Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

their prosperity retarded. The more advanced nations have reached the stature of manhood; the garments of their youth must be cast aside, and now they claim to be invested with the "manly robe." During the last thirty years of comparative peace in Europe, the schoolmaster has been abroad; the press has yielded an abundant harvest; commerce has prosecuted her enterprises with success; many have run to and fro, and knowledge has been increased. Meanwhile, governments have been unobservant of the signs of the times, and the progress of society; the stream has run on, but they have hung at their old moorings, reposing in false security. Instead of accommodating institutions to the spirit of the age, they have, for the most part, disregarded and repressed the expression of popular feeling; whilst the pentup fires of disappointment and discontent have been accumulating and gathering strength, until at length they have burst forth with the irrepressible force and uncontrollable power of the volcano. Though for the present the commotion be violent, there is good ground to hope that, after the first tumults have subsided, order will be re-established on a solid basis, and peace among the nations maintained. Europe has, within the memory of the living, not merely tasted, but drained, the bitter cup of war, and can have no desire so soon again to drink deep of the poisoned chalice. Whatever war may be to kings and contending factions, to the body of the people it brings only losses, bereavements, tyrannies, and heavy burdens. Whilst the war now going on between the Italians and the Austrians, the Germans and the Danes, is much to be deplored, as well as the loss of life in the various emeutes and internal convulsions in different kingdoms and states; yet, on the whole, the character of the present movement must be regarded as pacific. Internal

amelioration, more than foreign aggrandizement, is its aim. Even the second act in the drama of the French Revolution, bloody and deplorable though it was, is not, we apprehend, at variance with this hope of peace. In that lamentable act, we only see order defending itself against anarchy, property against pillage,-liberty against tyranny, in its most terrific embodiment as a many-headed monster, eager to gorge itself with the blood and substance of a nation, and revel for a brief hour in the indulgence of a wild and destructive communism. It is gratifying to find, that, since the suppression of this attempted insurrection, the country has become more peaceful; that confidence is returning, the labours of industry are peacefully prosecuted, and that every thing wears a more hopeful, more promising aspect.

If such be the distinctive characteristics of the present commotions; if in their character they be European; if they be countenanced, not by factions or classes, but by the great body of the people in the different nations; and if the great aim be the attainment of popular freedom, and the adaptation of the institutions and governments to the advanced state of society in the different countries,-may we not, on good grounds, hope, that the results will prove highly favourable to Christian freedom, and the progress of evangelical truth on the continent? The following results may, with some confidence, be anticipated:-1st. The weakening of the Popedom. The Popedom, being itself an usurpation and gigantic tyranny, finds its congenial supports in civil despotisms. The ecclesiastical and civil strengthen one another, mutually supporting and supported. The subverted monarchy of France, and the humbled monarchy of Austria, not to speak of minor states, were the chief pillars of the Papacy. It is indeed a remarkable fact, that the present commotions chiefly pre

vail in Catholic countries, and in the kingdoms that gave their power to the beast. Not only the supporting kingdoms, but Rome itself, is the seat of commotion; and his Holiness, notwithstanding his assumed infallibility, has been constrained to listen to the demands of his subjects for reform, and to adapt his government to the prevailing spirit of the times. However honourable these concessions may be to the liberality and good feeling of the present Pope, they are all made at the expense of the Popedom. It is a remarkable fact, that the year 1848 has been particularly marked out by Mr Fleming, in his discourse on the Rise and Fall of the Papacy, published nearly 150 years ago, as a year that would prove very disastrous to the Popedom. He supposes that the fifth vial, which is to be poured out on the seat of the beast, or the dominions that more particularly belonged to and depend upon the Roman See, would expire about A.D. 1848. "For I do suppose," says he, "that, seeing the Pope received the title of Supreme Bishop no sooner than A.D. 606, he cannot be supposed to have any vial poured upon his seat immediately (so as to ruin his authority so signally as this judgment must be supposed to do) until the year 1848, which is the date of the 1260 years in prophetical account, when they are reckoned from A.D. 606. But yet we are not to imagine that this vial will totally destroy the Papacy (though it will exceedingly weaken it); for we find this still in being and alive when the next vial is poured out." 2d. The opening of the continent to the light of the gospel. Hitherto the Hitherto the gospel has only been very partially admitted into several continental kingdoms. From some of them, indeed, it has been almost wholly excluded. Now, however, that free governments are about to be established, the liberty of the press, that great palladium of freedom, must be

