HEBREWS 13th. CHAP. 17th. VERSE. ‘OBEY THEM THAT HAVE THE RULE OVER YOU, AND SUBMIT YOURSELVES; FOR THEY WATCH FOR YOUR SOULS, AS THEY THAT MUST GIVE AN AC⯑COUNT.’
[]IN examining a Religion, which pretends to come from God, one of the firſt things which forceth itſelf upon our attention, is the Influence of its Doctrines and Precepts upon human Felicity. If the natural ten⯑dency of theſe, be to regulate the paſſions, and to promote the general Happineſs of Mankind; a ſtrong preſumption ariſeth, that its pretenſions to a divine origin, may be well founded. But if a Religion obvi⯑ouſly tendeth to leſſen human happineſs, or [2] to diſturb the peace of Society; we may, with⯑out further examination, conclude with cer⯑tainty, that it cometh not from that great, and beneficent Being, who (far from de⯑lighting in the miſery of his creatures) would have all to be pious, and virtuous, only, that all may be finally, and com⯑pletely happy, in thoſe realms where Death hath no dominion.
Viewed in this light, Chriſtianity is emi⯑nently diſtinguiſhed above every other reli⯑gious Inſtitution, which hath hitherto pre⯑vailed in the world. It teacheth in per⯑fection, the duties of Man to Man; it affordeth divine aids to human weakneſs; and encourageth the practice of what it ſheweth to be good, by motives the moſt engaging, and the moſt exalted.
Chriſtian Religion exhorteth us to be mindful of ‘whatſoever things are true, honeſt, juſt, pure, lovely, or of good report’—to forgive our enemies, to love our neighbours as ourſelves, to do good, as [3] we have opportunity, to every individual of the human race, and, as much as lieth in us, to live peaceably with all men.
In Society only are theſe duties practica⯑ble; and, without Government and Subor⯑dination, Society could not ſubſiſt. There⯑fore the divine Author, and Finiſher of our Faith, in order to give efficacy to his other commands, enforced obedience to the civil Magiſtrate by an injunction of the Goſpel, requiring his followers to ‘render unto Caeſar the things that were Caeſar's,’ as well as ‘unto God the things that were God's.’
The ſame courſe of ſalutary inſtruction, was faithfully purſued by the Apoſtles, and others, the firſt Preachers of Chriſtianity; who earneſtly exhorted their Converts to ‘render to all their dues; tribute to whom tribute was due; cuſtom to whom cuſ⯑tom; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour; to ſubmit themſelves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's [4] ſake; whether to the King as ſupreme, or to Magiſtrates, as unto them, who are ſent by him for the Puniſhment of evil-doers, and for the Praiſe of them that do well.’
To theſe Precepts of Civil Obedience no objection of importance hath ever been made. They are (on the contrary) ap⯑plauded both by the believer, and by the unbeliever,—by him who reverenceth the Goſpel, as the power of God unto Salva⯑tion,—and by him who conſidereth it as a cunningly deviſed fable, calculated merely to erect a Dominion over the conſciences of men.
But the Precept of my Text, hath fre⯑quently been viewed in a light leſs favour⯑able. It, certainly ſuppoſeth an Authority different from that of the civil Magiſtrate, whoſe Duty is to watch, not for the Souls, but for the Lives and Properties of his ſub⯑jects; and to that Authority St. Paul, here, enjoineth an Obedience, which the ‘chil⯑dren [5] of this world’ are little willing to pay.
It would be idle to reaſon in ſupport of ſpiritual Authority with ſuch as doubt, or deny the divine origin of the Goſpel; for THESE MEN muſt be convinced that they HAVE SOULS, before they can be perſuaded to enquire WHO are appointed to watch for them; to WHOM, on that account, their obedience is due; or WHAT is the Nature and Extent of the obedience required.
THEY are not, however, ALL infidels, who deny the reality of ſpiritual Powers;—for many ſincere believers in Chriſtianity contend that, under the Goſpel-diſpenſa⯑tion, there is nothing which bears the ſmalleſt reſemblance to an excluſive Prieſt⯑hood; that the Authority which is ſup⯑poſed in my Text, either ceaſed with the Apoſtles; or that (if it ſtill continueth in the Church) it can be conferred on one claſs of Chriſtians, only, by the Election of others; and that, therefore, we are bound [6] to obey it, no farther, than is neceſſary to preſerve Decency and Order in the conduct of public worſhip.
