as church officers, who were set over the people, and yet occupied a station inferior to that of the pastors, or public preachers.

* Apostol Constit. lib. ii. cap. 28.

76

Nor does the class of officers appear to have entirely ceased in the church at as late a period as that of Gregory the Great, who wrote in the latter part of the sixth century. In one of his epistles he gives the following direction : — " If any things should come to your ears concerning any clerg3mfian, which may be justly considered as matter of offence, do not easily believe it ; but let truth be diligently investigated by the elders of the church, who may be at hand, ana then, if the character of tlie act demand it, let the pro- per punishment fall on the offender."*

Here there is evidently a very distinct reference to such a class of officers as that of which we are q3eak- ing. They are distinguished from clergymen ; and yet they are represented as ecclesiastical officers, to whom it properly pertained to investigate ecclesiastical offences ; and to give advice and direction in peculiarly delicate cases of discipline. At an earlier period of the church, indeed these eldei*s, as well as all other classes of ecclesiastical men, were styled clergymen ; as we shall have occasion more fully to show hereafter : but from the fourth century and onward, elders of this class declined in numbers and in popularity, and not long afterwards were in a great measure laid aside, excepting by the humble and devoted witnesses of the truth, of whose testimony we shall speak in the next chapter.

There is another species of evidence here worthy of notice. The representation which the fathers give of the manner in which the bishop or pastors and his elders were commonly seated, when the church was assembled, and during the solemnities of public wor- ship, afford very strong evidence that the mass of the elders were such as it is the object of this essay to establish. We are told by several of the early fathers, that when the church was convened for public worship,

* Epistolse, lib. ii. epist. 19 — quoted from the Politica Ecclesiastica of Voetius, par. ii. lib. ii. tract, iii.

77

the bishop, or pastor, was Commonly seated on the middle of a raised bench, or long semi-circular seat, at one end of the church ; that his elders were seated on each side of him^ on the same seat, or on seats im- mediately adjoining, and commonly a little lower ; and that the deacons commonly stood in front of this bench, ready to give any notice, to execute any order, or to perfc^rm any service which the pastor or elders might think proper to direct. This practice was evidently drawn from the Jewish synagogue. And, indeed, the order of assembling, sitting, and worship in the Chris- tian assemblies, for the first two or three centuries, so strikingly resembled that of the synagogue, that Christian churches were frequently contemned, and opposed as " synagogues in disguise."*

This general fact is so well attested by the early Chistian writers, that it is unnecessary to detain the reader by any formal proof of it. Now, if in every church, when assembled in ordinary circumstances, there were present a pastor, overseer, or bishop, and a body of elders, sitting with him, and counselling and aiding him in the inspection and discipline of the charch ; it is hardly necessary to say, that these elders could not all have been such presbyters as the friends of Prelacy contend for, as their " second order of clergy.*' The supposition is absurd. They could only have been such a bench of pious and venerable men, as were chiefly employed in overseeing and ruling ; and corresponding, substantially, with the elders of thepres- byterian church. It is true, indeed, the advocates of Prdacy endeavour to persuade us that these presbyters were the stated preachers in the several congregations or worshipping assemblies which were, as they suppose, comprehended in the bishop's charge. But this supposition is wholly unsupported. Nay, it is directly contrary to the whole current of early testimony on this subject. The very same writers who imform us

* Thorndike*s Discourse on Religious Assemblies, p. 57.

g2

78

that there were any presbyters at all in the Christian church within the first three hundred years, represent a plurality of them as sitting with the bishop orpastor, and present in every worshipping assembly. Tnere is no system with which this statement can be made essentially to agree, but that which is received among presbyterians.

Another strong argument in support of the doctrine of ruling elders, as drawn from the early fathers, is found in the abundant evidence which their writings fiirnish, that during the first three or four centuries after Christ, the great body of the Christian prestoy- ters did not ordinarily preach, indeed never, but by the special permission of the bishop or pastor. The following statement by the learned Bingham, in his Originea EeeksiasHccB book ii. chapter iii. section 4. will be found' conclusive on this point: —

" The like observation may be made upon the office of preaching. This was in die first place the bishop's office, which they commonly discharged themselves, especially in the African churches. Which is the reason we so frequently meet with the phrase, Trac- tante Episcopo the bishop preaching, in the writings of Cyprian. For then it was so much the office and custom of bishops to preach, that no presbyter was permitted to preach in their presence, till the time of St. Austin, who, whilst he was a presbjrter was author- ized by Valerius, his bishop, to preach before him. But that, as Possidius, the writer of his life observes, was so contrary to the use and custom of the African churches, that many bishops were highly offended at it, and spoke against it ; till the consequence proved that such a permission was of good use and service to the church; and then several other bishops granted their presbyters power and privilege to preach before them. So that it was then a favour for the presbyters to preach in the presence of the bishops, and wholly at the bishop's discretion, whether they would permit them or not; and when they did preach, it was wholly

79

poteHate accepta, by the power and authority of the bishops that appointed them. In the eastern churches presbyters were more commonly employed to preach, as Possidius observes, when he says Valerius brought the custom into Africa from their example. And St. Jerome intimates so much, when he complains of it as an ill custom only in some churches to forbid presby- ters to preach. Chrysostom preached several of his elaborate discourses at Antioch, while he was but a presbyter ; and so did Atticus at Constantinople : and the same is obser/ed to have been granted to the pres- byters of Alexandria and Caesarea, in Cappadocia, and Cyprus, and other places. But still it was but a grant of the bishops ; and presbyters did it by their authority and commission. And whenever bishops saw just reason to forbid them, they had power to limit or withdraw their commission again : — as both Socrates and Sozomen testify, who say that at Alexan- dria presbyters were forbidden to preach from the time that Arius raised a disturbance in the church. Thus we see what a power bishops anciently challenged and exercised over presbyters in the common and ordinary offices of the church : particularly for preach- ing, bishops always esteemed it their office as much as any other." This statement is amply illustrated and confirmed by the learned author by numerous refer- ences to early writers of the highest reputation, which it is altogether unnecessary to recite, on account of the notoriety of the fact alleged.

Can such a statement be contemplated a moment without perceiving, that the mass of the presbyters or elders, during the times here spoken of, were a very different class of officers from those commonly styled " presbyters," in the papacy afterwards, and in more modern prelatical churches ? The very circumstance of preaching making no part of their ordinary func- tion; nay, that, in ordinary cases, they were never allowed to do it, but in virtue of a special permission, which is evidently the import of the whole account,

80

unless we make nonsense of it ; places it beyond all doubt that the authority which they received at ordina- tion, did not really commission them to preach at all ; but that the bishop only was the commissioned preacher. This is exactly what presbyterians say. And if ever ruling elders or deacons among us, conduct social worship, and address the people in public, it is always under the direction of the bishop or pastor, who may encourage or arrest it as he pleases. It is vain to say, that presbyters in the Protestant Episcopal church at the present day cannot preach, or perform any ecclesiastical act without the bishop's permission. This is an idle evasion. The fact is, that every one knows that their original ordination, as presbyters, or " priests," as they are called — conveys the full power to preach, administer sacraments, and perform every duty of the ordinary parochial ministration, statedly, and without any further let or impediment. The cases then, are wholly unlike. There were, evidently, in the days of Ignatius and Cyprian, of Chrysostom and Augustine, of Socrates and Sozomen, some elders who did not ordinarily preach, and were not considered as authorised to engage in this part of the public ser- vice, without a special permission ; and who stood, not exactly, indeed, but very much on the same ground, as to this matter, with the elders of our denomination.

The truth is, some of the very same writers who inform us that elders and deacons were not ordinarily allowed to preach during the first three or four cen^ turies, also inform us, that laymen, in cases of necessity, might preach by the bishop's permission. This at once illustrates and strengthens the presbyterian argument For the same authority which might give a special permission in each case, or a general permis- sion, for a time, to an elder or deacon to preach ; which permission, it seems, might be revoked at plea- sure, without touching the official standing of the in- dividual, much less deposing him from office ; — might also authorize the merest layman in the whole parish

81

to perforin the same service, whenever it was judged expedient to give the license.

The trutli of the matter seems to have been this. A large majority of the officers called elders, in the three first centuries, were, no doubt, ruling elders — or- dained, it is probable, in the same manner with the teaching elders, — «. e. with " the laying on of hands," and the same external solenmity in every respect. They were not qualified, and were not expected, when ordained, to be preachers; but were selected, on account of their piety, gravity, prudence, and experi- ence, to assist in inspection and government. When, however, the bishop or pastor, who was the stated preacher, was sick, or absent, he might direct a ruling elder to take his place on a single occasion, or for a few Sabbaths. But this function made no part of their stated work ; and they seldom engaged in it. After a while, however, these elders, like the bishops on the one hand, and the deacons on the other, began to aspire ; were more and more fi'equently permitted to preach ; until, at length, non-preaching elders were chiefly banished from the church. As this was a gradual thing, they were, of course, retained in some churches longer than others. They were, probably, first laid aside in large cities, where ambition was most prevalent, laxity of morals most indulged, and strict discipline most unpopular. In this way things pro- ceeded, until this class of officers was almost wholly lost sight of in the Christian community.

One more testimony, by no means unimportant, of the existence of this office in the primitive church, is to be found in the Rev. Dr. Buchanan's account of the Syrian Christians, contained in his Asiatic Researches. It will be borne in mind that the learned and pious author considers those Christians as having settled in the East, within the first three centuries after Christ, before the corruptions of the Church of Rome had been introduced, and when the original simplicity of gospel order had been but in a small degree invaded.

82

Separating from the Western church at that early pe- riod, and remaining for many centuries, ahnost wholly secluded from the rest of the world, they were found in a great measure free from the innovations and super- stitions of the Papacy. Now, if ruling elders had any existence in the Christian church withm the first three hundred years, as Ambrose expressly declares they had, we might expect to find the Syrian Christians, in their seclusion, retaining some traces at least of this office in their churches. Accordingly, Dr. Buchanan, in describing the circumstances of a visit which he paid one of the churches of this simple and highly interest- ing people, speaks as follows : — " When we arrived, I was received at^the door of the church by three Kas- heeshas, that is presbyters, or priests, who were habited in like manner in white vestments. Their names were Jesu, Zecharias, and Urias, which they wrote down in my journal, each of them adding to his name the title Kasheesha. There were also present two Shumshanas, or deacons. The elder priest was a very intelligent man, of reverend appearance, having a long white beard, and of an affable and engaging de- portment. The three principal Christians, or lay- elders, belonging to the church, were named Abra- ham, Thomas and Alexandros."*

This remarkable fact, it is believed, belongs most properly to the present chapter. For if these simple Syrian Christians were really settled in the East, as early as Dr. Buchanan seems, with good reason, to suppose, and were for many centuries entirely secluded from all foreign influence ; we may consider them as having in operation among them, substantially, that ecclesiastical system which existed through the greater part of the Christian church at the close of the third, and the beginning of the fourth centurv. A kind of testimony which, of course, falls in with our purpose

* Christian Researches in Asia, p. 75. N. Y. Edit. 12nio. 1812.

83

in eiutmining the testimony of the early ages of the church.

Such then, is the amount of the testimony from the Christian fathers. They tell us, with a unanimity and frequency truly remarkable, that in every church, there was a bench or college of elders ; that they sat, with the bishop or pastor, as an ecclesiastical judica- tory, and with him ruled the church ; that this bench or body of rulers was called by various names in diflFerent parts of the world, such as, EcclesicB Con- sensus^ me Session or Consistory of the church — van ir^str^uTf^etv trvn^^tw, the court or Sanhedrim of the elders — EccksicB Senatus^ the senate of the church — BeuXn txxXfisseir the couucil of the church, &c. &c. ; that they were always, present with the bishop or pastor when he presided in public worship ; that he did nothing of importance without consulting them; that they seldom or never preached, unless in cases of necessity, or when specially requested to do so by the pastor ; that they were more frequently than other- wise called clergymen, like the elders who " laboured in the word and doctrine," but sometimes distinguished from the clergy; that, however, whether aalled clergjnnen or not, they were " ecclesiastical men," that is, set apart for ecclesiastical purposes, devoted to the spiritual rule and edification of the church ; that all questions of discipline, such as admitting members into the church, inspecting their Christian deportment, and censuring, suspending and excommunicating, were decided by Uiese elders: and, finally, from all it is apparent, that as discipline became unpopular, and ecclesiastics more aspiring, the ruling part of the elder's office was gradually laid aside, and the teaching part alone retained.

Chapter V TESTIMONY OF THE WITNESSES FOR THE TRUTH DURING THE DARK AGES

It has been the habit of zealous and high-toned Prelatists, for more than two centuries past, as well as of some Independents, to assert, that ruling elders were unknown in the Christian church until about the year 1541 ; that then Calvin invented the order, and introduced it into the church of Geneva. And some worthy men, of other denominations, have allowed themselves, with more haste than good advisement, to adopt and repeat the assestion. It is an assertion which, undoubtedly, cannot be made good; as the fol- lowing testimonies will probably satisfy every impartial reader.

At how early a period the old Waldenses took their rise is uncertain. In some of their Confessions of Faith, and other ecclesiastical documents, dated at the com- mencement, or soon after the commencement, of the Reformation by Luther, they speak of their doctrine and order as having been handed down from father to son for more than five hundred years. But Rei- nerius, who himself lived about two hundred and fifty years before Luther, who had once resided among the Waldenses, but afterwards became one of their bitterest persecutors, seems to ascribe to that people a much earlier origin. " They are more pernicious," says he, " to the cnurch of Rome than any other set of here-

85

tics, for three reasons: — 1. Because they are older than any other sect ; for some say that they have been ever since the time of Pope Sylvester, (who was raised to the Papal chair in 314 ;) and others say, from the time of the Apostles.* 2. Because they are more extensively spread than any other sect ; there being scarcely a country into which they have not crept. 3« Because other sects are abominable to God for there blasphemies ; but the Waldenses are more pious than any other heretics ; they believe truly of God, live justW before men, and receive all the articles of the creed ; only they hate the Church of Rome."

Now, John Paul Perrin, the well known historian of the Waldenses, and who was himself one of the ministers of, that people, in a number of places recog- nizes the office of elder, distinguished from that of pastor, or teacher, as retained in their churches. He expressly and repeatedly represents their Synods as coipposed of ministers and elders. The same writer tells us that in the year 1476, the Hussites, being en-

§aged in separating and reforming their churches from le Church of Rome, understood that there were some churches of the ancient Waldenses in Austria, in which the purity of the gospel was retained, and in which there were many eminent pastors. In order to ascertain the truth of this account, they (the Hussites) sent two of their ministers, with two elders, to inquire and ascertain what those flocks or congregations were.f The same historian, in the same work, speaks of the ministers and elders of the Bohemian churches.^ Now the Bohemian Brethren, it is well known, were

* Reinerius flourished about A.D. 1250, more than 250 years before the Reformation ; and, at that time, he speaks of the Waldenses as an ancient people, of too remote an origin to be traced with distinctness and certainty.

f History of the Old Waldenses, part. iL book 1. chap. 10; book 2, chap. 4; book 5, chap. 7.

:|: Partii. book 2. chapter 9, 10.

86

a branch of the same people called Waldenses.* They had removed from Picardy, in the north of France, about two hundred years before the time of Huss and Jerome, to Bohemia, and there, in conjunction with many natives of the country, whom they brought over to their opinions, established a number of pure churches, which long maintained the simplicity of the gospel. The undoubted existence of ruling elders, then, among the Bohemian Brethren, affords in itself, strong pre- sumptive proof that the same class of o£Bcers existed in other branches of the same body. And, accordingly, a Synod, of which we have an account, as held in Piedmont in Italy, in 1570, is represented repeatedly as made up of " pastors and elders.** Again, in the form of Government of the same people, in the chapter on Excommunication, we find the following direction respecting the disorderly, who refuse to listen to private admonition : — " Tell it to the church ;" that is, to the " guides, whereby the church is ruled ;" and that we may be at no loss who these " rulers" were, we are told in a preceding chapter that they were elders chosen from among the people for the purpose of governing ; and informed that they were distinct from the pastors.

The testimony of Perrin and others, is supported by that of M. Gillis, another historian of the Wal- denses, and also one of their pastors. In the Confes- sion of Faith of that people, inserted at length in the " Addition" to this work, and stated by the historian to have been the Confession of the ancient, as well as of the modern Waldenses, it is declared, (p. 490 — art. 31,) that " it is necessary for the church to have pastors, to preach God's word, to administer the sacra-> ments, and to watch over the sheep of Jesus Christ ; and also elders and deacons, according to the rules of good and holy church discipline, and the practice of the primitive church."

f History of the Waldenses, 4to. 1655, published by order of Cromwell.

■ ■ w^..^- ■

Sir Samuel Moreland, who visited the Waldenseg b the year 1656, and took unwearied pains to learn from themselves their history, as well as their doctrine and order; informs us, that besides their Synodical meetings, which took place once a year, when all can- didates for the pastoral office were commonly ordained, they had also consistories in their respective churches, by means of which pure discipline was constantly maintained.*

Accordingly, the Rev. Dr. Ranken, in his labori- ously learned History of France, gives the following account of the Waldenses and Albigenses, whom he very properly represents as the same people. ** Their government and discipline were extremely simple. The youth intended for the ministry among them, were placed under the inspection of some of the elder barbes, or pastors, who trained them chiefly to the knowledge of the Scriptures ; and when satisfied of their proficiency, they received them as preachers, with imposition of hands. Their pastors were maintained by the voluntary offerings of the people. The whole church assembled once a year, to treat of their gen- eral affairs. Contributions were then obtained ; and the common fund was divided, for the year, among not only the fixed pastors, but such as were itinerant, and had no particular district or charge. If any of them had fallen into scandal or sin, they were prohibited from preaching, and thrown out of the society. The pastors were assisted in their inspection of the people's morals, by elders, whom probably both pastors and people elected, and set apart for that purpose."f

Further ; not only does Perrin speak of the minis- ters and elders of the Bohemian churches, thereby plainly intimating that they had a class of elders

* History of the Evangelical Churches of Piedmont, book i.

Chapter viii

f History of France, vol. iii. pp. 203, 204.

88

distinct from their pastors, or preachers; but the same thing is placed beyond the possibility of doubt or question by the Bohemian Brethren themselves, who, in the year 1535, presented a Confession of their Faith to Ferdinand, king of Hungary and Bohemia, with a friendly and highly commendatory preface by Luther; and who, a number of years afterwards, published their " Plan of Government and Discipline," which con- tains the following paragraph : —

"Elders (Presbyteri^ sen Censor es morum) are honest, grave, pious men, chosen out of the whole con- gregation, that they may act as guardians of all the rest. To them authority is given, (either alone or in connection with the pastor) to admonish and rebuke those who transgress the prescribed rules, also to re- concile those who are at variance, and to restore to order' whatever irregularity they may have noticed. Like- wise in secular matters, relating to domestic concerns^ the younger men and youths are in the habit of ask — ing their counsel, and of being faithfully advised by them^^- From the example and practice of the ancient church^^ we believe that this ought always to be done ; see^: Exodus xviii. 21. — Duteronomyi. 13. — 1 Cor. vi. 2^m 4, 5.-1 Tim. V. 17."

This they say, at the close, " is the ecclesiastical^ order which they and their forefathers had had estab-^ lished among tnem for two hundred years:* which they derived from the word of God ; which they main- tained through much persecution, and with much patience, and which they had observed with much happy fruit to themselves, and to the people of God."f

* The '* Plan of Ooveniment and Discipline/* from which the above extracts are made, was drawn up by their ** General Synod" in 1616, and printed in 1632. When, therefore, they declare that they and their forefathers had enjoyed the same order for two hundred years, it carries back the date of this system to 1416, that is to the time of John Huss ; and, of course, nearly a century before the birth of Calvin.

f Jo. Amos Comenii Historia Fratrum Bohemorum Ratio DisciphncB Ordinisque, &c. 1 1, 56, 68.

89

And that all mistake might be precluded respecting the real import of the above stated classes, the Bohe- mian historian and commentator, Comenius, makes the following remarks on the elders in question : —

** Presbyter, a Greek term, signifying the same with Senior, in Latin, (an elder,) is applied by the apostles both to the pastors of the church, and to those who assisted them in taking care of the flock, who do not labour in the word and doctrine ; 1 Timothy v. 17. Such are our elders; they are styled judges of the congregation, or censors of the people, and also ruling elders. I am not ignorant, indeed, that Hugo Grotius has laboured hard to prove that, in the apostles' days there were no other presbyters than pastors ; and that he assigns a different meaning to the passage in 1 Timothy v, 17. Yet, inasmuch as he finally confesses, that although such elders of the church as sit with the pastors in ecclesiastical judica- tories, be an institution of human prudence, they are, nevertheless, very useful, and ought by all means to be retained : I hope no one will easuy find any reason- able objection. To guard against abuses, he subjoins very judicious cautions, at the close of chapter xi. of the book which he entitled, De Imperio Summarum Protestatum circa Sacra.'**

In precisely the same manner are both the theory and practice of the Bohemian Brethren understood by the celebrated Martin Bucer, a very learned Lutheran divine, whose fame throughout Europe induced Arch- bishop Cranmer to invite him to England, during the progress of the Reformation in that country, where he received patronage and preferment, and was held in high estimation. Bucer was a contemporary of the Bohemian worthies who published the exhibition of their faith and practice above quoted, and, of course, had every opportunity of knowing both its letter and spirit He speaks of it in the following terms : —

'* Annotationes ad Rationem Ordinis Fratrum Bohemorum ad cap. i. p. 68.

2 II

90

"The Bohemian Brethren, (Picardi,)* who pub- lished a Confession of their faith, in the year 1535, with a preface by Luther, and who almost alone pre- served in the world the purity of the doctrine, and the vigour of the discipline of Christ, observed an excellent rule, for which we are compelled to give them credit, and especially to praise that God who thus wrought by them, notwithstanding those brethren are prepos- terously despised by some learned men. The rule which they observe was this : besides ministers of the Word and Sacraments, they had, in each church, a bench or college of men, excelling in gravity and prudence, who performed the duties of admonishing and correcting offenders, composing differences, and judicially deciding in cases of dispute. Of this kind of elders, Hilary (Ambrose) wrote, when he said — " Therefore the synagogue and afterwards the church had elders, without whose counsel nothing was

done."t

It would seem difficult to deny or resist this testi- mony that the Bohemian Brethren held to ruling elders, and actually maintained this class of officers in their churches. Could Bucer, whom Mr. Middleton, in his Biographia Evangelica, represents as " a man of immense learning," and who is spoken of by Bishop Burnet as " perhaps inferior to none of all the Re- formers for learning ;" — could he have been ignorant, either of the real meaning of a public document, put forth in his own time, or of the public and uniform practice of a body of pious people, whom he seems la have regarded with so much respect and affection, as

* Bucer styles these worthy people, Fratres Picardi, in refer- ence to their orig^in from the Waldenses, or rather the branch called Albigenses in France, to which those who migrated to Bohemia belonged. But the people to whom he refers are ascertained witn unerring certainty by the *' Confession of Faith" which he so precisely describes.

f Scripta duo Adversaria Latomi^ &c. in Cap, De EcclesitB Au tori tale, p. 159.

91

^'^Staesses for God in a dark world ? It cannot be **laagined. And what gives additional weight to the testimony of this illustrious man is, that he seems to ^ave had no mterest whatever in vindicating this class Cfcf church o£Scers; forit is not known that he ever had any Special inducement, from a sense of reputation, or any other cause, to exert himself in maintaining them ; sfind the latter part of his life was spent in England, in ^e service of the established church of that kingdom, in the bosom of which he died.

As a further confirmation of Bucer's judgment in reference to the Bohemian Brethren, the celebrated John Francis Buddseus, an eminently learned Lu- theran divine of Germany, of the seventeenth century, who gave an edition, with a large preface, of the work of Comenius, in which the history of the Bohemian Brethren, and their form of Government, are pub- lished, evidently understands their plan in reference to the office of ruling elder, precisely as Bucer and other learned men have understood it. He employs the greater part of his preface in recommending this office. And although he does not seem prepared to allow that it existed as a separate office in the apostolic church, yet he thinks that, virtually, and in substance, it did make a part of the apostolic system of supervision and order. He thinks, moreover, that, without some such office, it is wholly impossible to maintain pure morals and sound discipline in the church of God ; and that the Bohemian Brethren rendered a most important service to the cause of truth and piety in maintaining it in their ecclesiastical system.*

Luther in some of his early writings, had expressed an unfavourable opinion of the Bohemian Brethren ; but, upon being more fully informed of their doctrine and order, and more especially of their provision for maintaining sound discipline, by means of their elder- ship in each congregation, he changed his opinion, and

* Jo. Francisci Baddaei, Praefatio de instauranda Disciplina EcclesiasHca — Passim.

92

became willing both to speak and to write strongly i their favour. Hence his highly commendatory pn face, to their ** Confession of Faith," of which men- tion has been already made. And hence, at a still . later period, the following strong expressions in favour of the same people. " There hath not arisen any peo- ple since the time of the apostles, whose church hath come nearer to the apostolical doctrine and order than the Brethren of Bohemia." And again, " although these brethren do not excel us in purity of doctrine, (all the articles of faith with us being sincerely and purely taken out of the word of God,) yet in the ordinary discipline of the church which they use, and whereby they happily govern the churches, they go far beyond us, and are, in this respect, far more praise- worthy. And we cannot but acknowledge and yield this to them, for the glory of God, and of his truth; whereas our people of Germany cannot be persuaded to be willing to take the yoke of discipline upon them."*

It is presumed that no one, after impartially weigh- ing the foregoing testimonies, will listen for one moment, with any respect, to the allegation that the plan of a bench of elders for ruling the church and conducting its discipline was invented by Calvin. But we may go further. The truth is, that instead of the Waldenses, or Bohemian Brethren taking this order of oflScers from Calvin, it may be affirmed that precisely the reverse was the fact. We have satisfac- tory evidence that Calvin took the hint from the Bohemian Brethren ; and that the system which he afterwards established in Geneva, was really suggested and prompted by the example of those pious sufferers and witnesses for the truth, who had this class of officers in their churches long before Calvin's day. This will be made clearly to appear from the follow- ing statement.

* Job. A. Comeoii Historia Bohem, Frat sect. 82.

93

When Calvin first settled in Geneva, in 1536, he c^und the Reformed religion already introduced, and, o a considerable extent, supported, under the ministry >f Farel and Viret, two bold and faithful advocates of ^Tangelical truth. Such, however, was the opposition iiade to the doctrines which they preached, and espe- ::ially to the purity of discipline which they struggled lard to establish, by the licentious part of the innabi- Dants, among whom were some of the leading magis- trates, that in 1538, Calvin and his colleagues were expelled from their places in the Genevan church, because they refused to administer the Lord's Supper to the vilest of the population who chose to demand the privilege. In a paroxysm of popular fury, those faithful ministers of Christ were commanded to leave the city within two days. During this temporary triumph of error and profligacy, Calvin retired to Strasburg, where he was appointed Professor of Divinity and Pastor of a Church, and where he re- mained nearly four years.

In 1540, the year before he was recalled to Geneva, he corresponded with the Bohemian Brethren, and made himself particularly acquainted with their plan of church government, which he regarded with deep interest ; an interest, no doubt greatly augmented by the sufferings which he had recently undergone in fruitless efforts to maintain the purity of ecclesiastical discipline ; in which efforts he had been baflSed chiefly by the want of such an efficient system as the Bohe- mian churches possessed. In the course of this cor- respondence, while yet in exile for his fidelity, Calvin addressed the Bohemian pastors in the following pointed terms: — " I heartily congratulate your churches, upon which, besides sound doctrine, God hath bestowed so many excellent gifts. Of these gifts, it is none of the least to have sucn pastors to govern and order them ; to have a people themselves so well affected and dis- posed; — to be constituted under so noble a form of government ; — to be adorned with the most excellent

I

94

discipline, which we justly call most excellent, and, in- deed, the only bond by which obedience can be pre- served. I am sure we find with us, by woful experience, what the worth of it is, by the want of it ; nor yet can we by any means attain to it. On this account it is that I am often faint in my mind, and feeble in the discharge of the duties of my office. Indeed, I should quite despair did not this comfort me, that the edifica- tion of the church is always the work of the Lord, which He himself will carry on by his own power, though all help beside should fail. Yet still it is a great and rare blessing to be aided by so necessary a help. Therefore I shall not consider our church as properly strengthened, until they can be bound to- gether by that bond," And the pious historian, after giving this extract fi-om the venerable Reformer, adds: " It so happened, in the course of divine Providence, that not long afterwards, this eminent man was re- called to minister in the church of Geneva, where he established the very same kind of discipline which is now famed throughout the world."*

Testimony more direct and conclusive could scarcely be desired. Comenius, himself a Bishop of the Bohe- mian Brethren, surely knew what kind of eldership it was which was established among the churches of his own denomination. He says it was the very same with that which Calvin afterwards established in Geneva. We know, too, that this venerable man, before he was expelled from Geneva, in 1538, and while he was struggling and suffering so much for want of an efficient discipline, made no attempt to introduce the institution in question. But, during his painful exile, his attention is forcibly turned to the Bohemian plan. He is greatly pleased with it; speaks in the strongest terms of its excellence : declares that he has no hope of any church prospering until it is in- troduced ; and the very next year, on his return,

* Job. A. Comenii Historia Bohem, Frat. sect, 80,

95

it one of the conditions of his resuming his 1 charge, that this plan of conducting the dis- of the church, by a bench of elders, shall be i with him, and thus causes it to be adopted in I.

yet the historian of the Waldenses, John Paul has been reproached, and insinuations made arable to his honesty, because he has represented hemian Brethren as having ecclesiastical elders : from their ministers of the gospel. How utterly such reproaches are, every one must now see. 3 were ever ruling elders in Geneva, they were n the churches of Bohemia. Nor is it any solid :>n to the fact, as we have stated it, that they had »ther features in their system of church order were not strictly presbyterian. All that the his- lias to do is with facts. Having stated these, he erable for nothing more. That those churches le title of Seniors, but more frequently of Antis- certain elderly clergymen, who were peculiarly ble in their character, and who chiefly took the L all ordinations, is no doubt true ; that, in their f church government, they distinguished their li from their Eleemosynarii ; and that they in- in the list of their ecclesiastical offices, some are strictly secular, is also manifest. But surely f these invalidate the fact, that they had ruling ; a Fact stated in a manner which it is impossible to doubt or mistake.

IS we have good evidence, that all the most dis- hed and faithful witnesses for the truth, during rk ages, with whqse faith and order we have any ) acquaintance, carefully maintained the office ich we are contending ; that some of them, at considered it as of divine appointment, and ingly quote in its support Scriptural authority ; lat they appear, with good reason, to have re- 1 it as one of the most efficient means, under the blessing, of promoting the spiritual order and tion of the church.

i

J

Chapter VI TESTIMONY OF THE KEFORMEBS, AND OTHER LEARN- ED AND DISINTERESTED WITNESSES, NEARLY CONTEMPORARY WITH THEM

We have seen how utterly groundless is the asser- tion, that ruling elders were invented and first in- troduced by Calvin at Geneva. If there be any truth in history, they were in use long before Calvin was bom, and in the purest churches on earth, to say no- thing of their apostolical origin. Nor is this all. It may further be maintained, that a great majority of the Reformers, in organizing those churches whidi separated from the Church of Rome, either actually introduced this class of ojfficers, or, in their published writings, freely and fully declared in its favour. And this was the case, as we shall presently see, not merely on the part of those who followed Calvin both as to time and opinion ; but also on the part of those who either preceded, or had no ecclesiastical connection whatever with that illustrious man : and who were far from agreeing vrith him in many other particulars. Now this is surely a marvellous fact, if, as some respectable writers would persuade us to believe, the office in question is a mere figment of Genevan contriv- ance, toward the middle of the sixteenth century.

The first reformer whose testimony I shall adduce in favour of this, office is Ulrick Zuingle, the celebrated

97

«der in the work of Reformation in Switzerland. k^nd I mention him first, because as he never was Dnnected with Calvin — nay, as he was removed by eath in 1531, five years before Calvin ever saw leneva, or appeared in the ranks of the Reformers, id ten years before the introduction of ruling elders ito that city — he cannot be suspected of speaking as le humble imitatorof that justly honoured individual.

On the subject of ruling elders, Zuingle speaks us : — " The title of presbyter or elder, as used in :;ripture, is not rightly understood by those who con- ier it as applicable only to those who preside in caching: for it is evident that the term is also metimes used to designate elders of another kind, at is, senators, leaders, or counsellors. So we ad Acts XV. where it is said, * the apostles and elders .me together to consider of this matter.' Here we e that the elders spoken of are to be considered

senators or counsellors. It is evident that the \s^urt^ot mentioned in this place were not ministers the word ; but that they were aged, prudent, and nerable men, who, in directing and managing the Fairs of the church, were the same thing as the nators in our cities. And the title elder is used in e same sense in many other places in the Acts of the postles."*

Again, Oecolampadius, who also died before Calvin ►peared as an active reformer, and of course before e introduction of ruling elders in the church of eneva, speaks thus, in an Oration which he pro- mnced before the Senate of Basil in 1530, about a ar before his death : " But it is evident that those lich are here intended, are certain seniors or elders, ch as were in the apostle's days, and who of old time jre called ^^isp^vn^ot, whose judgment being that of

* This quotation from Zuingle, is taken from the PoliticcB cclesiasticcB of Voetius, in which it is cited for the same pur- ^se as here ; a copy of the works of the Swiss Reformer not ing^ at present within the reach of the writer of the Essay.

I

98

the most prudent part of the church, was considered as the decision of the whole church."

Here again, is the testimony of a man, who coold not have been influenced by any knowledge of the opinions of Calvin — for Calvin had as yet published no opinions on the subject — and who yet speaks in very unequivocal terms of a class of o£Bcers, as not only existing afterwards, but as of apostolical institution; which, according to some, were not known in the church, either in theory or practice, for ten years after the decease of this distinguished reformer.

The testimony of Martin Bucer, as one of the most venerable and active of the reformers, properly belongs to this branch of the subject But as his sentiments were so fully detailed in the quotation from him presented in the preceding chapter, it is not deemed necessary to repeat the statement here. From that ex- tract it is evident, not only that he approved of the o£Bce of ruling elder, as of eminent use in the church, but also that he considered Ambrose as asserting that oflScers of this class were found in the primitive church, and that he agreed with the pious father in maintaining this assertion. Here was another eminently learned man, and a contemporary of Calvin, who bears testi- mony that ruling elders were in use in the purest portion of the Christian church, as a laudable and scriptural institution, centuries before the reformer of Geneva was born.

The character of Peter Martyr, a celebrated Pro- testant divine of Italy, whose high reputation induced Edward VI. to invite him to England, where he was made Professor of Divinity at Oxford, and Canon of Christ Church, speaks of ruling elders in the follow- ing decisive terms : — " The church" (speaking of the primitive church) " had its elders, or, if I may so speak, its senate, who consulted about things which were for edification for the time being. Paul describes this kind of ministry, not only in the 12th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, but also in the first Epistle

99

•

to Timothy, where he thus writes: — 'Let the elderjs that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially those that labour in the word and doctrine.' Which words appear to me to signify that there were then some elders who taught and preached the word of God, and another class of elders who did not teach, but only ruled in the church. Concerning these Ambrose speaks when he expounds this passage in Timothy. Nay, he inquires whether it was owing to the pride or the sloth of the sacerdotal order that they had then almost ceased in the church."*

The celebrated John Alasco, a devoted and ^ninetitly useful reformer, is also a decisive witness on the satile side. Alasco was a Polish nobleman, of excellent education, and great learning. He was offer- ed two Bishoprics, one in Poland, and another in Hungary : but he forsook his native country, and all the secular and ecclesiastical honours which awaited him, from love to the Reformed religion. In his youth he enjoyed the specisd friendship of Erasmus, who speaks of him in one of his letters, (Erasmi Epist. Lib. 28. Ep. 3,) as a man of uncommon excellence and worth. The Protestant churches in the low coun- tries being scattered, in consequence of the agitation produced by the celebrated ordinance caUed the In- terim, published by Charles V., Alasco was invited to England, by King Edward VI., at the instance of Archbishop Cranmer. He accepted the invitation, and was chosen Superintendentf of the German, French, and Italian congregations erected in London, which are said to have consisted in the aggregate, of more than three thousand souls. He afterwards published

* P. Martyris Loci Communes. Class, iv. Cap. 1. Sect. 2.

f tt is worthy of notice here that although a superintendent tras regrarded by Alasco as one who had the inspection of l^yeral congregations ; yet ^ he was greater than his brethren Milv in respect of his greater trouble and care, not having more authority than the other elders, either as to the ministery of the Word and scraments, or as to the exercise of ecclesiastical dis- cipline, to which he was subject equally with the rest"

100

•

an account of the form of government and worship adopted in those congregations. The af&irs of each, it is distinctly stated in that account, were managed by a pastor, ruling elders, and deacons, and each of these classes of officers was considered as of divine appoint- ment. We also learn from his statement, that the ru- ling elders and deacons of these churches, as well as the pastors were ordained by the imposition of hands. He further informs us, that in the administration of the Lord's Supper, in the churches under his superin- tendency, the communicants sat at the table ; and he occupies a number of pages in showing that this posture ought to be preferred to kneeling. In short, he de- clares " We have laid aside all the relics of Popery, with its mummeries, and we have studied the greatest possible simplicity in ceremonies."

