Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

For

that care belongs, constitute the legitimate authority. In order to illustrate this definition, we may make the following observations: 1. It supposes the lawfulness of the rule to depend on the concurrence of two parties: the clergy and the civil powers. It is evident that the consent of the clergy is necessary, since they are the persons to whom the care and watching over the souls of the people is committed. The concurrence of the prince is also necessary, since he comprehends virtually the body of the people in him. when a Church is in a state of persecution under the civil powers, then the consent and approbation of the people who receive the faith is necessary, not only because they give protection and encouragement to those that labour over them, but also from the words of Scripture, by which men are forbidden to rule as the kings of the nations, and to be as "lords over God's heritage." (1 Pet. v. 3.) But on the other hand, when the Church is under the government of a Christian magistrate, then he stands in the stead of the people, and as he gives the protection and encouragement, great regard is therefore due to him in the exercise of his lawful authority.

2. That the concurrence of the people, or of the civil powers with the clergy, is thus necessary to constitute a lawful authority, is further evident from the decrees of the first general councils, which ordered that the concerns of every province

were to be settled in the province itself: an arrangement which was continued till the usurpations of the papacy broke in and disordered this constitution. Throughout the Roman communion, the chief jurisdiction is now in the Pope, and though we are aware that this authority is the effect of fraud and tyranny, still as it is thus settled, we do not annul the acts of that power, nor the missions or orders given in that Church, because there is among them an order in fact, though not, as it ought to be, in right.

3. On the other hand, when the body of the clergy becomes so corrupt that no dependence can be placed on the regular decisions of any synod, called according to their constitution, then if the prince shall select a peculiar number, and commit to their care the reformation of doctrine and of worship, and shall give the legal sanction to the articles on which they agree; though it must be confessed that such a process is irregular and excusable only on the ground of necessity, still there is thus an authority both in fact and in right; since if the magistrate has the power of making laws in sacred matters, he may order those to be prepared by whom, and as he pleases.

4. If a company of Christians should find the public worship of their country to be so defiled that they could not conscientiously join in it, and having separated themselves from it, should by common consent desire some of their own body

to minister unto them in holy things, and should from such a beginning grow up to a regular constitution; such a method, though extremely sinful unless warranted by necessity, is still not condemned by the words of the article, provided that necessity be real and unfeigned.

Thus it appears that the definition of the article was so expressed by our Reformers, as not to exclude those Churches, which from necessity have been compelled to violate the established rules of order. And in thus acting they are justifiable on the ground both of Scripture and of antiquity.

1. They are justified by Scripture. In the old dispensation, the High Priest was the chief person, being appointed by God to officiate in the principal act of their religion, the yearly expiation for the sins of the whole nation. In this service none could make the atonement but the High Priest, and it is therefore reasonable to conclude that no atonement was made in case any other person should thus officiate. Moreover, the office had been fixed by an express law of God in the eldest of Aaron's family; a law which could not therefore be changed except by the divine authority. We find however that great innovations were made by the Maccabees 2 and

a The Asmonean family derived its name from Asmoneus, from whom Matathias was descended in the fourth line. When the decree of Antiochus Epiphanes was about to be carried into execution in

their successors of the Asmonean family: Herod, too, changed the High Priesthood at pleasure,a and the Romans openly exposed it to sale. Now these were as great nullities in the High Priests of our Saviour's time as can be conceived, for the Jews, who kept their genealogies with such strictness, must have known in whom the right of this office was vested. Yet these were in fact High Priests, and made the atonement for the people, and were owned as such by our Saviour, as is evident from the instance of Caiaphas, whose claim to the title was acknowledged by him. (John xviii. 22.) Hence it appears, that where the necessity was real and unavoidable, the Jews were bound to think that God dispensed with his own precept. It is reasonable, therefore, to infer, that whenever God by his providence brings Christians under a visible necessity, either of joining in a defiled worship, or of breaking through established rules, in order to the being united in government, the latter may be chosen with impunity.

Modin, the city where Matathias resided, he resisted it with success, and his sons, following his example, at last freed their country from a foreign yoke.-See Hale's Anal. of Chronol. v. ii. p. 597.

a Herod the Great was made king of Judea by the Roman senate, B. C. 49. He elected Ananelus High Priest after the death of Antigonus, whom, however, he was obliged to depose, in order to make room for Aristobulus, the rightful successor to the pontificate.-See Hale's Anal. v ii. p. 643. and Lewis's Heb. Antiq. b. ii.

2. It is justified by antiquity. Frumentius, a layman, preached to the Indians, and was afterwards made a priest and a bishop by Athanasius." The king of the Iberians also, before he was baptised himself, converted his subjects, and thus became the Apostle of his country before he was initiated. These instances justify us in not passing too severe a censure on a departure from established rules, when necessity calls for it; at the same time, that we may not ourselves concur in that departure. Thus we believe that none ought to baptize but persons lawfully ordained, yet since a practice of admitting the baptism of laymen or women has generally prevailed, we have that regard to such a common practice, that we do not annul, though we condemn it.

See Mosheim's Hist. cent. iv. p. 1. c. 1. sec. xx.

See Sozomen, Hist. Eccl. 1. ii. c. vi.

« AnteriorContinuar »