That, our bleſſed Lord gave to none of his immediate followers Authority or Ju⯑riſdiction, of ſuch a nature as, to interfere with the Rights of the Rulers of the Earth, is, indeed, an undoubted Truth,—for all ſuch Authority was diſclaimed by Himſelf; ‘My kingdom,’ ſaid He to Pilate, ‘is not of this world’—And, upon being aſked by a certain perſon to decide a queſ⯑tion of Property between him and his bro⯑ther, his Reply was, ‘Man—who made me a Judge, or a Divider over you?’ But when it is conſidered that, Chriſt came into the world to ‘turn men from Dark⯑neſs unto Light, and from the Power of Satan unto God;’ that, ‘He gave him⯑ſelf for us, that He might redeem us from all Iniquity, and purify to himſelf a peculiar people zealous of good works’—and that of theſe works very many are ſuch [7] as unregenerate humanity cannot perform; and that the Doctrines which he revealed, are ſuch as human Reaſon could never have diſcovered; it will be ſeen how neceſſary it was that, when he aſcended into Heaven, he ſhould ſubſtitute ſome Authority, on Earth, to illuſtrate the Revelation which he had given, and to enforce obedience to the Laws which he had enacted.
There is nothing more ſtrictly required of Chriſtians, than that they ſhould live together in Unity; profeſſing the ſame Faith, joining in the ſame Worſhip, and practiſing the ſame Virtues on the ſame Principles. Now, as Men have different Paſſions, Prejudices, and Purſuits, ſuch Unity would be impoſſible, were they not linked together in one Society; under the Government of Perſons authoriſed to watch over the Faith, to preſcribe the Forms of pub⯑lic Worſhip, and to inculcate the neceſſity, and explain the Nature and Extent of the ſeveral Virtues.
[8] In the Scriptures of the New Teſtament, the Society of Chriſtians is (on account of its unity and organization) compared to the human body; ‘for as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the ſame office; ſo we, being many, are one Body in Chriſt, and every one members one of another.’ (Rom. XII. 4. 5)▪ This Society of Believers, in our common Deliverer, is called the CHURCH, 'the Kingdom of God',—and 'the Kingdom of Heaven'; and ITS affairs (like the affairs of every other Kingdom) are adminiſtered by proper officers in ſubordination to the one Lord; who ‘when he aſcended on high, and led captivity captive, gave ſome Apoſtles, and ſome Prophets, and ſome Evangeliſts, and ſome Paſtors, and Teachers, for the perfecting of the Saints, for the work of the Miniſtry, for the edifying of the body of Chriſt; that, henceforth we ſhould be no more children toſſed to and fro, and carried [9] about with every wind of Doctrine, by the ſleight of men, and cunning crafti⯑neſs whereby they lie in wait to de⯑ceive; but ſpeaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things, which is the Head, even Chriſt, from whom the whole Body fitly joined toge⯑ther, and compacted by that which every joint ſupplieth, according to the effec⯑tual working in the meaſure of every part, maketh increaſe of the body unto the edifying of itſelf in love.’ (Epheſ. IV. 11. 12. 14. 15. 16.)
Now,—of this Society (as of a philoſophi⯑cal Sect) it is not left to every man's choice, as a thing indifferent, whether or not he will become a Member. ALL who em⯑brace the Faith of the Redeemer of the world, are required to be baptized, under the pain of forfeiting the benefits of Redemp⯑tion. (St. Mark, XVI. 16.—St. John, III. 5.) But one great purpoſe propoſed by the inſtitution of Baptiſm, was the Initia⯑tion [10] of Perſons into the Church of Chriſt; ‘For by one Spirit’ (ſaith St. Paul, 1 Cor. XII. 13. 27. 28. 29.) ‘are we all bap⯑tized into one Body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free.’
Of Baptiſm, (whatever be the Import⯑ance) it is evident that to receive it is, not (like moral Juſtice, or the Veneration of the Supreme Being) a Duty reſulting from the Nature of the Relations of Man; and that all its efficacy (which in Scripture is ſaid to be nothing leſs than the Remiſſion of Sins, Acts II. 38. and XXII. 16.) is derived from po⯑ſitive Inſtitution, and can accompany the external Rite, only, when that Rite is ad⯑miniſtered in the manner preſcribed, and by the perſons authoriſed to adminiſter it.