Notwithstanding the publication of these sentiments, and the establishment of these practices, marking so great a non-conformity with the Church of England^ Alasco was highly esteemed, and warmly patronized by Archbishop Cranmer, and also by the King, who granted him letters patent, constituting him and the other ministers of the foreign congregations a body corporate, and giving them important privileges and powers. These letters may be seen among the original records subjoined to Burnet's History of the Refor- mation, ii. 202. The following remarks by Alasco himself, will serve at once to explain the design of the king in granting his royal sanction to these people, and also his own view of the principles upon which he and his brethren acted in founding the churches in question.

" When I was called by the king, and when certain laws of the country stood in the way, so that the public rites of divine worship used under the Papacy could not be immediately purged out, (which the king himself greatly desired,) and when I was anxious and earnest m my solicitations for the foreign churches, it was at length his pleasure that the public rites of the English

101

churches should be reformed by degrees, as far as could be accomplished by the laws of the country ; but that strangers who were not strictly and to the same extent bound by these laws, should have churches granted to them, in which they should freely regulate all things, wholly according to apostolical doctrine and practice, without any regard to the rites of the country ; that by this means the English churches also might be excited to embrace apostolical purity, by the unanimous con- sent of all the estates of isbe kingdom. Of this project, the king himself, from his great piety, was both the chief author and the defender. For although it was almost universally acceptsft>le to the king's council, and the Archbishop of Canterbury promoted it with all his might, there were not wanting some who took it ill, and would have opposed it, had not his majesty checked them by his authority, and by the reasons which he adduced in favour of the design." Again, in the appendix to the same book, p. 649, he says : — " The care of our church was committed to us chiefly with this view, that in the ministration thereof we should follow the rules of the divine word, and apostolical observance, rather than any rites of other churches. In fine, we were admonished both by the king himself, and his chief nobility, to use this great liberty granted to us in our ministry rightly and faithfully ; not to please men, but for the glory of God, by promoting the reformation of his worship."*

On the whole, we have in this case a witness as unexceptionable and weighty as can well be desired. A man of eminent learning, piety, and devotedness. A man formed not in the school of Calvin, but of Zuingle. A man who, when the transactions and

* See M'Crie'g Life of Knox, vol. i. pp. 392—396. See also, Gisberti Voetii PoUHccb EcclesiasticcB. Tom. i. 420 — 422. See also Forma et Ratio totius Ecclesiastici ministerii Edvardi sexti in Peregrinorum, maxime Germanorum JEceks. Also, De Ordinatione Ecclesiarum Peregrinarum in Anglia. Epist Dedicate et p. 649.

2i

I

102

pob] ications abDve all uded to occurred, lived in England, where ruling elders were unknown : and who yet in these circumstances, declared himself in favour of this class of officers as of divine appointment, and as im- portant to the purity and edification of the church.

But there is a still more conclusive fact in reference to this stage of the Reformation in England. Alasco, it will be observed, asserts that both king Eldward and Archbishop Cranmer were strongly favourable to the plan of discipline which he and others had intro- duced into the churches of foreign Potestants in Eng- land. In confirmation of this statement, there is evi« dence that Cranmer and the rest of the Commissioners in Edward's reicn, did directly propose the introduc- tion of ruling elders in the national church. They drew up a body of laws which, though not finally ratified, partly on account of opposing influence, and partly from the premature decease of the monarch, yet clearly show the opinion and wishes of Cranmer and nis associates. One of the proposed laws is as fol- lows : — " After evening prayers, on which all shall attend in their own parish churches, the principal min- ister or parson, and the deacon, if they are present ; or, in case of their absence, the curate and the elders, shall consider how the money given for pious uses had best be laid out : and then let discipline be exercised. For, those whose sin has been public, and given offence to the whole church, should be brought to a sense of it, and publicly undergo the punishment of it, that so the church may be the better for their correction. After that the ministers shall withdraw with some of the elders, and consult how all other persons who are disorderly in their life and conversation may be con- versed with ; first by some sober and good men in a brotherly manner, according to the direction of Christ in the gospel ; and if they hearken to their advice, God is to be praised for it ; but if they go on in their wickedness, tney are to be restrained by that severe

103

punishment which is in the gospel prescribed for such obstinacy."*

The testimony of Calvin will next be introduced. As he is charged with being the inventor of this class of officers, the weight of his opinion as a witness in its favour, will probably be deemed small by its opposers. But there is one pomt of view in which his testimony will surely be regarded with deep respect, and, may I not add, as decisive ? That he was a man of mature and profound learning no one can doubt. Joseph Scaliger, himself a prodigy of erudition, pronounced him to have been the most learned man in Europe in his day ; and, particularly, ^^ that no man understood ecclesiastical history so well." Now, it is certain that Calvin did not consider the office of ruling elder as origmating with himself; but that he regarded it as an apostolical institution ; that he refers to Scripture for its support ; and that he quotes Ambrose, (whose testimony has been so often refered to,) as an unques- tionable witness for the existence of the office under consideration in the primitive church. The following extracts from his Commentary and his Institutions will fully establish what is here asserted.

In his exposition of 1 Tim. v. 17, he speaks thus : ** From this passage we may gather that there were then two kinds of presbyters, because they were not all ordained to the work of teaching. For the words plainly mean that some ruled well, to whom no part of the public instruction was committed. And, verily, there were chosen from among the people grave and approved men, who, in common council and joint au- thority with the pastors, administered the discipline of the church, and acted the part of censors for the cor- rection of morals. This practice, Ambrose complains, had fallen into disuse, through the indolence, or rather

* Peirce*8 Vindication of the Dissenters, p. 23. Baxter's Treatise of Episcopacy, part. ii. p. 112. Reformatio Legum Eoclesiasticarum, ex authoritate Ke^s, Hen. vnu et Ed v. vi. 4to. 1640.

104

the pride of the teaching elders, who wished alone to be distinguished." ,

In his Institutions, (book iv. chapter iiL,) he has the following passage equally explicit ^^ In calling those who preside over churches by the appellations of

* bishops,' * elders,' and * pastors,' without any dis- tinction, I have followed the usage of the Scriptures, which apply all these terms to express the same mean- ing. For to all who discharge the ministry of the word, they give the title of * bishops.* So when Paul enjoins Titus to * ordain elders in every city,' he im- mediately adds, *' For a bishop must be blameless.' So, in another place, he salutes more bishops than one in one church. And in the Acts of the Apostles, he is declared to have sent for the elders of the church of Ephesus, whom, in his address to them, he calls

* bishops.' Here it must be observed, that we have enumerated only those offices which consist in the min- istry of the word; nor does Paul mention any other in die fourth chapter of the Epistle to the Ephesians which we have quoted. But in the Epistle to the Ro- mans, and the first Epistle to the Corinthians, he enu- merates others, as ' powers,' ' gifts of healing,' * inter- pretation of tongues,' * governments,' ' care of the

r)or.' Those functions which are merely temporary omit, as foreign to our present subject But there are two which perpetually remain, ' governments,' and

* the care of the poor.' ' Governors,' I apprehend to have been persons of advanced years, selected from the people, to unite with the bishops in giving admoni- tions, and exercising discipline. For no other inter- pretation can be given of that injunction, * He that ruleth, let him do it with diligence.' For from the beginning every church has had its senate or council, composed of pious, grave, and holy men, who were invested with that jurisdiction, for the correction of vices, of which we shall soon treat Now, that this was not the regulation of a single age, experience it-

105

self demonstrates. This office of government is necessary, therefore, in every age."

I ask, was Calvin honest or dishonest in these de- clarations? If be had invented and introduced the office himself, could he have been ignorant of the fact ? And whether it was so or not, who may reasonably be considered as best able to judge — himself, or those who lived nearly three hundred years after him ? And who would be most likely to know whether it were of ancient or modern origin; — the most learned man then, perhaps, in the world — or men with not a tenth part of his erudition, at the present day ? The truth is, these passages, considered in connection with that quoted in a former chapter, in which he speaks of himself, in reference to this office, as following the ex- ample of the pious witnesses of the truth who preceded him, — prove, either that Calvin did not consider him- self as the inventor of the office, but believed that it had been in the church in all ages, — or that he was gratuitously and profligately regardless of the truth, to a degree never laid to his charge.

Nor is the testimony to the primitive existence of the class of officers, confined to those of the reformers who were favourable to their continuance in the church. Some, by no means friendly to their restoration, were yet constrained to acknowledge their early origin.

That there were ruling elders in the primitive church, is explicitly granted by Archbishop Whitgift, a warm and learned friend of diocesan episcopacy. '* I know," says he, " that in the primitive church, they had in every church certain seniors, to whom the government of the congregation was committed ; but diat was before there was any Christian prince or magistrate that openly professed the gospel ; and before there was any church by public authority established."

And again : — " Both the name and office of seniors were extinguished before Ambrose's time, as he himself doth testify, writing upon the fifth of the first epistle to Timothy, Indeed, as Ambrose saith, the synagogue.

106

and afterwards the church, had seniors, without whose counsel nothing was done in the church ; but that was before his time, and before there was any Christian magistrate^ or any church established."* The learned and acute Archbishop, it seems, was not only convinced that there was ruling elders, distinct from preaching elders, in the primitive church, but with all his eru- dition and discernment, he understood Ambrose judt as the friends of this class of officers now understand him.

There is another testimony on this subject, from one of the most conspicious and active friends of the Refor- mation in England, which is worthy of particular notice. I refer to that of the Rev. Dean Nowell, who flourished in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and whose celebrated catechism, drawn up in 1562, obtained, p>erhaps, as much currency and respect as any publica- tion of that period. Nor are we to consider it as ex- pressing the sentiments of the illustrious divine whose name it bears, alone ; for it was unanimously approved and sanctioned by the same lower house of Convocation which passed the 39 Articles of the Church of England, and directed to be published and used as containing the true doctrine of that church. In this catechism, ^ward the close, when speaking of the evils of retain- ing unworthy members in the church, the following questions and answers occur : —

" Q. What remedy for this evil can be devised and applied ?"

" A. In churches well constituted and governed, there was, as I before said, a certain plan and order of government appointed and observed. Elders were chosen, that is, ecclesiastical rulers, who conducted and maintained the discipline of the church. To these pertained authority, reproof, and chastisement; and they, with the concurrence of the pastor, if they knew any who, by false opinions, troublesome errors, foolish

* Defence against Cartwright, p. 638, 651.

107

superstition^ or vicious and profligate lives, were likely to bring a great public scandal on the church of God, a^ who could not approach the Lord's Supper without a manifest profanation, repelled them from the communion, and no more admitted them until, by public penitence, they gave satisfaction to the church.*'

" Q. What is to be done?" (when those who have boen excluded from the church repent, and desire to be restored to its communion.)

" -4. That they may be received again into the church, and to the enjoyment of its holy mysteries, from which they have been deservedly cast out, they oi^ht humbly to supplicate and pray. And, on the whole, there ought to be such moderation used in ad- ministering public penance, that neither by too much severity the offender may be reduced to despondency, nor by too much lenity the discipline of the churdi relaxed, its authority diminished, and others encour- aged and incited to similar offences. But when, in the judgment of the elders and of the pastor, proper satisfaction shall be made, by the chastisement of the offeadei: for an example to odiers, he may be admitted again to the communion of the church."*

Nothing can be more unequivocal or decisive than this testimony. In the opinion not only of the writer of the catechism before us, but also of the leading dergy of the Church of England, who sanctioned it, and enjoined its general use, there ought to be, in every church, besides the pastor, a bench of elders, or ecclesiastical rulers, whose duty it should be to preside over the discipline, and, in conjunction with the pas- tor, to receive, admonish, suspend, excommunicate, and restore members, — in a manner precisely agreeable to the well known practice of the presbyterian church. In truth. Dr. Nowell could scarcely have expressed in moire distinct and unqualified terms his approbation of this part of our system, than in telling us what, in

* See Bishop Randolph's Enchiridion Theologicum, vol i. 326, 327, third Edition.

108

his judgment, and that of his brethren, every well regulated church ought to have.

Ursinus, a learned German divine, contemporary with Luther and Melancthon, speaks a language still more to our purpose. " Ministers," says he, *^ are either immediately called of God, or mediately, through the instrumentality of the church. Of the former class were prophets and apostles. Of the latter class there are five kinds, viz, evangelists, bishops, or pas- tors, teachers, ruling elders, and deacons. Evangel- ists are ministers appointed to go forth and preach the gospel to a number of churches. Bishops are ministers ordained to preach the Word of God and administer the sacraments in particular churches. Teachers are ministers appointed merely to fulfil the function of teaching in particular churches. Ruling elders are ministers elected by the voice of the church to assist in conducting discipline and to order a variety of necessary matters in the church. Deacons are ministers elected by the church to take care of the poor and distribute alms."*

In the Confession of Saxony, drawn up by Melanc- thon, in 1551, and subscribed by a large number of Lutheran divines and churches, we find this class of officers recognized, and represented as in use in those churches. Speaking of the exercise of discipline, in its various branches, they say : — " That these things may be done orderly, there be also consistories ap- pointed in our churches." Of these consistories, a majority of members, it is well known, were ruling elders.

Szegeden, a very eminent Lutheran divine, of Hungary, contemporary with Luther, also speaks very decisively of the apostolic institution of ruling elders. The following passage is sufficient to exhibit his sen- timents. " The ancient church had presbyters, or elders, of which the apostle speaks, 1 Corinth, v. 4.

* Ursini Corpus Doctrinse. par. iii. p. 721.

^Jm.Jm^^

109

And these elders were of two kinds. One class of them preached the gospel, administered the sacraments, and governed the church, the same as bishops ; for bishops and presbyters are the same order. But another class of elders consisted of grave and upright men, taken from among the laity, who, together with the preaching elders before mentioned, consulted respecting the a£birs of the church, and devoted their labour to ad- monishing, correcting, and taking care of the flock of Christ"

The Magdeburgh centuriators, who were eminently learned Lutheran divines, contemporary with Melanc- tfaon, and who have been regarded, for three hundred years, as among the highest authorities on questions of ecclesiastical history, speak in the following decisive terms with regard to the office in question. And al- though the extract has been given in a former page, yet, as it is brief and pointed, it may not be improper to assign it a place in this connexion. Speaking of the third century, they say : — " The right of deciding respecting such as were to be excommunicated, or of receiving, upon their repentance, such as had fallen, was vested in the dders of the church."f

The learned Francis Junius, a distinguished divine and professor of theology of the Church of Holland, who lived at the commencement of the Reformation in that country, and was, of course, contemporary with Martyr, Bucer, Melancthon, &c., wrote very fully and explicitly in favour of the office of ruling elder. In his work entided Ecclesiastici, he decisively, and with great learning, maintains that pastors, rming elders, and deacons, are the only three spiritual orders of church officers ; that pastors, or ministers of the word and sacraments, are the highest order, and of course are invested with the power of ordaining; that the

* Szegpedem Loci Communes, p. 197. edit, quint, foli Basil. 1608.

-f* Cent iii. cap. yii. p. 151.

K

110

second class are men of dbtinguished piety and prn^ dence, chosen from among the members of the churdi, to assist the pastor in the government of the church; and that the deacons are appointed to collect and dis- tribute the alms of the church. He affirms that these three orders are set forth in scripture, and existed in the primitive church : and that the disuse of ruling elders, as well as the introduction of prelacy, is a depar- ture from the primitive modeL*

The Protestant churches of Hungary and Tran- sylvania, although in organizing their churches they did not actually adopt and introduce the office of rul- ing elder, yet in the preface, and other statements, published with their ecclesiastical formularies, they spoke in the most unequivocal terms both of the value and the early origin of this class of officers. The following extract may be considered as a fair specimen of their testimony on this subject: — " Most other nations, belonging to the evangelical confession, have been in the habit of choosing and constituting elders in every village and city, agreeably to the prac- tice of the old church, and also of the New Testament: men sound in the faith, blameless, the husbands of one wife, having faithful children, chargeable with no crime, grave, prudent, &c. It is made the official duty of these men diligently to watch over the lives and conversation of all the members of the church, to rebuke the dissolute, and, if need be, to refer their cases to the pastors and to the whole eldership, &c." Here they make a clear distinction between these elders and the pastors of the churches, and represent the former as assistants to the latter in the spiritual concerns of the church. They then proceed to state why a class of officers so useful, in most cases so necessary, and which they also considered as having existed in the apostolic church, was not received among them.f

* Ecclesiastici, sive de nat. et administrat Ecclesise, &c. Lib. ii. cap. 2, 3, 4. f See G. Voetii Polit. Eccles. par. ii. lib. ii tract, iii.

Ill

The character of Jerome Zanchius, a learned divine of Italy of the sixteenth century, who greatly distin- miahed himself among the Reformers, is so well known, uiat a detailed account of his great accomplishments end reputation is unnecessary. On the subject before tis, he speaks thus : — " The whole ministry of the Christian church may be divided into three classes. IThe first consists of those who dispense the word and sacraments, corresponding with those who, under the OM Testament, were called priests and Levites, and under the New Testament, apostles, pastors, and 'teachers. The second consists of those whose peculiar office it is to take care of the discipline of the church, to inspect the lives and conversation of all, and to take care that all live in a manner becoming Christians; and also, if at any time there should be a necessity for it, in the absence of the pastor, to instruct the people. There were such under the Old Testament in the synagogue ; and such also were the senators who were added to the bishop in the administration of the New Testament church. These oflBcers are styled presby- ters, (presbyteri^) and elders, (seniores,) of which the apostle speaks, besides other places, in 1 Timothy, v. l!7; Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially those who labour in the ^N^rd and doctrine. In this passage the apostle mani- festly speaks of two sorts or classes of elders, as he was understood by Ambrose and others, among the ancients, and by almost all our modem Protestant divines, as Bollii^er, Peter Martyr, &c. &c.*

The most cursory reader of this extract will not fail to take notice, not only that Zanchius evidently ap- proved of this office, but that he thought it of divine 'sej appointment; that he interpreted as we do the famous banq pMsage in Ambrose, which the opposers of ruling dders have expended so much ingenuity in labouring to explain away ; and that he considered almost all

BIID0I<

* Zaoohii Opera. Tom. iv. In Qnartum Praeceptum, p. 727.

112

the reformed divines as being of the same opinion with himself.

The high reputation of ParsBus, a learned and pious German divine, contemporary with Melancthon and 2ianchius, is also well known. His testimony respect* ing the office under consideration is very explicit. In his commentary on Romans xii. 8, he observes:— *^ Here the apostle understands the function of that class of elders who, united with the pastors, watch over and correct the morals and discipline of the church. For there were two classes of elders, as may be gathered from 1 Timothy v. 17. Some who laboured in the word and doctrine, who were to be ac- counted worthy of double honour; such as teachers, pastors, or bishops ; the others, such as laboured in conducting discipline, who are here called govern- ments.'' And in his commentary on 1 Corinthians xii. 28, he says : " The apostle here undoubtedly speaks of the elders who presided in the administration of discipline. For the primitive church had its senate, who attended to the morals of the congregation, while the apostles and teachers were left at leisure to preach. This the apostle indicates very clearly in the first Epistle to Timothy, v. 17, where two classes of pres- byters are represented as constituted. The govern- ments here spoken of were not of princes or praetors, armed with the sword, but grave, experienced men, exercising authority over ouiers, chosen out of the church, by the consent of the church, to assist the pas- tors in conducting discipline, and to alleviate their burdens."

The celebrated Piscator, who held a distinguished place among the divines who adorned Germany, and maintained the Protestant cause in the sixteenth cen- tury, is equally decisive, as an advocate of the office under consideration. In his commentary on 1 Tim. V. 17, he says: — " The apostle distributes elders into two classes — those who preside in maintaining ecclesi- astical discipline but did not publicly teach, and

113 .

those who both taught and co-operated in ruUng, and were therefore worthy of a great honour, and a more liberal support than the others."

Few ministers of the Church of England, during the reign of Queen Elizabeth, were more distinguishea for talents, learning, and piety, than Thomas Cart- wright, professor of divinity in the University of Cam- bridge, the opponent of the high prelatical claims of Archbishop Whitgift, and concerning whom the cele- brated Beza pronounced, that he thought ^^ the sun did not shine upon a more learned man." This eminent divine, commenting on Matthew xviii. 17. Tell it unto the church, &c., thus remarks : — " Theo- phylact upon this place interpreteth. Tell the church, that is many, because this assembly taketh knowledge of this and other things by their mouths; that is, their governors.. Chrysostom also saith, that to tell the church is to tell the governors thereof. It is there- fore to be understood that these governors of the c^hurcb, which were set over every several assembly in :lie time of the law, were of two sorts ; for some had Jie handling of the word; some other watching igainst the offences of the church, did, by common :x>unsel with theministersof the word, take order against the same. Those governing elders are divers times in the story of the gospel made mention of under the title of * rulers of the synagogue.' And this manner of government, because it was to be translated into the church of Christ under the gospel, our Saviour, by the order at that time used among the Jews, de- clareth what after should be done in his church. Agreeably hereunto, the apostle both declared the Lord's ordinance in his behalf, and put the same in practice, in ordaining to every several church, beside the ministry of the word, certain of the chiefest men which should assist the work of the Lord's building. This was also faithfully practised of the churches after the apostles' times, as long as they remained in any good and allowable soundness of docti*ine. And being

2 K

114

fallen from the churches, especially from certain of them, the want thereof is sharply and bitterly cast into the teeth of the church's teachers, — by whose ambir tion that came to pass,"* And as proof of this, the author quotes in the margin that very passage of Ambrose cited in the preceding section, and which has always given so much trouble to Prelatists and Independents.

The same writer, in his second reply to Whitgift, speaking of the class of elders under consideration, expresses himself thus : — " For proof of these church elders, which being occupied in the government had nothing to do with the word, the testimony of Am- brose is so clear and open, that he which doth not give place unto it must needs be thought as a bat, or an owl, or some other night-bird, to delight in darkness. His saying is, that the elders fell away by the ambi- tion of the doctors ; whereby opposing the elders to doctors which taught, he plainly declareth that they had not to do with the word : whereupon it is mani- fest that it was the use, in the best Reformed churches, certain hundred years after the times of the apostles, to have an eldership which meddled not with the wcmxI, nor administration of sacraments.f

The testimony of the Rev. Richard Greenham, a divine of the Church of England, who flourished in the reign of Queen Elizabeth, and who was greatly revered both for his learning and piety, is very une- quivocal and pointed on this subject. It is in these words: — "The Apostle St. Paul doth notably amplify the honour due to the true and faithful minister. The elders that rule well, (saith he,) let them be had in double honour, specially they which labour in the word and doctrine, 1 Timothy v. 17. As if he should say, let those elders which are appointed to watch and look to the manners and behaviour of the children of God,

* Cartwright's Commentary on the 'Sew Testament — against the Rhemists. t Second reply. Part second, p. 44. 4to. 1577.

115

if tbey execute this charge faithfully, be had in double honour ; but above all let the faithful ministers, such as labour in the word be honoured : for why ? the other are overseers of your outward behaviour, but these have another manner of office ; they watch over your souk which tendeth to the salvation both of body and soul." And again, — " The rulers of the church are called the church to whom discipline appertaineth. Not the whole campany of the Jews, but the rulers of the Synagogue are called the church of the Jews."*

The celebrated Estius, the learned Popish expositor and Professor at Douay, in his commentary on 1 Tim. Y. 17, delivers the following opinion : — " From this pas- sage it may manifestly be gathered that in the time of the apostles there were certain presbyters in the church who ruled well, and were worthy of double honour, and who yet did not labour in the word and doc- trine; neither do the heretics of the present day (mean- ing the Protestants) deny this." And in speaking of the establishment of this class of elders in Geneva, about half a century before he wrote, he seems only to blame Calvin for considering and styling them laymen. He expresses a decisive opinion that the elders spoken of by Paul in this place were ecclesiastical men, set apart by ecclesiastical rites, and devoted to eccle- siastical duties; but they did not preach. And he explicitly acknowledges that Ambrose, in the fourth century, speaks of such elders as having existed long before his day. It is worthy of remark, that the same learned Romanist, in another work, not only avows, in the most distinct manner, his belief in the apostolic appointment of non-preaching elders, and quotes 1 Tim. V. 17, in support of his opinion ; but he also refers to Jerome and Augustine as witnesses to the same fact.f

The opinion of the learned Professor Whitaker, a

♦ Works, pp. 352. 842. fol. 1612.

-f* Estii Sententiarum Commentaria. Lib. iy. Par. 2. Sect. 21.

116

divine of the Church of England, who flourished i reiffn of Queen Elizabeth, as to the true mean! 1 Tmothy v. 17, was given at length in a preo The same distinguished divine, in writing a^ r, expresses himself thus concerning the under consideration: — ^^ Art thou so ignorant asi know that in the Church of Christ there ought elders who should devote themselves to the wo government alone, and not to the administrati the word or sacraments, as we are taught in 1 V. 17 ?'*

To these testimonies might be added many i from learned men of the same distinguished chai with those already mentioned, and to the same e Chemnitius of Germany; Salmasius of Hoi Marloratus and Danasus, of France; Hemmii of Denmark,^ — with a long list of similar m might all be cited as warm advocates of the ck elders under consideration, and almost all of decisive advocates of its divine authority.

Nor are these individual suffrages, though num( and unequivocal, all that can be alleged in favour o cause. The great body of the Protestant cliur when they came to organize their several systems state of separation from the Papacy and from other, differing as they did in many other res{ were almost. unanimous in adopting and mainta the oflSce of ruling elder. Instead of this office 1 confined, as many appear to suppose, to the eccL tical establishments of Geneva and Scotland, i generally introduced with the Reformation, by therans as well as Calvinists, and is generally reU to the present day in almost all the Protestant chu excepting that of England. Those of France, many, Holland, Switzerland, &c., received this

* Contra Durseam, Lib. ix. p. 807.

f See these writers, as well as a nambor of others, re to in the Politicse Ecclesiastics of Voetius, par. ii. ] tract iii.

117

of elders early, and expressly represented them in their

fiublic ocHifessions, as founded on the word of God. t is probably safe to affirm, that at the period of the Reformation, more than three-fourths of the whole Protestant world declared in favour of this office, not merely -as expedient, but as warranted by Scripture, and as necessary to the order and edification of the church.

Does all this, it may be confidently asked, look like the office in question being a mere Genevan innovation ? How shall we reconcile with this extraordinarv position the undoubted fact that Lutherans and Rerormed in every part of Europe, those who never saw Calvin as well as those who were within the sphere of his ac- quaintance and influence ; nay, some of those who died before the illustrious Reformer of Geneva ever appeared at all, either as a writer or preacher, — are found among the decisive, zealous advocates of the office in question, and quoting, as of conclusive authority in its favour, the principal passages of Scripture, and the principal Father, relied on by Presbyterians to establish its apostolical warrant, and its actual existence in the early ages of the ancient church ? Truly it is difficult to conceive how any one who seriously and impartially weighs these facts, can resist the impression that an Institution, in behalf of which so many eminently Wned and pious men of different and distant countries, ^thout concert with each other, and without any com- Jnon interest to serve, in reference to this matter, have *> remarkably concurred in opinion, must have some ^lid foundation both in the inspired volume, and in "^ nature and necessities of the church.

Chapter VIL TESTIMONY OF EMINENT DIVINES SINCE THE TIME

OF THE REFORMERS.

While we justly attach so much importance to the persons and services of the Reformers, and recur with the deepest reverence to their opinions, we owe scarcely less respect to the judgment of a number of other men who have lived since their time, and of whom the world was not worthy; — men whose testimony can never be quoted but with veneration, and whose charac- ters give an ample pledge of research, at once profound and honest. To the decision of a few of these illustrious men on the subject before us, the attention of the reader is respectfully requested.

The decisive opinion of Dr. Owen, undoubtedly one of the greatest divines that ever adorned the British nation, in favour of the scriptural warrant of the office of ruling elder was given in a preceding section, and need not now be repeated. I may however add, that the more weight ought to be attached to this opinion on account of Dr. Owen's ecclesiastical connections, which, as is well known, were by no means adapted to give him a bias on the side of Presbyterian order.

The venerable and eminently pious Richard Bax- ter was no Presbyterian. Yet he expresses himself in

119

the Allowing very unequivocal language on the subject iinder consideration. When I plead that the order of fubject presbyters (or lay-elders) was not instituted iQ Scripture times, and consequently that it is not of divine institution, I mean that, as a distinct office, or species of church ministers, it is not a divine institution, nor a lawful institution of man ; but that among men in the same office, some might prudentially be cnosen to an eminency of degree, as to the exercise ; and that, according to the diflFerence of their advantages, there might be a disparity in the use of their authority and gifts, I think was done in Scripture times, and might have been after, if it had not then. And my judgment is, that ordinarily, every particular church (such as our parish churches are) had more elders than one, but not such store of men of eminent gifts, as that all these elders could be such. But as if half a dozen of the most judicious persons of this parish were ordained to be elders of the same office with myself; but be- cause they are not equally fit for public preaching, should most employ themselves in the rest of the oversight, consenting that the public preaching lie most upon me, and that I be the moderator of them, for order in cir- cumstantials. This I think was the true Episcopacy and presbytery of the first times."*

Although it may be doubted whether this venerable man be correct in his whole view of this subject, yet it will be observed by every attentive reader, tliat in main- taining the existence of a plurality of elders in each church in primitive times, and that a great part of these elders were not in fact employed in preaching, but in inspecting and ruling, he concedes every thing that can be deemed essential in relation to the office which we are considering.

The Puritan Congregationalists of England, about the year 1605, in the summary of their faith and order, entitled English Puritanism, drawn up by the

* DisputatioDs of Church Goyemment. — Adyertisement, pp. 4, 5,4to. 1659.

1«0

venerable Mr. Bradshaw, translated into Latin for the benefit of the foreign Protestants by the learned Dr. Ames, and intended to express the sense of the general body of the Puritans, speak thus on the subject of ruling elders.

^' Since even in the best constituted churches, they know that not a few enormous qifences will arise, which, if not timely met, will do injury both to those who believe, and those who are inquiring; while, at the same time, they see that the authority of a single per- son in a parish, resembling the papal, is contraiy to the will of Christ : they think, as the case itself re- quires, and as appointed of God, that others also should be selected from the church, as officers, who may be associated with the ministers in the spiritual government."

" These are inspectors, t^tnfAfirm, a kind of censors, whose duty it is, together with the ministers of the word, as well to watch over the conduct of all the brethren, as to judge between them. And they think that this office is instituted that each may take the more heed to himself and his ways, while the ministers enjoy more leasure for study and devotion, and obtain, through the assistance of their coadjutors, a more accurate view of the state of the flock ; since it is the peculiar duty of the inspectors to be always watchful over the manners and conduct of all the members of the church."

" To this office they think that none should be pre- ferred but men veiy eminent for gravity and prudence ; established in the&ith; of tried integrity; whose sanc- tity of life and upright example are well known to the whole society."

In the choice of these elders, respect should always be had to their outward circumstances. They should be able to support themselves in some repectable manner ; though it will not be an objection to them

121

fliat they pursue some mechanical art, provided they be morally qualified."*

Near were these venerable men the only Independents who declared, in the most decisive manner, in &vour of this class of officers. The celebrated Dr. Thomas Goodwui, oneof the Westminster Assembly of Divines, and who is styled by. Anthony A. Wood, a very *' atlas and patriarch of Independency," is well known to have been one of the most learned and influential Independents of the seventeenth century, and one of the most voluminous and instructive writers of his class. In his " Church Order explained, in a way of Catechism," the following passage occurs; — " What sort of bishops hath God set in his church ?" Answer. Two; some pastors and teachers ; some ruling elders, under two heads ; some labour in word and doctrine, and of those, some are pastors, some teachers ; others rule only, and labour not in the word and doctrine." Again ; What is the office and work of the ruling elder ? Answer. Seeing the kingdom of God is not of this world, but heavenly and spiritual, and the. government of his kingdom is not lorldly, but stewardly and ministerial ; and to labour in the ministry of ex- hortation and doctrine is the proper work of the pas- tors and teachers ; it remaineth, therefore, to be the office and work of the ruling elders to assist the pas- tors and teachers in diligent attendance to all other aids of rule besides exhortation and doctrine, as be* Cometh good stewards of the household of God. As, first, to open and shut the doors of God's house, by admission of members, by ordination of officers, by ex- communication of notorious and obstinate ofienders. Secondly ; to see that none live in the church inordin- ately, without a calling, or idle in their calling. Thirdly ; to prevent and heal oflFences whether in life or doctrine, that might corrupt their own church, or other churches. Fourthly; to prepare matters for the

* NeaPs History of the Puritans, vol. i. p. 449. 4to. edit

L

122

church's consideration, and to moderate the carriage of all matters in the church assemblies. Finally, to feed the flock of God by a word of admonition, and, as they shall be called, to visit and pray with their sick brethren. The ground of all this is laid down in Romans xii. 8« where the apostle, besides him who exhorteth and teacheth, maketh mention of another officer, who ruleth with diligence, and is distinct from the pastors and teachers, and that is the sum of his work to rule with diligence. Thus you see the whole duty of these ruling elders, and how they are to assist ue pastors and teachers in all other acts of rule besides word and doc- trine. Use 1. From hence observe the great bounty of God unto pastors and teachers, that God hath not left them alone in the church, as Martha complains to Christ that Mary had left her alone to serve : the min- isters of the church have no such cause to complain : for, as he gave the Levites to the priests to help them in their service, so hath he given ruling elders to such as labour in the word and doctrine, that they might have assistance from them in ruling the church of God. Use 2. It may serve to answer a cavil that some have against this office, who saVj that if God hath given these officers to the church, he would then have set down the limits of these officers, and not have sent them forth witli illimited power. To which it is answered, that their power is strongly limited, as a stewardly or ministerial power and office. It is the power of the keys, which Christ hath expressed in his word, and it consisteth in those things that have been spoken of God's house, to open and shut the doors of God's house, bv admission of members, &c. This is such a rule as is no small help to the spirits and hearts of those who labour in doctrine ; and no small help it is also to the whole church of God ; and when they are wanting, many evils will grow, and those without the possibility of redress and amendment, much idleness, much con- fusion, many offences. Though other ministers have

123

been in the church, we may see how much, in the want of these officers, the churches have been corrupted."* The character of the Rev. Thomas Hooker, one of the most learned and pious fathers of New^- England, and a distinguished advocate of Independency, is too well known to require remark. In his work entitled ** A Survey of Church Discipline,'* &c., he speaks thus of the office under consideration : — " We begin with the ruling elder's place, for that carries a kind of sim- plicity with it. There be more ingredients required to make up the office of pastor and doctor; and therefore we shall take leave to trade in the first, quo simpHcius ac prius. That there is such an office and officer ap- pointed by Christ, as the Scriptures are plain to him whose spirit and apprehension is not possessed and fore- stalled with prgudice, the first argument we have from Romans xii. 7, which gives in witness to this truth, where all these officers are numbered and named expressly. The second argument is taken from 1 Cor. xii. 28. The scope of the place, and the apostle's in- tendment is, to lay open the several offices and officers that the Lord hath set in his church, and so manv chief members out of which the church is constituted as an entire body." And after making some other remarks for the right discovery of the apostle's proceed- ing and purpose, he adds: — " From which premises, the dispute issues thus : — As apostlesy prophets, and teachers are distinct, so are helps and governments distinct : for the spirit puts them in the same ranks, as having a parity of reason which appertains to them all. But they were distinct offices, and found in persons as distinct officers, as verse 30 — Are all aposdes ? Are all teachers ? Therefore, the same is true of gover- nors. A third argument is taken from the famous place, 1 Timothy v. 17, which is full to our purpose in hand, and intended by the Holy Spirit of the Lord to make

* Church order explaiDed, &c., pag^es 16, 19, 22; to be found in the 4tb vol of his Works, four vols. fol. London, 1697.

124

evident the station and office of ruling elders, xmto the end of the world.'**

The praise of the Rev. John Cotton, one of the most distinguished of the first ministers of New-England, was in all the churches in his time. In a small woric entitled " Questions and Answers on Church Govern- ment, begun 25th Nov. 1634," the following pass^es occur : — " Q. What sorts of ministers or (^cers hath God set in his Church ? A. The ministers and officers of the Church are some of them extra ordinary, as apos* ties, prophets, evangelists ; some ordinary, as bishops^ and deacons. Q. What sorts of bishops hath God ordained in his Church ? A. There are three sorts of them, according as there be three sorts of elders in the Church, though under two heads ; some pastors, some teachers, some ruling elders. That is to say, sudi elders as labour in the word and doctrine, and such as rule in the Church of God ; 1 Tim. i. 13 ; 1 Cor. xii. 28 ; Rom. xii. 7, 8 ; 1 Tim. v. 17. Q. What is the work of a ruling elder ? A. Seeing the kingdom of Christ is not of this world, but heavenly and spiritual; and the government of his kingdom is not lordly, but stewardly, and ministerial ; and to labour in the ad- ministration of exhortation and doctrine, is the proper work of pastor and teacher ; it remains to be the office of the ruling elder to assist the pastor and teacher in all other acts of rule besides, as becomes good stewards of the household of God. And, therefore, to put in- stances, as. First; To open and shut the doors of God's house, by admission of members, by ordination of officers, by excommunication of notorious and obstinate offenders. Secondly; To see that none live in the Church inordinately, without a calling, or idly in their calling. Thirdly; To prevent or heal offences. Four- thly; To prepare matters for the Church's considera-^ tion, and to moderate the carriage of all things in the Church assemblies. Fifthly; To feed the flock of God

* Survey &c., part ii. pp. 6, 8, lOy 11 ; 4to LondoD, 1648.

