صور الصفحة
PDF
النشر الإلكتروني

But admitting that the form of government, by bishops and prefbyters, was established by the Apostles, it must be confidered only as a form adapted to the circumstances of the church at that time, but not with a view to its being a permanent establishment; because no precife conftitution could be framed, which would fuit the church in its accommodation to the different arrangements of civil policy. The authority of a church establishment is founded in its utility." The conclufion to which the foregoing premises are defigned to lead, feems to be this: That whenever it fhall appear to the governing powers, that any new church establishment, different from that in poffeffion, fhall be more conducive to utility, as a scheme of religious inftruction, than that set on foot by the Apostles; they are justified in adopting it

But before this conclufion be admitted, we have a right to be fatisfied with refpect to the validity of the premises upon which it is built.

In answer to the pofition," that it cannot be proved that any form of church government was laid down in the Christian church, with a view of fixing a conftitution for fucceeding ages," fome readers will fay, that the contrary pofition has been abundantly proved. The authority of St. IGNATIUS and CLE

MENT, to pass over later writers, will, in the opinion of many, be deemed fufficient to balance against it..

The certainty with refpect to our SAVIOUR'S having delivered no command on this fubject does by. no means appcar: this certainty ftands only on the ground of the Archdeacon's naked affertion; to eftablifh which, it must be proved that every thing that paffed between our SAVIOUR and his Apoftles, relative to his church, has been recorded. This undoubtedly is not the cafe. The Apostle, for inftance, directs his difciples to obey them that had the rule over them, and to fubmit themfelves." The commiffion then, which the Apostles received, invested them with an authority, to which Chriftians were to be obedient. But there is no pofitive command of our SAVIOUR's to be produced, upon which fuch authority is built. To guard, therefore, against the idea of the Apoftles affuming to themfelves an authority, which their commission did not warrant; it must be fuppofed, that the evangelical narrative does not contain all the particulars relative to this subject. Now we read, Acts

i.. 32

of our SAVIOUR's being feen alive of his Apof tles, during the space of forty days after his paffion; and of his "giving them commandments, and speaking to them of the things pertaining to the kingdom of

GOD." Is it not, then, most reasonable to conclude, that fome of these commandments, and part of the inftruction vouchfafed to the Apostles at this time, refpected the fettlement and government of the Christian church; and that although nothing decifive on this fubject has been left upon record, the condu& of the Apostles in the difcharge of their high commiffion was in a great measure regulated by the directions which they had received.

But, upon the fuppofition that the Apostles, in their establishment of the church, were governed by the confiderations pointed out by the author here alluded to; before we place the authority of the governors of the church at any fubfequent period upon a level with that of the Apoftles in a matter of this kind, it requires that we fhould be fatisfied that the advantages poffeffed by them are equal with thofe heretofore poffeffed by the Apostles for the direction of their judgment on this fubject.

The establishment of the Christian church being only temporary, to be altered as the future circumftances of fociety, and the different arrangements of civil policy, might require, appears to be a pofition irreconcileable with the independence of the Chriftian church, and calculated only to corrupt it. Before

[ocr errors]

it be therefore admitted, some strong proof fhould be brought that the establishment of the church was defigned to be of this accommodating nature. The language and conduct of the Apoftles in the discharge of their office, together with the state of the church for the first three hundred years of its existence, authorize us to draw the contrary conclufion.

In fact, the connection of the church with the ftate appears to be an accidental circumftance, which may, or may not, exist; and which, confequently, did not constitute a part of the plan upon which it was originally established. The ftate may come into the church, as in the days of CONSTANTINE; but the church is not to accommodate itself to the state, to produce this effect: or the ftate may be in oppofition to the church, as in the days of the Apostles. Its establishment therefore, as a spiritual fociety, muft respect its permanent condition, as it exists in itself upon the authority of its Divine Founder; not its accidental one, as it is occafionally connected with civil policy. When kings and queens become the nurfing fathers and nurfing mothers to the church, the church is fupported and benefited by their protection: when those who ought to protect and fupport it, defert it or act in oppofition to it, the church

is no longer in a flourishing condition with refpect to temporalities; but its establishment is in both cafes the fame.

When Archdeacon PALEY, therefore, talks about "framing an ecclefiaftical conftitution, adapted to real life, and to the actual state of actual religion in the country," he appears (if I understand him right) to be placing the fubject in that political point of view, in which it was never defigned to ftand; and to be giving scope to that innovating spirit, which must be the confequence of establishing the Chriftian church. upon a human, rather than a Divine, foundation.

Before Dr, PALEY again commits himself on this important fubject, he will do well to confider what was fo judiciously faid upon it a hundred years ago; "that in accommodating church government to the frame and occafion of the ftate, nothing be difeftablished or unfettled, that seems to have been fettled by the authority of fcripture. Therefore, whereas we fee there the government of the church first settled in the hands of bifhops, that is, paftors that had authority over pastors; (fee epiftles to TIMOTHY and TITUS) and we find no other form of church government, neither in the fcripture, nor in the practice of the univerfal church; though the whole form and

« السابقةمتابعة »