That all Chriſtians, in common, are not veſted with this authority, is plain from the Commiſſion, which (after his Reſur⯑rection) the bleſſed Jeſus gave to his Apoſ⯑tles. We are aſſured that the number of [11] his followers was then five hundred at leaſt; but it was ONLY to the ELEVEN DISCI⯑PLES that ‘He came and ſpake ſaying, All power is given unto me in Heaven, and Earth; Go YE therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt.’ (St. Matthew, XXVIII. 16. 17. 18. 19.) Now there is no reaſon to ſuppoſe that there were not many of the five hundred well qualified to inſtruct either a Jew, or a Gentile, in the doctrines of the the Goſpel; and it is certain, that any one of them could have waſhed his Converts with water in the Name of the Holy Trinity, as well as St. Peter, or St. John: but then, ſuch an unauthorized waſhing would not have been Chriſtian Baptiſm, or of equal Validity with it, any more than the Opinion of a Lawyer at the Bar, is the Judgement of a Court of Juſtice, or of equal obligation: It is the Commiſſion of the Sovereign which gives force to the Judgement of the Court; as it is [12] the COMMISSION OF CHRIST which gives VALIDITY TO BAPTISM.
The ſame Things hold true of the Lord's Supper; which, if it be not adminiſtered by Perſons having Authority for ſuch cele⯑bration, cannot be deemed a Sacrament of Chriſt's Inſtitution. Theſe two Rites are the external Badges of our Profeſſion—by the one we are incorporated into that So⯑ciety, of which God our Saviour is the Head and Sovereign—of the other, with all its Advantages, we have a Right to par⯑take, whilſt we continue Members of that Society; but if, by an open and ſcanda⯑lous diſregard to the Precepts of the Goſ⯑pel, we ſhould prove ourſelves Deſpiſers of its Privileges: the ſame Perſons who are authorized to admit us into Chriſt's Church, are likewiſe veſted with Autho⯑rity to caſt us out of it; for to them were gi⯑ven ‘The Keys of the Kingdom of Hea⯑ven,’ with an aſſurance that ‘whatſo⯑ever they ſhould bind on Earth, ſhould [13] be bound in Heaven; and whatſoever they ſhould looſe on Earth, ſhould be looſed in Heaven.a’
Now, as Baptiſm is to be adminiſtered, ſo long as there ſhall be Perſons to be enliſted under the Banner of Chriſt; and, as the Lord's Supper is to be celebrated ſo long as it ſhall be the Duty of Soldiers to adhere to to the Standard of their Leader, and their Head; and as it is to be feared that there never will come a time, when all the ſer⯑vants of Chriſt ſhall walk ‘worthy of the [14] vocation wherewith they are called;’—It follows undeniably that this Power of the Keys, b which was originally veſted in the Apoſtles, muſt continue in the Church through all Ages, even unto the End of the World. But we have ſeen that it was not, at firſt, entruſted to all the Diſciples in com⯑mon, as one of the Privileges inſeparable from their Profeſſion; and, as no Body of men can poſſibly transfer an Authority, of which they themſelves were never poſſeſſed; it is certain, that even now it cannot, by the Election of one Claſs of Chriſtians, be delegated to another, but muſt, by ſome mode of Succeſſion, be derived from the Apoſtles, who were ſent by Chriſt, as He was ſent by his Father.
To argue from the Origin of civil to that [15] of eccleſiaſtical Government, although, per⯑haps, not very uncommon, is yet extremely fallacious.
Of the various Nations of the world (as particular Forms of Government may be deviſed on Earth, though Government itſelf is from above) many of the Sovereigns may, indeed, derive their Authority from the Suffrages of their Subjects; becauſe, in a State of Nature, every man has an inherent and undoubted Right to defend his Life, Liberty, and Property; and what he poſ⯑ſeſſes in his own perſon, he may, for the Good of Society, transfer to another: but no man is by nature, or can make himſelf, a Member of the Chriſtian Church; and, therefore, Authority, to govern that So⯑ciety, can be derived only from Him by whom it was founded, and who ‘died that he might gather together in one all the Children of God.’
