with us in desire, it is well for them; if not, the guilt remains with themselves, and not with us.

If we be not greatly mistaken, many fierce disputes which have divided Christians on the form, order, and government of the church of Christ, might, at least, have been considerably diminished by a proper attention to this subject. While one party contends for an Erastian latitude, or that no divine directions are left us on these subjects, and that the church must be modelled and governed according to circumstances; the other seems to have considered the whole as a system of positive institutions, requiring in all things the most literal and punctilious observance. The truth lies, we apprehend, between these extremes; and the way to find it is, to ascertain on what principles the apostles proceeded in forming and organizing Christian churches ; POSITIVE or MORAL ? If the former, they must have been furnished with an exact model, or pattern, like that which was given to Moses in the Mount, and have done all things according to it: but if the latter, they would only be furnished with general principles, comprehending, but not specifying, a great variety of particulars.

That the framing of the tabernacle was positive, there can be no doubt; and that a part of the religion of the New Testament is so, is equally evident. Concerning this, the injunctions of the apostle are minute and very express. Be ye followers (imitators) of me, as I also am of Christ. In this I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ORDINANCES as I delivered them to you. For I have received of the Lord that which also I delivered unto you. But were we to attempt to draw up a formula of church government, worship, and discipline, which should include any thing more than general outlines, and to establish it upon express New Testament authorities, we should attempt what is impracticable.

We doubt not but the apostles acted under divine direction; but in things of a moral nature that direction consisted, not in providing them with a model, or pattern, in the manner of that given to Moses, but in furnishing them with general principles, and enduing them with holy wisdom to apply them as occasions required.

We learn from the Acts and the Epistles, that the first churches were congregations of faithful men, voluntarily united together for the stated ministration of the word, the administration of Christian ordinances, and the mutually assisting each other in promoting the cause of Christ; that they were governed by bishops and deacons; that a bishop was an overseer, not of other ministers, but of the flock of God; that the government and discipline of each church was within itself; that the gifts of the different members were so employed as to conduce to the welfare of the body; and that in cases of disorder, all proper means were used to vindicate the honour of Christ, and reclaim the party.

These, and others which might be named, we call general principles. They are sometimes illustrated by the incidental occur rence of examples, and which, in all similar cases, are binding: but it is not always so. That a variety of cases occur in our times, in which we have nothing more than general principles to direct us, is manifest to every person of experience and reflection. We know that churches were formed, elders ordained, and prayer and praise conducted with the understanding, or so as to be under. stood by others; but in what particular manner they proceeded in each, we are not told. We have no account of the formation of a single church, no ordination service, nor any such thing as a formula of worship. If we look for express precept or example, for the removal of a pastor from one situation to another, we shall find none. We are taught, however, that for the church to grow unto a holy temple in the Lord, it requires to be fitly framed together. The want of fitness in a connexion, therefore, especially if it impede the growth of the spiritual temple, may justify a removal. Or if there be no want of fitness, yet if the material be adapted to occupy a more important station, a removal of it may be very proper. Such a principle may be misapplied to ambitious and interested purposes; but if the increase of the temple be kept in view, it is lawful, and in some cases attended with great and good effects.

This instance may suffice instead of a hundred, and goes to show that the forms and orders of the New Testament church, much more than of the Old, are founded on the reason of things. They VOL. VIII.

58

appear to be no more than what men who were possessed of the wisdom from above, would, as it were instinctively, adopt, even though no specific directions should be given.

But to place the matter beyond all doubt, let us refer to the professions and practices of the apostles themselves. The principles on which they professed to act, and which they inculcated on others, were these: Let all things be done to edifying.—Let all things be done decently, and in order. Whatever measures had a tendency to build up the church of God, and individuals, in their most holy faith, these they pursued. Whatever measures approved themselves to minds endued with holy wisdom, as fit and lovely, and as tending, like good discipline in an army, to the enlargement of Christ's kingdom, these they followed, and inculcated on the churches. And however worldly minds may have abused the principle, by introducing vain customs under the pretence of decency, it is that which, understood in its simple and original sense, must still be the test of good order and Christian discipline.

