Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

him near before him; and there was given him dominion and glory and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and lan guages, should serve him. His dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be destroyed." Here is that kingdomof hea ven spoken of by Jesus, which at first is as a grain of mustard seed, but shall extend its branches till it covers the whole earth; and though it has at present made but little progress comparatively, it must finally prevail over all opposi tion, till all shall submit to its divine government, and the whole earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, when all shall know him from the smallest to the greatest, when men shall beat their swords into plough-shares, and their spears into pruning-hooks, and learn war no more; but every man shall sit down under his own vine and his own fig tree, and none shall make him afraid; and they shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain, saith our God: for the earth shall be filled with the knowledge of the Lord, as the waters cover the channels of the sea.' And this is the constitution under which all men will then live, suited to the smallest and the largest communities, and every way calculated to secure their liberty, virtue, and happiness-a constitution the more it is understood the more it must be admired-a constitution that exceeds all that the heart of man ever devised the founder of which is God, and which is justly designated by the Apostle James as the perfect law of li berty; but it is a constitution only fitted to a wise and vir tuous society.

[ocr errors]

Having shewn the constitution of the kingdom of Jesus to be settled and founded by Deity; that it is clearly pourtrayed in the New Testament; and that its fundamental principles embrace and preserve monarchy, equality, unity, and indivisibility, and a compleat separation from the world; I shall proceed to shew the executive government emanating from it, as appointed by tlie Deity, is consistent with this constitution, and also the laws, by which the whole community of Christians are to be governed.

And, first, the government-It consists of a king, appointed by the Deity, and overseers, sometimes called elders and bishops, deacons, deaconesses, and messengers, to be appointed by the people; but as God was the founder of this kingdom-as the subjects of it were of his chusing-as it was he that constituted them a people-and as it is always set forth as a favour to be admitted into this kingdom, the people could have no right to chuse their constitution, government, or laws, and consequently they never can have

[ocr errors]

the right of altering them in the smallest degree. Our en1 quiry then is not whether we would have formed such; whether they are the most wise or the most useful; but if they are such as we are willing to place ourselves under? No man is compelled to become or continue to be a subject of this kingdom; it must be his own voluntary act; but as long as he continues to claim the privilege of it, he is bound to obey its laws, in every respect. He is not born a subject of it, and therefore bound by the absurd law which exists in all other kingdoms, viz. that whether he approves or disap proves of its institutions, he must always support them, or be hanged as a traitor! No; he cannot become a subject of this kingdom till he is capable of judging for himself; and even then it is a matter of choice with himself to become a member of it or not: and even after he has become a member, should he alter his mind, there are no penal laws to bind him to continue. He has only to renounce the privileges of the society, and the laws immediately cease to operate upon him; and the society from which he withdraws can do no more than declare he is cut off from them, that they may no longer be considered responsible for his character and conduct.

As the terms bishop and elder have been the subject of much controversy, I will endeavour to give their true meaning; and, first, I would most earnestly entreat, when I use the word bishop, not to be understood as having any reference to those men called. bishops in the present day, but characters as much the reverse of them as light is to darkness. By a bishop I mean not a man perjured by his first entrance into office-a man puffed up with pride and luxury, possessed of princely revenue, and dressed in a large wig and lawn sleeves, who pays his adoration to princes and little to his God-who exercies dominion, and has his spiri tual courts-in fact I do not mean a lord bishop-neither do I mean such a man as the Rev. Mr. Belsham, in his canonicals, nor such men as the Rev. Mr. Aspland, Vidler, Nightingale, or Huntingdon, in their black coats-the bishop I speak of is a scriptural bishop, and no other.

The words bishop and elder, it appears to me, were not intended as titles, but merely descriptive of the duties they had to perform; the same as if any persons were appointed to manage the affairs of a nation who were not distinguished by any particular title, and I were addressing a letter to them, I should say of course, if their names were not mentioned," To the rulers, the overseers, or the managers such a nation;" neither of which terms would be the title or

of

of their office, but merely descriptive of the business they had to perform; and this will I think be found to be the case in the terms bishop, &c.

The Greek word from which the name bishop or bishops is derived, occurs nine times in the New Testament, in our received version, and is translated as follows, Luke xix. 44, visitation; Acts i. 20, bishopric; Wakefield translates it, office; Acts xx. 28, overseers; Phil. i. 1, bishops; Wakefield, overseer; 1 Tim. iii. 1, 2, bishop; Wakefield, overseer; Titus i. 7, bishop; Wakefield, overseer; 1 Peter ii. 8, 12, visitation; 1 Peter ii. 25, bishop; Wakefield, shepherd. From all these passages it will be seen that the word does not necessarily imply title; nor is there any need of its being translated bishop in any one place. It is evident, that it would appear very absurd, were it so translated in all; but if we take it as overseeing, or being overseen, it will do in every place and I have generally found it to be a good criterion, where a word must be translated in some particular way in many places, and may be so in all, that that is the true and genuine meaning of it.