Againſt ſuch reaſoning as this, it hath been ſometimes urged that it appeareth in⯑conſiſtent [16] with the Wiſdom and Goodneſs of God, to make Inſtitutions which, (like Baptiſm and the Lord's Supper) are gene⯑rally neceſſary to the Salvation of all Chriſ⯑tians, depend upon the Authority and Com⯑miſſion of a particular Order; Becauſe, by ſuch an Economy, an intolerable Domina⯑tion would be eſtabliſhed over the Souls of Men; and the purpoſe, for which the Son of God died, might, in ſome degree, be de⯑feated, by the Caprice of an ignorant and arbitrary Prieſthood:—But, this objection, is either of no weight, or it militates with equal force againſt all Religion, natural as well as revealedc; and even againſt the Wiſdom of Providence in the Government of the World.
[17] In every thing relating both to their tem⯑poral, and their ſpiritual Intereſts, Mankind [18] are all ſubjected to mutual Dependence. The Rich depend upon the Poor, and the Poor upon the Rich. An Infant, neglected from the Birth, would ‘barely cry and ceaſe to live;’ nor is it very eaſily to be conceived how, in the more rigid Climates, a full⯑grown man could, without aſſiſtance, pro⯑vide even the Neceſſaries of mere animal Life. Of RELIGION, it is certain that in ſuch a ſituation, nothing could be known: For there is not the ſmalleſt Reaſon to ima⯑gine that any Individual of the human race—an Ariſtotle,—a Bacon,—or a Newton,—had he been left alone, from his Infancy, without culture, and without education, could ever, by the native Vigour of his own mind, have diſcovered the Exiſtence of a God; or that ſuch ſpeculations, as might be ſuppoſed to lead to that Diſcovery, would have employed any Portion of his Time, or his Thoughts.
[19] Even, in Society, it would be impoſſible for any Man, without the Aſſiſtance of others, to underſtand, in the preſent Age, the very firſt Principles of Chriſtianity; for the Scriptures, in which alone, thoſe Prin⯑ciples can be found, are written in Lan⯑guages which are now, no where vernacu⯑lar. In the Fidelity of Tranſlators, there⯑fore, every illiterate Diſciple of Jeſus, muſt confide for the Truth of thoſe Doctrines, which conſtitute the Foundation of all his Hopes; and, as no man ever pretended that the Chriſtian Sacraments are more neceſſary to Salvation than the Chriſtian Faith, where is the impropriety, or inconſiſtency of thoſe Perſons receiving the Sacraments of Bap⯑tiſm, and the Lord's Supper, by the mi⯑niſtration of others, who, by ſuch miniſtra⯑tion muſt, of neceſſity, receive the Truths of the Goſpel?
Having thus ſhewn that there is in the Church, a STANDING ORDER OF MEN, to whom, in the Affairs of Religion, the [20] great Body of Chriſtians ought, or are bound to pay obedience; it remains to be en⯑quired WHO they are that, among the va⯑rious Pretenders, have the beſt Claim to this SPIRITUAL AUTHORITY.
One Party maintains that, originally, the Officers of the Church were ALL, Preſby⯑ters of ONE ORDER, and veſted with equal Powers; Whilſt others (and the Church of England eſpecially) hold that Chriſt and his Apoſtles appointed DIVERS ORDERS of Miniſters in the Church; that of THESE ORDERS the HIGHST ALONE, was veſted with Authority to ORDAIN OTHERS; and that, therefore, Obedience (as to thoſe ‘who watch for our Souls’) can be due ONLY to ſuch as are EPISCOPALLY OR⯑DAINED.
This is the famous Queſtion, concerning the apoſtolic Model of Church-Govern⯑ment, which has (almoſt from the begin⯑ning of the Reformation) been agitated between us, and the Diſſenters of the Preſby⯑terian Sect.
[21] The Plea urged in Behalf of the Preſby⯑terians is, that the Titles, Biſhop and Preſ⯑byter, being in the New Teſtament indif⯑ferently given to the ſame Perſons, cannot be the Titles of diſtinct eccleſiaſtical Offi⯑cers; which appears, it is ſaid, ſtill more evident from the Ordination of Timothy, who (although the firſt Biſhop of Epheſus) was veſted with his epiſcopal Character by the Impoſition of the Hands of the Preſby⯑tery.