125

with the word of admonition, and, as they shall be called, to visit and pray over the sick brethren,"*

The venerable John Davenport, it is well known, held a distinguished place among the early lights of the Massachusets and Connecticut churches. In a treatise entitled " The Power of Congregational Churches asserted and vindicated, &c.," sOthough his plan did not require, or even admit, that he should treat expressly and at length ou the officers of the church; yet he repeatedly, and in the most unequivocal manner alludes to the office of ruling elder, as belonging to the church by divine appointment ; as altogether distinct from the office of both teaching elder and deacon ; and as being of indispensible importance to the edification of the church.f

Nor are these the sentiments of detached indivi- duals merely. They were adopted and published, about the same time, by public bodies, in the most solemn manner. In a work entitled, " Church Govern- ment, and Church Covenant Discussed, in an answer of the elders of the several Churches of New-England, to two-and-thirty questions sent over to them by divers ministers in England, to declare their judgment thereon," — in this treatise ruling elders are spoken of as of divine institution, and as actually existing, at the time, in the churches of New-England. The fifteenth question is : — " Whether do you give the ex- ercise of all church power of government to the whole church, or to the presbyters thereof alone ?" To which it is answered : — " We do believe that Christ hath ordained that there should be a presbytery or eldership, 1 Tim. iv. 14 ; and that in every church, Titus i. 5; Acts xiv. 28; 1 Cor. xi. 28; whose work is to teach and rule the church, by the word and laws

* A Treatise, 1. Of Faith; 2. Twelve Fundamental Articles of Christian Religion ; 3. A Doctrinal Conclusion ; 4. Questions and Answers on Church Government, — pp. 20, 21.

f The power of Congregatioual Churches, &c. pp. 56, 81, 91, 115. 12mo. London, 1672.

2l

\

126

of Christ, I Tim. v. 17, and tinto whom, as teaching and ruling, all the people ought to be obedient, and submit themselves; Heb. xiii. 17. And, therefore, a government merely popular, or democratical, (which divines and orthodox writers do so mudi condemn, in Morillius, and such like,) is far from the practice of these churches, and, we believe, far from tiie mind of Christ." The twenty-third question is, " What au- thority or eminency have your preaching elders above ^ your sole ruling elders; or are they both equal ?~^ Answer. It is not the manner of elders among whether ruling only, or ruling and teaching also, strive for authority or pre-eminence one above another^ As for the people's duty toward their elders, it i^ taught them plainly in that place, 1 Thess. v. 12, IS— asalsoin that of 1 Tim. v. 17 ; and this word (especially" shows them that, as they are to account all their eldei worthy of double honour, so in special manner thev teaching or preaching elders."*

But there is another testimony of the same class, still higher authority. In a volume entitled, " Th- Result of three Synods, held by the Elders and M< sengers of the Churches of Massachusets Province New- England," there is abundant evidence to same effect. These Synods met in 1648, 1662, am 1679. Each of them was called by the general coui or legislature of the province, and the results publishi by the court, with their sanction.

The Synod of 1648, consisting of the divines Massachusets and Connecticut, and which drew u' what is commonly known as the Cambridge Platfomc^y distinctly recognized the office under ccHisideration ^i-* of divine appointment. It speaks as follows, (cbapte^^ vii.) " The ruling elder's office is distinct from tlB^ office of pastor and teacher. Ruling elders are not ^^^ called to exclude the pastors and teachers from rulin^C ' because ruling and government is common to the^^

* The Power of Congregational Churches, &c. p. 47, 48^ 7*^

127

with the other : whereas attending to teach and preach the word, is peculiar unto the former ; Romans xii. 7, 8, 9; 1 Timothy v. 17; 1 Corinthians xii, 27; Heb- rews xiii. 17."

The Synod of 1679 gave its sanction most unequivo- t»lly to the same doctrine ; not only by unanimously renewing their approbation of the Platform of 1648, but also by new acts of the most decisive character. Two questions proposed to the Synod of 1679 were, first, What are the evils that have provoked the Lord to bring his judgments on New-England? Secondly, What is to be done, that so many evils may be removed ? In their answer to the second-question, die Synod say, * It is requisite that the utmost endea- vours should be used, in order to a full supply of oflS- •oers in the church, according to Christ's institution. The defect of these churches on this account, is very lamentable ; there being, in most of the churches, only one teaching officer for the burdens of the whole con- gr^ation to lie ufpon. The Lord Christ would not have instituted pastors, teachers, and ruling elders, (nor the apostles ordained elders in every church,) if he had not seen that there was need of them for the good of his people. And, therefore, for men to think tney <jan do well enough without them, is both to break the second commandment, and to reflect upon the wis- dom of Christ, as if he did appoint unnecessaiy offices in his church."* It may not be improper to add, that this Synod, assembled in consequence of the " general court of the colony having called upon all the churches ther^n to send their elders and messengers, that they might meet in form of a Synod, fn order to a most serious inquiry into the questions propounded to them; and that the result, when proposed, was read once and again, each paragraph being duly and distinctly Weighed in ' the balance of the sanctuary,' and then.

* Result of Three Synods, &c., p. 109,

126

of Christ, I Tim. v. 17, and onto whom, as teacbii and ruling, all the people ought to be obedient, sm submit themselves ; Heb. xiii. 17. And, therefore, a government merely popular, or democratical, (which divines and orthodox writers do so mudi condemn, in Morillius, and such like,) is far from the practice of these churches, and, we believe, far from tiie mind of Christ," The twenty-third question is, " What ao- thoi-ity or eminency have your preaching elders above your sole ruling elders; or are they both equal? Answer. It is not the manner of elders among us, whether ruling only, or ruling and teaching also, to strive for authority or pre-eminence one above another. As for the people's duty toward their elders, it is taught them plainly in that place, 1 Thess. v. 12, IS, as also in that of 1 Tim. v. 17 ; and this word (especially) shows them that, as they are to account all their elders worthy of double honour, so in special manner their teaching or preaching elders."*

But there is another testimony of the same dass, of still higher authority. In a volume entitled, " The Result of three Synods, held by the Elders and Mes- sengers of the Churches of Massachusets Province, New-England," there is abundant evidence to the same eifect. These Synods met in 1648, 1662, and 1679. Each of them was called by the general court, or legislature of the province, and the results published by the court, with their sanction.

The Synod of 1648, consisting of the divines of Massachusets and Connecticut, and which drew up what is commonly known as the Cambridge Platform, distinctly recognized the office under consideration as of divine appointment. It speaks as follows, (chapter vii.) " The ruling elder's office is distinct from the office of pastor and teacher. Ruling elders are not so called to exclude the pastors and teachers from ruling; because ruling and government is common to these

* The Power of Congregational Churches, &c, p. 47, 48, 76,

127

with the other : whereas attending to teach and preach the word, is peculiar unto the former ; Romans xii. 7, 8, 9; 1 Timothy v. 17; 1 Corinthians xii. 27; Heb- rews xiii. 17."

The Synod of 1679 gave its sanction most unequivo- •cally to the same doctrine ; not only by unanimously renewing their approbation of the Platform of 1648, but also by new acts of the most decisive character. Two questions proposed to the Synod of 1679 were, first, What are the evils that have provoked the Lord to bring his judgments on New-England? Secondly, What is to be done, that so many evils may be removed ? In their answer to the second-question, the Synod say, * It is requisite that the utmost endea- vours should be used, in order to a full supply of oflS- •oers in the church, according to Christ's institution. The defect of these churches on this account, is very lamentable ; there being, in most of the churdies, only one teaching officer for the burdens of the whole con- gregation to lie upon. The Lord Christ would not have instituted pastors, teachers, and ruling elders, (nor the apostles ordained elders in every church,) if he had not seen that there was need of them for the good of his people. And, therefore, for men to think they -can do well enough without them, is both to break the second commandment, and to reflect upon the wis- dom of Christ, as if he did appoint unnecessaiy offices in his church."* It may not be improper to add, that this Synod, assembled in consequence of the " general court of the colony having called upon all the churches therein to send their elders and messengers, that they might meet in form of a Synod, fn order to a most serious inquiry into the questions propounded to them; and that the result, when proposed, was read once and again, each paragraph being duly and distinctly weighed in ' the balance of the sanctuary,' and then,

* Result of Three Synods, &c., p. 109.

r

128

upon mature deliberation, the whole unanimously voted, as to the substance and scope thereof."*

It is well known that in the Westminster Assembly of Divines there was a small number of learned and zeal- ous Independents, who opposed some of the most prominent features in the presbyterian form of govern- ment with much ardour and pertinacity, and who pro- tracted the debates respecting them for many weeks. But it is equally well known, that all the most able of those divines were warm advocates of the office of ruling elder, not only as a useful office, but as of divine institution. The recorded opinion of one of them, the Rev. Dr. Goodwin, has been already stated. No less pointed in maintaining the same opinion were Messieurs Bridge, Burroughs, and Nye, form- ing, with Dr. Goodwin, a majority of the whole num- ber. And, acccordingly, in their ^^ Reasons against the Third Proposition concerning Presbyterial Govern- ment," they admit, that " the scripture says much of two sorts of elders, teaching and ruling; and in some places so plain, as if of purpose to distinguish them ; and, further, that the whole Reformed churches had these diflFerent elders. "f

The following very explicit extract from the well known work of the learned Herbert Thorndike, (a divine of the Church of England,) on " Religious As- semblies," chapter iv. p. 1 17, will show his opinion on the subject before us. Speaking of the language of the apostle in 1 Cor. xii. 28, he says : — " There is no reason to doubt that the men whom the apostle here calleth doctors, are those of the presbyters which had the abilities of preaching and teaching the people at their assemblies ; that those of the presbyters tnat preached not, are here called by the apostle govern- ments."

The following remarks of the Rev. Cotton Mather,

* Preface, pp. 5, 6.

f Reasons, &c. pp. 3, 40.

well known as an eminent con^egationalist of Mas- sachusets, and author of the Mdgnalia Christ! Ame- ricana, have too much point, and convey too much instruction, to be omitted in this list of testimonies. " There are some who cannot see any such officer as what we call a ruling elder, directed and appointed in the Word of God ; and partly through a prejudice against the office ; and partly, indeed chidly, through a penury of men well qualified for the discharge dP it : as it has been heretofore understood and applied^ our churches are now generally destitute of such helps in government. But unless a church have divers eiders, the church government must needs become either prelatic or popular. And that a church's needing but one elder, is an opinion, contrary not only to the sense of the faithful in all ages, but also to the law of the scriptures, where there can be nothing plainer than dders who rule well, and are worthy of double honour, though they do not labour in the word and doctrine : whereas, if there were any teaching elders, who do not labour in the word and doctrine, they would be so far from worthy of double honour, that they would not be worthy of any honour at all. Towards the adjusting of the difference which has thus been in the judgments of judicious men, some essays have been made, and one particularly in such terms as these. Let it be first recognized, that all the other church officers are the assistants of the pastor, who was himself intrusted with the whole care of all, until the further pity and kilid- ness of our Lord Jesus Christ joined other officers nnto him for his assistance in it. I suppose none will be so absurd as to deny this at least, that all the church officers are to take the advice of the pastor with them. Upon which I subjoin, that a man may be a distinct officer from his pastor, and yet not have a distinct office from him. The pastor may be the ruling elder, and yet he may have elders to assist him in ruling, and in the actual discharge of some things which they are able and proper to be serviceable to him in. This

i

130

consideration being laid, I will persuade myself every pastor among us will allow me, that there is much work to be done for God in preparing of what belongs to the admission and exclusion of church members; in careiiilly inspecting the way and walk of tliem all, and the first appearance of evil with them ; in preventing the very be^nnings of ill blood among them, and in- structing ofall from house to house, more privately, and warning of all persons unto the things more peculiarly incumbent on them: in visiting all the afflicted, and informing of, and consulting with the ministers, for the welfare of the whole flock. And they must allow me, that this work is too heavy for any one man ; and that more than one man, yea all our churches, do suffer beyond measure, because no more of this work is thoroughly performed. More- over, they will acknowledge to me, that it is an usual thing with a prudent and faithful pastor himself to single out some of the more grave, solid, aged brethren in his congregation to assist him in many parts of this work, on many occasions in a year ; nor will such a pastor, ordinarily, do any important thing in bis government without having first heard the counsels of such brethren. In short, there are few discreet pastors but what make many occasional ruling elders every year. I say, then, suppose the church, by a vote, re- commend some such brethren, the fittest they have, and always more than one, unto the stated assistance of their pastor in the church rule, wherein they may be helps unto him, — I do not propose that they should be biennial, or triennial only, though I know very famous churches throughout Europe have them so; yea, and what if they should by solemn fasting and prayer be commended unto the benediction of God in what service they have to do, — what objection can be made against the lawfulness? I think none can be made against the usefulness of such a thing. Truly, for my part, — if the fifth chapter of the first epistle to Timothy would not bear me out, when conscience,

131

both of my duty and my weakness, made me desire such assistance, I would see whether the first chapter of Deuteronomy would not."*

After these strong attestations in favour of the office of ruling elder from the most pious and learned of the early Independents, or Congregationalists, of New-England — it will naturally occur to every reader, as an interesting question, how it came to pass that churches which once unanimously held such opinions, laid so much stress on them, and practised accordingly, for about three-fourths of a century, should have long since as unanimously discontinued the office? The first company of emigrants in 1620, brought a ruling elder with them ; and the office was universally re- tained for many years afterwards. Yet in 1702, when Dr. C!otton Mather published the first edition of his Magnalia, it had been, as would seem from the quotation just made, in a great measure laid aside; and before the middle of the eighteenth century, it had entirely disappeared from the churches of New-Eng- land. A well informed and discerning friend has suggested that the chief reason of this remarkable fact is probably to be traced to another fact alluded to in the following extract In a small volume printed in Bos- ton, in 1700, and entitled, "The Order of the Gospel, Professed and practised by the Churches of Christ in lew-England, &c.;" by Increase Mather, President of Harvard College, and teacher of a church in Boston, — in this work, one of the questions discussed is, " Whether or not our brethren, and not the elders of the churches only, are to judge concerning the qualifications and fitness of those who are admitted into their communion ?" In answering it, he says : — " If only elders have power to judge who are fit to come to the sacrament, or to join to the churches, then, in case there is but one elder in a church, (as there are very few churches in New-England that have more elders

♦ Mag;nalia, &c. Book v. part ii. p. 206, 207, 8vo. edition, p. 1820.

r

132

than one,) the sole power will reside in that one man's hands."* On this passage, the friend above referred to remarks, ^^ I am inclined to think that he here means ruling elders; for, 1. Several churches (whether in consequence of the recommendation of the Synod of 1679, 1 do not know) had then two ministers. 2. This question and answer of Dr. I. Mather's is annexed to a reprint in Boston (now lying before me) of * A Vin- dication of the divine authority of ruling elders ia the Church of Christ asserted by the ministers and elders, met together in a provincial assembly, Nov. 2d. 1649, and printed in London, 1650.' But whether this was his meaning or not, it is abundantly evident from various other sources, that the churches of New- England, while they retained the office of ruling elder, had but one such elder at a time, and his business was especially to attend to discipline. The office was, of course, an unwelcome one ; and it became more and more difficult to find men willing to assume it."

It appears, then, that our excellent brethren, the Puritan Independents, while they zealously maintained the divine warrant, and the great importance of the ruling elder's office, misapprehended its real nature, and placed it under an aspect, before the churches, evidently adapted to discredit and destroy it. Instead of appointing a plurality of these ruling elders, they seldom or never had more than one in each church; and instead of uniting the pastor with him, and forming a regular judicial bench for regulating the affairs of the church, they seemed to have placed each in a sphere entirely separate and independent of each other ; nay, to have made the offices of teacher and ruler wear an appearance of being rivals for influence and power. Certain it is, that the views entertained by each of bis proper department of duty often, in feet, brought them into collision, and made the situation of the ruler both uncomfortable and useless. Can it be matter of surprise,

* Order of the Gospel, &c. p. 25.

133

that, in these circumstances, the office of ruling elder in the congregational churches of New-England ^dned but little favour with the body of the people, toat it came to be considered as at once odious and useless, would be undertaken by few, and, at length, fell into entire disuse ?

The testimony of the Rev. Dn John Edwards, an eminently pious and learned divine of the Church of England, who flourished during the latter half of the seventeenth century, is equally decisive in favour of this office. His language is as follows : —

*' This office of a ruling elder is according to the practice of the church of God among the Jews, his own people. It is certain that there was this kind of elders under that economy, — There were two sorts of elders among the Jews, the ruling ones, who go- verned in their assemblies and synagogues, and the teaching ones who read and expounded the Scriptures. Accordingly Dr. Lightfoot, in his harmony of the New Testament, inclines to interpret 1 Timothy v. 17, of the elders in the Christian congregations, who answer to the lay-elders in the Jewish Synagogue. For this learned writer, who was well versed in the Jewish customs and practices, tells us, that in every synagogue among the Jews, there were elders that ruled chiefly in the affairs of the synagogue, and other elders that laboured in the word and doctrine." " And so it was in the Christian Church ; there was a mixture of clergy and laity in their consults about church matters, as we see frequently in the Acts of the Apostles. The Christian Church retained this usage, for which they quote St. Augustine's 137th Epistle, where he mentions the clergy and the elders, and the people. So in his third book against Cresco- nius, he mentions deacons and seniors, that is lay- elders, for he distinguishes . them from other presby- ters. One of his Epistles to his Church in Hippo is thus superscribed, ' To the Clergy and the Elders.' See chapter 56th, in the fore-named book against Cres-

M

i

134

conius, where he mentions Peregrinus the Presbyter, and the Elders (Seniores.)* And nothing can be plainer than that of St. Ambrose — ' Both the syna- gogue and, afterwards, the church had their elders, widiout whose counsel nothing was done in the church, &c.' Further, we read of these seniors in the writings of Optatus p. 41, and in the epistles annexed to him, which the reader may consult. Thus it appears that this was an ancient office in the churcn, and not invented by Calvin, as some have thought and writ."f " And then as to the reason of the thing, there should be no ground of quarrelling with this office in the church seeing it is useful. It was instituted for the ease of the preaching elders, that they might not be overburdened with business, and that they might more conveniently apply themselves to that employment which is purely ecclesiastical and spiritual. Truly if there was no such office mentioned in the Scripture, we might reasonably wish for such a one, it being so useful and serviceable to the great purposes of religion. What can be more desirable than that there should be one or more appointed to observe the conversation of the flock in order to the exercising of discipline. The pastor himself cannot be supposed to have an eye on every one of his charge; and, therefore, it is fitting that out of those who are fellow-members, and daily converse with one another, and therefore are capable of ac-

* It will DOt escape the notice of the discerning^ reader that these testimonies from Au^^tine Ambrose, and Optatus, which some have ventured very unceremoniously to treat with con- tempt, when brought forward on this subject, are regarded by this very learned Episcopalian as evidence of the most conclu- sive character.

f The old and hacknied allegation, which has been the theme of high-toned Episcopalians and Independents for more than two hundred years, that Calvin invented and first intro- duced ruling elders, it will be observed is confidently rejected by this truly learned Episcopal Divine, who, from his ecclesi- astical connection, cannot be supposed to have had any other inducement to adopt the opinion which he has expressed than liis love of truth.

135

quainting themselves with their manners and behaviour, there should be chosen these elders I am speaking of, to inspect the carriage and deportment of the flock."*

The judgment of the Rev. Dr. Jerome Kromayer, a very learned Lutheran divine, and Professor of Di- vinity in the University of Leipsic, who lived in the seventeenth century, is very decisive in favour of the apostolical institution of ruling elders. " Of presby- ters, or elders," says he, " there were formerly two kinds, those who taught, and those who exercised the office of rulers in the church. This is taught in 1 Timothy v. 17 : Let the elders that rule well be accounted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine. The latter were the same as our ministers ; the former, were like the members of our consistories. "f

A similar testimony may be adduced from Frede-* ric Baldwin, another distinguished Lutheran divine and professor of the same century, who is no less decisive in favour of the class of officers under consi- deration.^

The celebrated John Casper Suicer, an eminently learned German divine and professor, in his The- saurus Ecclesiasticus, after speaking particularly of teaching presbyters or elders, in the first place, pro- ceeds to speak of another class of elders, who (he says,) " chosen from among the people, (or laity,) are united with the pastors, or ministers of the word, that they may be guardians of the discipline of the church. To these the Apostle Paul refers in 1 Timothy v. 17, where, by the elders who labour in the word and doctrine, he evidently understands that class of elders of which we have spoken in the preceding section ; and

* Tbeologfia Reformata, vol. i. Ninth Article of the Creed, pp. 526, 528.

f Historia Ecclesiastica, auctore Hieron)rmo Kroraayero, D.D. S.S. T. D. in Acad. Leips. 4to. p. 59.

X Fred. Baldiuni Institut. Ministrorum, Yerbi cap. 10.

#

136

by those who rule well, be plainly refers to the class of which we now speak. For if he had intended to speak of only one class, why did he add, especially those who labour in the word and doctrine ? This class are also designated by the term '^rQotsrctfi^povf, in Romans xii. 8, and by the term fcvi^t^vnaug, in 1 Corinthians xii. 29."*

The very explicit testimony of Dr. Whitby, of the Church of England, was produced in a preceding chapter, when we were discussing the scriptural evi- dence in favour of the office under consideration. It need not, therefore, here be repeated, excepting simply to remind the reader of its decisive character. The concessions also of Bishop Fell, the Rev. Mr. Marshall, and the celebrated Mr. Dodwell, of the same churdi, will also in this connection be borne in mind. Tbejr may be found in the fourth chapter, in connection witti the testimony from the fathers.

The pious and exellent Dr. Watts, though not a presbyterian, must be considered as indirectly doing homage to this part of the presbyterian system, whra he says, (in his Treatise on the Foundation of the Christian Church, p. 125,) " If it happens tliat there is but one minister or presbyter in a church, or if the ministers are young men of small experience in the world, it is useful and proper that some of the eldest, gravest, and wisest members be deputed by the church, to join with and assist the ministers in the care and management of that affair, (the admission and exclu- sion of members.")

The Rev. Dr. Doddridge, universally known as an eminently learned and pious divine of England, of the Independent denomination, in reference to the o£Bce in question speaks thus : — " It seems to be solidly argued, from 1 Timothy v. 17, that there were in the primitive church, some elders who did not use to preach. No- thing very express is said concerning them : only it seems to be intimated, James v. 14, that they prayed

* Suiceri Thesaurus Ecclesiasticas, Art. HfuOvn^c.

137

with the sick. It may be very expedient, even on the principles of human prudence, to appoint some of the more grave and honourable members of the society to join with the pastor in the oversight of it, who may constitute a kind of council with him, to deliberate on affairs in which the society is concerned, and prepare them for being brought before the church for its decision, to pray with the sick, to reconcile dif- ferences, &c."*

The same distinguished writer, in his commentary on 1 Timothy v. 17, has the following remark : — " Es- pecially they who labour, &c. This seems to intimate that there were some who, though they presided in the church were not employed in preaching, Limborch, indeed, is of opinion that t^o'Tnayres signifies those who did even fatigue themselves with their extraordinary labours, which some might not do, who yet in the general presided well, supposing preaching to be a part of their work. But it seems to be much more natural to follow the former interpretation."

The celebrated Professor Neander, of Berlin, was mentioned in a preceeding chapter as probably the most profoundly learned Christian antiquarian now living. In addition to the quotation from him pres- ented in that chapter, the following, from the same work, is worthy of notice.

" That the name g^/^xocrof, was of the same significa- tion with 'jp^io^vn^og, is manifest from those places in the New Testament where these words are exchanged the one for the other; Acts xx. 17, 28. Tit. i. 5, 7; and from those passages where, after the office of bishop, that of deacon is mentioned ; so that no other ofiBce can be imagined between them. If the name friaKO'x'os had been used to distinguish any of these elders from the rest, as a ruler in the church senate, a primus inter pares this use of it interchangeably with "^^safivTiQOf would not have obtained."

* Lectures on Divinity, Proposition 150, Scholium 5th.

2 M

(

138

" These presbyters, or bishops, had the oversight of the whole church, in all its general concerns; but the office of teaching was not appropriated exclusively to them ; for, as we have above remarked, all ChristiaD5 had a right to speak in their meetings for the edifica- tion of the members. It does not follow from this, however, that all the church members were capable of giving instruction : and it is important to distin- guish a faculty for instruction which was under the command of an individual, from the miraculous and sudden impulses of inspiration, as in prophecy, and the gift of tongues; and which might be bestowed upon those not remarkably favoured by natural gifts. The care of the churches, the preservation and extension of pure evangelical truth, and the defence of it against the various forms of error, which early appeared could not be left entirely to depend upon these extraordinary and often ti'ansient impulses. The weakness of human nature to which was committed the treasure of the gospel, as in ' earthen vessels,' seemed to render it necessary that there- should be, in every church, some possessed of the natural endowments necessary to in- truct their brethren in the truth, to warn and exhort them against error, and lead them forward in the way of life. Such endowments pre-suppose a previous course of instruction, clearness and acuteness of thought, and a power to communicate their ideas; and when these were present, and the Spirit of God was imparted to animate and sanctify, the man became

possessed of the ' %et^HJ{A0L hlecaKocT^tecg.* ThoSC pOS-

sessed of this xjag/ff^a, were on this account, calculated for all the purposes above alluded to, without exclud- ing the remainder from exercising the gift imparted to them, of whatever kind it might be. On this ac^ count, the ;«ae'*^A** h^ttaK»htMs, and the situation of teachers, (S/SaaxaX/o/,) who were distinguished by this gift, was represented as something entirely distinct and peculiar. (1 Cor. xii. 28. xiv. 6. Ephes. iv. 11.) All members of a church could, at times, speak be-

139

ibre tbeir brethren^ either to call upon God, or to praise him, when so inclined ; but only a few were M«i9XieXoi, in the foil sense of that term."

" It is very clear, too, that this talent for teaching, was different from that of governing, (i. e., x*^'^^* Kv^^vmiag,) which was especially necessary for him who took his seat in the council of the church, that is for a v^H^n^ or i'^tajwros. One might possess the know- ledge of external matters — the tact, the Christian pru- dence necessary for this duty, without the mental ' qualities so peculiarly desirable in a teacher. In the first apostolic church, from which every thing like mere arbitrary arangements concerning rank were very distant, and all offices were looked upon only as they promised the attainment of the great end of the Christian faith, the offices of teacher and ruler, %i^eurKm.>.o£ and ^ro/^ijf were separated. For this distinc- tion, see Romans xii. 7, 8. In noticing this well defined distinction, we may be led to the opinion, that originally those called, by way of preference, teach- ers, did not belong to the class of rulers, or overseers. Also, it is not clearly proved that they did always belong to the class of v^oQvre^i. Only this is certain — that it was considered as desirable that, among the rulers there should be those capable of teaching also. When it is enjoined upon the presbyters in general, as in. the farewell of Paul to the Church of Ephesus, (Acts XX.) to watch over the church and preserve its doctrine pure, it does not necessarily follow that the duty of teaching, in its strict sense, was insisted on ; bat rather a general superintendence of the affairs of that body. But when, in the epistle to Titus, it is de- manded in an «^«r»o^of that he not only ' hold fast the form of sound words ' in his private capacity, but that he should be able to strengthen others therein ; to overcome opposers, and * convince gainsayers,' it seems to be implied that he should possess the ' gift of teach- ing.' This must have been, in many situations of the churches, exposed as they were to errors of every kind.

140

highly desirable. And on this account, in 1 Tim. v. 17, those among the '^q&f^vn^t, who united the gift of teaching (3/JflMrx«x/«) with that of governing, (M/fieQpnns) were to be especially honoured. This distinction of the two gifts shows that they were not constantly or necessarily united."*

The same writer says : — " We find another office in the apostolic times — that of deacons. The duties of this office were from the first only external, (Acts vi,,) as it seems to have taken its rise for the sole purpose of attending to the distribution of alms. The care of the poor, however, and of the sick, and many other exter- nal duties were, in process of time, imposed upon those in this station. Besides the deacons, there were also deaconesses appointed, who could have free access to the female part of the church, which was, on account of the peculiar manners of the east, denied, to a great extent, to men. Here the female had an opportunity of exercising her powers for the extension of the true faith, without overstepping the bounds of modesty and propriety, and in a field otherwise inaccessible. It was their duty, too, as experienced Christian mothers, to give advice and support to the younger women, as seems to have been the case from Tertullian, De Vir- gin. Veland. c. 9."f

Only one authority more shall be adduced on this subject, and that shall be from the pen of our vener- able and eloquent countryman, the Rev. Dr. Dwight, whose character for learning, talents, and piety, needs no attestation from the writer of this essay. Though himself a congregational ist, and without any other inducement to declare in favour of ruling elders, than

* It is worthy of notice that this profound ecclesiastical his- torian, in another place, quotes Hilary (Ambrose) as speakings of the ruling elders, in the syna^o^ue, and in the church, and interprets him as plainly teachings the distinction here made be- tween teaching and ruling elders, substantially as we have done in a preceding chapter.

f kirchengeschichte.

141

that which the force of truth presented, he expresses himself concerning their office in the following une- quivocal terms : — " ruling elders are, in my apprehen- sion, scriptural officers of the Christian church ; and I cannot but think our defection, with respect to these officers, from the practice of the first settlers of New- England, an error in ecclesiastical government."*

This array of witnesses might be greatly extended, were it proper to detain the reader with further ex- tracts, feut it is presumed that those which have been produced are abundantly sufficient. It will be ob- served that no presbyterian has been cited as an au- thority in this case. The names, indeed, of multi- tudes of that denomination, might have been produced, equal to any others that can be shown on the catalogue of piety, talents, and learning. But the testimony of more impartial witnesses may be preferred. Re- course has been had, then, to those who could not possibly have been swayed by a presbyterian bias. And a sufficiency of such has been produced, it is hoped, to make a deep impression on candid minds. Romanists, Protestant Episcopalians, Lutherans and Independents, have all most remarkably concurred in vindicating an office, the due admission and scriptural use of which are, perhaps, of more importance to the best interests of the church of God, than this, or any other single volume can fully display.

* Theolog^y explained and defended, vol. iv. p. 399,

CHAPETR VIII.

RULING ELDERS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY IN THE

CHURCH.

By this is meant, that the laws which Christ has appointed for the government and edification of his people, cannot possibly be executed without such a class of officers in fact, whatever name they may bear. But that which is the necessary result of a divine in- stitution, is of equal authority with the institution itself. All powers or instruments really indispensable to the faithful and plenary execution of laws which an infinitely wise Governor has enacted, must be con- sidered as implied in those laws, even should they not be formally specified.

Now, all serious impartial readers of the Bible be- lieve, that, besides the preaching of the gospel, and the administration of the sacraments, there is very much to be done for promoting the order, purity, and edi- fication of the church, by the maintenance of a scriptural discipline. They believe that the best in- terest of every ecclesiastical community requires, that there be a constant and faithful inspection of all the members and families of the church ; that the negli- gent be admonished; that wanderers be reclaimed

143

that scandals be removed ; that irrregularities be cor- rected ; that differences be reconciled ; and every pro- per measure adopted to bind the whole body together by the ties of Christian purity and charity. They consider it as vitally important that there be added to the labours of the pulpit, those of teaching " from house to hquse," visiting the sick, conversing with serious inquirers, catechising children, learning as far as possible the character and state of every member, even the poorest and most obscure of the flock, and endeavouring, by all scriptural means, to promote the knowledge, holiness, comfort, and spiritual welfare of every individual. They believe, in fine, that none ought to be admitted to the communion of the church, without a careful examination in reference to their knowledge, orthodoxy, good moral character, and hopeful piety ; that none ought to be permitted to re- main in the bosom of the church, without maintaining, in some tolerable degree, a character proper for pro- fessing Christians ; that none ought to be suspended from the enjoyment of church privileges but after a fair trial ; and that none should be finally excommuni- cated from the covenanted family of Christ, without the most patient inquiry, and every suitable effort to bring them to repentance and reformation.

It is no doubt true, that the very suggestion of the necessity and importance of discipline in the church is odious to many who bear the Christian name. The worldly and careless portion of every church consider theinterpositionofecclesiasticalinspectionandauthority, in reference to the lives and conversation of its mem- bers, as officious and offensive meddling with private concerns. They would much rather retain their ex- ternal standing as professors of religion, and, at the same time pursue their unhallowed pleasures without control. They never wish to see a minister, as such, but in the pulpit ; or any church officers in any other place than his seat in the sanctuary. To such persons, the entire absence of the class of officers for which we

144

are pleading, U^ether with the exercise of all their appropriate functions, will be matter rather of felicita- tion than regret. Hence the violent opposition made to the introduction of ruling elders into the chnrdi of Geneva, by the worldly and licentious part of her members. And hence the insuperable repugnance to the establishment of sound and scriptural discipline, manifested so repeatedly and to this day, by some of the largest national churches of Europe.

But I need not say to those who take their views of the Christian church and its real prosperity from the Bible and from the best experience, that enlightened and faithful discipline is not only important but absolutely essential to the purity and edification of the body of Christ. It ought to be regarded as one of the most precious means of grace, by which offenders are humbled, softened, and brought to repentance; the church purged of unworthy members ; ofiences re- moved; the honour of Christ promoted; real Christians stimulated and improved in their spiritual course; faithful testimony borne against error and crime ; and the professing family of Christ made to appear holy and beautiful in the view of the world. Without wholesome discipline for removing oflFences and excluding the corrupt and profane there may be an assembly, but there cannot be a church. The truth is, the ex- ercise of a faithful watch and care over the purity of each other in doctrine, worship, and life, is one of the principal purposes for which the Christian church was established, and on account of which it is highly prized by every enlightened believer. And, I have no doubt, it may be safely affirmed, that a large part of all that is holy in the church at the present day, either in faith or practice, may be ascribed, under God, as much to sound ecclesiastical discipline as to the faithful preach- ing of the gospel.

And if the maintenance of discipline be all important to the interests of true religion, it is a matter otno less importancethatitbeconducted with mildness, prudence,

■•>

145

and wisdom. Rashness, precipitancy, undue severity, malice, partiality, popular fury, and attempting to en- force rules which Christ never gave, are among the many evils which have too often marked the dispensa- tion of authority in the church, and not unfrequendy defeated the great purpose of discipline. To conduct it aright is undoubtedly one of the most delicate and arduous parts of ecclesiastical administration, requiring all the piety, judgment, patience, gendeness, maturity of counsel, and prayerfulness which can be brought to bear upon the subject.

Now the question is, by whom shall all these multi- plied, weighty, and indispensable services be performed ? Besides me arduous work of public instruction and exhortation, who shall attend to all the numberless and ever-recurringdetailsof inspection, warning, and visita- tion, which are so needful in every Christian commun- ity ? Will any say it is the duty of the pastor of each church to perform them all ? The very suggestion is absurd. It is physically impossible for him to do it. He cannot be every where, and know every thing. He cannot perform what is expected from him, and at the same time so watch over his whole flock as to fulfil every duty which the interest of the church demands. He must " give himself to reading ;" he must prepare for the services of the pulpit ; he must discharge his various public labours ; he must employ much time in private, in instructing and counselling those who apply to him for instruction and advice; and he must act his part in the concerns of the whole church with which he is connected. Now, is it practicable for any man, how- ever diligent and active, to do all this, and at the same time to perform the whole work of inspection and go- vernment over a congregation of the ordinary size ? We might as well expect and demand any impossibil- ity ; and impossibilities the great and merciful Head of the church requires of no man.

But even if it were reasonable or possible that a pastor should, alone, perform all these duties, ought he

N

146

to be willing to undertake them ; or ought the church to be willing to commit them to him alone ? We know that ministers are subject to the same frailties and im- perfections with other men. We know, too^ that a love of pre-eminence and of power is not only natural to them, in common with others; but that this principle very early after the days of the apostles, b^an to mani- fest itself as the reigning sin of ecclesiastics, and pro- duced, first Prelacy, and afterwards Popery, which has so long and so ignobly enslaved the Church of Christ Does not this plainly show the folly and danger of yielding undefined power to pastors alone ? Is it wise or safe to constitute one man a despot over a whole church ? Is it proper to intrust to a single individual the weighty and complicated work of inspecting, trying, judging, admitting, condemning, excluding, and restor- ing, without control ? Ought the members of a church to consent that all their rights and pri vil^es, in reference to Christian communion, should be sul^ect to the will of a single man, as his partiality, kindness, and favour- itism, on the one hand, or his caprice, prejudice, or passion, on the other, might dictate ? Such a mode of conducting the government of the church, to say no- thing of its unscriptural character, is, in the highest d^ree, unreasonable and dangerous. It can hardly fail to exert an influence of the most injurious charac- ter both on the clergy and laity. It tends to nurture in the former a spirit of selfishness, pride, and ambition ; and instead of ministers of holiness, love, and mercy, to transform them into ecclesiastical tyrants. While its tendency, with regard to the latter, is gradually to beget in them a blind implicit submission to clerical domination. The ecclesiastical encroachments and despotism of former times, already alluded to, read us a most instructive lesson on this subject. The fact is, committing the whole government of the church to the hands of pastors alone^ may be affirmed to carry in it some of the worst seeds of Popery ; which though, under the administration of good men, they may not

147

at once lead to palpable mischief, will seldom fail in producing in the end the most serious evils, both to those who govern and those who obey.