recognised. Together with this we may anticipate freedom of preaching the gospel, and of circulating the scriptures; nay, it may be hoped that freedom of worship, and of the formation of evangelical churches, will also be conceded. Though we cannot hope that any of the continental nations will as yet take the start of Britain, and proclaim the entire separation of church and state, and restrict the functions of civil government exclusively to civil matters; yet the measure of freedom which must be conceded by all free governments, will open a wide door for the free admission of gospel light. It will then remain for the friends of the gospel to cause the light to stream in amidst the long-darkened and misled populations who have groaned under the double yoke of ecclesiastical and civil despotism. It is pleasing to reflect, that the United Presbyterian Church has been called so early to give a helping hand to this great and blessed work, and that she has responded so promptly and liberally to this call. It was with a heavy heart that Professor La Harpe, and his coadjutors of the Evangelical Society of Geneva, dreaded that, notwithstanding all their noble sacrifices, they would be constrained by the month of June last to suspend their labours and dismiss their agents, as the means of their supporters, in common with many others, had been so diminished by the revolution in France, that they were unable to furnish their treasury with the usual supplies. Many, whose wealth had been thus dissipated, deeply regretted that they had not more liberally devoted their means, while it was in their power, to the cause of the Redeemer; and others rejoiced that the portion of their substance which they had so devoted had at least been saved from the general wreck. Amidst their alarming fears and anxieties, they turned their eyes towards the friends of the gospel in Britain; and

the Professor, as the messenger of his countrymen and the advocate of the Geneva Society, made one of his earliest visits, after arriving in this country, to the United Presbyterian Synod, at its meeting in May last. There he met a reception so cordial and christian-like, as tended greatly to dissipate his fears and encourage his heart. In answer to his appeals, the Synod promptly and enthusiastically resolved to aid the Genevan Society in its difficulties. In the spirit of this resolution, the Mission Board soon after voted L.500 to sustain the operations of the society. Liberal as this gift appears, after all it is no more than L.1 for each church of the Synod; and, supposing each church on the average to contain only 240 members, it would only amount to one penny for each! This shows us, in the striking language of the warmhearted professor, that though the arms of individuals be short, yet,

Kettle.

when joined to one another, the arms of christian charity become long enough to encircle the globe.

On the whole, though the political horizon over Europe is still somewhat lowering-though the alarms of war be not wholly dissipated—yet may we hope that pacific counsels will maintain the ascendency, and that each nation may be permitted to arrange its own internal government without foreign intervention; or that, at most, the intervention may not go beyond the mediation of peace between contending parties. Come what may, this at least is our hope, that the Lord God Omnipotent reigneth; that, though human diplomacy proposes, divine counsel disposes. "The floods have lifted up, O Lord! the floods have lifted up their voice; the floods lift up their waves. The Lord on high is mightier than the noise of many waters, yea than the mighty waves of the sea."

D. G.

STRICTURES ON DR WARDLAW'S DEFENCE OF CONGREGATIONAL

INDEPENDENCY.-(Concluded.)

BY THE REV. JOHN M'KERROW, D.D.

THIS paper will conclude the strictures which I propose making on Dr Wardlaw's defence of Independency. I have already considered the chief points on which Presbyterians and Independents differ from each other, with regard to their schemes of ecclesiastical polity. In the remarks, which I have made in the preceding papers, I trust that I have succeeded in showing, that there are passages in the New Testament which do not admit of a fair and consistent interpretation, except on the supposition of the Presbyterian doctrine being true, that there are two classes of elders appointed in the Christian church-one class, whose peculiar business is that of ruling, and another class who, besides ruling, are also to preach. The former

of these classes, by way of distinction from the latter, are designated ruling elders. The passages to which I refer, as fully authorizing the distinction between the teaching and the ruling elder are-Rom. xii. 6-8; 1 Cor. xii. 28; and 1 Tim. v. 17. We have good authority for affirming (Acts xiv. 23), that the apostles "ordained them elders in every church" (kar' ekkλŋσiav). These elders were ordained for the express purpose of bearing rule over the flock-and they included both the classes that have now been mentioned. It is clear then, from New Testament history, that each congregation had what Presbyterians denominate a session, bearing rule over it. I have further shown, that we have good grounds for believing, that

some of the churches mentioned in the New Testament-such as those of Ephesus and Jerusalem-consisted of more congregations than one, while they are represented as being under a common eldership; and the elders, who had the charge of these churches, exercised a superintendence over all the congregations belonging to the churches. According to the number of the congregations would be the number of the elders, so as to admit of their exercising an effective superintendence over the whole. Each congregation would be placed under the special care of a portion of the elders; and while these elders attended to the spiritual interests of the congregation, both by teaching and by ruling, we find that the eldership of the church of Ephesus, and also of the church of Jerusalem, viewed as a whole, exercised government over the churches that were respectively placed under their superintendence. Here is a scriptural precedent for the ministers and elders, residing in a particular locality, meeting together, in what is usually denominated a presbytery, and deliberating concerning matters relating to the congregations that are situated within that locality, and that are connected with the religious denominations to which they belong. Again, in the course of these strictures, I have brought under the consideration of my readers the nature of the meeting of apostles and elders that was held at Jerusalem. In considering this meeting, we have seen that it was called for the special purpose of receiving and determining an appeal, or reference, that was brought before it from the church at Antioch. The nature of the subject that was referred, occasioned "much disputing" in the assembly. Those who were present reasoned on the subject, and deduced arguments from Scripture, and from the events of providence, in support of the particular views which they entertained.

