office-bearers, who derive their authority from Jesus Christ, and are accountable to him alone for the exercise of it. They are not, indeed, lords over God's heritage, but helpers of the faith and joy of the saints; and are their servants, but only in this sense, that the object of all their ministrations should be, the spiritual good of those who are committed to their care.

The constitution of the church differs from that of a civil society. A voluntary society is formed by the free consent of the members. Each of them has certain rights which he is desirous to secure, and to enlarge by the co-operation of others; and he therefore unites with them upon such terms as seem best calculated to promote the common design. They proceed in concert to compose a code of laws, and to appoint certain persons who shall have authority to execute the laws, and to manage the affairs of the society. In such cases, power necessarily emanates from the people. The society is created by them for their own benefit; and the rulers owe their official existence solely to the deed of their constituents, which is the source of their power, and prescribes its limits. Here, the society is before the rulers; but with respect to the church, the rulers were before the society; and no reasoning, therefore, from the one case, is fairly applicable to the other. There was no church when our Lord gave the Apostles their commission; when he committed to Peter, and to them all, the keys of the kingdom of heaven; when he invested them with authority to preach the gospel, to administer the ordinances, and to exercise discipline over his professed disciples. They were appointed immediately by him; and they were appointed as the first in a long succession, which was to continue to the end of time, as we learn from his promise to them: "Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world."* The office of the Apostles was extraordinary, and ceased at their death; but, besides the gifts of inspiration and of miracles, they were possessed of ordinary powers, for the edification and government of the church, which did not expire with them, but passed into other hands. The pastors, and teachers, and rulers, who existed in the primitive times, and can never be wanting, without the dissolution of the church as an organized body, were appointed by the Apostles. They were set apart to their office, and through them, as the channel in which power was conveyed to them from Christ, the source of all spiritual gifts and privileges.

This is the channel of transmission which was established in the beginning. As we are reasoning with Independents, who pretend to pay a more sacred regard to Scripture than other denominations of Christians, we confidently appeal to it, and ask, whether they can deny the statement now made, or show that the original order has been changed? Is it not true, that the Apostles derived their power immediately from Jesus Christ? Is it not true, that the first ministers and rulers of the church derived their authority from the Apostles? And can any passage be produced reversing this order, and ordaining that, in the subsequent ages, official power should flow from the people? The first governors of the church were not created by it, but received their official character before its erection. They did not, as in other voluntary societies, exercise a portion of power which the society had delegated to them. Their power came directly from heaven, and was given to them, that they might organize the society, and govern the members; not by laws of their own making, but by a code stamped with the authority of the King of Zion. In the New Testament, the people are known, not as rulers, but as subjects. It is acknowledged, that it recognizes a right in the people to interfere in the appointment of their office-bearers, to a certain extent. In many churches, they have been deprived of that right; but in the days of the Apostles, and for a long time after, they possessed and exercised the privilege of electing the persons who were

* Matth. xxviii. 20.

66

to preside over them in the Lord. But the limits of this right are defined with the greatest exactness; so as to show that it does not recognize any portion of authority as vested in the people, and far less represents them as the depositaries of all ecclesiastical power. The account which Luke gives of the election of deacons, is so expressed, as if it had been intended to guard against the principles of Independents: Look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business." 99% The people were called upon to choose persons whom they judged to be qualified, and in whom they could confide; and it was the more necessary that they should be consulted in the election, because there had been dissatisfaction in consequence of the former management of the poor. This, however, was a simple nomination, and here their power terminated. They could not invest the persons with the office, and give them authority to discharge its duties. This was the prerogative of the Apostles; it was their province to "appoint them over this business." In other words, it appears from this account, that official power is not derived from the people, but from those who are already in office.

I shall here quote a passage from the writing of the celebrated Dr. Owen, who was an Independent, but has admitted principles on the subject of church government, which are more congenial to the views of a professed Presbyterian. In his True Nature of a Gospel Church, after having shown that Christ has instituted offices in his church; that he qualifies persons for them; that he communicates power to them by their call and ordination, and commands the church to be subject to them; he adds, "By these ways and means doth the Lord Christ communicate office-power unto them that are called thereunto; whereon they become, not the officers or ministers of men, no, not of the church, as unto the actings and exercise of their authority, but only as the good and edification of the church is the end of it; but the officers and ministers of Christ himself. It is hence evident that, in the communication of church power in office, unto any persons called thereunto, the work and duty of the church consists formally in acts of obedience unto the commands of Christ. Hence, it doth not give unto such officers a power or authority which was formally and actually in the body of the community, by virtue of any grant or law of Christ, so as that they should receive and act the power of the church, by virtue of a delegation from them; but only they design, choose, and set apart the individual persons, who are thereon intrusted with office-power by Christ himself, according as was before declared. This is the power and right given unto the church, essentially considered, with respect unto their officers, namely, to design, call, choose, and set apart the persons, by the ways of Christ's appointment, unto those offices, whereunto, by his laws, he hath annexed church power and authority." He says again, in another part of the same work, speaking of the election of the pastors and rulers by the people, "This choice or election doth not communicate a power from them that choose, unto them that are chosen, as though such a power as that whereunto they are called should be formally inherent in the choosers, antecedent unto such a choice. For this would make those that are chosen to be their ministers only, and to act all things in their name, and by virtue of authority derived from them. It is only an instrumental, ministerial means, to instate them in that power and authority which is given unto such officers by the constitution and laws of Christ, whose ministers they thereon are. These gifts, offices, and officers, being granted by Christ unto the churches, wherever there is a church called according to his mind, they do, in and by their choice of them, submit themselves unto them in the Lord, according to all the powers and duties wherewith they are by him intrusted, and whereunto they are called." These quotations Acts vi. 3. † Owen's True Nature of a Gospel Church, chap. iii. p. 39. Ib. chap. iv. p. 77.