Accordingly, as was intimated in a preceding chapter, we have no example in Scripture of a church being ccnnmitted to the government of a single individual. Such a thing was unknown in the Jewish synagogue. It was unknown in the apostolic age. And it continued to be unknown, until ecclesiastical pride and ambition introduced it, and with it a host of mischiefs to the body of Christ. In all the primitive churches we find a plu- rality of " elders," and we read enough in the early yeoords, in some particular cases, to perceive that these ^ elders" were not only chosen by the members of the church, out of their own number, as their representa- tatives, to exercise over them the functions of inspection and ruling; but that, viHbenever they ceased to discharge the duties of their office acceptably, they might be re- moved from its actual exercise at the pleasure of those by whom they were chosen. Thus plainly evincing that the constitution of the primitive church was emi- nently adapted to guard against ecclesiastical tyranny; and that if that constitution had been preserved, the evils of clerical encroachment would have been avoided. Accordingly, it is remarkable that the pious Ambrose, a venerable father of the fourth century, quoted in a former chapter, expressly conveys an intimation of this kind, when speaking of the gradual disuse of the office of ruling elder. " Which order," says he, " by what n^ligence it grew into disuse, I know not, unless, per- haps, by the sloth, or rather by the pride of the teachers, who alone wished to appear something."

" It is a vain apprehension," says the venerable Dr. Owen, ** to suppose that one or two teaching officers in a church, who are obliged to give themselves unto the word and prayer, to labour in the word and doctrine, to preach in and out of season — would be able to take care of, and attend with diligence unto, all those things that do evidendy belong unto the rule of the church.

148

And hence it is, that churches at this day do live on the preaching of the word, and are very little sensible of the wisdom, goodness, love, and care of Christ in the institution of this rule in the church, nor are partakers of the benefits of it unto their edification. And the supply which many have hitherto made herein, by per- sons either unacquainted with their duty, or insensible of their own authority, or cold, if not negligent in their work doth not answer the end of their institution. And hence it is, that the authority of government, and the benefit of it, are ready to be lost in most churches. And it is both vainly and presumptuously pleaded, to give countenance unto a neglect of their order, that some churches do walk in love and peace, and are edified without it; supplying some defects by the prudent aid of some members of them. For it is nothing but a preference of our own wisdom, unto the wisdom and authority of Christ; or at best an un- willingness to make a venture on the warranty of his rule, for fear of some disadvantages that may ensure thereon."*

If, in order to avoid the evils of the pastor standing alone in the inspection and government of his church, it be alleged that the whole body of the church members may be his auxiliaries in this arduous work; still the difficulties are neither removed nor diminished.

For, in the first place, a great majorty of all church members, we may confidently say, are altogether un- qualified for rendering the aid to the pastor which is here contemplated. They have neither the knowledge, the wisdom, nor the prudence necessary for the purpose; and to imagine a case of ecclesiastical regimen, in which every weak, childish, and indiscreet individual, who^ though serious and well-meaning enough to enjoy the privilege of Christian communion, is wholly unfit to be an inspector and ruler of others, should be associated

* True Nature of a Gospel Churcb, pp. 177, 178.

149

with the pastor, in conducting the delicate and arduous work of parochial regulation, is too preposterous to be regarded with favour by any judicious mind. Can it be believed for a moment, that the all-wise Head of the church has appointed a form of government for his peo^ fie in which ignorance, weakness, and total unfitness for the duty assigned them, should always, and almost necessarily, characterize a great majority of those to whom the oversight and guidance of the church were committed ? Surely this is altogether incredible.

And if this consideration possess weight in regard to old and settled churches, established in countries which have been long favoured with the light and order of the go^)el, how much more to Pagan lands, and to churches recently gathered from the wilds of Africa, the d^raded inhabitants of the Sandwich Islands, or the miserable devotees of Hindoo idolatry ? If in the best instructed and best regulated churches in Christendom, a majority of the members are utterly unqualified to participate in the government of the sacred family, what can be expected of those recent, and necessarily dubious converts from blind heathenism, who must, of course, be babes in knowledge and experience, who are surrounded with ignorance and brutality, and have just been snatched themselves from the same degradation ? Surely, if we may say with propriety of some nations who have recently thrown off the chains of slavery, to which they had long been accustomed, that they were not prepared for a republican form of governmen t, with still more cmifidence can we maintain, that, whoever may be prepared to take part in the government of the churdi, the poor novices in the situation supposed, are totally unqualified. Even if the popular form of eccle- siastical polity could be considered as well adapted to the case of a people of more enlightened and elevated character, which may well be questioned, it must be pronounced altogether unfit for a church made up of such materials. Now it is the glory of the gospel that it is adapted to all people and all states of society. Of

2n

150

course, that form of ecclesiastical government which is not of a similar stamp, affords much ground of suspicion that it is not of God, and ought to be rejected.

But further ; if the greater part of the members of the church were much better qualified than they com- monly are for co-operating in its government, would their co-operation be likely to be really obtained in a prompt, steady, and faithful manner ? All experience pronounces that it would not We know that there are few things in the government and regulation of the church, more irksome to our natural feelings, than doing what fidelity requires in cases of discipline. When the ministers of religion are called upon to dis- pense truth, to instruct, to exhort, and to administer sacraments, they engage in that in which we may sup- pose pious men habitually to delight, and to be always ready to proceed with alacrity. But we may say of the business of ecclesiastical discipUne, that it is the " strange work," even of the pious and faithful. It is, in its own nature, an unacceptable and unwelcome employment. To take cognizance of delinquencies in faith or practice ; to admonish offenders ; to call them, when necessary, before the proper tribunal; to seek out and array proof with fidelity ; to drag insidious error and artful wickedness from their hidmg places ; and to suspend or excommunicate from the privileges of the church, when the honour of religion, and the best interests of the body of Christ call for these measures, — is painful work to every benevolent mind. It is work in which no man is willing to engage, unless constrained by a sense of duty. Even those who are bound by official obligation to undertake the task, are too apt to shrink from it ; but where there is no par- ticular obligation lying on any one member of the church more than another to take an active interest in this work, the consequence will probably be, that few will be disposed to engage in the self-denying duty. Where all are equally bound, all may be equally back- ward, or n^ligent, without feeling themselves charge-

151

able with any special delinquency. And, what is worthy of notice, those who will be most apt to go forward in this work, and profer their aid with most readiness, will generally be the bold, the vain, the ardent, the rash, the impetuous, — precisely those who are, of all persons living, the most unfit for such an employment. But even if it were otherwise ; if all the members of the church were equally forward and active, what might be expected in a religious com- munity, when every member of that community was equally a ruler, and when the most ignorant and childish busy-body among them might be continually tampering with its government, and fomenting disturb-^ ances with as much potency as the most intelligent and wise ? The truth is, in such a community, tran- quility, order, and peace could scarcely be expected long together to have any place.

We could scarcely have a more instructive comment on these remarks than the practice of those churches which reject ruling elders. Our Episcopal brethren reject them. But tfiey are obliged to have their vestry- men and church-wardens, who, though no divine warrant is claimed for them, and they are not set apart in the same manner or formally invested with the same powers with our ruling elders, yet they per- form many of the same functions in substance, and are in fact official counsellors and helps. True, in- deed, these officers are not clothed with the power, and seldom perform any acts of ecclesiastical discipline, properly so called ; yet they may be, and sometimes pernaps are, consulted on subjects of this nature. And where this is not the case, we may say without impropriety, that in churches of that denomination no discipline is exercised. In the Church of England, as is confessed on all hands, no scriptural discipline exists. The most profligate and vile are not excluded from the communion of the establishment This is deeply lamented by many of the pious members of that establishment ; and at an early period, after the com-

152

t

mencement of the Reformation in that country, it was earnestly wished and proposed, as we have seen in a preceding chapter, to introduce ruling elders, as a principal means of restoring and maintaining discipline. And although the absence of discipline does not exist to the saihe extent, in the churches c^ the Protestant Episcopal denomination in the United States, yet it may be altogether wanting, as to any pure and eSr cient exarcise, in all those Episcopal churches in which some leading pious laymen are not habitually consul- ted and employed in maintaining it A pious minis* ter, indeed, of that denomination may, and does, con- form to his rubrics, in giving the people proper in- struction and warning, as to a suitable approach to the communion which he dispenses. But here he is com- monly obliged to stop ; or, at any rate, does in prac- tice, usually stop. All efficient inspection of the moral condition of the whole church, admonishing the care- less, bringing back the wanderers, and causing those who persist in error or in vice to feel the discipline <^ ecclesiastical correction, is notoriously almost un- known in the churches of the denomination to which we refer. And this deficiency is manifestly not owing to the want of intelligent and conscientious piety in many of the ministers of those churches ; but, beyond all doubt, to the entire want of an organization which alone renders the exercise of a faithful and impartial discipline at all practicable.

Our congregational brethren also reject ruling elders. Yet it is well known, that while they adopt a form of government which in theory allows to every member of the church an equal share in the exercise of discipline, their most judicious pastors, warned by painful experience of the troublesome character and uncertain issues of popular management in delicate and difficult cases which involve Christian character, are careful to have a committee of the most pious, intelligent, and prudent of their church" members, who consider each case of discipline before-hand in private,

153

and prepare it for a public decision ; and thus perform, in fact, some of the most important of the duties of ruling elders. This is what the venerable Dr. Cotton Mather doubtless means, when he says, as quoted in a preceding chapter, that " there are few discreet pastors but what make many occasional ruling elders every year ;" and when he gives it as his opinion, in the same connection, that without something of this kind, churches must suffer unspeakably with respect to discipline. And where nothing of this kind is done, the experience of Independent and Congrega- tional churches in conducting discipline, it is well known, is often such as is calculated to give give deep and lasting pain to those who love the peace and order of the church. Strife, tumult, and division of the most distressing kind, are often the consequence of attempt- ingto rid the church of one corrupt member.

But perhaps it will be said, let the pastor habitually call to his aid, in conducting the discipline of the church, a few of the most judicious and pious of his communicants; those whom he knows to be most conscientious and wise in counsel. But neither is this an adequate remedy. The pastor may consult such, if he please; but he may choose to omit it, and be governed entirely by his own counsels. Or, if he con- sult any, he may always select his particular friends, who he knows will encourage and support him in his favourite measures ; thus furnishing no real relief in the end. How much better to have a bench of assis- tant rulers, regularly chosen by the people, and with whom he shall be bound to take counsel in all impor- tant measures.

Thus it is that those churches which reject the class of officers which it is the object of this essay to recom- mend, do practically bear witness that it is impossible to conduct discipline in a satisfactory manner, without having a set of individuals virtually, if not formally, vested with similar powers. Where no such efficient substitute is employed, discipline is either in a great

154

measure neglected, or its maintenance is attended with inconveniences of the most serious kind. In other words, the opponents of ruling elders are obliged either to neglect discipline altogether, or, for main- taining it, to have recourse to auxiliaries of similsur chai*acter and power, while they deny that there is any divine warrant for them. Now, is it probable, is it credible, that our blessed Lord and all-wise King and Head of his church, and his apostles, guided by his own Spirit, should entirely overlook this necessity, and make no provision for it ? It is not credible. We must, then, either suppose that some such officers as those in question were divinely appointed, of that means, acknowledged by the practice of all to be indrs^ pensable in conducting uie best interests of the church, were forgotten or neglected by her divine Head and Lord. Surely the latter cannot be imputed to in- finite wisdom.

There are some, however, who acknowledge that there ought to be, and must be, in every church, in order to the efficient maintenance of discipline, a plu- rality of elders. They confess that sudi a body or bench of elders was found in the Jewish synam)gue; that a similar eldership existed in the primitive church; and that the scriptural government of a Christian con- gregation cannot be conducted to advantage without it. But they contend that these presbyters or elders ought all to be of the teaching class ; that there is no ground for the distinction between teaching and ruling elders ; that every church ought to be furnished with three or more ministers, all equally authorized to preach, to administer the sacraments, and to bear rule.

It requires little discernment to see that this plan is wholly impracticable ; and that if attempted to be car- ried into execution, the effect must be, either to de- stroy the church, or to degrade, and ultimately to pro- strate the ministry. It is with no small difficulty that most churches are enabled to procure and support one

155

qualified and acceptable minister. Very few would be able to afFord a suitable support to two ; and none but those of extraordinaiy wealth could think seriously of undertaking to sustain three or more. If, therefore, the principle of a plurality of teaching elders in each church were deemed indispensable, and if a regular and adequate training for the sacred office were also, as now, insisted on ; and if it were, at the same time, considered as necessary that every minister should re- ceive a competent pecuniary support, the conse- quence, as is perfectly manifest, would be, that nine- teen out of twenty of our churches would be utterly unable to maintain the requisite organization, and must of course become extinct. Nay, the regular establishment of gospel ordinances, in pastoral churches, would be physically possible only in a very few great cities or wealthy neighbourhoods. Surdy this cannot be the system enjoined by that Saviour who said— ^* to the poor the gospel is preached."

The only remedy for this difficulty would be to reduce the preparation and acquirements for the ministry — to make choice of plain illiterate men for this office ; men of small intellectual and theological furniture, dependant on secular emplo3anents for a subsistence, and, therefore, needing little or no sup- port from the churches which they derve. This is the plan upon which several sects of Christians pro- ceed ; and it is easy to see, that upon this plan the feeblest churches may have a plurality of such mini- sters as these, and, indeed, any number of them, without being burdened by their pecuniary support. But, then, it is equally evident that the execution of this plan must result in degrading the ministerial character, and in finally banishing all well qualified ministers from the church. They could no longer be ** able ministers of the New Testament — workmen that need not be ashamed." They could no longer ** give themselves wholly " to the labours of the sacred office. They could no longer " give themselves to

156

reading," as well as to exhortation and teaching. In short, die inevitable consequence of maintaining, as some do, that there must be a bench, that is a plur- ality of elders in every church, for the purpose of in- spection and government, as well as of teaching ; and, at the same time, that all these elders must be of the same class, that is, that they must all be equally set apart for teaching and ruling, — cannot &il to be, to bring the ministerial character, and of course ulti- mately the religion which the ministry is destined to explain and recommend, into general contempt* The Sandemanians, and a few other sects, have substan- tially held the opinion, and made the experiment here stated, and invariably, it is believed, with the result which has been represented as imavoidable.

To obviate these difficulties, some have said, let deacons, whom all agree to be scriptural officers, be employed to assist the pastor in conducting the government and discipline of the church. This pro- posal, together with some principles connected wiUi it, will be considered in a subsequent chapter. All that it is deemed necessary or proper to say in this place is, that an entirely different sphere of duty is assigned to deacons in the New Testament No hint is given of their being employed in the government of the church. For this proposal, therefore, there is not the shadow of a divine warrant. Besides, if we assign to deacons the real office, in other words the appropriate functions of ruling elders, what is this but granting the thing, and only disputing about the title ? If it be granted that there ought to be a plurality of officers in every church, whose appropriate duty it is to assist the pastor in inspecting and ruling the flock of Christ, it is the essence of what is contended for. Their proper title is not worth a contest, except so far as it may be proper to imitate the language of Scripture.

If, then, the maintenance of discipline be essential to the purity and edification of the church; if en- lightened, impartial, and efficient inspection and disci-

157

pline, especially over a large congregation, cannot pos* sibly be maintained by the pastor alone ; if it would be unsafe, and probably mischievous in its influence on all concerned, to devolve the whole authority and responsibility of conducting the government of a church on a single individud ; if it would, especially, in all probability essentially injure the clerical char- acter to be thus systematically made the depository of so much power, without control and without appeal; if every other mode of furnishing each church with a plurality of rulers besides that for which we contend would either deprive a great majority of our churches of the means of grace altogether, or, by bringing ministers within their reach, reduce and degrade the ministerial office far below the standard which the scriptures require ; if these things be so, then we are conducted unavoidably to the conclusion, that such officers as those for which we contend are absolutely necessary; that although a church may exist, and for a time may flourish without them, yet, that the best interests of the church cannot be systematically and steadfastly pursued without those, or some other officers of equivalent powers and duties.

But all the difficulties which have been supposed are obviated, and all the advantages referred to, attained by the plan of employing a judicious class of ruling elders in each church to assist in counsel and in government. In this plan we have provided a body of grave, pious, and prudent men, associated with the pastor, chosen out of the body of the church mem* bers, carrying with them, in some measure, the feel- ings and views of their constituents ; capable of coun- selling the pastor in all delicate and doubtful cases ; counteracting any undue influence or course of measures into which his partiality, prejudice, or want of information might betray him; exonerating him at once from the odium and the temptation of having all the power of the church in his own bauds ; con- ducting the difficult cases which often arise in the

158

exercise of discipline with the intelligence, calmness^ and wisdom, which cannot be expected to prevail in a promiscuous body of communicants ; and, in a word, securing to each church all the principal advantages which might be expected to result from being under the pastoral care of four or five ministers; vested with plenary preaching as well as ruling power; without at the same time burdening the church with the pecuni- ary support of such a number of ordinary pastors. In a word, the insuperable difficulty of doing without this class of officers on the one hand, the great and mani- fest advantages of having them on the other, and the perfect accordance of the plan which includes them with that great representative system which has per- vaded all well regulated society from its earliest exis- tence, and received the stamp of divine approbation- form a mass of testimony in favour of the office be- fore us, which, independently of other considerations, seems amply sufficient to support its claims.

I shall close this chapter with the following extract from Dr. Owen, when speaking of the importance and necessity of the office of ruling elders in the church. " It is evident," says he, " that neither the purity nor the order, nor the beauty or glory of the churches of Christ, nor the representation of his own majesty and authority in the government of them, can long be preserved without a multiplication of elders in them, according to the proportion of their respective mem- bers, for their rule and guidance. And for want here- of have churches of old, and of late, either degenera- ted into anarchy and confusion, their self-rule being managed with vain disputes and janglings unto their division and ruin ; or else giving up themselves unto the domination of some prelatical teachers, to rule them at their pleasure, which proved the bane and poison of all primitive churches ; and they will and must do so in the neglect of this order for the future."*

* Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church, 4to, p. 178.

159

We have thus completed our view of the first part of the inquiry before us, viz. our warrant for the office of ruling elders. If this office were found in the Old Testament economy — if it plainly had a place in the apostolic church — if a number of the early fathers evidently recognize its existence in their day — if the witnesses for me truth in the darkest times, and the ^reat body of the Reformers sanctioned and retained It as of divine appointment; if some of the most learned Episcopal and Independent divines since the Reformation, have borne decisive testimony to this office as of apostolical authority; and if some such office be manifesdy indispensable to the purity and order of the church, — we may confidently conclude that our warrant for it is complete.

Chapter IX THE NATURE AND DUTIES OF THE OFFICE

Having considered, so much at large, the warrant for the oflSce of ruling elder, chiefly because there is no part of the subject more contested ; we now pro- ceed to other points connected with the general in- quiry. And the first of these which presents itself, is the Nature and Duties of the office in question.

The essential character of the officer of whom we speak is that of an ecclesiastical ruler. He that ruleth let him do it with dili^nce, is the summary of his appropriate functions as laid down in Scripture. The teaching elder is indeed also a ruler. In addi- tion to this, nowever, he is called to preach the gos- pel and administer sacraments. But the particular department assigned to the ruling elder is to co-operate with the pastor m spiritual inspection and government The Scriptures, as we have seen, speak not only of " pastors and teachers," but also of " governments ;" — of " elders that rule well, but do not labour in the word and doctrine.'*

There is an obvious analogy between the office of ruler in the church, and in tbe civil community. A

161

Justice of the Peace in the latter has a wide and impor- tant range of duties. Besides the function which he discharges when called to take his part on the bench of the judicial court in which he presides, he may be, and often is, employed every day, though less publicly, in correcting abuses, compelling the fraudulent to do justice, restraining, arresting, and punishing criminals, and, in general, carrying into execution the laws formed to promote public tranquility and order, which he has sworn to administer faithfully.

Strikingly analogous to this are the duties of the ecclesiastical ruler. He has no power, indeed, to employ the secular arm in restraining or punishing offenders against the laws of Christ The kingdom under which he acts, and the authority which he ad- ministers, are not of this world. He has, of course, no right to fine, imprison, or externally to molest the most profligate offenders against the church's purity or peace, unless they be guilty of what is technically called, " breaking the peace," that is, violating the civil rights of others, and thus rendering themselves liable to the penalty of the civil law. And even when this occurs, the ecclesiastical ruler, as such, has no right to proceed against the offender. He has no other than moral power. He must apply to the civil magistrate for redress, who can only punish for break- ing the civil law. Still there is an obvious analogy between his office and that of the civil magistrate. Both are alike an ordinance of God — both are necessary to social order and comfort — and both are regulated by principles which commend* themselves to the good sense and the conscience of those who wish well to social happiness.

The ruling elder, no less than the teaching elder, or pastor, is to be considered as acting under the authority of Christ, in all that he rightfully does. If the office of which we speak was appointed in the apostolic church by infinite wisdom ; if it be an ordi- nance of Jesus Christ, just as much as that of the

o2

162

minister of the gospel, then the former, equally with the latter, is Christ's officer. He has a right to speak and act in his name; and though elected by the members of the church, and representing them in the exercise of ecclesiastical rule, yet he is not to be con- sidered as deriving his authority to rule from them, any more than he who " labours in the word and doctrine" derives his authority to preach and ad- minister other ordinances from the people, who make choice of him as their teacher and guide. There is reason to believe that some, even in the Presbyterian church, take a different view of this subject. They regard the teaching elder as an officer of Christ, and listen to his official instructions as to those of a man appointed by Him, and coming in his name. But with respect to the ruling elder, they are wont to regard him as one who holds an office instituted by human prudence alone, and, therefore, as standing on very different ground in the discharge of his official duties from that which is occupied by the " am- bassador of Christ." This is undoubtedly an errone- ous view of the subject, and a view which, so far as it prevails, is adapted to exert the most mischievoas influence. The truth is, if the office of which we speak be of apostolic authority, we are just as much bound to sustain, honour, and obey the individual who fills it and discharges its duties according to the Scriptures, as we are to submit to any other officer or institution of our Divine Redeemer.

We are by no means, then, to consider ruling elders as a mere ecclesiastical convenience, or as a set of councillors whom the wisdom of man alone has chosen, and who may, therefore, be reverenced and obeyed as little or as much as human caprice may think proper ; but as bearing an office of divine ap- pointment — as the " ministers of God for good " to his church — and whose lawful and regular acts ought to command our conscientious obedience.

The ruling elders of each church are called to

163

attend to a public and formal, or to a more private ^here of duty.

With regard to the first, or the public and formal duties of their office, they form, in the church to which they belong, a bench or judicial court, called among us the ^^ church session,'' and in some other Presbyterian denominations, the "consistory.;" both expressions importing a body of ecclesiastical men, sitting and acting together as the representatives, and for the benefit of the church. This body of elders, with the pastor at their head, and presiding at their meetings, form a judicial assembly, by which all the spiritual interests of the congregation are to be watched over, regulated, and authoritatively determined. Ac- cordingly, it is declared in the ninth chapter of our Form of Government — " The church session is charged with maintaining the spiritual government of the congregation, for which purpose they have power to inquire into the knowledge and Christian conduct of the members of the church, to call before them offenders and witnesses, being members of their own congregation, and to introduce other witnesses, where it may be necessary to bring the process to issue, and when they can be procured to attend; to receive members into the church ; to admonish, to rebuke, to suspend, or exclude from the sacraments, those who are found to deserve censure; to concert the best measures for promoting the spiritual interests of the congregation, and to appoint delegates to the higher judicatories of the church."

This general statement of the powers and duties of the church session, it will be perceived, takes in a wide range. Or rather, to speak more properly, it embraces the whole of that authority and duty with which the great Head of the church has been pleased to invest the governing powers of each particular con- gregation, for the instruction, edification, and comfort of the whole body. To the church session it belongs to bind and loose; to admit to the communion of the

164

church, with all its privileges; to take cognizance cf all departure from the purity of faith or practice; to try, censure, acquit, or excommunicate those who are charged with offences; to consult and determine upon all matters relating to the time, place, and circum- stances of worship, and other spiritual concerns; to take order about catechizing children, congregational fasts or thanksgiving days, and all other observances^ stated or occasional; to correct, as far as possible,' every thing that may tend to disorder, or is contrary to edification; and to digest and execute plans for promoting a spirit of inquiry, of reading, of prayer, of order, and of universal holiness among the mem- bers of the church. It is also incumbent on them, when the church over which they preside is destitute of a pastor, to take the lead in those measures which may conduce to a choice of a suitable candidate, by calling the people together for the purpose of an election, when they consider them as prepared to make it with advantage.

Although, in ordinary cases, the pastor of the church may be considered as vested with the right to decide whom he will invite to occupy his pulpit, either when he is present, or occasionally absent; yet, in cases of difficulty or delicacy, and especially when ministers of other denominations apply for the use of the pulpit, it is the prerogative of the church session to consider and decide on the application. And if there be any fixed difference of opinion between the pastor and the other members of the session, in re- ference to this matter, it is the privilege and duty of either party to request the advice of their presbytery in the case. ,

In the church session, whether the pastor be pre- sent and presiding or not, every member has an equal voice. The vote of the most humble and retiring ruling elder, is of the same avail as that of his minis- ter. So that no pastor can carry any measure unless he can obtain the concurrence of a majority of the

165

eldership. And as the whole spiritual government of each church is committed to its bench of elders, the session is cmnpetent to reflate every concern, and to correct every thing which they consider as amiss in the arrangements or affairs of the church, which ad- mits of correction. Every individual of the £()sssion is, of course, competent to propose any new service, plan, or measure, which he believes will be for the benefit of the congregation, and if a majority of the elders concur with him in opinion, it may be adopted. If, in any case, however, there should be a difference of opinion between the pastor and the elders, as to the j)ropriety or practicability of any measure proposed, and insisted on by the latter, there is an obvious and efiectual constitutional remedy. A remedy, however, which ought to be resorted to with prudence, caution, and prayer. The opinions and wishes of the pastor ought, undoubtedly, to be treated with the most re- spectful delicacy. Still they ought not to be suffered, when it is possible 16 avoid it, to stand in the way of a great and manifest good. When such an alternative occurs, the remedy alluded to may be applied. On an amicable reference to the presbytery, that body may decide the case between the parties.

And as the members of the church session, whether assembled in their judicial capacity or not, are the pas- tor's counsellors and colleagues, in all matters relating to the spiritual rule of the church, so it is their official duty to encourage, sustain, and defend him in the faithful discharge of his duty. It is deplorable when a minister is assailed for his fidelity by the profane or the worldly, if any portion of the eldership either take part against him or shrink from his active and deter- mined defence. It is not meant of course, that they are to consider themselves as bound to sustain him in every thing he may say or do, whether right or wrong : but that when they really believe him to be faithml both to truth and duty, they should feel it to be their duty to stand by him, to shield him from the arrows of

166

the wicked, and to encourage him as far as he obeys

Christ

But besides those dudes which pertain to ruling elders with the pastor, in their collective capacity as a judicatory of the church, there are others wbidi are incumbent on them at all times in the intervals of their judicial meetings, and by the due discharge of which they may be constantly edifying the body of Christ. It is their duty to have an eye of inspection and care over all the members of the congr^ation, and for this purpose to cultivate a universal and inti- mate acquaintance, as far as may be, with every family^ in the flock of which they are made "overseers.*' Thejl are bound to watch over the childem and youth, ana especially baptized children, with paternal vigilance, recognizing and affectionately addressing them on all proper occasions ; giving them and their parents in reference to them seasonable counsel, and putting in the Lord's claim to their hearts and lives, as the chilaren of the church. It is their duty to attend to the case of those who are serious, and disposed to inquire concern- ing their eternal interest; to converse with them, and from time to time, to give information concerning them to the pastor. It is their duty to take notice o^ and admonish in private, those who appear to be growing careless, or falling into habits in any respect criminal, suspicious, or unpromising. It is their duty to visit and pray with the sick as far as their circumstances admit, and to request the attendance of the pastor on the sick and the dying when it may be seasonable or desired. It is incumbent on them to assist the pastor in main- taining meetings for social prayer, to take part in con- ducting the devotional exercises in those meetings; to preside in them when the pastor is absent ; and, if tiiey are endowed with suitable gifts, under his direction oc- casionally to drop a word of instruction and exhortation to the people in those social meetings. If the officers of the church neglect these meetings, (the importance of which cannot be estimated,) there is every reason

167

apprehend that they will not be duly honoured or :enaed by the body of the people. It is the duty

ruling elders also to visit the members of the urch and their families with the pastor, if he request without him if he do not, to converse with them, instruct the ignorant, to confirm the wavering, to iition the unwary, to reclaim the wandering, to en- urage tlie timid, and to excite and animate all classes a faithful and exemplary discharge of duty. It is ;umbent on them to consult frequently and freely th their pastor on the interests of the flock committed their charge ; to aid him in forming .and executing ins for the welfare of the church ; to give him from ae to time such information as he may need, to enable [n to perform aright his various and momentous ties, to impart to him with affectionate respect their vice, to support him with their influence, to defend i reputation, to enforce his just admonitions, and in word, by every means in their power to promote the mfort, and extend the usefulness of his labours. Although the church session is not competent to try e pastor, in case of his falling into any delinquency iter of doctrine or practice ; yet, if the members iserVc any such delinquency, it is not only their ivilege, but their duty to admonish him, tenderly d respectfully, yet faithfully, in private; and, if icessary, from time to time : and if the admonition be thout eflect, and they think the edification of the urch admits and demands a public remedy, they ight to represent the case to the presbytery, as before sgested in other cases, and request a redress of the levance.

But the functions of the ruling elder are not con- led to the congregation of which he is one of the lers. It it his duty at such times, and in such order

the constitution of the church requires, to take his at in the higher judicatories of the church, and there

exercise his official share of counsel and authority. \ every Presbytery, Synod, and General Assembly of

168

the Presbyterian church, at least as many ruling as teaching elders are entitled to a place; and in all the former, as well as the latter, have an opportunity of exerting an important influence in the great concerns of Zion. Every congregation, whether provided with a pastor or vacant, is entitled besides the pastor, .(where there is one,) to be represented by one ruling elder, in all meetings of the tresbytery and Synod ; and as in those bodies vacant congregations and those which are supplied witli pastors are equally represented each by an elder, it is manifest that if the theory of our ecclesiastical constitution be carried into effect, there will always be a greater number of ruling elders than of pastors present. In the General Assembly accord- ing to our constitutional plan, the numbers of each are precisely equal.

In these several judicatories the ruling elder has an equal vote, and the same power in every respect with the pastors. He has the same privilege of ori- ginating plans and measures, and of carrying them, provided he can induce a majority of the body to con- cur in his views ; and thus may become the means of imparting his impressions, and producing an influence greatly beyond the particular congregation with which he is connected, and indeed, throughout the bounds of the Presbyterian Church in the United States. This consideration serves to place the nature and the impor- tance of the office in the strongest light He who bears it, has the interest of the church as a spiritual trust as really and solemnly, though not in all respects to the same extent, committed to him as the elder who " labours in the word and doctrine." He not only has it in his power, but is daily called, in the discharge of his official duties, to watch over, inspect, regulate, and edify the body of Christ ; to enlighten the ignor- ant, to admonish the disorderly, to reconcile differences, to correct every moral irregularity and abuse within the bounds of his charge; and to labour without ceasing for the promotion of the cause of truth, piety.

169

and universal righteousness in the church to which he belongs, and wherever else he has an opportunity of raising his voice, and exerting an influence.

But when it is considered that those who bear the office in question are called upon in ^heir turn to sit in the highest judicatories of the church, and there to take their part in deliberating and deciding on the most momentous questions which can arise in conducting ecclesiastical affairs — when we reflect that they are called to deliberate and decide on the conformity of doctrines to the word of God; to assist as judges in the trial of heretics, and every class of offenders against the purity of the gospel; and to take care, in their respective spheres, that all the ordinances of Christ's house be preserved pure and entire ; when, in a word, we recollect that they are ordained for the express pur- pose of overseeing and guarding the roost precious con- cerns of the church on earth — concerns which may have a bearing, not merely on the welfare of a single indi- vidual or congregation, but on the great interests of orthodoxy and piety among millions, we may surely conclude, without hesitation, that the office which they sustain is one, the importance of which can scarcely be over-rated, and that the estimate which is com- monly made of its nature, duties, and responsibility, is far, very far from being adequate.

If this view of the nature and importance of the office before us be admitted, the question very natu- rally arises, whether it be correct to call this class of elders lay elders, or whether they have not such a strictly ecclesiastical character as should prevent the use of that language in speaking of them ? This is one of the points, in the present discussion, concerning which the writer of this essay frankly confesses that he has, in some measure, altered his opinion. Once he was disposed to confine the epithet clerical to teaching elders, and to designate those who ruled only, and did not teach, as lay elders. But more mature inquiry and r^ection have led him first to

170

doubt the correctness of this opinion, and finally to persuade him that so far as the distinction between clergy and laity is proper at all, it ought not to be made the point of distinction between these two classes of elders, and that when we speak of the one as clergymen, and the other as laymen, we are apt to convey an idea altogether erroneous, if not seriously mischievous.

Some judicious and pious men have, indeed, ex-

f)ressed serious doubts whether the terms clergy and aity ought ever to have been introduced into our theological nomenclature. But it is not easy to see any solid reason for this doubt It is wise to contend about terms, when the things intended to be expressed by them are fully understood and generally admitted ? The only question, then, of real importance to be decided here is this, Does the New Testament draw any distinct line between those who hold spiritual offices in the church, and those who do not? Does it represent the functions pertaining to those offices as confined to them, or as common to all Christians? Now, it seems impossible to read the Acts of the Apostles, and the several apostolic epistles, especially those to Timothy and Titus, and to examine, in con- nection with these, the writings of the " apostolic fathers," without perceiving that the distinction be- tween those who bore office in the church, and private Christians, was clearly made, and uniformly main- tained, from the very origin of the church. That the terms clergy and laity are not found in the New Testament, nor in some of the earliest uninspired writers, is freely granted. But is not the distinction intended to be expressed by these terms evidently found in Scripture and in all the early fathers? Nothing can be more indubitably clear. The titles of " rulers" in the house of God, '* ambassadors of Christ," "stewards of the mysteries of God," '^bishops, leaders, overseers, elders, shepherds, guides, ministers," &c,, as distinguished from those to whom they minis-.

171

tered, are so familiar to all readers of the New Testament, that it would be a waste of time to attempt to illustrate or establish a point so unquestion- able. If the inspired writers every where represent certain spiritual offices in the church as appointed by God, if they represent those who sustain these offices as alone authorized to perform certain sacred functions, and teach us to consider all others who attempt to perform them as criminal invaders of a divine ordi- nance, then surely the whole distinction intended to be expressed by the term clergy and laity is evidently and most distinctly laid down by the same authority which founded the church.

The word «?^»2go^» properly signifies a lot. And as the land of Canaan, the inheritance of the Israelites, was divided among them by lot, the word, in process of time, came to signify an inheritance. In this figu- rative or secondary sense, the term is evidently em- ployed in 1 Peter v. 3. Under the Old Testament dispensation, the peculiar people of God were called (Septuagint translation) his «>^>7eo?» or inheritance. Of this we have examples in Deuteronomy iv. 20, and ix. 29. The term, in both these passages, is manifestly applied to the whole body of the nation of Israel as God's inheritance or peculiar people. Clemens Ro- manus, one of the " apostolic fathers," speaking of the Jewish economy, and having occasion to distinguish between the priests and the common people, calls the latter y^^^Mi, Clemens Alexandrinus, towards the close of the second century, speaks of the Apostle John as having set apart such persons for " clergymen " {»>y}^oi) as were signified to him by the Holy Ghost. And in the writings of TertuUian, Origen, and Cyprian, the terms " clergy" and ** laity" occur with a frequency which shows that they were then in general use. Jerome observes, that ministers are called clerici, either because they are peculiarly the lot and portion of the Lord, or because the Lord is their lot, that is, their inheritance. Hence that learned and pious father

172

takes occasion to infer — " That he who is God's portion ought so to exhibit himself that he may be truly said to possess God, and to be possessed by Him.'** And as we have abundant evidence that ecclesiastical men were familiariy called clerici^ or '* clergjmoien,'* from the second century, so have the saTme evidence that this term was employed to designate all ecclesias- tical men. That is, all persons who had any spiritual office in the church, were called by the common name of clericiy or " clergymen.** It was ap[died oontioually to elders and deacons, as well as to bishops or pastors. Nay, in the third century, when not only the inceptive steps of Prelacy became visible, but when the same spirit of innovation had also brought in a number of inferior orders, such as sub-deacons, readers, acolyths, &c., these inferior orders were all dericL Cyprian, speaking of a sub-deacon, and also of a reader, calls them both clerici. The ordination of such persons, (for it seems they were all formally ordained) he calls ordinationes clericcB^ and the letters which he trans- mitted by them, he styles literce clericce. The same fact may be clearly established from the writings of Ambrose, Hilary, and Epiphanius, and from the canons of the council of Nice. Indeed, there seems reason to believe, that in the fourth and fifth centuries, and subsequently, the title of clerici was not only given to all the inferior orders of ecclesiastical men, but was more frequently and punctiliously applied to them than to their superiors, who were generally addressed by their more distinctive and honourable titles. Those who recollect that learning, during the dark ages, was chiefly confined to the ministers of religion, that few, excepting persons of that profession, were able to read and write, and that the whimsical privilege, commonly called " benefit of clergy,** grew out of the rare accomplishment of being able to read, will be at no loss to trace the etymology of the word

* Epist. 2d. ad. Nepotian^ 5.