The way in which the apostles actually proceeded in the forming and organizing of churches, corresponds with this statement of things. When a number of Christians were assembled together in the days of pentecost, they were considered as a Christian church. But at first they had no deacons, and probably no pastors, except the apostles. And if the reason of things had not required it, they might have continued to have none. But in the course of things new service rose upon their hands, therefore they must have new servants* to perform it; for, said the apostles, It is not REASON that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables. WHEREFORE, brethren, look ye out among you seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost, and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. In this process we perceive nothing of the air of ceremony, nothing like that of punctilious attention to forms, which marks obedience to a positive institute; but merely the conduct of men endued with the wisdom from above; servants appointed when service required it, and the number of the one

* A, deacons, as well as a minister, signifies a servant.

regulated by the quantity of the other. All things are done decently and in order; all things are done to edifying.

It is not difficult to perceive the wisdom of God in thus varying the two dispensations. The Jewish church was an army of soldiers, who had to go through a variety of forms in learning their discipline: the Christian church is an army going forth to battle. The members of the first were taught punctilious obedience, and led with great formality through a variety of religious evolutions : but those of the last (though they also must keep their ranks, and act in obedience to command whenever given) are not required to be so attentive to the mechanical as to the mental, not so much to the minute observance of forms as to the spirit and design of them. The order of the one would almost seem to have been appointed for order's sake: but in that of the other the utility of every thing is apparent. The obedience of the former was that of children: the latter that of sons arrived at maturer age.

As our Saviour abolished the Jewish law of divorce, and reduced marriage to its original simplicity; so, having abolished the form and order of the church, as appointed by Moses, he reduced it to what, as to its first principles, it was from the beginning, and to what must have corresponded with the desires of believers in every age. It was natural for the sons of God, in the days of Seth, to assemble together, and to call upon the name of the Lord; and their unnatural fellowship with unbelievers brought on the deluge. And even under the Jewish dispensation, wicked men, though descended from Abraham, were not considered as Israelites indeed, or true citizens of Zion. The friends of God were then the companions of those that feared him. They spake often one to another, and assembled for mutual edification. What then is gospel church-fellowship, but godliness ramified, or the principle of holy love reduced to action? There is scarcely a precept on the subject of church discipline, but what may, in substance, be found in the Proverbs of Solomon.

Nor does it follow that all forms of worship and church-government are indifferent, and left to be accommodated to times, places, and circumstances. The principles, or general outlines of things, are marked out, and we are not at liberty to deviate from them ;

nor are they to be filled up by worldly policy, but by a pure desire of carrying them into effect according to their true intent.

It does follow, however, that scripture precedent, important as it is, is not binding on Christians in a moral nature, unless the reason of the thing be the same in the case to be proved as in the case adduced. The first Christians met in an upper room; for they had no proper places of worship. But it does not follow that we who have more convenient houses should do so. The first Christians were exhorted to salute one another with a HOLY KISS. The reason was, it was the custom in the east for men in general in this manner to express their affection; and all that the apostle did, was to direct that this common mode of affectionate salutation should be used in a religious way. In places where it is a common practice, it may still be used to express the strength of Christian affection: but in a country where the practice is nearly confined to the expression of affection between the sexes, it is certainly much more liable to misconstruction and abuse.— And as it was never a divine institution, but merely a human custom applied to a religious use, where this custom has ceased, though the spirit of the precept remains, yet the form of it may lawfully be dispensed with, and Christian affection expressed in the ordinary modes of salutation.

Again: The Corinthian men were forbidden to pray or prophesy with their heads covered. The reason was, the head being uncovered was then the sign of authority, and its being covered, of subjection. But in our age and country, each is a sign of the contrary. If, therefore, we be obliged to wear any sign of the one or the other, in our religious assemblies, it requires to be reversed.

It also follows that in attending to positive institutions, neither express precept nor precedent are necessary in what respects the holy manner of performing them, nor binding in regard of mere accidental circumstances, which do not properly belong to them. It required neither express precept nor precedent, to make it the duty of the Corinthians, when they met to celebrate the Lord's supper, to do it soberly, and in the fear of God, nor to render the contrary a sin. There are also circumstances which may on some