are long, but they are important; and have the greater weight, as coming from an avowed Independent, who, in learning, piety, and profound knowledge of the Scriptures, was never surpassed by any of his brethren. They contain the essential principles of Presbytery, and show that, when such a man dispassionately examined the Scriptures, he found in them the elements of that system of government which our church has adopted.

There are other arguments by which we prove that power is not lodged in the members of the church, and by them imparted to its office-bearers; but that the latter derive it immediately from Christ. When Paul says, that Christ has given to his church "pastors and teachers, for the work of the ministry, and the edifying of his body,"* it certainly would not occur to a person whose mind was not biassed by previous notions, that his meaning is, that Christ has given power to the church to create such ministers by its own deed. The words would naturally suggest, that the church and the ministers are distinct from each other; that the church is merely the society for whose benefit provision was to be made; that the Head of the church has manifested his attention to its interests, by appointing persons to instruct and govern it; and that the rights and prerogatives of its office-bearers emanate directly from himself. No man, when he was told that a king had appointed the governor of the province, would conclude that the governor was appointed by the people, and possessed no power but what they had conferred upon him. "God hath set some in the church, first, Apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers; after that, miracles; then gifts of healing, helps, governments, diversities of tongues." While this passage suggests that teachers are set in the church, not by the people, but by God, and the word government, which is the abstract for the concrete, imports, that there is authority to be exercised, as well as knowledge to be communicated, it is worthy of observation, that God is said to have "set some in the church;" not all, but a certain number of persons, for the various purposes mentioned. But how does this comport with the principles of Independents, according to whom all possess an original right to govern; all do actually govern, as no cause can be decided but by the suffrages of the church; and those who bear official names are, in fact, as subject to its authority as others; for as it made, so it can unmake them at its pleasure? In an Independent church all are governors, and there are none to be governed but the individuals who have done something which has brought them under the cognizance of their brethren, and exposed them to censure.

I shall only add, that the Scripture speaks of persons in the church, whom it calls pastors, overseers, leaders, elders who rule; and that it calls upon the members to "know" or acknowledge them, to "submit" to them, to "obey them," to "esteem them very highly in love, for their work's sake," and to "count them worthy of double honour."‡ The titles of the office-bearers import authority; but they would be merely titles of honour and empty sounds, if all power were vested in the people, and the nominal rulers were their servants, whom they had a right to control. The duty of the people would be confined to sentiments of affection, and an external show of respect. According to the Independent system, they owe no obedience to their rulers, who are, in fact, such only in name, as the people retain the rule in their own hands. How shall they obey those who can issue no command, and submit to those who have no authority to exercise? The language of Scripture is absolutely unmeaning, if all power resides in the people; but is perfectly intelligible upon the Presbyterian plan, which clearly distinguishes between the governors and the governed.

To this reasoning, Independents oppose some passages of Scripture which seem to them to recognize a power of government and discipline in the body * Eph. iv. 11, 12. 1 Cor. xii. 28. 1 Thess. v. 12, 13. Heb. xiii. 17. 1 Tim. v. 17.

of the people. Thus, our Lord says, "If thy brother shall trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault between thee and him alone: if he shall hear thee, thou hast gained thy brother. But if he will not hear thee, then take with thee one or two more; that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may be established. And if he shall neglect to hear them, tell it unto the church: but if he neglect to hear the church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican."* The ultimate appeal, say Independents, is to the church, and by the assembled church the offender is judged and excommunicated. Let it be observed, that when these words were spoken, the Christian church was not founded; and that, consequently, they would have been unintelligible to the disciples, unless they had alluded to some mode of proceeding with which they were acquainted. Now, I think that no dispassionate person can doubt that the allusion is to the Jewish synagogue, the constitution of which bore a close resemblance to that of a Presbyterian congregation. It was composed of two classes of persons,-the people, who met together to hear the law read and expounded, and the rulers, who presided over this assembly. The latter are frequently mentioned in the New Testament; and we learn from the writings of the Jews, that their office consisted in teaching and governing, and that the government comprehended the regulation of all the ordinary proceedings of the synagogue, the care of the poor, and the judging and excommunicating of offenders. "Tell it," says Christ, "to the church," in the same way in which such cases are told to the synagogue; that is, bring it before the rulers of the church, that they may deal with the obstinate brother, and expel him if he will not submit.' If our Lord intended to give a rule for the future conduct of his disciples when his church should be established, he plainly signified that the mode of treating offenders should be taken from the model of the synagogue; and his words, instead of favouring the Independent notion, that the people are the depositories of power, import that it is vested in the rulers alone, and that to them exclusively the government belongs. Thus the passage is in unison with those from which it has appeared, that the keys of the kingdom of heaven were granted to the Apostles, and their successors in the care of the church.f