173

clerk (clericus), or secretary, as used to designate one who officiates as the reader and writer of a public body.

To distinguish the mass of private Christians from those who bore office in the church, they were desig- nated by several names. They were sometimes called xcttMi — laici^ laymen, from ?^«of» populus; sometimes ihareti, « private men," from t^tog, privaius^ (Acts iv. 13 ;) sometimes Bturtxot, i, e. " seculars," from B/of, which signifies a secular life. Soon after the apostolic age, common Christians were frequently called ett^is iKKhmeMsrtKOh " men of the church," i. e. persons not belonging either to Jewish synagogues, or Pagan temples, or heretical bodies, but members of the church of Christ. Afterwards, however, the title '* ecclesiastics" became gradually appropriated to persons in office in the church.*

The quotations made in a former chapter from Augustine, and the writings of some other fathers about his time, in which they seem to distinguish between the clergy and the elders, may seem to militate with the foregoing statement. But in reference to these passages, the learned Voetius, while he quotes them as decisive of the general fact of the early existence of the elders under consideration, supposes that the office, in the fourth and fifth centuries, was beginning to fall into disuse, and that, of course, though it was still found in some churches, it began to be spoken of with less respect, and sometimes to be denied a place among the offices strictly clerical. f

But, after all, there is no real difficulty as to this point. For although the terms " clergy " and " cleri- cal" were pretty generally applied to all classes of church officers, even the lowest, in the third, fourth, and fifth centuries ; yet this was not always the case. Thus, in the Apostolical Canons, which were probably composed in the fourth or fifth centuries, there is an

* See Stephani Thesaurus, and Bingham's Origines Eccle- siasticae.

f Politicse Ecclesiasticaei par. ii. lib. ii. tract, iii.

2 p

174

express distinction made between the deacons and the clergy. In the third and fourth Canons, having ordered what sorts of first-fruits should be sent to the church, and what to the home of the bishop and presbyters, it ordains as follows : — ^^ Now it is mani- fest that they are to be divided by them among the deacons and the clergy/' From cases of this kind we may evidently infer, that although all kinds of ecclesiastical officers were generally ranked among the clergy during the period just mentioned, yet this was not invariably so, and of course no inference can be drawn from occasional diversity of expression as to this matter.

Now, if this historical deduction of the titles clergy and laity be correct, it is plain that, according to early and general usage, ruling elders ought not to be styled laymen, or lay elders. They are as really in office — they as really bear an office of divine appoint- ment — an office of a high and spiritual nature, and an office, the functions of which cannot be rightfully performed but by those who are regularly set apart to it — as any other officer of the Christian church. They are as really a portion of God's lot — as really set over the laity or body of the people, as the most distinguished and venerated minister of Jesus can be. Whether, therefore, we refer to early usage or to strict philological import, ruling elders are as truly entitled to the name of clergy, in the only legitimate sense of that term — that is, they are as truly eccle- siastical officers as those who *' labour in the word and doctrine."

The scope of the foregoing remarks will not, it is hoped, be mistaken. The author of this Essay has no zeal either for retaining or using the terms clergy and laity. So far as the former term has been heretofore used, or may now be intended to convey the idea of a " privileged order" in the church — a dignified body lifted up in rank and claim above the mass of the church members — in a word, as desginating a set of

175

men claiming to be vicars of Christ, keepers of the human conscience, and the only channels of grace — he disclaims and abhors it. He is a believer in no such meaning or men. But so far as it is intended to desig- nate those who are clothed with ecclesiastical office under the authority of Christ, and authorized to dis- charge some important spiritual functions which the body of the church members are not authorized to perform, and to mark the distinction between these two classes, the writer is of the opinion that the language may be defended, and that either that, or some other of equivalent import, ought to be used, nay, must be used, if we would be faithful to the New Testament view of ecclesiastical office as an ordinance of Jesus Christ. And if the term clergy, in this hiunble. Christian, and only becoming sense, be applied to those who preside in the dispensation of public ordi- nances, it may with equal propriety be applied to those who preside with pastors in the inspection and rule of the church.

If any should be disposed to remark, on this subject, that the use of the term clergy is so appropriated, by long established public habit, to a particular class of ecclesiastical officers; that there can be no hope that the mass of the community will be reconciled to an extension of the title to ruling elders ; the answer is, be it so. The writer of this volume is neither vain enough to expect, nor ambitious enough to attempt, a change in the popular language to the amount here supposed. But he protests against the continued use of the term lay elder, as really adapted to make an erroneous impression. Let the class of officers in ques- tion be called ruling elders. Let all necessary dis- tinction be made by saying : — " Ministers, or pastors, ruling elders, deacons, and the laity or body of the people." This will be in conformity with ancient usage. This will be maintaining every important principle. This can offend none, and nothing more will be desired by any.

176

Were the foregoing views of the nature and duties of the elder's office generally adopted, duly appreciated, and faithfully carried out into practice, what a mighty change would be eflFected in our Zion ! With what a different estimate of the obligation and- responsibilities which rest upon them would the candidates for this office enter on their sacred work ! And with what different feelings would the mass of the people, and especially all who love the cause of Chri^ regard these spiritual counsellors and guides in their daily walks^ and particularly in their friendly and official visits! This is a change most devoutly to be desired. The interests of the church are more involved in the pre- valence of just opinions and practice, in reference to this office, than almost any other that can be named. Were every congregation, besides a wise, pious, and faithful pastor, furnished with eight or ten elders, to co- operate with him in all his parochial labours, on the plan which has been sketched, men of wisdom, faith, prayer, and Christian activity — men willing to deny and exert themselves for the welfare of Zion — men alive to the importance of every thing that relates to the orthodoxy, purity, order, and spirituality of the church, and ever on the watch for opportunities of doing good — men, in a word, willing to " take the oversight" of the flock in the Lord, and to labour, without ceasing, for the promotion of its best interests — were every church furnished with a body of such elders, can any one doubt that knowledge, order, piety, and growth in grace, as well as in numbers, would be as common in our churches as the reverse is now the prevailing state of things, in consequence of the want of fidelity on the part of those who are nominally the overseers and guides of the flock ?

While discussing the nature of this office, and the duties which pertain to it, it seems to be natural to offer a few remarks on the manner in which those who bear it ought to be treated by the members of the

177

church; in other words, on the duties which the church owes to her ruling elders.

And here the discerning and pious mind will be at no loss to perceive that these duties are co-relative to those which the rulers owe to the church. That is, if they are the spiritual rulers of the church, and bound to perform daily, and with fidelity and zeal, the duties which belong to this station, it is evident that the members of the church are bound to recognize them in the same character, and to honour and treat them as their spiritual guides. Were it, then, in the power of the writer of this volume to address the members of every Presbyterian church in the United States, he would speak to them in some language as the following : —

Ch RiSTi AN B RETHRE N, — Every consideration which has been urged to show the importance and duties belonging to the office of ruling elders, ought to remind you of the important duties which you owe to them. Remember, at all times, that they are your ecclesiastical rulers, rulers of your own choice, yet by no means coming to you in virtue of mere human authority, but in the name and by the appointment of the great Head of the Church, and, oi course, the " ministers of God to you for good."

In all your views and treatment of them, then, recognize this character. Obey them " in the Lord," that is, for his sake, and as far as they bear rule agree- ably to his word. " Esteem them very highly in love for their work's sake," and follow them daily with your prayers, that God would bless them and make them a blessing — reverence them as your leaders — bear in mind the importance of their office, the arduous- ness of their duties, and the difficulties with which they have to contend — countenance and sustain them in every act of fidelity, make allowance for their infir- mities, and be not unreasonable in your expectations from them.

Many are ready to criminate the elders of the church

J

178

for not taking notice of particular offences as speedily, or in such manner, as they expect. And this disposition to find fault is sometimes indulged by persons who have never been so faithful themselves as to give that infor- mation which they possessed respecting the allied offences ; or who, when called upon publicly to sub- stantiate that which they have privately disclcsed, have drawn back, unwilling to encounter the odium or the pain of appearing as accusers, or even as witnesses. Such persons ought to be the last to criminate chordi officers for supposed negligence of discipline. Can your rulers take notice of that which never comes to thenr knowledge ? Or can you expect them, as prudent men, rashly to set on foot a judicial and public investigation of things, concerning which many are ready to whis- per in private, but none willing to speak with frankness before a court of Christ ? Besides, let it be recollect- ed that the session of almost every church is some- times actually engaged in investigating charges, in removing offences, and in composing differences which many suppose they are utterly neglecting, merely because they do not judge it to be for edification in all cases to proclaim what they have done, or are doing, to the congregation at large.

Your elders will sometimes be called — God grant that it may seldom occur ! — but they will sometimes be called to the painful exercise of discipline. Be not offended with them for the performance of this duty. Rather make the language of the Psalmist your own : " Let the righteous smite me, it shall be a kindness ; and let him reprove me, it shall be an excellent oil, which shall not break my head." Add not to the bitterness of their official task by discovering a resent- ful temper, or by indulging in reproachful language, in return for their fidelity. Surely the nature of the duty is sufficiently self-denying and distressing with- out rendering it more so by unfriendly treatment. Receive their private warnings and admonitions with candour and affectionate submission. Treat their

179

public acts, however contrary to your wishes, with respect and reverence. If they be honest and pious men, can they do less than exercise the discipline of Christ's house against such of you as walk disorderly ? Nay, if you be honest and pious yourselves, can you do less than approve of their faithfulness in exercising that discipline ? If you were aware of all the difficul- ties which attend this part of the duty of your elder- ship, you would feel for them more tenderly, and judge concerning them more candidly and indulgently than you are often disposed to do. Here you have it in your power, in a very important degree, to lessen their burdens and to strengthen their hands.

When your elders visit your families for the purpose of becoming acquainted with them, and of aiding the pastor in ascertaining the spiritual state of the nock, remember that it is not officious intrusion. It is nothing more than their duty. Receive them not as if you suspected them of having come as spies or busy intruders, but with respect and cordiality. Convince them, by your treatment, that you are glad to see them; that you wish to encourage them in promoting the best interests of the church, and that you honour them for their fidelity. Give them an opportunity of seeing your children, and of ascertaining whether your households are making progress in the Christian life. Nay, encourage your children to put themselves in the way of the elders, that they may be personally known to them, and may become the objects of their affec- tionate notice, their occasional exhortation, and their pious prayers. Converse with the elders freely, as with fathers who " have no greater joy than to see you walking in the truth." And ever give them cause to retire under the pleasing persuasion, that their office is honoured, that their benevolent designs are duly appreciated, and that their labours " are not in vain in the Lord." In short, as every good citizen will make conscience of vindicating the fidelity, and holding up the hand of the faithful magistrate who

I

180

finnly and impartially ezecntes the law of the land, ao every good Christian ought to feel himself bomid in conscience and honour, as well as in duty to his Lord, to strengthen tbe hands and encourage the heart of the spiritual ruler, who evidently seeks, in the fear of God, to promote the purity and edification of the church.

The nature of the office before us also leads to another remark with which the present chapter will be closed. It is, that there seems to be a peculiar propriety in tbe ruling elders (and the same principle will apply to the deacons, if there be any of diis dass of officers in a congregation,) having a seat assigned them, for sitting together in a conspicuous part oi the church, near the pulpit, during the pubuc service, where they can ovenook the whole worshipping assembly, and be seen by all. The considerations which recommend this are numerous. It was in- variably so in the Jewish ^nagogue. The same practice, as we have seen in the former chapter, was adopted in the early church, as soon as Christians began to erect houses for public worship. This official and conspicuous accommodation for the elders is ccm- stantly provided in the Dutch Reformed Church in this country, and it is believed by most of the Re- formed Churches on the Continent of Europe. It is adapted to keep the congregation habitually reminded who their elders are, and of their official authority, and also to remind the elders themselves of their functions and duties. And it furnishes a convoii^it opportunity for the pastor to consult them on any question which may occur, either before he ascends the pulpit or at the close of the service.

Chapter X DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE OFFICES OF THE RULING ELDER AND DEACON

These offices have been so often confounded, and opinions attempted to be maintained which tend to merge the former in the latter, that it is judged pro- per to make the difference between them the subject of distinct consideration.

The only account that we have in scripture of the origin of the deacon's office is found in the following passage in the Acts of the Apostles vi. 1 — 6. " And in those days, when the number of the disciples was multiplied, there arose a murmuring of the Grecians against the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration. Then the twelve called the multitude of the disciples unto them, and said. It is not reason that we should leave the word of God and serve tables. Wherefore, brethren, look ye out among ye seven men, of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But we will give ourselves con- tinually to prayer, and to the ministry of the word. And the saying pleased the whole multitude; and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the

18S

Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a Proselyte of Antioch, whom they bad set before the apostles; and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them."

On this plain passage various opinions have been entertained. It will be to our purpose to notice a few of them.

I. Some have doubted whether these were the first deacons chosen by the direction of the inspired apostles. The learned Dr. Mosheim supposes that the Church of Jerusalem, from its first organization, had its in- ferior ministers, in other words, its deacons, and that there is a reference to these in the fifth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, under the title of young men, (y£«T«eoA and yiet¥iaKOh) who assisted in the interment of Annanias and Sapphira. He is confident that the seven deacons spoken of in the passage just cited, were added to the original number; ana Uiat they were intentionally selected fi'om the foreign Jews, in order to silence the complaints on the part of the Grecians of partiality in the distribution of the offerings made for the relief of the poor. To this opinion there seems to be no good reason for acceding. The objec- tions to it are the following : —

1. It is by no means probable that a class of officers, of great importance to the comfort and prosperity of the church, should have been instituted by divine authority, and yet that the original institution should have been passed over by all the inspired writers in entire silence.

2. In this narrative of the election and ordination of the seven deacons there is not the most distant allusion to any pre-existing officers of the same charac- ter or functions. The murmuring spoken of seems to have proceeded from the body of the Grecian, or foreign Christians, and to have been directed against the body of the native, or Hebrew Christians.

3. It is evident from the spirit of the narrative that the appointment of these deacons was expressly

18

o

designed to relieve the apostles themselves of a labori- ous service, with which they had been before encum- bered, but which interfered with their discharge of higher and more important duties. Surely the address of the apostles would have been strange, if not un- meaning, had there been already a body of oflScers who were intrusted with the whole of this business, and they had only been solicited to appoint an additional number, or to put a more impartial set in the place of the old incumbents.

4. It is plain that these oflScers were not chosen from among the young men of the church, as Dr. Moshiem seems to imagine, nor was the office itself one of small trust or dignity. The multitude were directed to " look out for seven men of honest report," or established reputation, " full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom:" and when the Apostle Paul afterwards writes to Timothy, and points out the character of tiiose who ought to be selected for this office, he speaks of them as married men, fathers of families, distin- guished for their gravity, men who had been " first proved" and found "blameless," as orthodox, just, temperate, holy men, regulating their own households with firmness and prudence.

5. Dr. Moshiem is not borne out by the best authorities in his interpretation of the words vsare^oi, and viccvttrKot, The most skilful lexicographers assign to them no such official meaning. Besides, the nature and responsibility of the office, and the high qualifi- cations for it pointed out by the apostles at the time of this first choice, and required by the Apostle Paul afterwards, when writing to Timothy respect- ing proper persons to be chosen and set apart as deacons, by no means answer to the view which Dr. Moshiem takes of the inferiority of the office, or the propriety of bestowing it on young men, as the church's servants.

6. Finally, it may be doubted whether there had been any real need of the deacon's office until the time

184

arrived and the events occurred which are recorded in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. But a short time had elapsed since the church had been organized on the New Testament plan. At its first organization the number of the poor connected with it was probably small. But very shortly after the day of Pentecost the number of foreigners who had come up to the feast, and had there been converted to the Chris- tian faith, was so great, and the number of these who, at a distance from all their wonted pecuniaiy resources and their friends, stood in need of pecuniary aid, had also become so considerable, that the task of " impart- ing to those who had need," became suddenly a most arduous employment. This had been accomplished, however, for a short time under the direction of the apostles, and without appointing a particular class of officers for the purpose. But when the foreign Jews came forward and made complaint of partiality in this business, the apostles, under the direction of heavenly wisdom, called upon the " multitude *' to make choice of competent persons whom they might appoint over this branch of Christian ministration. This appears to be a plain history of the case; and to resort to Dr. Moshiem's supposition is to throw a strange and per- plexed aspect over the whole narrative.

II. There are others who have doubted whether the " seven" whose election and ordination are recorded in the 6th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles were deacons at all. They allege that the office to which they were chosen and set apart was a mere temporary function, not designed to be a permanent one in the Christian Church, and which, probably, did not last much if any longer than what is commonly called " the community of goods," which existed sometime after the day of Pentecost.

Against this supposition the following reasons are, in my view, conclusive.

1. If this supposition were admitted, then it would follow that there is no account whatever in the scrip-

185

tures of the origin or nature of the deacon's ofBce. The oflSce is mentioned again and again in the New Testament ; but if the narrative in the beginning of the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles be not a statement of its origin, nature, and duties, we have no account of them any where. Can this be considered as probable ?

2. Is it likely, judging on the principles and from the analogy of scripture, that a short occasional trust, a mere temporary trusteeship, if I may so speak, would be appointed with so much formality and solemnity — marked not only by a formal election of the people, but also by the prayers and " the laying on of the hands " of the apostles ? What greater solemnities attended an investiture with the highest and most permanent offices in the Christian Church ?

3. It is a well known fact, that in the Jewish syna- gogue, which was assumed as the model of the primi- tive church, there was a class of officers to whom the collection and distribution of alms for the poor were regularly committed. We may venture to presume, then, that the appointment of similar officers in the church would be altogether likely.

4. When it is considered what an important and arduous part of the church's duty it was in the apos- tolic age, and for some time afterwards, to provide for the very numerous poor who looked to her for aid, it is incredible that there should be no class of officers specifically set apart for this purpose. Yet if the " seven " are not of this class, there is no account of any such appointment in the New Testament.

5. The language of some of the earlier, as well as the later Christian fathers on this subject, clearly evinces that they considered the appointment recorded in the chapter of the Acts of the Aposdes now under consideration, as the appointment of Christian deacons, and as exhibiting the nature of that office, and the great purpose for which it was instituted. A small specimen of the manner in which they speak on the

q2

i

186

subject will be sufficient to establish this position. Hernias, one of the apostolical fathers, in his Simili- tude, ix. 27, expresses himself thus: — " For what concerns the tenth mountain, in which were the trees covering the cattle, they are such as have believed, and some of them have been bishops, that is, presi- dents of the churches; then such as have been set over inferior ministries, and have protected the poor and the widows." Origen (Tract. 16, in Matt) evi- dently considered the deacons as charged with the pecuniary concerns of the church. " The deacons," says he, "preside over the money-tables of the church." And again, " those deacons who do not manage well the money of the churches committed to their care, but act a fradulent part, and dispense it not according to justice, but for the purpose of enriching themsdves, these act the part of money-changers, and keepers of those tables which our Lord overturned. For the deacons were appointed to preside over the tables of the church, as we are taught in the Acts of the Apostles." Cyprian speaks (Epist. 25) of a certain deacon who had been deposed from his " sacred diaconate on account of his fraudulent and sacril^ious misapplication of the church's money to his own private use, and for his denial of the widows' and orphans' pledges deposited with him." And in another place (Epist. 3, ad rogatianum) he refers the appoint- ment of the first deacons to this choice and ordination at Jerusalem. It seems, then, that the deacons, in the days of Cyprian, were intrusted with the care of widows and orphans, and the funds of the church destined for their relief. It is incidentally stated in the account of the persecution under the Emperor Decius, in the third century, that by order of the Em- peror, Laurentius, one of the deacons of Rome, was seized, under the expectation of finding the money of the church, collected for the use of the poor, in his possession. It is further stated that this money had really been in his possession^ but that, expecting the

187

storm of persecution, he had distributed it before his seizure.

Eusebius (lib. ii. cap. 1) says, — " There were also seven approved men ordained deacons, through prayer and the imposition of the apostles' hands;" and he immediately afterwards speaks of Stephen as one of the number. Dorothseus, bishop of Tyre, contem- porary with Eusebius, also says, (Lives of the Pro- phets, &c.) " Stephen, the first martyr, and one of the seven deacons, was stoned by the Jews at Jerusalem, as Luke testifieth in the Acts of the Apostles."

Ambrose, in speaking of the fourth century, the time in which he lived, says, (Comment, in Ephes. iv.) " The deacons do not publicly preach." Chrysostom, who lived in the same century, in his commentary on this very passage in Acts vi. observes, that " the deacons had need of great wisdom, although the preaching of the word was not committed to them ;" and remarks further, that " it is absurd to suppose that they should have both the offices of preaching and taking care of the poor committed to them, seeing it is impossible for them to discharge both functions adequately." Sozomen the ecclesiastical historian, who lived in the fifth century, says (lib. v. cap. 8) that " the deacon's office was to keep the church's goods." In the apostolical constitutions, which, though un- doubtedly spurious as an apostolical work, may pro- bably be referred to the fourth or fifth centuries, it is recorded, (lib. viii. cap. 28,) " It is not lawful for the deacons to baptize or to administer the Eucharist, or to pronounce the greater or smaller benediction." Jerome^ in his letter to Evagrius, calls deacons " mini- sters of tables and widows." Oecumenius, a learned commentator who lived several centuries after Jerome, in his. commentary on Acts vi., expresses himself thus: *' The apostles laid thei^ hands on those who were chosen deacons, not to confer on them that rank which they now hold in the church, but that they might, with all diligence and attention, distribute the neces-

188

saries of life to widows and orphans." And the council of Trullo, in the sixth century, expressly asserts, (can. 16,) that the seven deacons spoken of in the Acts of the Apostles, are not to be understood of such as ministered in divine service or in sacred mysteries, but only of such as served tables and attended the poor.

Another consideration, which shows beyond contro- versy that the early Christians universally considered the " seven " spoken of in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles as the proper New Testament deacons, is, that for several centuries many of the largest and most respectable churches in the world considered themselves as bound, in selecting their deacons, to confine themselves to the exact number seven, whatever might be their extent and their exi- gencies, on the avowed principle of conformity to the number of this class of oflScers first appointed in the mother church at Jerusalem. The council of Neocae- sarea enacted it into a canon that there should be but seven deacons in any city, however great, because this was according to the rule laid down in the Acts of the Apostles. And the church of Rome, both before and after this council, seems also to have looked upon that example as binding; for it is evident from the epistles of Cornelius, written in the middle of the third century, that there were but seven deacons in the church of Rome at that time, though there were forty-six presbyters. Prudentius intimates that it was so in the time of Sixtus, also in the year 261; for, speaking of Laurentius the deacon, he terms him the chief of those " seven men " who had their station near the altar, meaning the deacons of the church. Nay, in the fourth and fifth centuries, the custom in that city continued the same, as we learn both from Sozomen and Hilary, the Roman deacon, who wrote under the name of Ambrose.*

* Bingham's Origiaes Eccles-asticse, b. ii. ch. 20, sect. 19.

189

6. The current opinion of all the most learned and judicious Christian divines of all denominations, for several centuries past, is decisively in favour of con- sidering the passage in Acts vi. as recording the first 3>pointment of the New Testament deacons. Among 1 classes of theologians, Catholic and Protestant, Lutheran and Calvinistic, Presbyterian and Episcopal, this concurrence of opinion approaches so near to unanimity, that we may, without injustice to any other opinion, consider it as the deliberate and harmonious judgment of {he Christian church.

The very learned Suicer, a German Professor of the seventeenth century, in his Thesaurus Ecclesiasticus, (Art AtctKovos,) maikes the following statement on this subject : — " In the apostolic church, deacons were those who distributed alms to the poor, and took care of them : in other words, they were the treasurers of the church's charity. The original institution of this class of officers, is set forth in the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles. With respect to them, the 16th canon of the council of Constantine (in Trullo) says : — " They are those to whom the common administering to poverty is committed, not those who administer the sacraments." And Aristinus in his Synopsis of the canons of the same council, canon 18th says: — "Let him who alleges that the seven of whom mention is made in the Acts of the Apostles were deacons know that the account there given is not of those who ad- minister the sacraments, but of such as 'served tables.' " Zonaras, ad Canon 16, Trullanum, p. 145, says, those who by the apostles were appointed to the diaconate, were not ministers of spiritual things, but ministers and dispensers of meats. Oecumenius also, on the 6th chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, says: — "They laid their hands on the deacons who had been elected, which office was by no means the same with that which obtains at the present day in the church, {i. e. under the same name;) but that with the utmost care

190

and diligence they might distribute what was necessary to the sustenance of orphans and widows,"

From these considerations, I feel myself warranted in concluding with confidence, that the "seven" chosen at Jerusalem to " serve tables," were scriptural deacons, and the first deacons; and that, of course, every attempt to evade the necessary consequence of admit- ting this fact is wholly destitute of support.

III. A third opinion held by some on this subject is, that although the passage recorded in the b^inning of the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, is an account of the first appointment of New Testament deacons, and though their primary function was to take care of the poor, and " serve tables;" yet that the appropriate duties of their office were afterwards en- larged. Thus the Prelatists say, that Philip one of " the seven," is found soon after his appointment as deacon, preaching and baptizing. Hence they infer that these functions of right pertain to the deacon's office, and have belonged to it from the beginning. On the other hand, some Independents say, that the word deacon, according to its Greek etymology, means minister or servant ; that this general term may cover a large field of ecclesiastical ser\ice, and that New Testament deacons were probably at first intended, and now ought to be employed, to assist the pastor in counsel and government, as well as in serving the Lord's table, and attending to the relief of the poor. And even some Presbyterians have expressed the opinion that our ruling elders were a kind of deacons in disguise, and ought so to be considered and called; and that there ought not to be, and cannot be consis- tently with Scripture, any office-bearer charged with the duty of assisting the pastor in counsel and rule, other than the deacon.

I am fully persuaded that this is an erroneous opinion. It appears to me manifest, not only that it is inconsistent with the form of government of the Pres- byterian church, but what is a much more serious

191 •

difficulty, that it is altogether irreconcileable with the New Testament For,

1. An attentive and impartial perusal of the record of this first institution of deacons, must convince any one that preaching, baptizing, or partaking in the spiritual rule and government of the church, were so far from being embraced in the original destination of the New Testament deacon, that they were all absolutely pre- cluded by the very terms, and the whole spirit of the representation given by the inspired historian. The things complained of by the Grecian believers are, not that the preaching was defective, or that the govern- ment and discipline of the church were badly man- aged. Not a hint of this kind is given. The only complaint was, that the poor " widows had been neglected ;" in otlier words, had not had the due share of attention to their wants, and of relief from the church's bounty. To remove all cause of complaint on this score, the " seven" were chosen and set apart. The Inhere of duty to which they were appointed was one which the apostles declared they could not fulfil without leaving the word of God to serve tables."* They say, therefore, to the members of the church, ** look ye out seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business," i. e, over the " serving of tables:" ** And we will give ourselves to prayer and the ministry of the word." Now, to suppose that these

* It has been supposed by many that the phrase, *' serving- tables/* in the history of the institution of the deacon's office, had a reference either to the Lord's table, or to overseeing and supplying the tables of the poor, or perhaps both. But I am inchned to believe that this is an entire mistake. The word r^wjci^u, signifies indeed a table; but, in this connection, it seems obviously to mean a money-table, or a counter on which money was laid. Hence r^uTn^irvig a money-changer, or money- merchant. See Matt. xxi. 12, xxv. 27; Mark xi. 15; Luke xix. 2.3. The plain meaning, then, of Acts vi. seems to be this; — " It is not suitable that we should leave the word of God and devote ourselves to pecuniary affairs."

192

very deacons were appointed to officiate in ^' the ministry of die word and prayer," is an inconsistency, nay an absurdity, so glaring that the only wonder is bow any one can possibly adopt it after reading the passage in question. If the object had been, to adopt a supposi- tion, fitted to exhibit theaposdes, and the ^^mulutude" too, as acting like insane men or children, one more directly adapted to answer the end could not have been thought of.

2. The circumstance of Philip, sometime after his appointment as deacon, being found preaching and baptizing in Samaria, and other places, does not afford the smallest presumptive evidence agaiqst this conclusion. Soon after his appointment to the diaconate in Jerusalem, the members of the church in that city were chiefly " scattered abroad by persecution." Philip was of course driven from his residence. Now, the probability is that about this time, seeing he was a man " full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom," and therefore eminently qualified to be useful in preaching the gospel, he received a new ordination as an Evan- gelist, and in this character went forth to preach and baptize. He is expressly called an " Evangelist," by the same inspired writer who gives us an account of Im appointment as a deacon ; ( Acts xxi. 8. ) Until it can be proved, then, that he preached and baptized as a dea- con and not as an Evangelist, the supposition is utterly improbable and altogether worthless. It is really an imposition on credulity to urge it. And that cer- tainly never can be proved as long as the sixth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles remains a part of the inspired volume. As to Stephen, another of the "seven,*' dis- puting with gainsayers in private, and defending him- self before the council, it was not official preaching at all. It was nothing more than every professing Christian is at all times not only at liberty but under obligation to do, when assailed by unbelievers, or when brought before an unjust tribunal.

The truth is, the practice of connecting the functions

193

of preadiing and baptizing with the deacon'^ office, is one of the various human inventions which early hegBLa to q)ring up in the churchy and which turned aknost every eodesiastical office which had been £vindy instituted more or less from its primitive cbar^ acter. ^^ But from the beginning it was not so.'' It is a departure from die apostolic^ modeL We find, indeed, in several of the writers of the first three or four centuries, frequent intimations of deacons bdng

Grmitted to preach and administer the ordinance of ptism. But in almost every instance, it is r^re- sented as done in virtue of a i^>ecific permission from the pastor or bishop in each oase, ana as entirely un^ lawfol without such permission,' — a very different thing from a function inherent in an office, and always law- ful when a proper occasion for its exercise occurred ! In fact, ecelesiastieal history, I believe, will bear me out in saying, that within the first three centuries it would be just as correct to assert that private Chris- tians in general had a ri^it to preadi and baptize, as to maintain that deacons, in virtue of their office as such, had this right, because we meet with some in^ stances of their being both called upon to do so in cases of supposed necessity, or when specially permit- ted by superior ecclesiastics. Mr. Bingham, the learned episcopal antiquary, explicitly tells us, on the authority of several early writers, that private Chris^ dans, who sustained no office whatever in the church, were sometimes called upon to address the peo]:^e in the absence, or at the special request, of him whose official du^ it was to preach. The same learned author goes on to state, that in the apostolic age, or as long as the special gifts of the Holy Spirit, enabling men to prophecy, continued, all who possessed such special gifts, whether in office or not, might use '^ the word of exhortadcMi " in the church. ^' But then," 1^ adds, ^^ as such extraordinary gifts of the spirit of prophecy, were in a manner peculiar to the apostoli- cal age, this could not be a rule to the following ages

R

194

of the church. And, therefore, when once these gKb were ceased, the church went prudently by another rule, to allow none but such as were called by an ordi- nary commission to perform this office, except where some extraordinary natural endowments (such as were in Origen before his ordination) answering in some measure to those special gifts, made it proper to grant a license to laymen to exercise their talents for the benefit of the church. Or else, when necessi'hr im- posed the duty on deacons to perform the office oi preaching, when the bishop and presbyters were by sickness or other means debarred from it For the aforesaid author (Ambrose) plainly says, that deacons in his time were not ordinarily allowed pr^edicare in populo, i. e. preach to the people, as being an office to which they had no ordinary commission. And the same is said by the author of the Apostolical Constitu- tions, and many others. Therefore, since deacons were not allowed this power, but only in some special cases, it is the less to be wondered at, after the ceas- ing of spiritual gifts, it should generally be denied to laymen."*

A mistake on this point, in reference to the deacon's office, has arisen from misinterpreting certain terms which are used by some of the early writers to express their public service. The words Kn^vyfAot, xjj^pg, Kn^wga, &c., are frequently used in the New Testament to ex- press the public preacher, and preaching of the gospel. Now, when the same words are applied by some of the earlier Greek Fathers, and the corresponding words, prcBCOy prcedicatio^ and prcedicare^ by the Latins to the deacon's office, it has been hastily concluded that they were habitually preachers, in the New Testa- ment sense of the term. But the truth is, as every one in the least degree acquainted with those writers knows, these terms when used by the Fathers signify an en- tirely different thing. The deacons, in the third,

* BinghBm's Origines Ecclesiasticse, b. 14. ch. 4. sect 4.

195

fourth, and fifth centuries, are every where represen- ted as the common heralds, or criers of the church. That is, when any public notice was to be given; when the catechumens or the penitents were to be called upon aloud to come forward, or to withdraw; or when any public proclamation was to be made, in the course of the service in the church; it belonged to the deacon's office to perform this duty. Hence he was called the «»»e*'2» or crier, and was said «>»^v<r<rg/p, to cry aloud, or make proclamation. It belonged to the deacons also, to keep order at the doors, when the service was beginning; to see that the worshippers were seated in a quiet and orderly manner ; to stand around the communion table when it was spread, and with fans, made either of dried skins or peacock's feathers, to keep ofiP the flies from the consecrated elements ; and, after the consecration of the sacramen- tal elements, to bear them to the communicants. Hiese and a variety of subordinate duties were con- sidered as pertaining to their office, and hence they were regarded not as having any part of the priest- hood, according to the language of that day ; but as being the *' church's servants." All this is so explicitly acknowledged, and so abundantly proved by the learned Bmgham, (Origines Ecclesiasticae, book ii. chap. 20; and book xiv. chap. 4,) that any further enlargement on the subject is altogether unnecessary. The original office of the deacon was one of high trust and digni^; requiring much piety, wisdom, pru- dence, and diligence. But when the purity of the ehurch, both in doctrine and practice declined, and especially, when the ardour of her charity to the poor haid greatly slackened, that officer having little to do in his appropriate department, sunk, for a time, into a kind of ecclesiastical menial.

3. The directions afterwards given by Paul to Timothy, (1 Tim. iii.) respecting die proper qualifica^ tions of candidates for the deacon's office, are decis- ively opposed to the view of the subject which I am

196

now examining. When the apostle speaks of die qualifications indispensable in a teaching elder or bishop, he says he must not only be grave, pious, and of good report, but also *' apt to teadi,'' &c But he prescribes no such condition in the choice of deaoons. He gives no intimation that teaching made any part of their official work. It is said, indeed, that thejr ought to be men ^' holding the mystery of fiuth in a pure conscience ;" by which I understand to be meant, that they must be men holding the true faith in sincerity ; in other words, that they must be ortfaodoL and pious ; qualifications which ought to be found in all who bear office in the Church of God.

4. We have not the least evidence from any source, that the function of government was ever oonnectei with the deacon's office. We read of ruling elders^ but never of rulii^ deacons. Among .all the multi- plied witnesses drawn from the synagogue and the church, and fix>m almost all denominations of Chris- tians, ancient and modem, in favour of a bench of elders in each congregation for conducting its govern^ ment and discipline, I recollect no example of the members of that bench being called deacons, or of deacons having any place among them. Nay, it is pei*fectly manifest, that if, according to the scriptoral model, there ought to be bench or college, made up of a plurality of elders in each church, to be intmsted with the inspection and rule of the whole body, then there is not a shadow of evidence to support the daim of the deacons to a seat in that body. But if such a bench of rulers, imder the name of elders or presby-* ters be given up, then I will venture to assert, there is not a shred of evidence, either in or out of the Bible, that similar powers were ever assigned to deacons as such. We may, indeed, call our ruling elders by the name of deacons if we please. And so we may call them dervises or imans with the Turks, and say that we mean by these titles to designate the members of the parochial presbytery or consistory in

197

eadi church. But the real questions which present themselves for solution are such as these, — Is it agree- able to the New Testament model, that there be in every Christian congregation a plurali^ of pious and prudent men, invested with the office of inspection and government in the church ? Or ought all eccle- siastical authority and discipline to be exercised by* the pastor alone? If the former be admitted, then ought the body of spiritual rulers to be styled elders or deacons? If the latter name be contended for, as the more scriptural, then what passage of Scripture, or of early uninspired history, can be mentioned which countenances the application of this title to ecclesiastical rulers as such ? The truth is, it is not perceived how any can consistently maintain, that the officers whom Presbyterians are wont to call ruling elders, are really deacons, and ought to be so desig- nated, without abandoning the church session, as destitute of all scriptural warrant. He who does this, however, must hold, either that the pastor of each church has the whole government and discipline in his own hands, and that the persons called elders or deacons, are only a set of convenient advisers, without any rightful judicial authority, or that all authority ought to be exercised by the body of the communi- cants, and every question of admission or discipline submitted to their vote. In the latter case, he may be a very pious and excellent Independent, but he has no claim to the character of a Presbyterian.

It is deeply to be regretted, that the office of deacon in its true nature, and its highly important and scrip- tural character, is not to be found in many Presby- terian churches. In some, this office is wholly dropped. Neither the name nor the thing is to be found in them. In others, the ruling elders, or the members of the church session, are constantly styled deacons, and scarcely ever designated by any other title, while the office really indicated in Scripture by that title is not retained. And in a third class of our churches,

r2

198

those who are meant for real deacons, that is, who are chosen and set apart as such, as well as called by that name, are employed in functions for which the office of deacon was never instituted* The cases, it is feared, are few, in which the offices of elder and deacon are both retained, and the appropriate functioiis of each distinctly maintained.