The term elder, or elders, has also been as much the subject of dispute as that of bishop, and from the same cause, that of being taken as a title, instead of being descriptive of the business he had to perform. The word itself occurs fifty-five times in the New Testament, exclusive of the Revelations; thirty of which relate to the rulers of the Jewish people; eleven to elders, as it respects age; twelve times to officers of the Christian church; once to Peter; and once is translated presbytery, though in this place, Wakefield properly translates it elders, as it is the same word so translated elsewhere, and there is no word for presbyter or presbytery in the New Testament. Now that the word elder, must be synonimous to bishop or overseer, when it refers to men in office, is clear; because they are used indifferently respecting the same persons. See Titus i. 5, 6. " Ordain elders in every city, as I had ap pointed. If any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot or unruly, FOR a bishop," &c. that is, the persons he had before spoken of as the elders; and if properly translated, it would have been appoint elders of such a character; for he that is an overseer, &c. so that the term overseer explains to us decidedly what the apostle meant by bishop or elder.

But it is contended, that elder and bishop cannot be synonimous; because Peter calls himself an elder, when, it is said, he was no bishop: but if the word bishop means only

VOL. III.

L

overseer, and should be so translated, then it follows that Peter, and all the apostles, were elders or overseers, though holding no stationary office in any particular branch of the church. The whole difficulty arises from making the word mean a title attached to a particular office in the church.

If those who were appointed as stationary presidents or rulers, were called elders or overseers, on account of their presiding and overseeing the affairs of the particular branch of which they were members, with equal propriety might they be so called who watched over the affairs of the whole Christian church; and I apprehend that the term elder originated either from the circumstance of the apostles being Jews (and they were habituated to use it of those who ruled the Jewish people, and conducted their concerns); or else that in the first planting of the Christian church, before it was organized, and regular officers appointed, that the earliest converts or the oldest men among them took upon themselves the management of its concerns, and either from age or earlier conversion were called elders and when a proper organization took place, and proper officers were appointed, not for their long standing in life orfin the church, but for their fitness, those who were appointed in their place succeeded to the name as well as the office. The latter appears to me the most likely, though probably both circumstances might have contributed towards it. One thing however is clear, that bishops, overseers, and elders, are the same officers, and consequently a character or characters holding such office or offices as they did, formed a part of the government of the Christian church.

:

In my next I shall shew the qualifications and duties of these officers, their number, mode of election, &c.

And am, Sir, your's, &c.

A FREETHINKING CHRISTIAN.

ON THE OBSERVANCE OF THE SABBATH, &c.

To the Editor of the Freethinking Christians' Magazine.

SIR,

YOUR correspondent T: has made some desultory remarks upon the Sabbath Day, a subject which appears to me, to lie within a very narrow compass. 1. Jesus left the Jewish Sabbath as he found it. 2. There is no autho, rity, that I know of, for the Christian Sabbath; consequently Christians may meet together on any day that is most convenient.

Your correspondent observes, that "the practice of the apostles and first Christians, is a proof that they did not consider the law respecting the seventh day as binding upon them." That the seventh day was never binding upon Gentile converts, is evident enough to me; but, where can this writer find, that the apostles, who were Jews, did not consider the seventh day as binding upon them? Who freed them from the Mosaic laws? On the contrary, it does not appear to me, that Jesus and his disciples, any more than other Jews, were ever absolved from their obligation to the observance of the law of Moses. Where, when, and by whom, was it ever abrogated? This is a distinction that ought ever to be kept in our view, and which will serve greatly to elucidate the sacred writings. We must be careful not to appropriate or apply to ourselves, as Gentiles, what was never intended for us.

Jesus and his disciples, as Jews, abstractedly considered, are no examples for us. They partook of the passover, which some have converted into the Lord's Supper; where as we, as Gentiles, have not a single rite or ceremony to observe. But wherever Jesus and his disciples exemplified the great principles of piety and benevolence, they are models to all mankind, whether Jew or Gentile.

There is not the shadow of authority in the New Testament for Baptism, the Lord's Supper, Ordination, Keeping of Days, Public Worship, or for the order of men called the Priesthood. These priests, who are the root of all the corruptions in religion, are the modern Pharisees; but in the kingdom of Christ all men are equal, and they have nothing to do, but to do justly, love mercy, and walk hum, bly before God.

Sandon, Jan. 1813.

G. G. F.

« AnteriorContinuar »