The other passage which seems to recognize the power of the people, is in the first Epistle to the Corinthians, when, speaking of the incestuous person, the Apostle commands them, "in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when they were gathered together, and his spirit, with the power of our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver him unto Satan for the destruction of the flesh." And in the second Epistle, he speaks of this punishment as "having been inflicted by many." It is worthy of attention, that from this case, which was evidently peculiar, no legitimate inference can be drawn respecting the ordinary procedure of the church. The Corinthians had neglected to do their duty, and Paul, interposing by his apostolical authority, pronounced a sentence, and called upon them to execute it. It was Paul, and not the Corinthians, who excommunicated the incestuous man; and their office consisted in publishing the sentence in their assembly, and acting conformably to it, by excluding him from their fellowship. There is no recognition of power in that church to judge and censure; their business was merely ministerial. This I consider as the proper explanation of the passage, which, thus viewed, gives no countenance to Independents. The common answer, however, is satisfactory; that, on the supposition that the sentence was pronounced by the Corinthians, the address to the whole church does not necessarily imply that they were all judicially concerned, because there are many examples of addresses to a whole society or people, when only a part is intended, or only the rulers. The congregation of Israel

• Matth. xviii. 15-17.

+ 1 Cor. v. 4.

† Vitringa de Synagogo Vetere, 96. 734.
§ 2 Cor. ii. 6.

is said to have done what was certainly done only by persons in authority, and the people are spoken to as chargeable with sins which their rulers alone had committed. In such cases, we must ascertain from circumstances what persons are meant; and the case before us must be explained consistently with other passages which appropriate power to the governors of the church. At the same time, it should be remembered that all the members of the church had a part to act in the excommunication of the offender, not however as judges; but they were all bound to concur in the sentence, and to testify their approbation of it by refusing to associate with him. Thus the punishment was, in the most emphatic sense, inflicted by many.

I proceed to consider the last principle of Independency, That all acts of government are performed in a single congregation, ultimately, and without appeal to a superior assembly. Presbyterians maintain that there is a subordination of courts, and a right of appeal from an inferior to a superior court. This seems to be a fair deduction from what we have already established concerning the union of several congregations in one church. Being separate assemblies, each of which possesses its own rulers, they can be considered as one only, because they are united under one general government; and there are two ways in which their union may be effected, namely, by their being placed under a bishop, or under a presbytery. We have proved that, in the Apostolic age, there were no bishops, in the modern sense of the word; and it follows that the Church of Jerusalem, in which there were many assemblies, was governed by the common council of its presbyters. Each assembly regulated its own ordinary affairs; but when any extraordinary case arose, or any difficulty occurred, it was referred to that council, and decided by its authority. No reasonable objection can be made to this view of the subject; and if it be admitted to be just, the principle must be given up that a single congregation possesses in itself all the powers of government, and is independent of all other congregations in the world.

This argument would hold good although we should not be able to produce from Scripture, proof of an appeal from an inferior to a superior court. But Presbyterians think that they are furnished with an example in the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, and that, by the transaction there recorded, the lawfulness of courts of review is clearly established. I shall examine that passage of Scripture; and show you what countenance it gives to the plan of ecclesiastical government which we have adopted.

Some persons from Judea had taught the brethren in Antioch, that "unless they were circumcised after the manner of Moses, they could not be saved."* As this doctrine was subversive of the gospel, Paul and Barnabas opposed them, and much contention ensued. It was found impossible to settle the controversy, even by the authority of Paul, to whom the false teachers refused to submit; and it was therefore determined to refer it to the Apostles and elders in Jerusalem. Besides, it was not a local controversy, arising from the peculiar circumstances of the place, but might be agitated in any other city or district where the Jews resided; and for this reason, prudence required that it should be finally decided in a higher assembly than that of the rulers of Antioch, an assembly which would command the respect and obedience of all the churches in the world. There is no doubt that it might have been determined in Antioch, in which, besides Paul and Barnabas, both men of high rank in the church, there were prophets and teachers competent to manage such affairs; but the opposing party was refractory, and there was no hope of reducing them to silence except by the sentence of a court from which there was no appeal. It was resolved that "Paul and Barnabas and certain others of them should go up to Jerusalem unto the Apostles and elders about this question."t † Ib. 2.

• Acts xv. 1.