Perh^ in a majority of our churdies, the office of deacon, strictly so called, is entirely dropped. This, it is believed, is also virtually the case to a consider- able extent in the Church of Scotland, and anumg the large and respectable body of Presbyterians in the north of Ireland. The origin of this extensr?e disuse of an unquestionable scriptural office, is pro- bably to be traced to the peculiar form of the provisicm made in some countries for the support of the pocnr, which was supposed to render the deaconship as a separate office, unnecessary. Deacons had a place in the original organization of the Protestant Church of Scotland, and for many years after the Reformation were universally retained and much employed in that church as a distinct class of officers. But in later times, the office has either been sufiPered to fall into disuetude altc^ether, or, as is more common, has been imited with that of ruling elder, in the same indi- viduals. So that the ruling elders in the Church of Scotland are generally expected, and undertake to act as deacons also. The same arrangement, it is believed, is also generally adopted among the Presby- terians in Ireland.

As to those churches in our own country in which the office of deacon has been suffered to fall into disuse altogether, this event is certainly, on a variety of accounts, to be regretted ; among others, for the following reasons.

1. Every scriptural precedent is worthy of serious regard. The office of deacon was evidently brought into the church by inspired men. And although it is not contended that it is essential to an organized

199

cdiurdi to have officers of this class, inasmirch as the churdi undoubtedly did without them for a short time after its first organization, yet as the office is an institution of infinite wisdom, and necessary to a full array of all the officers which belong to the vii^ble church, it seems expedient to retain it in all cases in which it is possible.

2. We know that in every Jewish synagogue, before the coming of Christ, there was a class of officers whose peculiar duty it was to collect and dispense the monies contributed for the support of the poor. This seems to have been an invariable part of the syna*' gogae system. And as that system was evidently the model on which the Christian church was formed, we may presume, that a feature of it so strongly recom- mended by age and experience, is worthy of adoption.

3. Although some churches may plead in excuse for discontinuing the use of this office, that they have no church poor, and therefore no occasion tor the appropriate services of deacons, yet the question is, Ought they to allow this 1x) be the case ? What though the laws of the state make provision of a decent kind for all the poor? Are there not commonly within the bounds, and even among the communicants of every church of any extent, and of the ordinary standing in point ox age, generally found a greater or less number of persons who have seen more com« fortable days, but ai*e now reduced; aged widows,

' persons of delicate retiring spirits, who are struggling with the most severe privations of poverty in secret, but cannot bring themselves to apply to the civil officer for aid as paupers; who, at the same time, would be made comparatively comfortable by a pit- tance now and then administered in the tender and affectionate spirit of the gospel? Now, ought the church to take no measures for searching out such members who are not, and cannot be reached by the ]^al provision^ and kindly ministering to their com- fort? But if there be no class of officers whose

soo

appropriate duty it is to make this whole concern an ODject of their attention, it will too often be n^lected, and thus the interest of Christian charity seriously suffer. It is not a sufficient answer to this argument to say, as those who philosophize on the subject of pauperism say, and, to a certain extent, with great trutn, that this very provision would probably invite application, and perhaps, in some instances, induce improper reliance upon it, to the neglect of economy and diligence. Supposing this, in some degree, to be the case, would it not be better to relieve some portion of the poverty brought on by improvidence, than to allow humble, tender piety to pine in secret, unpitied and unrelieved, under the pressure of that helpless penury, which was induced by the hand of a sovereign God ? Nay, is no pity, no active sympathy due fiom the church even to indigence notoriously induced by sin ? The considerations which have been suggested, furnish, indeed, a good argument for having deacons of suitable character; men of piety, wisdom, benevo- lence, practical acquaintance with the world and with human nature, who would be likely to perform their duty with discernment, prudence, and unfeigned Christian charity, cautiously guarding against the evils to which the relief they are commissioned to bear is exposed, but no argument at all against affording such relief when really needed.

4. It is a great error to suppose that deacons can- not be appropriately and profitably employed in various other ways besides ministering to the poor of the church. They might, with a great propriety be made . the managers of all the money tables, or fiscal concerns of each congregation ; and, for this purpose, might be incorporated, if it were thought necessary by law, that they might be enabled regularly to hold and em-

loy all the property, real and personal of the church.

ut, even if it were thought inexpedient that boards of deacons should be allowed thus to supersede the boards of " trustees," which are, at present, commonly

fi

201

•mpfoyed to manage ^acheeoleBiastical treasury; still tlini*e are very inxpofttant services in reference to pecuniary ooneemsy which they might manage, and which it is'believed, would be greatly beneficial to the church if they were considered as at all times bound to! manage, and should actually manage with wisdom^ energy, and zeal. I refer to the church's contributions, to the various great objects of Christian enterprise which distinguish the present day. That these contri- butions to the cause of the Bible; of missions, foreign and domestic; of Sabbath schools; and of the various other Christian and benevolent undertakings for pro- moting knowledge, virtue, and happiness, temporal and etemsd, among men^ ought to be continued, and greatly increased, — no one who looks into the Bible, or who knows any thing of the Christian spirit, can for a moment doubt. It is quite evident, too, that these contributions ought to be perfectly volun- tary, and any attempt to render them' otherwise, would be both unsoriptural and mischievous. But would it not tend to render the whole business of liberali^ to the cause of Christ more regular, more ea^, more abun- dant, and ultimately more productive, if it were placed under the enlightened advice, and wise management of six or eight deacons in each church? Suppose the pastor and the elders of every congregation to be animated with a proper spirit on mis subject, and to be habitually uttering and diflusing proper sen- timents; and suppose the whole business of collecting the contributions, and paying them over to the respec* tive -'.reasuries for which they were destined, were devolved on the deacons, as an executive board, who might call to their aid, and would really confer, as w^ as receive a benefit, by calling to their aid, in the details of collection, a number of active, pious sub- agents ? Can any one doubt that the contributions of the churches would be more systematic, more regular, more conveniendy received, better proportioned, and a part, at least, and in some cases a large part, of the

S02

expenses paid to travelling agents, saved for the cause of Christ r The truth is, an enlightened, active, pious board of deacons might place this whole subject on such a footing, and when they had gotten it fairly arranged, and under way, might manage it in such a manner, as without adding in the least degree to the burdens of the people, would render their contribu- tions more productive, as well as more easy and economical in every part of their management.

With respect to the mode of disposing of the deacon's office adopted extensively in our sister churches of Scotland and Ireland,* and in a few instances in this country, namely, laying it on the ruling elders, and uniting both offices in the same individual, it is un- doubtedly liable to very strong objections, as will appear from the following considerations.

1. One office is quite enough to be borne by the same person ; especially an office so important, so responsible, so abundantly sufficient to employ the heart, the hands, and the time of the most active and zealous, as that of the ruling elder. However pious, wise, and unwearied he may be, he will find the work pertaining to his office as elder, enough, and more than enough, especially in this day of enlarged Christian activity to put in requi- sition all his powers. Why then add another office to one already occupied, if he be faithful to the utmost extent of his faculties? Similar remarks may be made to a considerable extent concerning the deacon's office. It is enough when faithfully discharged, to occupy all the leisure time of the most active and faithful incum- bent Both certainly cannot be undertaken by the same individual, without some of the duties pertaining to one or the other being neglected.

2. Where there are suitable candidates for office among the communicants of a church, it is commonly

* The same mixture of offices has also long existed, it is believed in the Church of Geneva. See Le Mercier's Ch. Hist of Gen. p. 214.

203

wise to distribute offices as extensively among them as circmnstances will conveniently admit. If indeed, there be a dearth of proper materials for making ecclesiastical officers, the difficulty must be surmounted in the best way that is practicable. But if there be individuals enough to sustain it, the diffusion of office-power among a considerable number, is so far from being an evil, that it is manifestly, and may be highly advantageous. It brings a greater number to take an interest in the affairs of the church. It makes a greater number intimately acquainted with the concerns of the church. And by calling a greater number to pray, and speak, and act in behalf of the church, it tends to promote the spiritual, and it may be the everlasting benefit of them and their children. Why, then, heap a plurality of offices upon a single person ? It is depriving the church of a manifest advantage, and may be the means of depri- ving the individuals themselves of both comfort and edification.

3, If there be not an absolute imcompatibility be* tween the offices of ruling elder and deacon, there is at least such an interference between their respective duties, as is certainly undesirable, and ought by all means to be avoided. There is a collision in this case analagous to that which takes place, when a man visits the sick in the double character of a physician and minister of the Gospel. For although in many cases, the duties and services of each character may happily harmonize and help one another; yet perhaps, in many more, it will appear to the discerning eye that they had better be separated. When an elder, as such, goes forth to the discharge of his official duties, it is to promote the spiritual interest of the flock of which he is made one of the " overseers." To this purpose it is important that he should have the most unreserved and confidential access to all the members of the flock and their children ; and that nothing should be allowed to intervene which was adapted to disguise the feelings, to divide the attention, or to clog the operations of either

204

party. Bot if, when this elder visits the poor for the sake of benefitting their souls, they receive him with smiles, with apparent cordiality, aiid with mudi pioos talk, chiefly for the concealed purpose of increasing the allowance which, as deacon, he may be disposed to minister to them : or, when he visits them as a dear con, they feel jealous, or alienated on account of some supposed deficiency in that allowance, and of course in some measure close their minds against him as their

Spiritual guide : or, when the mind of the Presbyter eacon himself becomes divided and perplexed between the rival claims of these two classes of auties^ less f^ood is done, less pure unmingled feeling exercised, and less comfort enjoyed on either side.*

On all these accounts, the two offices in que^on, as they are entirely different in their nature, ought VBr doubtedly to be separated in practice, to be disdiarged by different persons, and to be carefully guarded against that interference which is adapted to render both less useful.

We are led, then, by the foregoing &cts and argi>- ments, to the iFollowing conclusions :—

1. That the deacon is a divinely instituted officer, and ought to be retained in the church.

2. That the function to which the deacon was ap- pointed by the apostles, was to manage the pecuniary affairs of the church, and especially to preside over the collections and disbursements for the poor.

3. That deacons, therefore, ought not only to be men of piety, but also of judgment, prudence, know- ledge of the world, and weight of character.

4. That preaching was not, in the primitive church, any part of the deacon's duty, but came in among other human innovations, as corruption gained ground.

5. That there is no warrant whatever for assigning

* See this subject treated in a striking manner, and at con- siderable length, in Dr. Chalmers* Christian and Civic £<Sononiy of Large Towns. Vol. i. chapter vii.

205

to deacons the function of government in the church, and that their undertaking any such function, . is nothing less than ecclesiastical usurpation.

6. That confounding the office of deacon with that of ruling elder, is an unwarranted confusion, both of names and offices, which are entirely distinct.

7. That even die .uniting of these two offices in the same persons is by no means advisable, and tends materially to impair the comfort and usefulness of both.

8« That deacons ought to be ordained by the im- position of hands. In this ordination the hands of the pastor and of the eldership ought to be laid on. I know not the shadow of a reason why this solemnity should be omitted. The venerable Dr. Dwight, in his System of Theology, when treating on the office of deacons, unequivocally declares his conviction that the laying on of hands ought always to be employed in setting them apart, and pronounces the omission of it to be ^' incapable, so far as he knows, of any de- fence." The disregard of scriptural example in the omission, is as painful as it is obvious and unques- tionable.

9. That the deacons, although they ought always, if possible, to be present at the meetings of the church session, for the sake of giving information and aidii^ in counsel, can have no vote as church 'rulers, and, therefore, cannot give their vote in the admission or exclusion of members, or in any case of ecclesiastical discipline.

Chapter XL THE QUALIFICATIONS PROPER FOR THIS OFFICE

The account which has been given of the nature and duties of the office of ruling elder, is adapted to reflect much light on the qualifications by which he who bears it ought to be distinguished. Those who are called to such extensive, interesting, and highly important spiritual duties — duties which enter so deeply into the comfort and edification of the Church of God — it surely requires no formal argument to show, ought to possess a character in some degree corresponding with the sphere in which they are ap- pointed to move. There cannot be a plainer dictate of common sense. Yet to attempt a brief sketch of the more important of the qualifications demanded for this office, may not be altogether unprofitable.

And here it may be observed, in the outset, that it is by no means necessary that ruling elders should be aged persons. For although it cannot be doubted that the tide is literally expressive of age ; and although it is equally certain, that, originally, the office was

f generally conferred on men somewhat advanced in ife, as being most likely, other things being equal, to possess wisdom, prudence, experience, and weight of

207

character; yet the term, from a very early period, came to be a mere title of office, without any respect to the years of the individual who bore it. This is evident, not only from the history of Jewish practice, but also from the statements of the New Testament. If Timothy was not merely a ruling, but also a teach- ing elder, though so young a man that the apostle said to him — Let no man despise thy youth ; and if, in every age of the church, young men have been con- sidered as qualified, on the score of age, to be elders that labour in the word and doctrine as well as rule, there can be no doubt that young men, if otherwise well qualified, may with propriety be appointed elders to assist in ruling the Church of God. Nay, where such persons, with other suitable qualifications, are to be found, it is expedient to introduce some in younger life into the eldership of every church; not only that there may be individuals in the body fitted for more active duties, but also that some of the number may have that kind of official training, and that familiarity with ecclesiastical business, which early experience and long habit alone can give.

It may be remarked, however, that although neither scripture, nor the constitution of the presbyterian church, prescribes any absolute rule with respect to the age of those who may be considered as candidates for the eldership ; yet it is very manifest, that those who are either minors in age, or " novices " in the Christian character and profession, ought by no means, in ordinary circumstances, to be elected to this office. In the Church of Scotland, the rule is, that no one can be chosen an elder who is not twenty-one years of age. A similar regulation, it is believed, exists in some other foreign churches; and it may be consi- dered as a dictate of common prudence.

But, though the circumstance of age, as a general rule, does not enter into the essential qualifications of ruling elders, there are other qualifications which are highly important, and indeed indispensable. These

208

are stated by the inspired apostle, in writing to Timothy, in the following comprehensive and pointed language : — " An elder must be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children ; one that ruletfa well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity ; not accused of riot, or unruly ; not self-willed; not soon angry; not given to wine; no striker; not given to filthy lucre; but .a lover of hos- pitality; a lover of good men; sober, just, holy, tem- perate, sound in the faith, in chari^, in patience.'' See Timothy iii. compared with Titus i, 6—8, and il 2, which passages evidently appear, on tracing the connection, to be equally applicable to teadiing and ruling.

The design of appointing persons to the office of ruling elder is, not to pay them a oompliment ; not to give them an opportunity of figuring as speakers in judicatories ; not to create the pageants of ecclesias- tical ceremony ; but to secure able, faithful, and truly devoted counsellors and rulers of the church. To obtain wise and efficient guides, who shall not only go along with the flock in their journey heavenward, but go before them in every thing that pertains to Chris- tian duty.

It cannot be doubted, indeed, that every member of the Christian church is bound to exhibit a holy, de- vout, and exemplary life ; to have his mind well stored with religious knowledge ; to be able to give an answer to every one that asketh a reason of the hope that is in him ; and to avoid every thing that is criminal in itself, that may be just cause of offence to his breth- ren, or that may have even the appearance of evil. But it is equally manifest, that all these qualifications are still more important, and required in a still higher degree in those who are intrusted with the spiritual inspection and regulation of the church. As they occupy a place of more honour and authority than the other members of the church, so they also occupy a station of greater responsibility. The eyes of hun-

209

dreds will be upon them as elders, which were not upon them as private Christians. Their brethren and sisters, over whom they are placed in the Lord, will naturally look up to them for advice, for instruction, for aid in the spiritual life, and for a shining example. The expectation is reasonable, and ought not to be disappointed. The qualifications of elders, therefore, ought, in some good measure, to correspond with it.

1. An elder, then, ought, first of all, to be a man of unfeigned and approved piety. It is to be re- gretted when the piety of .any member of the church is doubtful, or evidently feeble and wavering. It is deplorable when any who name the name of Christ manifest so much indecision in their profession — so much timidity and unsteadiness in their resistance to error and sin — so much conformity to the world, and so little of that undaunted, ardent, and thorough adherence to their professed principles, as to leave it dubious with many whether they are " on the Lord's side" or not. But how much more deplorable when any thing of this kind appears in those who are ap- pointed to watch, to preside, and to exert an extensive influence over a portion of the family of Christ! What is to be expected, when " watchmen on the walls of Zion " — for such ruling elders are undoubtedly to be regarded — appear as beacons to warn private Christians of what ought to be avoided, rather than as models to guide, to attract, and to cheer them on to all that is spiritual, and holy, and becoming the gospel.

Can he who is either destitute of piety, or who has but a small portion of it, engage in the arduous and deeply spiritual duties of the ruling elder with comfort to himself, or with any reasonable hope of success ? It cannot be supposed. To fit ecclesiastical rulers for acting in their appropriate character, and for per- forming the work which pertains to it, with cordial diligence, faithfulness, and perseverance, will require cordial and decisive attachment to the service of the

s2

210

church; minds intent upon the work; hearts filled with love to Jesus and to the souls of men, and pre^ ferring Jerusalem above their chief joy. Unless they are animated with this affectionate interest in their work ; unless they are habitually impelled by an en- lightened and cordial attachment to the great cause in which they are engaged, they will soon become weary of their arduous and self-denying labours ; they will find waiting on the flock, visiting and prajring with the sick, instructing the serious and inquir- ing, correcting the disoi^erly, watching over the spiritual interests of all, and attending the various judicatories of the church, an irksome task. But with such a zeal as has been described, they wili be ready to contend for the truth, to engage in the most self-denying duties, nay, to ^* spend and be spent" for Christ. To promote the best interests of Zion will be their " meat and drink." No labours, no trials, no difficulties will move them, neither will they count their lives dear unto themselves, so that they may finish their course with joy, and accomplish the work which they have received of the Lonl Jesus. A few such elders in every church would, with the divine blessing, do more to silence infidelity — to strike even the scomer dumb — to promote the triumph of gospel truth — and to rouse, sustain, and bear forward the cause of vital piety, than hundreds of those mini- sters and elders who act as if they supposed that supplying the little details of an ecclesiasticdi formality was the whole purpose of their official appointm^it. And, in truth, we have no reason to expect, in general, that the piety of the mass of members, in any church, will rise much higher than that of their rulers and guides. Where the latter are either lifeless formalists, or, at best, but " babes in Christ," we shall rarely find many under their care of more vitality or of superior stature.

2. Next to piety, it is important that a ruling elder be possessed of good sense and sound judgment.

211

Without this he will be wholly unfit to act in the various difficult and delicate cases which may arise in the discharge of his duty. A man of weak and child- ish mind, however fervent his piety, is by no means adapted to the station of an ecclesiastical ruler, coun- sellor, and guide. He who bears the office in question is called to have intercourse with all classes of people ; to. engage in the most arduous and trying duties, and to' deliberate and decide on some of the most perplex- ing questions that can come before the human mind. Can it be doubted, that good sense and solid judg- ment are indispensable to the due discharge of such official work as this? How would a judge on the bench, or a magistrate in his office, be likely to get along without this qualification? Much more im- portant is it, if possible, that the ecclesiastical ruler be enlightened and judicious, because he deliberates and decides on more momentous subjects, and because he has no other than moral power with which to enforce his decisions. Moses, therefore, spoke the language of good sense, as well as of inspired wisdom, when he said to the people of Israel, (Dent. i. 13,) " Take ye wise men, and understanding, and known among your tribes, and I will make them rulers over you." This point, indeed, it would seem, can scarcely be made more plain than common sense makes it, and might, therefore, be considered as foreclosing all illustration, did not some churches appear disposed to make the experiment, how far infinite wisdom is to be believed when it pronounces, by the prophet, a wo against those who make choice of babes to rule over them.

3. A ruling elder ought to be sound in the faith, and well informed in relation to gospel truth. The elder who is not orthodox in his creed, instead of con- tributing as he ought to build up the church in the knowle<^ and love of the truth, will of course be the means of scattering error, as far as his influence extends. And he who is not well informed on the subject of Christian doctrine, will not know whether

212

he is promoting the one or the other. Accordingly, when this class of officers is ordained in our church, we call upon them to do what we do not require from the private members of the church, viz. solemnly and publicly to adopt the Confession of Faith, '^as con- taining the system of doctrine taught in the Holy Scriptures." When this is considered, and also that they are expected to be, to a certain extent, instructors and guides in divine things to many of those committed to their oversight; and, above all, that they will be often called to deliberate on charges of heresy, as well as immorality, and to sit in judgment on the doctrinal belief, not only of candidates for admission into the church as private members, but also on cases of alleged aberration from the truth in ministers of the gospel ; the necessity of their being ^^ sound in the faith," and of their having enlightened and clear views of the system of revealed truth, is too plain to need argument for its support.

The truth is, the ruling elder who is active, zealous, and faithful, will have occasion, almost every day, to discriminate betwen truth and error, to act as a guardian of the church's orthodoxy, to pass his judg- ment, either privately or judicially, on real or supposed departures from it, and to instruct the inexperienced and the doubting in the great doctrines of our holy re- ligion. And although all elders are not expected to be profound theologians any more than all ministers, yet that the former as well as the latter should have a general and accurate acquaintance with the gospel system, and be ready to defend its leading doctrines, by a ready, pertinent, and conclusive reference to scriptural testimony, and thus be able to " separate between the precious and the vile," in theory as well as in practice, is surely as little as can possibly be demanded of those who are placed as leaders and scuides in the house of God. ^

4. Again, an elder ought to be a man of eminent prudence. By prudence here is, of course, not meant

213

that spurious characteristic which calls itself by this name, but which ought rather to be called timidity, or a criminal shrinking from duty, on the plea that ^^ there is a lion in the way." Yet while we condemn thi^ as unworthy of a Christian, and especially unworthy of a Christian counsellor and ruler, there is a prudence which is genuine and greatly to be coveted. This is no other than practical Christian wisdom which not only discerns what is right, but also adopts the best mode of doing it ; which is not at all inconsistent with firmness, and the highest moral courage, but which happily regulates and directs it. It has been often observed that there is a right and a wrong way of doing the best things. The thing done may be excellent in itself, butJifiay be done in a manner, at a time, and attended with circumstances, which will be likely to dis- gust and repel, and thus prevent all benefit. Hence a man who is characteristically eccentric, undignified, rash, precipitate, or indiscreetly talkative, ought by no means to be selected as an ecclesiastical ruler. He will probably do more mischief than good, will generally create more divisions than he heals, and will rather generate offences than remove them. Perhaps there is no situation in human society which more imperiously calls for delicacy, caution, reserve, and the most vigilant discretion, than that of an ecclesiastical ruler. If popu* lar rumour begin to charge a church member with some delinquency either in faith or practice; let one of the elders, under the notion of being faithful, implicitly credit the story, go about making inquiries respecting its truth, winking and insinuating, and thus contributing to extend its circulation ; and however pure his motives, he may, before he is aware, implicate himself in the chaige of slander, and become so situated, in respect to the supposed culprit, as to render it altogether improper that he should sit in judgment on his case. The maxim of the wise man — " be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath," applies to every human being, especially to every 'professing Christian, but above all to every one

214

who is appointed to maintain truths order, purity, peace and love in the Church, of God.

It requires much prudence to judge when it is pro- per to commence the exercise of discipline against a supposed offender. Discipline is an important, nay, a vital matter in the Christian church. But it may be commenced indiscreetly, vexatiously, when that which is alleged cannot be shown to be an offence against the divine law; or when, though a really censurable offence, there is no probability that it can be proved. To attempt the exercise of discipline in such cases is to disgrace it, to convert it from one of the most impor- tant means of grace into an instrument of rashness, petulance, and childish precipitancy. Often, very often has the very name of discipline been rendered odious, the peace of families and neighbourhoods grievously disturbed, the influence of ecclesiastical judicatories destroyed, and the cause of religion deeply wounded, by judicial proceedings, which ought either never to have been commenced, or to which the smallest measure of prudence would have given a very different direction.

The importance of the subject constrains me to add, that prudence, much prudence is also imperiously demanded in the exercise of a dignified and cautious reserve while ecclesiastical process is pending. One great reason why it is thought better by Presbyterians to exercise discipline rather by a bench of wise and pious ecclesiastical senators, than by the vote of the whole body of church members, is, that the public discus- sion and decision of many things concerning personal character, which the exercise of discipline necessarily discloses respecting others, as well as the culprit, is adapted in many cases to do more harm than good, especially before the process is closed. To guard against this evil, it is very important that the elders carefully avoid all unseasonable disclosures in respect to the busi- ness which may be at any time before the Session. Until they have done what shall be deemed proper, in a

215

delicate case it is surely unwise, by thoughtless blabbing, to throw obstacles in their own way, and perhaps to defeat the whole purpose which they have in view. Yet how often, by one imprudent violation of this plain rule, has the discipline of the church been degraded or frustrated, and the character of those who administered it exposed to ridicule ?

These, and similar considerations, serve clearly to show, that no degree of piety can supersede the necessity of prudence in ecclesiastical rulers ; and that, of all characters in a congregation, an indiscreet, meddling, garrulous, gossiping, tattling elder, is one of the most pestiferous.

5. It is important that an elder be " of good report of them that are without.'* The circumstance of his being chosen to the office by the members of the church, does, indeed, afford strong presumption that he sustains among them an unexceptionable character. But it is also of great importance that this class of officers, as well as those who " labour in the word and doctrine,'* should stand well with those who are without, as well as those who are within the pale of the Christian community. The ecclesiastical ruler may often be called, in discharging his official duties, to converse with the worldly and profane, who have no particular regard either for his master or his office. Nay, he must be almost every day that he lives the object of the scrutiny of such men. In this case it is peculiary desirable that his personal character be such as to command universal respect and confi- dence ; that it be not liable to any particular suspicion or imputation ; but that, on the contrary, it possess such weight and respectability in the community, as will render him an aid and a blessing to his eccle- siastical connection* To this end, his unbending integrity in all the walks of life ; his spotless probity and honour in every pecuniary transaction ; his gravity and dignity in all the intercourse of society; his exemplary government of his own family ; his abstrac-

216

tion from all unhallowed conformity to the world; — ought to present in some good measm^ a pattern of Christian consistency. It is saying little in fevour of a church officer, to aJl^e that his reputation is sodi that he does no harm to the ecclesiastical body with which he is connected. It is to be r^retted if he do not promote its benefit every day by his active senrices^ and extend its influence by the lustre of his exainple.

6. A ruling elder ought to be a man of puUic sHrit and enlarged views. He who is called by his official duty to plan and labour for the extension of the Redeemer's kingdom, surely ought not, of all men, to have a narrow and illiberal mind ; to be sparing of labour, parsimonious in feeling and habit, or contented with small attainments. It is eminently desirable, then, that a ruling elder be a man of expanded heart toward other denominations, as far as is consistent with entire fidelity to scriptural truth and order; that he aim high in spiritual attainment and progress; that he be will- ing to give much, to labour much, and to make sacrifices for the cause of Christ; and that he be continually looking and praying for the further enlargement and prosperity of Zion. Such a man will not be willing to see the church fall asleep, or stagnate. Such a man's mind will be teeming with desires, plans, and prayers for the advancement of the Saviour's cause. Such a man will not content himself, nor be satisfied to see others contenting themselves, with a little round of frigid form- alities, or with the interests of a single parish; but the aspirations of his heart, and the active efforts of his life, will be directed to the extension and prosperity of tKe church in all its borders, and to the universal establish- ment and triumph of that gospel which is " the power of God unto salvation to every one that believetfi."

The qualification of which we speak has been, in all ages, and from the nature of the case must ever be, of inestimable importance in every ruler and guide of the church. But we may venture to pronounce that it never was so important to the church that she should have

217

such rulers as it is at the present day. Now that she is awaking from her slumber, and arousing to a sense of her long forgotten obligations — now that she is, as we hope, arising from the dust, and " putting on her beautiful garments," and looking abroad in the length and breadth of those conquests which have been promised her by her Almighty Head — now that all her resources, phyacal and moral, are called for in every direction, with an emphasis and a solemnity never before equalled — is it not manifest that all who, in such a stage of her course, undertake to be her counsellors and guides, ought to be neither drones nor cowards, neither par- simonious of labour and sacrifice, nor disposed to sit down contented with small acquisitions ? Ruling elders at the present day have perhaps an opportunity of serving the church more extensively and effectually than ever before. How desirable and important then, that they have a heart in some measure commensurate with the calls and opportunities of the day in which their lot is cast ! How desirable that they cherish those enlarged and liberal views, both of duty and effort, which become those who are called to a conspicuous and interesting part in a cause which is dear to all holy beings ! So important is this, that it is probable we shall generally find that in liberality of contribution to the various ol3Jects of Christian effort, and in en- largement of mind to desire and seek the extension of the Redeemer's kingdom, the mass of the members of any church may commonly be graduated by the char- acter of their eiders. If the leaders and guides of the church be destitute of public spirit, and be not found taking the lead in large plans, labours, and sacrifices, for extending the reign of knowledge, truth, and righteousness ; it will be strange, indeed, if a more en- larged spirit be found prevailing among the generality of their fellow members.

7. The last qualification on which I shall dwell, as important in the office before us, is ardent zeal and a spirit of importunate prayer. Large views, and

218

liberal plans and donations, wiU not answer withoot this. The truth is, the Church of Ood has the most serious and unceasing obstacles to encounter in every step of her progress. As long as she is faidifiil, h^ course is never smooth or unobstructed. In maintain- ing truth, in guarding the claims of gospel holiness, and in sustaining discipline, the enmity of the human heart will not £ul to manifest itself, and to <^er more or less resistance to that which is good. The worldly and profane will ever be found in the ranks of deter- mined opposition. And, alas! that some who bear the name of Christ are not unfrequently found in llie same ranks ; thus grieving the hearts and trying the patience of those who are called to act as the repre* sentatives and leaders of the church. To meet and overcome difficulties of this kind, requires all the fixed- ness of purpose, and all the zeal in the service of Christ, which his most devoted servants can bring to their work.

Besides all this, there is much in the daily duties of the ruling elder which puts to a very serious test all his devotedness to the cause of his Master. He is called to live like a minister of the gospel, in the very atmos- phere of prayer and religious conversation. In the chamber of the sick and dying, in conversing with die anxious inquirer and the perplexed or desponding be- liever in the private circle, and in the social meeting for prayer, abroad and at home, in the house and by the way, it must be " his meat and drink" to be found ministering to the best interests of his fellow-men. So that if he have but little zeal, but little taste for prayer, but little anxiety for the welfare of immortal souls, he will not, he cannot enter with proper feeling into his appropriate emplojmients. But if he be animated with a proper spirit, he will find it ]:^asant to be thus employed. Instead of shunning scenes and opportuni- ties of usefulness he will diligently seek them. And instead of finding them wearisome, he will fed no hap-

219

piness more pure and rich than that which he expe- riences in such occupations as these.

It is evident, then, not only that the ecclesiastical ruler ouffht to have unfeigned piety, but that his piety ought to be of that decisive character, and accom- panied with that fervent zeal, which bears its possessor forward without weariness in the discharge of self- denying duties* The higher the degree in which he pos- sesses tJ^is characteristic, provided it be accompanied with" wisdom, prudence, and a knowledge of human nature, the greater will probably be his usefulness in the church which he serves ; and the greater assuredly will be his own personal enjoyment in rendering that service.

It is more than possible that this view of the qualifi- cations proper for the office which we are considering, may cause some, when solicited to undertake it, to draw back under the conscientious impression that they have not the characteristics which are essential to the faith- ful discharge of its duties. And it would be wrong to say that there are not some cases, in which such an impression ought to be admitted. There can be no doubt that there are those who bear this office who ought never to have accepted it. To this class unques- tionably belong all those who have no taste for the appropriate duties of the office, and who do not resolve sedulously and faithfully to perform them. But let no humble devoted follower of Jesus Christ, who truly desires to serve and glorify him, and who is willing from the heart to do all that God shall enable him, for the promotion of the Redeemer's kingdom ; let not him be deterred by the representation which has been given from accepting the office, if called to it by his Christian brethren. The deeper his sense of his own unfitness, the more likely will he be to apply unceas- ingly and importunately for heavenly aid, and the nearer he lives to the throne of grace the more largely will he partake of that wisdom and strength which he needs. There are no doubt some, as we said, who are

\

220

really unqualified for this office ; but, in general, it may be maintained that those who hare the deepest im- pression of the importance and arduousness of its duties, and of their own want of adequate qualifications, are £Eir better prepared for those duties than such as advance to the discharge of them with unwavering confidence and self-complacency.

Chapter XII ON THE ELECTION OF RULING ELDERS

Under this general head a variety of questions occur, the solution of which is important.

I. In the first place, who are the proper electors of ruling elders ? This question is not definitely re- solved by the " Form of Government" of the Presby- terian Church in the United States. Its language is as follows : — " Every congregation shall elect persons to the oflSce of ruling elder, and to the office of deacon, or either of them, in the mode most approved and in use in that congregation; but, in all cases, the persons elected must be male members in full communion in the church in which they are to exercise their office."

When a new church is to be organized, and when of course there are no elders already in office, applica- tion ought to be made to the presbytery, stating the wishes of those who contemplate forming the church, requesting their sanction, and also the appointment of one or more of their number to preside in the election and ordination of the candidates for the respective offices of elders and deacons. The person or persons thus appointed by the presbytery to act in the case, after causing due and regular notice of their appoint-

t2

2^2

ment and its object to be given, ought to meet with the members of the congregation, to preach on the subject which occasions the meeting, to explain the nature and importance of the office ; and, having done this, to call upon those who may be quaHfied as electors to give their votes for such of their number as they would wish to have as their spiritual rulers. Having done this openly in the face of the congregation, the ordina- tion of the elders elect may either take place on the spot before the assembly shall separate, or may be postponed to a future time, as may be judged most expedient. By this is meant, that the election in this case, being made immediately by a popular vote of the members of the church, there is no need of postponing the ordination for the purpose of propounding the names of the pei'sons elected from the pulpit, as is necessary and practised in other cases. In the case supposed, the full concurrence of the persons entitled to vote in the choice made, has been already ascertained by their suffrages.

In this choice, the votes may be given either viva voce^ or by ballot. The latter method, however, is by far the most common, and is evidently the most proper, for a variety of reasons, some of which will readily occur to every enlightened and delicate mind.

Concerning the persons who are properly entitled to vote in such an election, there has been some diversity of opinion. That all the male members of the church in what is called " full communion" have this right, there can be no question. In this all are agreed. But it has been maintained, not indeed with the same unanimity, yet it is believed by a large majority of the most judicious and enlightened judges, and probably on the most correct principles, that all baptized members of the church, who must be of course regarded as subject to the government and discipline administered by these rulers, are entitled to a voice in their election. And where there are female heads of families, who bear the relation of membership to the church in either

223

of the senses just mentioned, and who are not repre- sented by some qualified male relative on the occasion, it has been judged proper to allow them to vote in the choice of ruling elders, as is generally the case in the choice of a pastor.

There seems, howet^er, to be some good reason for restricting the right to vote for ruling elders within narrower bounds than are commonly assigned in the choice of a pastor. In that choice, in most congrega- tions, all pew-holders, and all stated worshippei-s who are stated contributors to the support of the pastor in their just proportion, whether baptized or not, whether willing to submit to the exercise of discipline or not, and whether of fair moral character or not, are con- sidered as entitled to a vote. But, in the election of a pastor, there is one security against an improper choice •which does not exist in the case of a ruling elder; namely, that the call must be submitted to the presby- tery, and receive the sanction of that body before it can be prosecuted. Whereas, no such security exists in the case of a ruling elder. Of course, if all pew- holders and pecuniary supporters, without any refer- ence to member-ship or character, were allowed to vote in the election of the latter class of oflScers, they might choose persons to the last degree unsuitable for the office, and adapted to destroy rather than benefit the church. Besides, every one, however heterodox or immoral, may be a stated attendant on public worship; and every stated attendant on the worship of any church may be said to have an interest in the charac- ter of the pastor, and a right, as far as may be, to be pleased in the choice : but no one can be said to have any part or particular interest in the discipline of the church, excepting those who are subject to its opera- tion, which can be the case with none but those who are members of the church.

Accordingly, the General Assembly of the church, which met in 1829, in answer to a question solemnly

. 224

referred to it by one of the western presbjrteries* — adopted, and sent to the churches the following judg- ment, in relation to the subject before us: — '' It is the opinion of this General Assembly, that the office of ruling elder is an office in the Church of Christ ; that ruling elders, as such, according to our Confession of Faith, book 1. on Government, chapter v. are the re- presentatives of the people, by whom they are chosen for the purpose of exercising government and discip- line in the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ; that the discipline lawfully exercised by them is the dis- cipline exercised through them by their constituents, in whose name, and by whose authority, they act in all that they do.f To suppose, therefore, that an unbap- tized person, not belonging to the visible kingdom of the Redeemer, might vote at the election of ruling elders, would be to establish the principle, that the children of this world might, through their represen- tatives, exercise discipline in the Church of God; which is manifestly unscriptural, and contrary to the standards of our church. Resolved, therefore, that the question in the said overture be answered in the negative."

Where there is already an existing church session, and the object is to add to the number of its members, in this case the election of new elders may be made in any one of several methods : — either by the vote of the members of the church at large, as already stated ; or

* The qaestion submitted was ia these words — *' Ought aa unbaptized person, who yet pays his proportion for the support of a congregation, to be permitted to vote for ruling elders ?**

f It is well known that the General Assembly, m this clause of their judgment, did not mean to deny that ruling elders, in the rightful discbai^e of their duties, act in the name and by the authority of Christ. This great truth is plainly recognized in a preceding clause. But merely to say, that they act as the representatives, and on the behalf of the members of the church at large; so that when a complaint is brought to the eldership, it is, strictly speaking, according to ancient language, '* telling it to the church.*'

225

by a nomination on the part of the existing elders, proposed to the church, and considered as their choice, if not objected to ; or by the nomination of double the number proposed to be chosen by the session, and a choice by the members of the church out of the list so nominated.