The decision to which they came was one which, after full deliberation, they considered to be in complete accordance with the mind of the Holy Ghost: and, after having adopted it, they required that the churches should yield obedience to their decree, on the ground now specified. This assembly, sanctioned by apostolical authority, furnishes a precedent for ministers and elders meeting in what is usually called a Synod -either more or less frequently, as circumstances may require-to receive and determine references and appeals, and to deliberate concerning matters of importance relating to the church at large.

While, however, I make these statements, I consider that the grand distinctive feature of the Presbyterian system, is having in every congregation a session composed of teaching and ruling elders, for the purpose of bearing rule over the flock—and that the members of the congregations are to be subject to these elders "in the Lord." This point I consider as clear and indisputable as Scripture language can make it. With regard to those associations of ministers and elders, known by the name of presbyteries and synods, there is sufficient warrant in Scripture, from the instances above mentioned, for holding such associations. They are scriptural in their nature. The principle of them is clearly recognized in New Testament history, in the cases to which a reference has already been made; and no violence is done to this principle, when, instead of all the elders of a district assembling in these associations, a certain number are chosen to represent the whole. I consider meeting by representation as a virtual meeting of the whole: and whether the elders of a district shall meet in person, or meet by representation, does not involve in it any Scripture principle, but must be regarded as a mere matter of arrangement. What I plead for, on the

Presbyterian side of the question, is, that there is not only satisfactory evidence to be found in the New Testament of each congregation being under the government of a council (or session), composed of teaching and of ruling elders, but that there is also a fair and sufficient warrant furnished by apostolical precedents, for the ministers and elders of particular districts meeting, either on a more limited or a more extensive scale, to deliberate concerning the affairs of their congregations, viewed as one association united together by spiritual ties. But with regard to the frequency with which such meetings shall be held, and with regard to the proportional number of office-bearers that shall assemble on any one occasion, no precise rule appears to be laid down. This is left to be determined by the ministers and elders themselves, acting on the principle of doing all things so as to maintain order and promote the edification of the body.

In the course of the preceding strictures I have stated, that there is considerable difficulty in ascertaining, from Dr Wardlaw's book, what that system of ecclesiastical polity is which obtains in the churches of our Independent brethren. The difficulty arises from the apparently contradictory language which the author employs in describing this system. So far as I have been able to ascertain-by comparing one part of the book with another-what that system is, the following may be regarded as a faithful sketch of it :-1. It is distinctly stated by Dr Wardlaw (p. 310), that " "all are not rulers;" that the elders, bishops, or pastors, are ordained in the churches of Christ, to have the rule over them to be over them in the Lord, and admonish them." 2. These elders, bishops, or pastors of the Independent churches, who are ordained to have the rule over them (Dr Wardlaw states p. 320), “have no wish for the

power to apply and execute the laws that exist, independently of the concurrence of their brethren." And the reason assigned why they have no wish for this is, "because they believe that with such authority Christ has not invested any man, or any body of men." 3. Though all are not rulers-though only the elders, bishops, or pastors are ordained in the churches to have the rule over them, the government is to be conducted, not by these office-bearers alone as the representatives of the congregations, "but by the officebearers and the congregation conjointly "that is, it is to be conducted by those who are not rulers, as well as by those who are ordained to have the rule in the churches. Why the members of the congregations, who conduct the government "conjointly" with the "elders, bishops, or pastors," should not all be called rulers, Dr Wardlaw has not thought it necessary to state. 4. As there is (generally speaking) only one elder, bishop, or pastor ordained in each of the Independent churches of this country "to have the rule over them,” it follows that there is only one official ruler in each of these churches. The duty of this one ruler is to preside in the church meetings, to lay down the law of Christ for the information of the congregation, and to point out its application to particular cases: the duty of the members of the congregation is to obey this ruler, and to "submit themselves." "The submission enjoined (says Dr Wardlaw) is submission to the presiding pastor, or pastors, as the divinely authorized organ by whom, in each case, the law is to be pointed out, and, with the concurrent judgment and voice of the church, to be carried into execution." 5. Though the members of the congregation are enjoined to submit to the presiding pastor, as the divinely authorized organ by whom, in each case, the law is to be pointed out, yet they are not bound to submit,

« AnteriorContinuar »