In the Church of Scotland, " new elders are chosen by the voice of the session.* After their election has been agreed upon, their names are read from the pul- pit in a paper called an edict, appointing a day, at the distance of not less than ten days for their ordination. If no member of the congregation oflPer any objection upon that day, or if the session find the objections that are offered frivolous, or unsupported by evidence, the minister proceeds, in the face of the congregation, to ordain the new elders."f

The same method of adding new elders to existing church sessions is adopted, in substance, by many Presbyterian churches in the United States. The church sessions, in these congregations, judge when it is proper to make an addition to the number of elders;:}: deliberate on the proper candidates ; ascertain privately whether they will serve if appointed ; and, after com- pleting, with due consideration and care, their lists

* la the infancy of the Reformed Church in Scotland, the mode of electing^ ruling* elders was by no means uniform. In some churches the existing session made a nomination to the church members, out of which a choice was made by the latter. In other churches, the choice was made immediately by the com- municants at large. In some churches the session appointed electors ; and in others, they acted as electors themselves. It was a number of years before the practice stated above as the prevalent one, became general. — M*Crie's Life of Melville, ii. p. 477 478.

f Hili*8 Institutes. Part ii. Section 4th, p. 212, 213.

f. It is hardly necessary to say, that when the church session^ in any such congregation, shall be considered as unduly delaying to maJke a suitable addition of new elders to their number, it is the privilege of the members of the church, after due application and remonstrance to the session, without effect, to apply to the presbytery for the redress of their alleged grievance.

226

cause them to be announced by their moderator from the pulpit, on several successive Sabbaths; — after which, at the proper time, their ordination takes place. This plan of choosing has some real advantages. Wheo wisely executed, it may be supposed likely to lead to a more calm, judicious, and happy choice, than would probably result from a popular vote, especially where no consultation and understandii^ had taken pkoe among the more grave, piou^ and prudent of the church members. And, therefore, where this plan has been long in use, and unanimously acquiesced in, it had, perhaps, better not be changed. Yet it seems to be more in harmony with the general spirit of Presby- terian church government, and certainly with the pre- vailing character of our institutions, to refer the choice, where it can conveniently be done, after due consul- tation and care, to the suffrages of the members of the church.

Accordingly, the General Assembly of our Church, which convened in 1827, in reply to a complaint made respecting the mode of electing elders adopted in one of the churches under the care of the presbytery of Philadelphia, pronounced the following judgment: —

" While the assembly would recognize the undoubted right of each congregation to elect their elders in the mode most approved, and in use among them, they would recommend, that in all cases, where any dissa- tisfaction appears to exist, the congregation be promptly convened to decide on their future mode of election. And they are inclined to believe that the spirit of our constitution would be most fully sustained by having, in all cases, a direct vote of the congregation in the appointment of their elders."

In the Church of Holland, the following is the general rule in regard to the election of this class of officers : — " The elders shall be chosen by the suffrages of the consistory, and of the deacons. In making this choice, it shall be lawful, as shall best suit the situation of each church, either to nominate as many elders as

227

shall be judged necessary for the approbation of the members in full communion, and upon their being Improved, and found acceptable, to confirm them with public prayers and engagements; or, to propose a double number, that the one half of those nominated tnay be chosen by the members, and in the same manner confirmed in their oflSce." Accordingly, in that country, although an election by the members of the ehm'ch sometimes takes place, yet the common method, it is believed, is for the consistory, or elder- ^ip of the church, together with the deacons, to make choice of new elders and deacons; in other words, to form a list of proper candidates for the office, to nominate them agreeably to a certain rule to the ehm'ch, and if no objection be made to consider the person so nominated as the choice of the church.

In the " explanatory articles " of government adopted by the Reformed Dutch Church in the United States, the following article explains the practice of that church in this country: — " The manner of choosing ekiers and deacons is not rigidly defined. A double namber may be nominated by the consistory, out of which the members of the church may choose those vfho shall serve. Or, all the members of the churdi may imite in nominating and choosing the whole num- ber, without the interference of the consistory. Or, the consistory for the time being, as representing all the members, may choose the whole, and refer the per- scms thus chosen, by publishing them in the church, for the approbation of the people. The last method has been found most convenient, especially in large churches, and has long been generally adopted. But where that, or either of the other modes, has for many years been followed in any church, there shall be no varia- ticm or change, but by previous application to the dassis, and express leave first obtained for altering such custom."*

* See the Constitution of the Reformed Datch Church in the United States.

228

In the Church of Greneva, the choice of elders and deacons is made in the manner which the foregoing article declares to be most common in the Dutch churches in tfae United States — namely, by a selection and nomination by the consistorial assembly, which, if not opposed, is final, and followed by the usual ordination, without the " laying on of hands."*

The same method, also, of electing elders and deacons was early established in the Protestant churches of France. The consistory nominated, and the nomination was announced from the pulpit, for the approbation of the people.f

II. The next question which arises is, how often ought this election to be made ? Is it for life, or for a limited time ?

According to the original constitution of the Reformed Church of Scotland, the elders and deacons were chosen but for one year. This was the arrangement adopted in the " First Book of Discipline," formed in 1660, and also in the " Second Book of Discipline," drawn up in 1578, and which continued for a number of years in the Scottish church. This plan seems to have been suggested by the earnest wish of the first elders themselves, who, finding the office burdensome, as it then involved much care and labour, begged permission to resign it to others after a single year. But although the election, at that time, was made annually, and a large portion of the incumbents of the office were actually changed every year ; yet the same men might be elected from year to year if they were willing to serve, and it sometimes happened, in fact, that a few whose piety and leisure rendered due attention to the duties of the office easy and pleasant, were re-elected for many suc- cessive years. The same form of ordination seems to have been repeated after every annual election, as well with respect to those who had often been ordained

* See Mercier's Church History of Geneva, p. 209. f Quick's SjDodicoD, i. p. 27.

229

before, as to those who had never submitted to this solemnity.

This practice, however, has been long since laid aside in the Church of Scotland; and the office of the ruling elder been for many years regarded as an office for life, as much as that of the ministry of the gospel.

In the Protestant Churches of France also, the office in question was from the beginning, and it is believed still is temporary. The rule on this subject found in the Book of " Discipline of the Reformed Churches of France," as drawn up by the first national Synod in 1559, is in these remarkable words — " The office of elders and deacons as it is now in use among us, is not perpetual, yet because changes are not commodious, they shall be exhorted to continue in their offices as long as they can, and they shall not lay them down without having first obtained leave from their churches."*

The Reformed Dutch Church in the United States, after the example of her parent Church in Europe, adopts the following plan for the election of elders and deacons: — "In order to lessen the burden of a perpetual attendance upon ecclesiastical duties, and by a rotation in office, to bring forward deserving members, it is the established custom in the Reformed Dutch Church, that elders and deacons remain only two years in service, after which they retire from their respective offices, and others are chosen in their places; the rotation being always conducted in such a manner, that only one half of the whole number retire each year. (See Syn. Dord. Art. 27.) But this does not forbid the liberty of immediately choosing the same persons again, if from any circumstances it may be judged expedient to continue them in office by a re-election."-)-

Yet, notwithstanding this annual election, those who have ever borne the office of elder or deacon in the

* Quick's Sy nodi con, p. 28.

-I* Constitution of the Reformed Dutch Church in the U. States.

u

230

Dutch Church, are still considered, though never re- elected, as bearing while they live a certain relation to the offices wliich they have sustained respectively. This appears from the following additional article found in the same code. ^^ When matters of peculiar importance occur, particularly in calling a minister, building of churches, or whatever relates immediately to the peace and welfare of the whole congregation, it is usual (and it is strongly recommended upon such occasions, always) for the consistory to call together all those who have ever served as elders or deacons, that by their advice and counsel they may assist the members of the consistory. These when assembled constitute what is called the ' Great Consistory.' From the object or design of their assembling, the respective powers of ead) are easily ascertained. Those who are out of office, have only an advisory or counselling voice ; and, as they are not actual members of the board or corporation, cannot have a decisive vote. After obtaining their advice, it rests with the members of the consistory to follow the counsel given them or not as they shall judge proper."

But in the Presbyterian Church in the United States, the office of ruling elder is now, and has been from the beginning, perpetual. The election to h is once for all. It or course continues through life, un- less the individual be deposed from office. Like a minister of the gospel, he cannot lay aside his office at pleasure.* He may indeed, from ill health or for

* The writer is here statinor what is the actual constitution of the Preshyterian church as to this point. He does not tiup- pose, however, that there is any infringement of Presbyterian principle in the annual elections of ruling" elders, formerly practised in the Church of Scotland, and still practised in the Dutch and French Ciiurches. Where a church is large, con- taining a sufficient number of grave, pious, and prudent mem- bers to furnish an advantageous rotation, and where the duties of the ofBce are many and arduous, it may not be without its advantages to keep up some change of incumbency in this

231

other reasons, cease if he think proper, to perform the active duties of the office. But he is still an elder ; and if he recover his health, or the reason which in- duced hira to withdraw be removed, he may resume the duties of the office without a new ordination. Of this, however, more in a subsequent chapter.

III. A third question which arises under tliis head, is. How many elders ought to be elected in each church ? In answer to this question little more than considerations of expediency can be suggested. No absolute rule can be laid down.

In the Jewish Synagogue, we are told there were commonly at least three ruling elders found in each ecclesiastical senate. In the time of Cyprian in the third century, there were in the single church of Car- thage, of which he was bishop or pastor, eight elders, of whom five were opposed to his being received as their pastor. Soon after the opening of the Reforma- tion in Scotland, and while there was only a single Protestant congregation in the city of Edinburgh, there were twelve elders, and sixteen deacons belong- ing to that church. Dunlop ii. 638. In the year 1560, four years before the decease of Calvin, there were twelve ruling elders in the Church of Geneva. Calv. EpisL Gaspari Oleviano.

The Formof Governmentof the Presbyterian Church in the United States, does not define the proper num- ber of elders in each church. Speaking of the church session, it declares (chapter 9, sect. 2,) that of this judicatory, " two elders, if there be as many in the congregation, with the pastor, shall be necessary to constitute a quorum." From this rule it seems to be a legitinuite inference, that if there be only one elder in

office. But in general, it seems manifest that the spiritual interests of a conj^regation will be likely to be managed most steadily and to edification by permanent officers, who are never even temporarily withdrawn from the sphere of duty in which they move, and who are daily gaining more knowledge of the churchy and more experience.

232

the congregation, he, with the pastor, may constitute a regular session for the transaction of business. The existence of so small a number as even two, however, is greatly to be regretted, and ought by no means to be submitted to, if proper candidates for the office can be found. In the smallest church it is desirable that there should be at least from five to seven elders. Without some such number, there cannot be that weight in their judicial counsels, and that influence drawn from every part of the congregation in aid of the pastor, and the best interests ot the whole body, which a well selected bench of officers of that number would be likely to im- part. In large churches there ought to be at least ten or twelve : and in churches much beyond the usual size, fourteen or fifteen would not be more than enough to gain all the advantages which the best arrange- ment with regard to this office might be expected to secure.

It ought to be borne in mind, however, that there is no advantage whatever to be gained by electing un- suitable men to this office, for the sake of adding mere numbers to the church session. It is much better to get along with three or four pious, wise, and pnrudent elders, than to add two or three dozens to their ranks of men of an opposite stamp, who by their want of piety and wisdom, might be a nuisance instead of a comfort, a curse instead of a blessing. Pastors, then, and their churches, instead of making haste to fill up the ranks of their congregational senators with un- suitable members, had better wait patiently until the Head of the Church shall provide for them candidates in some measure " after his own heart."

IV. The last question which will be proposed for solution is. Who may be considered as eligible to this office?

The proper personal qualifications for this office have been considered in a preceding chapter. These are not intended to be brought into view here. All that is designed is, a reference to two or three points of

233

legal qualification, which are necessary to render a candidate eligible in the view of the ecclesiastical ca3uist.

And first, no one can be elected an elder in any church, who is not a member in full communion in the church of which he is to be chosen an officer. The extreme impropriety of choosing men to represent the members of the church, and to sit in judgment on the standing, deportment, and church membership of others who were not themselves in firil communion with the body of Christ, is so glaring as to need no comment.

But the eligible candidate for this choice must be a male member. Some indeed have seriously doubted whether there were not in the apostolic church, female elders, or elderesses; and also whether there ought not to be a similar class of elders in every church at the present day. A great majority, however, who have treated of this subject, believe, that the female officers apparently referred to in Titus ii. 3, and a few other passages in the New Testament, were intended to be merely a temporary appointment, arising out of that state of seclusion in which females lived, and do still live in the eastern world, and not at all necessarv in those countries where females may be approached and instructed without the intervention of individuals of their own sex. The Presbyterian Church has judged and acted in conformity with this view of the subject.*

It has been queried, whether a person who is an acting ruling elder in one church, may be chosen to the same office in another, and thus be an acting mem- ber of two church sessions at the same time ? This question ought undoubtedly to be answered in the negative. An elder can no more be a member of two

* The Moravians, or United Brethren, and the society of Friends or Quakers, are the only ecclesiastical bodies in Pro- testant Christendom, so far as is now recollected, in whose system of church order female elders actually have a place.

u 2

!2S4

diiFerent sessions, and responsible of course to both at the same time, than a private Christian can be enrolled as a member in two different churches at the same time, and equally amenable to both ; or than a minis- ter of the gospel can be a member of two Presbyteries at the same time, and liable to be called to an account by both simultaneously, and to have entirely inconsis- tent requisitions made by each. An elder in one church, then, is not eligible to the eldership in another, unless on the principle of his taking a dismissidh from the former, for the purpose of forming a regular and official relation to the latter.

Chapter XIIL OF THE ORDINATION OF RULING ELDERS

By ordination is meant that solemn rite or act by which a candidate for any office in the Church of Christ is authoritatively designated to that office, by those who are clothed with power for the purpose.

It cannot require formal argument to prove that this rite or something analagous and equivalent to it, is in- dispensable in conducting all regular ecclesiastical government. If certain officers have been appointed in the Church by Jesus Christ, her King and Head ; if certain qualifications have been declared by Him indispensable to fit men for serving the church in these offices, without which they ought not to be permitted to occupy them, and if an extraordinary and immedi- ate designation to office by Jesus Christ himself be not now to be expected in any case — if these things be so, it inevitably follows that some person or persons must have power committed to them by the Head of the Church, to examine or try candidates for these offices; to judge of their qualifications, and if approved, to invest them with office. The idea that, with such directions as the New Testament contains on this subject, men should be left at liberty to take these offices upon themselves by their own act, and at their own

236

pleasure, is full of absurdity ; and if realized, would undoubtedly lead to endless disorder and mischief Only suppose the secular offices of a nation to be thus assumed by men at will ; and by none more readify than the vain, the ignorant, the self-sufficient, and the ambitious, as would inevitably be the case, if such were the path of access to office, and there would be an end of all order. But if it be neither safe nor per- mitted for men to intrude into official stations uncalled, and if an immediate investiture by the Master himsdf be out of the question, we are driven to the conclu- sion that all regular and lawful introduction to office must be through the medium of human ordainers, acting in the name of Christ, and governing themselves by his declared will.

Accordingly, while the Saviour himself in the days of his flesh, immediately invested with office the twelve aposdes, and all others whom he personally called and sent forth, no sooner had He ascended to heaven, than the practice of introducing to office by the instrumen- tality of men began, and so far as we are informed, was uniformly continued. Then the ministers of Christ began to act upon the principle afterwards so explicitly communicated to Timothy, and enjoined upon him : " That which thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also." Here we are plainly taught that men are not to seize upon the sacred office themselves. It is to be ** com- mitted to them," and that not by every one, but by those only who have regularly "received" it them- selves. We find, too, that the method of ordination which had been in use in the Jewish Synagogue, and to which all the first Christians had been accustomed, was transferred to the church, and became a stated part of ecclesiastical order. Paul and Barnabas were set apart to a particular service, by a plurality of ecclesi- astical men, with prayer, imposition of hands, and fast- ing. When they, in their turn, went forth to execute

^37

the work to which they had been called, we find them, wherever they went, " ordaining elders,'* and commit- ting to them the care of the church. Timothy was in- vested with office " by the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." And even the deacons were called to their ofiice in the same manner. It was referred to the people to " look out " and elect the candidates; but having done so, they brought them to the apostles, who " laid their hands upon them," and conferred on them the important office to which they were appoin- ted.

It is no part of the belief of the Presbyterians that ordination imparts any direct influence, either physical or moral, to whom who receives it. They have no idea that in this act, by a kind of opus operatum^ ac- cording to the Romanists, an " indelible character" is communicated. They do not suppose that any hal- lowed energy proceeds from the hands of the ordain- ers to him on whose head they lay them in the act of imposition. But they regard it simply as that official act by which a man is pronounced, declared, and mani- fested to be actually put in possession of the office to which he has been chosen. It is, in one word, the actual induction into office of one elected to fill it. The case is precisely analogous to that of civil rulers. The man who is appointed to the office of judge on a secular bench, has no real addition made, either to his intellect, his learning, or his moral excellence, by taking the oath of office, and complying with those formalities which actually introduce him to his official station. And yet so important are these formalities, that his power lawfully to act as judge absolutely de- pends upon them. Before they take place, he is not really in office ; and after they take place, he is clothed with that plenary power which qualifies him for the regular discharge of every official duty. And so of every other civil officer in the land. Thus it is in the church. Ordination is the essence of a lawful exter- nal call to ecclesiastical office. It is that act, before

238

which, the ecclesiastical oflScer is not prepared, regu- larly, to discharge a single function appropriated to the station to which he is elected ; but after which, he is prepared for their regular and valid performance.

That ruling elders, besides being regularly chosen to office, should be ordained,^that is publicly and solemnly designated and introduced to office by appro- priate formalities — our ecclesiastical constitution re- quires and prescribes a form for the purpose, concern- ing which I shall only say, that as far as it goes, it is well devised, impressive and excellent. I say, as far as it goes ; — for it has been for many years my settled conviction that the ordination service in question in not making the imposition of hands a stated consti- tuent part of it, is chargeable with an omission which, though not essential, and therefore not a matter for which it is proper to interrupt the peace of the church, yet appears to me incapable of a satisfactory defence, and wliich it is my earnest hope may not much longer continue to be, as I know it is with many, matter of serious lamentation.

The " imposition of hands," as a constituent part of ordination, is an old and impressive rite. It was, noto- riously, a familiar mode of designation to office, through the whole of the Old Testament economy. It is, if I mistake not, universally acknowledged to have been employed in ordaining all the elders of the Jewish synagogue. We find it is used in every ordination without exception, the particulars of which are detailed in the New Testament history. And even in setting apart the deacons, nothing can be more explicit than the statement, that it was done with the " irapo^tion of hands." So far, then, as we are bound to reverence and follow ancient, primitive, and uniform usage, I know of no solid reason why it should be omitted in any case.

Some, indeed, have attempted to defend the omission of this rite, by alleging that the imposition of hands, in the days of the apostles, was connected with the.

239

supernatural gifts of the Holy Spirit, which were then common ; and that with those special gifts, it ought to have ceased. In support of this allegation, they com- monly adduced such passages as those recorded in Acts viii. 17, 18; xix. 6; Heb. vi. 2, &c. This argument, however, if it have any force, ought to banish the im- position of hands fi'om all ordinations, but can never justify the omission of it in ordaining ruling elders and deacons, while it is retained in the ordination of those who " labour in the word and doctrine." But the validity of the whole argument, it is believed, may be set aside without difficulty.

We read in the New Testament of four cases or kinds of " laying on of hands." The first by Christ himself, to express an authoritative benediction; (Matt. xix. 15; Mark X. 16;) the second, in the healing of diseases; (Mark xvi. 18; Acts xxviii. 8;) the third, in conferring extraordinary gifts of the Spirit ; (Acts viii. 17, xix. 6;) and the fourth, in setting apart persons to sacred office ; (Acts vi. 6, xiii. 3; 1 Tim. iv. 14.) The venerable Dr. Owen, in his commentary on Heb. vi. 2, expresses the opinion, that the " laying on of hands," mentioned in that passage, is to be considered as belonging to the third kind or class of cases, and, of course, as referring to the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit. Others have supposed, that it rather be- longs to the fourth example here enumerated, and therefore applies to the ordination of ministers. On this point I decide nothing. But my reasons for sup- posing that the imposition of hands in the ordination of church officers, had no reference to the imparting of supernatural gifts, and consequently ought not to be deemed an extraordinary and temporary rite, are such as these — 1. This rite has been employed in all ages of the church in setting apart persons to ecclesi- astical office ; 2. It is one of the most natural and significant modes of designating a person who is in- tended to be consecrated or devoted to a particular ser- vice ; 3. It was manifestly employed in a number of

240

cases which occur in the sacred history, where no spe- cial gifts were intended to be conveyed ; and, therefore, though sometimes connected witfi those gifts, yet we are sure it was not in all cases thus connected;* 4. When hands were laid on Paul and Barnabas at Antioch, it was not that they might receive these gifts, for they were possessed of them prior to this solemnity; 5. In this case too, it is remarkable that they seem to have been ordinary pastors and teachers who laid their hands upon one, at least, of extraordinary gifts and character ; 6. And finally, in 1 Tim. v. 22, the whole rite of ordination seems to be comprehended in this act — " Lay hands suddenly on no man," &c. And if we consider the act of laying hands on the head of the candidate for sacred oflSce, as intended at once solemnly to designate his person, to express an official benediction, and to indicate his entire consecration to the service of God, we could scarcely conceive of an act more simple, and yet more appropriate and full of meaning. And although those who lay on hands in this transaction altogether disclaim, as was before stated, the power of conveying the Holy Ghost to the indivi- dual ordained, yet as an emblem of what he needs, and ought unceasingly to seek, and of what his brethren desire and pray for on his behalf, it is surely in a high degree expressive, and by no means open to the charge of either presumption or superstition. I would say,

* '' Imposition of hands was a Jewish ceremony, introdaced not by any divine authority, but by custom : it being* the prac- tice amonw those people, whenever they prayed to God for any person to lay their hands upon his head. Our Saviour observed the same custom, bath when he conferred his blessings on children, and when he healed the sick, adding^ prayers to the ceremony. The apostles likewise laid hands on those upon whom they bestowed the Holy Ghost. The priests ob- served the same custom when any one was received into their body. And the apostles themselves underwent the imposition of bands afresh, when they entered upon any new design. In the ancient church imposition of hands was even practised on persons when they were married , which custom the Abyssinians still observe.** Burder's Oriental Customs, ii. 25.

241

therefore, concerning this part of the sdemnity of oidination, in the language of the venerable Calvin, — ^^ Although th^e is no express precept for the imposition of hands, }ret since we find it to have been constantly used by the apostles, such a punctual observance of it by them oi^ght to have the &rce of a precept with us. And certainly this ceremony is highly useful both to recommend to the people the dignity of the ministry, and to admonish the person ordained, that he is no longer his own master, but devoted to the service of God and the church. Besides, it will not be an unmeaning

Ji, if it be restored to its true origin. For if the Spirit God institute nothing in the church in vain, we shall p^'ceive that this ceremony which proceeded from Him, is not without its use, provided it be not perverted by a superstitious abuse."*

But if this rite be so reasonable, so scriptural, so expressive, and so generally adopted by almost all Christian denominations, in ordaining those elders who "labour m the word and doctrine ;" how comes it to pass that it should be so generally, not to say univer- salfy omitted in the ordination of ruling elders ? I have long depk)red this omission,f and cannot help believ- ing that the restoration of so appropriate and impres- sive a part of the ordaining service, would in all proba- bility be attended with beneficial effects.

It is not easy to ascertain the origin of the omission

* Institutiones, Lib. iv. Cap. iii. 16.

f More than twenty years ago, the author of this volume, onder the deep and unwavering conviction that he had scrip- tural authority to sustain him, when called upon to ordain elders and deacons in a vacant church, added to the usual solemnity on such occasions, the act of *' laying on hands" in the ordaining prayer. Finding, however, that many of his brethren considered it as an innovationi and were by no means prepared to introduce the practice ; believing that diversity of practice in relation to this matter would be very undesirable ; and persuaded, moreover, that the act in question ought not to be deemed an essential in any ordination, — he resolved not to repeat it until it could be used without offence, and with better prospectB of edification to the church.

X

24£

in question. The apostolic office of ruling elder was preserved as we have seen by the witnesses of the truth during the dark ages. Whether the pious WaHenses and Bohemian Brethren were in the habit of setting apart this class of officers with the imposition of hands, cannot now, so far as I know, be determined. The reformers received the office under consideration from those pious Waldenses, and were well aware as their writings evince, that all ordinations in the Synagogue and in the primitive church, had been accompanied with the laymg on of hands. Still however, while they with one accord retained this rite in the ordination of teaching elders, they seem quite as unanimously 19 have discarded it in the ordination of ruling elders.* Of the cause of this their writings give us no intimation, nor has it ever been my lot to hear from any quarter, a single reason for the omission which was in the least degree satisfactory. To be told that the omission has " long been established," that while all the Protestant Churches in the world, except that of England receive this class of officers in one form or another, they are " no where ordained by the imposition of hands," that this is " the custom of the church," that to depart from it would be "to innovate" and "give offence," &c. that this rite "may be omitted without injury, not being an essential part of ordination," &c. is surely little adapted to satisfy an inquiring mind, desirous of receiving as well as of being able to give a reason for every practice.

But although, as has been already said> no reason is

* h is ivorthy of remark that our Independent brethren, at early periods of their history, adhered more closely to the scriptural method of ordaining rulings elders and deacons than even Presbyterians. See the Cambrido^e Platform, chapters vii. and ix. See also a Confession of Faith adopted by some Anti-psedobaptists, (to the amount of 100 congregations) in England and Wales in 1689 ; and ratified and adopted by a Baptist Association, met at Philadelphia in 1742, chapter 27. Also a " Short Treatise on Church Discipline," appended to* it by the latter, chapters 3, 4.

243

formally assigned, or even hinted, in the writings of the reformers, for laying aside the imposition of hands in the ordination of ruling elders ; it is not, perhaps, difficult to conjecture how it happened. One mistake I suspect naturally led to another. They began by considering the office as a temporary one, or rather allowing those who bore it, if they saw fit, to decline sustaining it for more than a single year. There was a new election of these elders annually. The same individuals indeed, if they were acceptable to the peo- ple, and were willing to continue to serve the church, might be re-elected for a series of years, or, if they consented, even for life. But this seldom occurred. There was, for the most part, annually a considerable change in the individuals, and annually a new ordina- tion. The tenure of the office being thus temporary, and in many cases but for a single year, no wonder that there should seem to the discerning and pious men who took the lead in organizing the reformed churches, some incongruity between this annual renewal of the official investiture and obligation, and setting apart men to the office in question, each time with the very same formalities which attended the ordination of ministers of the gospel, whose tenure of office was for life. This incongruity, it is probable, struck them with so much force, that they could not reconcile it with their feelings to set apart to their office these temporary incumbents with the same rites and solemnity which tney employed in ordaining ministers of the word and sacraments.* Nor is it matter of wonder that such feelings should have had an influence on their minds. Those who take such a view of the tenure of the office in question

* This representation is not wholly gratuitous. It appears from the Compendium Theologise Christianse of Marck, and from the opinion of Frederick Spanheim, quoted with approba- tion by De Moor, the Commentator on Marck, that all three <^ these divines of the reformed church had no other objec- tion to the laying^ on of hands in the ordination of rulings elders, than that which I have suggested. De Moori, Com« Perpet vol. vi. p. 330.

244

as they did, will never be Terj cordial or decisive either in addressing those who bear it, or in setting them apart, as men consecrated for life to the service of the church. But that in the Church of Scotland,* and in the Presbyterian church in this country, where it is bdieved correct views of the office of rming elder as perpetual are universally received, the scriptural mode of setting apart to this office should have been so k»g and so generally disused, is a fact for which it is not easy to assign a satisfactory reason.

We are now prepared to take a brief survey of the arguments by which the prc^riety of ordaining eMers by the imposition of hands may be maintained. They are such as the following :

1. We find throughout the whole Jewish history, that solemnly laying the hands on the head of a person who was intented to be particularly honoured, blessed, or devoted to sacred functions was a rite of frequent, not to say constant use ; and even in cases in which the conveyance of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Spxiii, could not possibly have been designed*

2. The inspired apostles, in organizing the New Testament Church, took as their model the synagogue system of government, to which the first Christians had been all their lives accustomed.

3. It is certain that in every Jewish synagogue there was a bench of ruling elders ; and it is just as certain that these elders were always ordained by the impo* sition of hands.

4*. There is not a single instance of an ordination to any ecclesiastical office whatever, of which we have any account in the New Testament, in which the ceremony

* At what period in the History of the Church of Sco^nd it was that the annual election of elders was laid aside, and the office made permanent, it has not fallen in the author's way to obtain information. He is disposed to believe, however, that the change took place either late in the sixteenth, or earlj in the seventeenth century.

245

of the laying on of hands does not appear to have been used.

5. The first deacons, though not intrusted with an office so purely spiritual or so arduous as that of rul- ing elder, were yet, as all acknowledge, set apart to the diaconate by the imposition of hands. Of course those who bear a superior office ought not to be intro- duced to it with less solemnity.

6. To imagine that there is any peculiar meaning or mystical influence in the laying on of hands, which is above the dignity of the ruling elder's office, involves at once a superstitious estimate of a simple emblemati- cal act, and an unworthy degradation of an important order in the Christian family.

Accordingly, it is observable that almost all classes of writers whose judgment in reference to this matter is worthy of particular notice, fieely concede the propriety of setting apart both ruling elders and deacons in the manner for which I contend, and scarcely offer any other reason for omitting it, than that such has been " long the custom" of the reformed churches, and that the ceremony is not " essential** to a valid ordination. The following specimen of the manner in which the subject is treated by such writers, will be quite sufficient to establish my position.

The very learned authors of the " Theses Leydenses," who were zealous Presbyterians, in speaking of the biennial election of ruling elders and deacons in the Church of Holland^ acknowledge that in the apostolic church those offices were both perpetual, and concede that the different plan adopted among themselves was an imperfection,* plainly intimating that their mode of ordaining these officers had grown out of this im- perfection.

The foreign Protestants who established themselves in London, during the reign of Edward the sixth, not only had ruling elders and deacons in all their

* Synopsis Purioris Theologicse, Bisput. 42. p. 621.

x2

U6

churches, but also uniformly ordained them by the imposition of hands, as we have seen in the preceding chapter.

The Rev. John Anderscm, of Scotland, the able and zealous defender of Presbyterianism against Bhind, who lived a little more than a century ago, speaking c£ the ordination of ruling elders by the impositioii of hands, has the following passage: — ^^ Nobo^ doubts it is very lawful, and for my own part, I heartily widi it were practised ; but I deny that it is absolutely neoes* saiy, there being no precept enjoining it."*

The Rev. Archibald Hall, also of Great Britain, and a thorough-going advocate forpresbyterian order, speaks on the same subject in the following t&OBs: '^ The call of ruling elders, like the call of the dders who ' labour in the word and doctrine,' consists in two things, viz. election jmd ordination. Their elec- tion should be popular, and their ordination judicial, and performed with laying on of hands." And, in a subsequent page, he expresses an opinion that deacons ouglit to be ordained in the same manner.f

The Rev. John Brown of Haddington, one of the most decisive, consistent, and devoted presbyterians that ever lived, after giving an account of the nature and warrant of the office of ruling elders, observes — " Their ordination ought to be transacted in mudi the same manner as that of teaching elders or pastors."^

The learned and pious Dr. Cotton Mather delivers the following opinion on the subject before us. " The imposition of hands in the ordination of a church officer, is a rite not only lawful to be retained, but it seems by a divine institution directed and required; so that, al- though the call of a person to church office may not become null and voia where that rite may have been

* Defence, &c. Chap. ii. Sect. vi. p. 179. f Scriptaral View of the Gospel Church, chapters xii. and xv. p. 67, 102. t Compendious View, Book vii. chap. ii. p. 640.

247

omitted (as it is in the seniors and deaconsr in most of the reformed churches), yet we cannot approve the omission of it. A ceremonial defect may be blame- worthy."*

Om- excellent and eloquent countryman, the Rev, President Dwight, gives an opinion concerning the ordination of deacons, which is decisive of bis opinion concerning that of ruling elders, in favour of which latter class of oflBcers he very explicitly, as we have before seen, declares his judgment. He speaks thus :-— " Deacons are to be ordained by the imposition of hands, and by prayer."

" When the brethren had set these men before the aposdes," St Luke informs us, " they prayed, ^nd laid their hands upon them."

" This, also, is an authoritative example of the man- ner in which deacons are to be introduced into every church. It is the example of inspired men; and was, therefore, the pleasure of the Spirit of God. There is no hint in the New Testament, nor even in ecclesias- tic^ history, that they were ever introduced in any other manner. At the same time, there is no precept revoking or altering the authority or influence of this example. It stands, therefore, in full force, and re- quires that all persons chosen by the church to this office, should be consecrated to the duties of it in the same manner."

" It is to be observed, further, that if any such alte- ration had existed in periods subsequent to the apos- tolic age, it would have been totally destitute of any authority to us. This mode of consecration has, in fact, been disused in New England to a considerable extent. For this, however, there seems to have been no reason of any value. So far as I have been abl^ to gain information on the subject, the disuse was origi- nated at first, and4)asbeen^aduaUy extended, by mere

* Ma^alia, vol ii. p. 218.

248

inattention: nor is it capable, so far as I know, of any defence."*

These are a few of the authorities which might be

? noted in favour of the same general position. In fact, have met with no Presbyterian or Independent writer who believed in the propriety of the imposition of hands in any case of ordination, who did not, either explicitly or virtually, grant that there was no reason for withholding this ceremony in the case of ruling elders, but the custom of the church, or some similar consideration.

On the supposition, then, that the imposition of hands ought always to be employed in the ordination of ruling elders, the question naturally arises. Whose hands ought to be laid on in such ordinations? And here, if we attend to the simplest principles of all government, it would seem that we could scarcely be at a loss fbr a satisfactory answer.

It seems to be a fundamental principle in every de- partment, both of the natural and moral world, that every thing must be considered as capable of begetting its like. If this be so, does it not follow as a plain dictate of common sense, that, in ordaining ruling elders, the members of the session already in office should lay on hands with the pastor, in setting apart an additional number to the same office? In other words, if there be such a body already in existence in the church, the hands of the parochial presbytery ought to be laid on in adding to its own number, and the " right hand of fellowship'* given, at the close of the service, by each member of the session to each of his newly- ordained brethren. This appears to me equally agree- able to reason and scripture, and highly adapted to edification. And if there be no eldership already in the church in which the ordination takes place — then the presbytery, upon proper application being made to them, ought to appoint at least one minister and two

* Theology Explained and Defended, vol. iv. p. 291.

249

or more ruling elders to attend, at the time and place most convenient, to perform the ordination. How much more impressive and acceptable would be such a acene, than the cold aad naked manner in which this service is too often performed !

A question may here arise in the minds o( some, whether those elders who, when ordained, had no hands laid on them^ may, without impropriety, join in the im* position of hands on the heads o( their younger brethren who may be ordained in this manner? To this ques- tion, beyond all doubt, we may confidently return an affirmative answer. They may unite in the impoi$itioQ of hands without the least scruple, and with the utmost propriety. All reasonable men grant that the rite in question, though rational and scriptural, is not essen- tial to a valid ordination. Our venerable fathers of the Scotch Reformation did not deem the imposition of hands necessary even in the ordination of ministers of the gospel, and, therefore, in their First Book of Discipline did not prescribe it. Elders, therefore, who have been regularly set apart to their office^ agreeably to the formula prescribed in the presbyterian church, have received an ordination completely valid* They are fully invested with the office, and with all the powers and privileges which it includes. It is contrary to the whole genius of the gospel to make a mere ceremonial defect fatal to the substance of an otherwise regular investiture. If elders who have been thus ordained be deemed competent to any part of their official work, they are competent to every part, and, of course, to partake in the solemnity which I am here endeavouring to recommend.

If the foregoing principles be cxMrrect, then ruling elders ought also to lay on hands with the pastor in the ordination of deacons — their office as rulers vesting them with full power for this act> and rendering it strictly prefer. But inasmuch as deacons make no part of the parochial presbytery, and are not vested

250

with any portion of the function of spiritual govern- ment, it does not seem proper that they should lay on hands in any case of ordination. In that of ruling elders, it would be manifestly incongruous, since their office is altogether unlike. But even in the ordination of deacons, it would be inconsistent with regular order. Ordination is an act not only official, but also authori- tative. It is an act of government; but to no partici- pation in this are deacons appointed. This office, as we have seen, is highly important, and requires much wisdom, piety, prudence, and diligence; but their sphere of duty is entirely different from that of those who are " set over the flock in the Lord," and who are appointed to '^ watch for souls as they that must give account."

If, after this whole discussion, any should be disposed to ask what additional advantage may be expected to flow from ordaining our elders by the imposition of hands, and with similar external solemnities, to those which are employed in setting apart ministers of the gospel, — I answer — it will be a return to scriptural example and primitive usage, which is always right, and will, we have reason to hope, by the grace of God, be connected with a blessing. It will be doing wai- ranted and appropriate honour to a class of officers too long deprived of their due estimation and authority. When the people see those whom they have elected to this office devoutty kneeling before the Lord, and the hands of the parochial presbytery laid on their heads, with fervent prayer, and with a solemn charge and benediction, they will naturally attach to the office itself more importance, and to those who bear it more reve- rence. Nay, perhaps it is not unreasonable to believe that such solemnities may be made the means of salutary impressions on the minds even of their immediate sub- jects. If the writer of these lines does not greatly mistake, he has known the solemnities attending the ordination of pastors productive of deep and lasting

251

impressions, both on the ordained and the spectators. But he has no recollection of ever witnessing any such result from our comparatively cold and lifeless mode of setting apart the official rulers in Christ's house. *' This is a lamentation, and shall be for a lamen- tation."

Chapter XIV

I

OF THE RESIGNATION OF RULING ELDERS — THEIR REMOVAL FROM ONE CHURCH TO ANOTHER — AND THE METHOD OF CONDUCTING DISCIPLINE AGAINST THEM.

As it is a fundamental principle of the presbyterian church that the oflSce of ruling elder is permanent — that when a man is once set apart to it, he is always an elder while he lives, unless deposed by regular consti- tutional process — a variety of questions naturally re- sulting from this principle claim our notice. Among these, some of the more obvious and important will be briefly considered in the present chapter.

A ruling elder, after being regularly and solemnly set apart to this office, with, perhaps, as fiill an inten- tion of faithfully performing its duties to his life's end as ever man had, may lose his health, and thus become physically and permanently unable to perform those duties. Or he may become, unavoidably, so situated with regard to his temporal business as to render the regular fulfilment of his duties altogether impracticable. In this case, the individual supposed may resign his place in the session; in other words, he may cease to be an acting overseer, or inspector and ruler of that church. He will, of course, still retain his place and

253

privileges as a regular member of the church; but he will no longer take any part in its spiritual government. This is so reasonable a provision that it can scarcely be thought to require either illustration or defence. We all know that a teaching elder, or minister of the word and sacraments, after being for a time a pastor, may, if the state of his health or any other circumstance should imperiously demand it, resign his pastoral charge, and retire, as long as the cause or his resignation con- tinues to operate, to private life. He who does this, it is well known, though he ceases to be a pastor, still continues to be a mmister, fully invested with the powers of an " ambassador of Christ." He may still, if he think proper, reside within the bounds of the con- gregation which he formerly served; and he may occa- sionally, if mutually convenient and agreeable, minister to them in sacred things. But he is no longer their minister, and he may never think proper again to take a pastoral charge.

All these principles apply to the ruling elder. If he verily think that he cannot any longer perform the duties of his office in a manner acceptable either to the Head of the Church or to his people, he may withdraw from active service. When he does this, however, he does not lay down his office, — he does not cease to be an elder: he only ceases to be an acting elder. If his health should ever be restored, or his temporal circum- stances undergo a favourable alteration, he may resume the duties of his office, and again take his place in the session from which he withdrew, or some other, with- out a new ordination. When an elder thus wishes to resign his station, he is to give official notice of his de- sire to the session — they are to declare, if they think proper, their acceptance of his resignation — the whole transaction is to be distinctly recorded in the sessional book — and report made to the presbytery that the individual in question has ceased to be an acting mem- ber of that session.

\

S54

Again; an elder may become wholly incapable of serving the church with which he is connected, by the entire loss of his popularity. He may not have become either heterodox in his theological opinions, or so irre- gular in any part of his practice, as to render himself liable to process or deposition from office, and yet he may, by indiscretions or by undignified conduct, so lose the respect and confidence of the people — or, in a moment of prejudice or passion, the popular feeling, without any just ground of blame on his part, may be so strong against him, that he may be no longer able to serve the church, either acceptably or to edification, as a spiritual ruler. In either of these cases, he ought voluntarily to resign his place in the session, as statedin the preceding paragraph; and the session, aUtjer taking a vote of acceptance on the resignation, ought distincdy to record the same in the minutes of their proceedings, and make regular report of it for the information of the presbytery. In all this there will be recc^nized an almost exact similarity to the usual course oi proceed- ing when a pastor is sensible that he has become unpo- pular, and wishes to resign his charge.

It may be, however, that the elder whose popularity is thus prostrated may not be sensible of his real situa- tion, may be unwilling to believe that he is not popular, and may therefore refuse, even when requested, to resign his station. In this case, the course prescribed in our form of government is, that the session make due report of the whole matter to the presbytery, giving due notice to the elder in question of the time and place at which it is intended to make the report; and that the presbytery decide, after due inquiry and deli- beration, whether he ought to resign or continue his connexion with the session. On the one hand, no chm'ch ought to be burdened by the incumbency of an unpopular and obstinate elder, who, instead of edifying, is injuring it; and, on the other hand, no innocent and really exemplary elder ought to be abandoned to the

255

fury of popular prejudice, and permitted to be trampled under feet, when, perhaps, he ought to be sustained and honoured for his fidelity.

Further — ^ruling elders, like other church members, may find it their duty to remove their residence from the bounds of the church which called them to oflBce to another. Such cases not unfi'equently arise. The question is, when they do occur, how is the oflScial standing of such a removing elder to be disposed of? He, of course, when he goes, ought to take with him a regular certificate of good standing as a private Chris- tian, and a dismission and recommendation to the church to which he removes. The certificate ought also to bear an attestation of his regular standing as an elder, and of his official as well as personal dismission from his former church. With this certificate he will repair to the church to which he is recommended, and will, of course, be received as a private member in good standing. If the existing eldership and members of the church to which he removes think it for their edifica- tion that he be introduced into their session, he may be elected in the manner " most approved and in use in that congregation" — that is, either by a nomination by the session, or by a popular vote of the church mem- bers, and, if thus elected, introduced to an official rela- tion to that people — not by a new ordination, which ought never to be repeated, but by being regularly installed as their elder. This is effected by the can- didate appearing in the face of the congregation as one about to be ordained, answering in the affirmative the fourth question directed to be put to candidates for the eldership at their ordination — the members of the congregation publicly professing to receive him as their spiritual ruler, agreeably to the last question in the same formula, declaring him one of the ruling elders of that church, and closing with prayer for the divine blessing on the transaction.

It may be, however, that when an individual who has served one congregation as an elder removes into the

1t56

bounds of another, that other may not, on the whole, think best to elect him as one of their elders. They may already have as many as they think there ought to be in one church. Or his character, though nnex- ceptionably good, may not be such as to promise great benefit by taking him into their parochial presbj^ry. In this case, they are under no obligation to elect him one of their elders. And if they do not think best to employ him in his character, he may live among them as a private member of the church. At this he ought to take no offence. It would be a hard case, indeed, if churches were not left at liberty to act agreeably to their own views of propriety and duty in such cases. If a preaching elder or pastor be liberated from his

Eastoral charge, and remove his residence within the ounds of another church, however excellent his cha- racter, that church is not bound to employ him. To suppose it bound, would indeed be ecclesiastical slavery. A preacher inferior to him in every respect might be preferred. Every church must be left to its own un- biassed choice. Still the elder, as well as the minister^ in the case supposed, though in retirement and with- out official employment, retains his office, and is capable of being employed in that office whenever the judica- tories of the church think proper to avail themselves of his services.

When ruling elders become chargeable with heresy or immorality, and, of course, liable to the discipline of the church, they are amenable to the bar of the church session. By that body Xhey are to be arraigned and tried. Process against them is to be conducted according to the same general rules which regulate the trial of private members of the church, excepting that as their character is in some respects more important and their example more influential than the character and example of those who bear no office in the church, so there ought to be particular caution, tenderness, and care in receiving accusations and in commencing pro- cess against them. ^^ Against an elder," says the inspired

257

Paul, " receive not an accusation but before two or three witnesses." If, therefore, any person observe or hear of any thing in a ruling elder which he considers as rendering him justly liable to censure, he ought by no means immediately to spread it abroad, but to com- municate what he has observed or heard to the pastor of the church, and take his advice as to the proper course to be pursued; and if the pastor cannot be seen and consulted, then similar consultation and advice should be had with one, at least, of the brother elders of the supposed delinquent: and all this before any hint respecting the alleged delinquency is lisped to any other human being.

As the church session is the tribunal to which the ruling elder is, at least in the first instance, always amenable, so it is generally proper that he should be tried by that judicatory. Yet, where there is any thing peculiar or delicate in the case of process against an elder, a presbytery should be consulted.

There are cases, however, so very peculiar as to pre- clude the possibility of an impartial trial, and some- times, indeed, of any trial at all before the session. A few such cases may be specified.

An instance occurred a few years since, in which there were only two elders in a certain church session, and the moral conduct of both these elders became impeached. It was, of course, impossible to try them in the usual manner.

In another case, the session was composed of two elders beside the pastor. These elders were own brothers. One of them was charged with immoral conduct, and it was judged altogether improper that any attempt should be made to try the delinquent in that session.

In a third class of cases, when process against mem- bers of church session had been commenced, it was found that so many of the brother elders of the delin- quents were cited as witnesses, that there was no pros-

y2

258

pect of a dispassionate and impartial trial by the re- mainder.

In all these cases, it was wisely judged proper to apply immediately to the presbytery, to take the sever ral causes in hand, and to commence and issue procefls*

It has been sometimes proposed, in exigencies simi- lar to those which have been stated, without applying to the presbytery, to call in the aid of the eldership of a neighbourmg church, and to submit the case to their decision. To this course there are two objections. First, the constitution of the presbyterian church knows of no such body. It has no where provided for the formadon of a parochial tribunal in such a manner. And secondly, the adoption of this plan would be to set one church as a judge over a neighbouring sister church.

To avoid this incongruity, it has been sometimes proposed to form a tribunal for the trial of delinquent elders, by selecting one or two of the same class of officers from each of several neighbouring sessions. This was intended as an expedient to avoid the impropriety of setting one church in judgment over another. But this expedient, besides that it is unauthorized by any constitutional provision, is liable to the charge of a selection of judges which may not always be fair and impartial. It is far better on every account, and espe- cially more in harmony with the nature of the case, and with the spirit of our general principles, to go immediately to the Presbytery. That body is the natural resort in all cases in which the church session is unable, in its ordinary structure and situation, to perform the contemplated work.

Chapter XV

ADVANTAGES OF CONDUCTING DISCIt»LIN£ ON THE

PRESBYTERIAN PLAN.

It is not forgotten in entering on this chapter, that most denominations of Christians are so far prejudiced^ and sometimes so blindly prejudiced in favour of their own particular government and formularies, that their judgment in reference to this matter, can seldom be regarded as impartial. The writer of this essay, though he does not allow himself to indulge in such prejudices, yet does not claim to be wholly free from them. Instead, therefore, of troubling the reader with his bare impres- sions and preferences in regard to the Presbyterian mode of conducting discipline, which would of coui*se go for nothing; it is proposed to present such a series of principles and reasonings as will enable the intelligent inquirer to judge for himself, how far the conclusions of the writer are sustained by solid argument

I. And in the first place, the plan of discipline for which we plead, is founded essentially on the principle of representation, which in a greater or less degree, prevades all human society. When a community of any extent wishes to frame laws for its own govern-

260

ment, by whom is this service usually performed ? By the whole Ixxly of citizens wise and unwise, orderly and disorderly, coming together and debating on the pro- priety and the form of every proposed enactment? No^ never. An attempt of this kind would soon show the plan to be equally foolish and impracticable. Again, when a court is to be formed for applying the laws already in force to human actions, of what materials is this tribunal commonly composed ? Does any one ever think of summoning the whole mass of the male popula- tion excepting the cidprit, or the complainant, whose cause is to tried to come together, and decide on the case ? Who would ever expect either a tranquil or a wise decision from such a judicial assembly ? In bodi these cases, the good sense of men in all civilized society, dictates the choice of a select number of individuals representatives of the whole body, and supposed to pos- sess a competent share of knowledge, wisdom, and int^- rity, to form the laws of the community ; and another body smaller indeed but constituted upon similar principles, judicially to apply them when enacted. And so in every department of society. The representative S}'stem was one of the earliest that appeared in the pro- gress of mankind. It is recommended by its reason- ableness, its convenience, its wisdom, and its efficiency. In fact, the more deeply we look into the history and stale of the world, the more clearly we shall see that large bodies of men cannot take a step without it.

And as this system prevades all civil society, so we may say without fear of contradiction, that it equally

?revades the whole economy of redemption and grace. s it not reasonable then, that we should find it in the visible Church ? If we did not, it would indeed be a strange departure from a general principle of Jehovah's kingdom.

The Presbyterian plan then, of conducting the government of each congregation, is recommended by Its conformity with this almost universal principle. It deposits the power of applying the laws which Christ

1

)

f

261

has enacted and given to his people, not with the whole professing population of the church, but with a select body of the communicants, most distinguished for their piety, knowledge, jud^ent, and experience. It does not make judges indiscriminately of the young and old, the enlightened and the ignorant, the wise anq the unwise. It selects the exemplary, the pious, the prudent, the grave, and the experienced, for tnis impor- tant work. " It sets those to judge who are most es- teemed in the house of God." This is the theory, and in most cases, we may suppose the actual practice. And where it is really so, who does not see that there is every security which the nature of the case admits, that the judgment will be most calm, judicious, and edifying, that the amount of wisdom and of piety in that church could pronounce ?

The inconvenience, nay, the positive mischiefs of committing the judgment in the most delicate and diffi- cult cases of implicated Christian character, to the whole mass of Christian professors, have been alluded to in a preceding chapter. And the more closely they are examined, Ae more serious will they appear. No confidential precaution, no calm, retired inquiry, no deliberate consultation of sensitive feelings with fidelity, and yet with fraternal delicacy, can possibly take place in ordinary cases, but by the adoption of an expedient, which amounts to the temporary appointment of elders. On the contrary upon any other plan, the door is wide open for tale-bearing, for party heat, for the violation of all those nicer sensibilities, which in Christian society are of so much value ; and after all, for a decision with which perhaps no one is satisfied. It would truly, be passing strange, if a sober, wise, and consistent decision should be pronounced by such a tribunal. We are surely then warranted in setting it down as one of the manifest advantages of conducting discipline on the Presbyterian plan, that by the adoption of the repre- sentative system, it provides in all ordinary cases, for

262

the purest, the wisest, and the most edifying decisions of which the nature of the case admits.

11. Further, as was hinted in a preceding chapter, this method of conducting discipline, presents one of the firmest conceivable barriers against the ambition and encroachments of the clergy. It is not intended again to enlarge on the liableness of ministers of the gospel to feel that love of power which is natural to man. Very few of them it is believed in this land of religious liberty, have ever really aimed at ecclesiastical encroachment. But as laws are made for the dis- obedient, and as ministers are but men, so that system of ecclesiastical polity may be considered as the best, which, while it is attended with the greatest amount of positive advantage, is adapted most effectually to obviate those evils to which human nature is exposed.

Now it is evident that the method of conducting dis- cipline at present under consideration, assigns to every pastor a council, or senate of pious, wise, pinident men, chosen from among the body of the conmiunicants; and though not strictly lay-men, yet commonly so viewed, and at any rate, carrying with them the feelings of the mass of their brethren. He is simply the chairman of this body of six, eight or ten men, who are charged with the whole spiritual rule, and ^* without whose counsel nothing is done in the church." He can carry no measure but with their consent. He can neither admit nor exclude a single member, without their concurrence. If he engage in any sinister or foul plan, as many are fond of supposing the clergy inclined to attempt, he certainly cannot accomplish it either in his own church, or in neighbouring churches, unless he can prevail on these men to join with him in conspiring to elevate himself at their own expense. Will he be likely to work such a wonder as this ? At any rate, there seems to be the best barrier against it, that the nature of human society admits.

The same general safeguard pervades all the judi- catories of the Presbyterian church. In all of them

263

ruling elders have a place, and in all of them ex- cepting the General Assembly, the elders, if the theory of our system were earned into perfect execution, would be a majority. In the General Assembly alone, if com- pletely full, they would stand on an equality in votes with the pastors. And these ruling elders are not merely present in all these bodies. They mingle in all the business; are appointed on all committees, and have every possible opportunity of becoming acquainted in the most intimate manner, with all that is proposed or done. There can be no concealment. The pro- ceedings of all our judicatories excepting the church session, where the elders form an overwhelming majority, are open and public as the light of day. And every ruling elder has at his disposal a vote as potent, as that of his most eloquent and learned neighbouring pastor.

It may be asked then, whether there is not here a barrier gainst clerical ambiUon and encroachment as fixed and firm as can well be conceived or desired? It is undoubtedly, a far more firm barrier than is pre- sented by the popular plan in use among our Indepen- dent brethren. For as in every church, a majority of the members have but little discernment, and are, of course, easily influenced and led ; so an artful design- ing pastor, if such an one should appear in a church thus constituted, might generally succeed in concilia- ting to his own person and schemes a majority of the votes, to the utter discomfiture of the more wise, pious, and prudent portion of the members. But upon the Presbyterian plan, it is precisely this best class of his church members who are associated with him in authority and counsel, who are with him ecclesiastically speaking, abroad and at home, in the house and by the way, in going out and in coming in, from whose notice he cannot escape, aud without whose co-operation he can do nothing. Truly this is the very last method that designing ambitious ministers would adopt to forward their projects ! Nothing could be conceived

5264

more unfriendly to corrupt schemes, than snch a band of official colleagues. And accordingly, as we have more than once seen in the foregoing chapters, the honest and pious old Ambrose, of the fourth century, expressly tells us, that it was a wish to get rid of such colleagues on the part of the teaching elders, that first led to the gradual disuse of ruling elders in the church, after the first three centuries.

III. Again, as the Presbyterian plan of administering discipline is adapted to present one of the strongest con- ceivable barriers against clerical ambition, so it also furnishes one of the best securities for preservins the rights of the people. And here nothing wiU be said on the supposed congeniality between the Presbyterian form of church government, and the republican representative systems under which we live, and the alleged tendency of the former to prepare men for understanding, prizing, and maintaining the latter — I say, on these allegations I shall not dwell — not because I do not consider both as perfectly well founded, but because the discussion might be deemed by some readers invidious, and because it forms no necessary part of my argument Independently of these consi- derations, it may be confidently maintained that the presbyterian plan of administering discipline furnishes far better security for preserving unimpaired the rights of private Christians than any plan with which we are acquainted. It is not forgotten that this assertion will appear a paradox to many, but it rests, nevertheless, on the most solid grounds.

There is no oppression more heavy, no tyranny more unrelenting, than that of an excited, infuriated popu- lar assembly, — no body with which the rights and privileges of an inculpated individual are less safe, especiiuly when headed and controlled by an eloquent, artful, and highly popular pastor who has taken part against that individual. Suppose, then, as the annals of Independency have too often exemplified, that a member is on tnal for some alleged delinquency before

265

a church of that denomination, — suppose the alleged oSence to be one which has deeply alienated from him his pastor and all the particular friends of the pastor, — suppose these as one man rise up against him, and resolve to crush him, — and suppose this pastor to be so generally admired and beloved by his people, that he is able to command an overwhelming majority of their votes in support of all his favourite measures, — what dbance would such an accused person stand of an im- partial trial before such a tribunal? Not the smallest. He might be guilty, indeed, and deserve the heaviest sentence; but, even if innocent, his acquittal in such circumstances could be anticipated by none. He must become the victim of popular resentment, and, if he thus fall, he has no remedy — there is no tribunal to which he can appeal: he must lie down under the oppressive sentence — and there he must lie as long as he lives. He cannot regularly (that is, according to that ecclesiastical rule which pervades all religious dcr nominations) go to another church ; for the supposition is that he is excommunicated, and cannot be recom- mended as in "good standing" to any other ecclesiastical body. He must submit to the operation of the sentence, however un'ust, until the excited and impassioned body which laid it upon him shall be disposed to relent, and consent to remove the deadly weight

It is not denied that there may be moments of pre- judice and passion, in the Presbyterian church, in which even the grave and experienced elders may be so \hx>ught upon by different sorts of influence as to dis- pense justice very imperfectly, or even in a particular case to refuse it entirely. But then, in every such case, upon the Presbyterian plan, there is an immediate and perfect remedy. An individual who supposes him- self wronged may appeal to a higher tribunal, where his cause will be heard by judicious, enlightened, impartial men who had no concern in its origin, and who, if .wtong^Jiave been done, may be expected to afford prompt and complete redress. The oppressive sentence

266

may be reversed — he may be reinstated, in spite of popular excitement, in all his Christian privileges, and even where his own reluctance or that of his former connections may forbid his return to the bosom of the same congregation in which he recently received such treatment, yet he may easily and regularly be at- tached to a neighbouring one of the same denomina- tion, and thus find the whole difficulty satisfactorily removed.

It is not asserted, then, that other churches, in the exercise of discipline, do in fact more frequently injure and oppress the subjects of their discipline than th^ Presbyterian church. Such an assertion, indeed, migjik perhaps be made without invidiousness, inasmuch tA decisions formed and pronounced by the popular voice may be deemed, without disparagement to the indivi- duals who form them, less likely to be wise and impar- tial than when formed by a select body of enlightened and pious judges. But on this point no comparative estimate will be attempted. It is, however, confidently asserted, that when such wrong as that of which we speak unhappily occurs, the Presbyterian system atfibrds more complete relief from oppression, and therefore furnishes more fixed security for the rights of the people than is found in any other denomination. No single man in our church, whatever title he may bear, can, by his single, perhaps capricious veto, deprive a pro- fessing Christian of his privileges as a church member, nor can it be done by a feverish popular assembly, impelled bv its own prejudice or passion, or held under the sovereign control of one man. The best array of piety, wisdom, and knowledge which the society afibrds must sit in judgment in the case, and even if this judi- catory should give an unjust sentence, the religious rights of the individual are not prostrated or foreclosed, but may be reviewed by an impartial tribunal, and every privilege which he ought to enjoy secured.

IV. Further, the plan of conducting church gowtn* ment with the aid of ruling elders, secures to raiiust^]^

267

of the Word and sacraments counsel and support, in all tiieir official proceedings, of the best possible kind* §»upppsing< ministers of the gospel to be honest, pious, disinterested, and zealous in their appropriate work — lo have no disposition at any time to encroach on the rights of others — and to be above the reach of that passion and prejudice which are so apt to assail even ihe honest, and which need a check in all, — even sup- pose ministers of the gospel to be above the reach of these evils, still they need counsel, information, and support in a multitude of cases, and cannot, with either safety or advantage, proceed without them. In all the affairs of the church, it is of the utmost importance that the interests of the whole body be constantly con- sulted, and that the whole body act an appropriate part in conducting its affairs. As there are no privileged orders to b^ aggrandized and elevated? so there are no ecclesiastical secrets to be kept, no private or selfish schemes to be tolerated. The more completely every plan is laid open to pubUc view, understood and appre- ciated by every member, sustained by unanimous and willing effort, and made to promote the knowledge, purity, and order of the whole, the better. Of course, that plan of ecclesiastical regimen which is best adapted to attain these ends, and to attain them in the most certain, direct, quiet, and comfortable manner, is mpst worthy of our choice.

Such a plan, it is firmly believed, is the presby terian. In every department of official duty, the pastor of this denomination has associated with him a body of pious, wise, and disinterested counsellors, taken from among <^e people — acquainted with their views — participating in their feelings— able to give sound advice as to the wisdom and practicability of plans which require general co-operation for canning them into effect — and able also, after having aidea in the formation of such plans, to return to their constituents, and so to advo- cate and recommend them as to secure general con- currence in their favour.

268

This is an advantage, strictly speaking, pecoliar to Presby terianism. For although other forms of chardi government provide for associating laymen with the clergy in ecclesiastical business, yet, according to them, there is no divine warrant for it. It is a mere hmnan expedient to meet an acknowledged exigency, for which those who make this acknowledgment suppose that the law of Christ makes no provision. And the human provision which they thus make is mani- festly liable to many objections. It consists either ia constituting the whole body of the communicants the pastor's counsellors (which is liable to all the objections stated at large in a former chapter), or in providing for him a committee, orsmall delegation of laymen, who may be changed every year or oftener, and, of course, may have very little experience; and in some churches these lay delegates are not required to be communicants^ or even baptized persons, and consequently may have no real ecclesiastical responsibility for their conauct

V. The method of conducting discipline under con- sideration has also the advantage on the score of dis- patch an energy, as well as of wisdom and the security of equal rights.

Where all the discipline that is exercised is in the hands of a single individual, without appeal, it must be confessed that in this case provision ibr dispatch and energy cannot be, at least in theory, more perfect; but where it is in the hands of the whole body of the church members, there is no saying how long litigation may be protracted, or in what perplexities and delays the plainest case may be involved. There are so many minds to be consulted, and every case upon this plan is so open to capricious or malignant interposition, that it is impossible, in ordinaiy circumstances, to calculate results or to forsee an end.

Even on the Presbyterian plan, there is'no doubt that delay and perplexities may in some cases arise; but where the whole management of discipline, from its inceptive steps to the consummation of each case, is

269

entirely committed to a select body of pious, intelligent, prudent, and experienced men, accustomed to the work and aware of the dangers to which their course is ex-

Eosed, we may reasonably calculate on their decisions eing as speedy, as unembarrassed, and as much lifted above the temporizing feebleness, or the tempestuous irregularity and confusion incident to popular manage- ment, as human infirmity will allow.

VI. The plan of conaucting discipline by means of a succession of judicatories, admitting of appeal, pro- vides for redressing many grievances which do not appear otherwise to admit of a remedy. According to the Independent, or strictly congregational system, as suggested in a preceding page, when a member of a church has been unjustly censured or cast out, he has no appeal, there is no tribunal to which he can apply for relief: yet his case may be an exceedingly bard one, loudly calling for redress; the cause of religion in his neighbourhood may be sufiering severely by the situation in which he is placed. Ought there not to be some regular and adequate method of meeting and removing such a diflSculty? In such of the churches of Connecticut as have entered into the plan of conso- ciational union, such a method has been to a certain extent provided, but it has been by adopting, to pre- cisely the same extent, a leading principle of Presby- terianism. When difficulties arise in a particular church, a tribunal is formed by a number of neighbouring ministers, together with one or more lay delegates from each of the churches represented, who may review, and, if need be, redress the alleged grievance. This is a Presbyterian feature in their system, and, so far as it goes, excellent and effectual. In the judgment, how- ever, of the venerable president Dwight, this plan is still defective, and defective precisely in the point at which it stops short of Presbyterianism. The opinion which this distinguished congregational minister has expressed, in reference to the subject before us, will best

z2

270

appear by presenting it in its connection. It is as follows: —

^* There are many cases in which individnals are dissatisfied on reasonable j?rounds with the judmient of a church. It is perfecUy obvions that in a debate between two members of the same church, the parties may in many respects stand on uneaual ground. One of them may be ignorant, without family connections, in humble circumstances, and possessed of little or no personal influence; the other may be a person of dis- tinction, opulent, powerfully connected, of superior understanding, ana of gt^eat persDhal influence, not only in the church, but also in the country at large. As things are in this world, it is impossible that th^ persons should possess, in any controversy between them, equal advant^es. Beyond all this, the church itself may be one party, and a poor and powerless member the other. In this ca^ aiso^ it is unnecessary to observe, the individual must labour under every sup- posable disadvantage to which a righteous cause can be subjected. To bring the parties in these or any similar circumstances as near to a state of equality as human affairs will permit, it seems absolutely necessary that every ecclesiastical body should have its tribunal of appeals, a superior judicature, established by common consent, and vested with authority, to issue finally all those causes which, before a single church, are obviously liable to a partial decision."

" Such a tribunal, in all the New England states except this (Connecticut), is formed by what is called a select council; that is, a council mutually chosen by the contending parties. This has long appeared to me a judicatory most unhappily constituted. The parties choose, of course, such persons as they suppose most likely to favour themselves; if, therefore, they commit no mistake in the choice, the council may be considered as divided in opinion before it assembles, and as fur- nishing every reason to believe that it will not be less

271

divided afterwards. Its proceeding will frequently be marked with strong partialities, and its decision, if made at all, will not unfrequently be those of a bare majority. Coming from different parts of the country, it will have no common rules of proceedii^, — after its deci- sions, its existence ceases. Its responsibility vanishes with its existence, as does also the sense of its authority. As the members frequendy come from a distance, it Cain have no knowledge concerning those numerous particulars which respect the transactions to be judged of, and the characters, interests, views, and contri- vances of those who are immediately concerned. As individuals, these members may in some instances have much weight, and, in certain circumstances, may by their wisdom and piety do much good. But all this must arise solely from their pei'sonal character. As a coun- cil, as a judicatory, they can scarcely have any weight at all; for, as they disappear when the trial is ended, they are forgotten in their united character — ^and having no permanent existence, are regarded with no habitual respect, and even with no prejudice in their favour. Very often, also, as they are chosen on par- tial principles, they are led, of course, to partial deci- sions, and leave behind them very unhappy opinions concerning ecclesiastical government at large."

^' In this state (Connecticut) a much happier mode has been resorted to for the accomplishment of this object. The tribunal of appeal is here a consociation *— a standing body composed of the settled ministers within an associational district, and delegates from the churches in the same district — a body always existing, of acknowledged authori^, of great weight, possessed of all the impartiality incident to human affairs, feel- ing its responsibility as a thing of course — a court of record, having a regular system of precedents, and, from being frequendy called to business of this nature, skilled to a good degree in the proper modes of pro- ceeding."

272

^< The greatest defect in this system, as it seems to me, is the want of a still superior tribunal to recei^ appeals in cases where they are obviously necessary. These, it is unnecessary for me to particularise. Eveiy

Eerson extensively acquainted with ecclesiastical afibirs nows that such cases exist. The only remedy pro- vided by the system of discipline established in this state for those who feel aggrieved by a consociational judgment, is to introduce a neighbouring consociation as assessors with that which has given tne judgment, at a new hearing of the cause. The provision of this partial, imperfect tribunal of appeals, is clear proof that those who formed the system perceived the abso- lute necessity of some appellate j ifrisdiction. The judi- catory which they have furnished of this nature is perhaps the best which the churches of the state would at that, or any succeeding period, have consented to establish. Yet it is easy to see that, were they disposed, they might easily institute one which would be incom- parably better."

" The only instance found in the scriptures of an appeal actually made for the decision of an ecclesiasti- cal debate, is that recorded in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, and mentioned for another purpose in a former discourse. A number of the Jews in the church at Antioch insisted that the Gentile converts should be circumcised and be obliged to keep the law of Moses. Paul and Barnabas strenuously controverted this point with them. As no harmonious termination of the debate could be had at Antioch, an appeal was made * to the apostles and elders at Jerusalem;' but, as I observed in the discourse mentioned, it was heard and determined by the apostles, elders, and brethren. As this judicatory was formed under the direction of the apostles themselves, it must be admitted as a precedent for succeeding churches; and teaches us, on the one hand, that an appellate jurisdiction is both lawful and necessary in the church, and, on the other, that it is

27S

»

to be composed of both ministers and brethren, neces- sarily acting at the present time by delegation."*

In this quotation and in the remarks which pre- ceded it, a reference, it will be perceived, is principally had to cases in which individual private members have considered themselves as aggrieved by the decisions of particular churches; but the same remarks, in sub- sance, are applicable to those cases in which difficulties arise between ministers and their congregations, or between two neighbouring congregations of the same name. No form of church government provides for the settlement of such difficulties so promptly or so well as the Presbyterian. Independency, strictly so called — that is. Independency, in strict adherence to its essential principles — furnishes for such evils no remedy whatever. Other sects furnish a nominal or partial remedy by investing some official individual with power to constitute a tribunal for settling such controversies; but the choice of the members of this tribunal is usually committed entirely to that indivi- dual, and it is, of course, in his power to make it like a " packed jury" in the hands of a corrupt returning officer, a mere instrument of oppression. But in the Presbyterian church every difficulty of this kind is com- mitted for adjustment to a permanent responsible body — a body whose proceedings may be reviewed and examined, whose organization or members cannot be changed at the will of a corrupt individual who may choose to tamper with them, and whose decisions are not merely advisory, but authoritative.

VII. Finally; the Presbyterian method of conduct- ing the government of the church is most friendly to the spread of the gospel, and furnishes peculiar facili- ties for union and efficiency of action in promoting the great objects of Christian benevolence.

It has been sometimes, indeed, alleged in opposition to this, that Presbyterianism is naturally, and almost

* Theology Explained and Defended, vol. iv. 399, 401.

274

necessarily cold and formal, and that congr^ational- ism has been found, in &ct, more fiivourable to zeal and activity in spreading the gospeL It is by no means intended to depreciate either the zeal or tibe activity of our congregational brethren; justice demands that much be said in commendation of both; and ^t will be BO small praise to any other denomination td.be found saccessfully emulating the intelligence, enterprize, and perseverance which they have often manifested in pur- suing the best interests of the Redeemer's kingaom. But when the organization of the Presbyterian churdi b examined, one would think that prejudice itself could scarcely deny its peculiar adaptedness for united, har- monious, and efficient action in every thing which it might become convinced was worthy of pursuit. ^

In order to enable this church to act with the utmost energy and uniformity throughout its entire extent, there is no need df any new organization. It is oiga^ nized already, and in a manner as would seem as perfect as possible for united and harmonious action. A delegation from every church meet and confer several times in each year, as a matter of course, in presbytery. What opportunity could be imagined more favourable for forming and executing plans of oo-operation among all the churches thus united and statedly convening]? They have the same opportunity and every advantage of meeting at pleasure that can be enjoyed by a voluntary association, with the addi- tional advantage that they act under a system of eccle- siastical rules and authority which enable them to go forward with more energy and uniformity in their adopted course. If a more extended union, of Presby- terian churches than of those which belong to a single presbytery be desired for any particular purpose, the regular meetings of the synods, each comprising a number of presbjrteries, afford the happiest opportunity, without any new or extra combination, of effecting the object. The representatives of perhaps one hun- dred and fifty churches, assembled in their ecclesiasti-

275

cal ca{5acity, and in the name of Christ, could hardly be conceived to convene in circumstances more perfectly favourable to their co-operating in any wordiy and hal* lowed cause, with one heart, and with the most perfect concentration of effort. And when we extend our thoughts to the General Assembly, the bond of unions counsel, and co-operation, for more than two thousand churches, all represented and combined in the same cause; we see a plan which, in theory at least, it would seem difficult to adapt more completely to union of heart and hand in any good work. The most admirable combination, with every possible advantage, exists be« forehand. Nothing is in any case wanting but the animating spirit necessary for applying it to the prop^ objects. The machinery, in all its perfection, is already constructed, and ready to be set in motion. Only let the impelling principle, which is necessary to set all moral conbinations into vigorous movement, be present, and operate with due power, and it may be asserted that a more advantageous system for ecclesiastical enterprise was never devised.

It is not a sufficient reply to this statement to say, that the Congregational Churches of New England, have in fact, done more within the last thirty years in the way of contribution and effi^rt for extending the Redeemer's kingdom, than any equal number of churches of the Presbyterian denomination in the United States. It is impossible to contemplate the in- telligence, harmony of feeling, and pious enterpise of the mass of our congregational brethren, without sen- timents at once of respect and gratitude. But is not the general fact alluded to, chiefly referable to other causes than the form of their church government? No one, it is believed, can doubt for a moment that this is the case. Their church government is manifestly less adapted to promote union and effective co-operation, than most others. But their intelligence, their piety, their common origin, their homogenous character, their compact situation, and tiie sameness of the instruction.

276

the excitements, and the agencies which they enjo}', have all tended to prepare them for united and har- monious co-operation. Only give to the members of churches organized on the Presbyterian plan, the same advantages, the same natural principles of cohesion, the same intellectual and moral stimulants, and the same pervading spirit, and can any one believe that there would be found less union and less energy in pujr- suing the best interests of man? We must deny the connection between cause and effect, before we can doubt that there would be more of both. It has be^n sometimes, indeed, said as a supposed exemplification of the unfavourable influence of Presbyterianism, that the churches called Presbyterian in South Britain have generally declined, both in orthodoxy and piety, within tne lasthundred years, while the Independents havegen- erally and happily maintained their character for both. But the fact is, that when the English Presbyterians gradually fell into those errors for which the greater part of them are now distinguished, they at the same time gradually renounced the Presbyterian form of government, although they retained the name. There are not now, and have not been for many years, any real Presbyterians in England, excepting those who are directly or indirectly connected with churches in Scotland. After all, it is not pretended that the Pres- byterian form of church government can of itself infuse spiritual life and activity into an ecclesiastical body; but that where vitality, and zeal, and resources exist, there is no form of ecclesiastical organization in the world so well adapted to unite counsels, and invigorate efforts, as that under which we are so happy as to live.

It makes no part however, of the design of the author of this volume to assail or to depreciate the ecclesiastical order of other denominations. On the contrary, wherever he finds those who evidently bear the image of Christ, and who appear to be engaged in advancing his kingdom, whatever form of church order

277

they may prefer, he can hail them with unqualified affection as Christian bi'ethren. The truth is, he would not have alluded to any other portion of the Christian Church than that with which he is more immediately connected, had it appeared possible without doing so, fully to illustrate the character and advantages of our own form of government. His ardent wish is, not to alienate by high claims, or unkind language, but rather to conciliate and bind together by every thing that can minister to brotherly love. And his daily prayer is, that all the Evangelical churches in our land may be more and more united in principle and effort, for extending that " kingdom which is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy Ghost."

BELL AND BAIN PRINTERS, GLASGOW.

C k

)f>

"K

i

^m

NOV 6

-1941

mmm