That one and the ſame Man is, in the New Teſtament, ſometimes called a Biſhop, and ſometimes a Preſbyter, cannot perhaps be denied; but although every apoſtolic Biſhop was, therefore, undoubtedly a Preſ⯑byter;—it does not follow that every Preſ⯑byter was likewiſe a Biſhop. In the Old Teſtament Aaron, and his Sons are (with⯑out any Diſcrimination of Order) frequently ſtyled Prieſts;—as in the New Teſtament both St. Peter, and St. John call themſelves Preſbyters. (1 Pet. V. 1.—2 John, 1.— [22] 3 John 1.) And St. Paul upon one occaſion, denominates himſelf a Deacon. (Coloſſ. 1. 24. 25. See the original) Yet, I believe, no man ever ſuppoſed that thoſe Apoſtles were ſuch eccleſiaſtical Officers, as modern preſbyterian Miniſters, or Deacons: And it is univerſally known that in the Jewiſh Prieſthood, there were different Orders; and that Aaron was of an Order ſuperior to his Sons.
This being the Caſe; the Preſbyters, by the laying on of whoſe Hands Timothy was made a Biſhop, may have been of the ſame Order with St, Peter, and St. John; and, if ſo, his Conſecration was undoubtedly Epiſcopal. We are (at all Events) certain that it was not (in the modern ſenſe of the word) Preſbyterian; for the Gift, which in the firſt Epiſtle is ſaid to have been given to him by Prophecy, ‘with the laying on of the Hands of the Preſby⯑tery;’ is in the ſecond ſaid to have been in him ‘by the putting on of the [23] Hands of St. Paul.’ d But by the confeſſion of all Parties, St. Paul was a Biſhop in the higheſt ſenſe in which that word is taken; and the Powers of the Epiſcopate not being parcelled out among various Partners, of whom each poſſeſſes only a ſhare, the Impoſition of his Hands was ſufficient for every purpoſe which could have been effected by the Hands of the whole College of Apoſtles.
It appears, therefore, that (from the [24] promiſcuous uſe of the Titles Biſhop, and Preſbyter) nothing can with certainty be concluded on either Side of this celebrated Queſtion. But if, inſtead of reſting in ſingle words, (which are always more or leſs ambiguous) we attend to ſome impor⯑tant Facts recorded in the New Teſta⯑ment; I think, we ſhall diſcover in them ſufficient Evidence, that the Government of the primitive Church was prelatical, and not adminiſtered by a College of Elders, an our Adverſaries are wont to affirm.
During our Saviour's Stay upon Earth, we know that He had under Him two diſ⯑tinct Orders of Miniſters; the Twelve and the Seventy: and after his Aſcenſion (im⯑mediately before which he had enlarged the Powers of the Eleven) we read of Apoſtles. Preſbyters, and Deacons. That the Preſ⯑byters were ſuperior to the Deacons, and the Apoſtles ſuperior to both is univerſally ac⯑knowledged; but it hath been ſaid that in Scripture we find no Intimation that the [25] Apoſtolic Order was deſigned for continu⯑ance.—A Quaker ſays the ſame thing of Water-Baptiſm; and, I know not by what Text of Scripture, or by what Mode of Ar⯑gument, Thoſe who, upon this Plea, reject the Apoſtolic Order of Chriſtian Miniſters, could overthrow the Principles upon which the Diſciples of George Fox reject the Uſe of that Rite, inſtituted for the Initia⯑tion of Mankind into the Chriſtian Church.
They were the Eleven, alone, to whom our Saviour ſaid ‘Go ye, therefore, and teach all Nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghoſt—teaching them to obſerve all things whatſoever I have commanded you.’ (Matthew XXVIII. 16. 19. 20.) And, therefore, although we frequently find Preſbyters and Deacons ad⯑miniſtering the Sacrament of Baptiſm; we muſt conclude that (as a Judge adminiſters Juſtice by Authority derived from his So⯑vereign, ſo) thoſe inferior Officers of the [26] Church adminiſtered Baptiſm by Authority derived from the Apoſtles: Indeed, had they pretended to act by any other Authority, it is not eaſy to conceive how their Baptiſm could have been the Baptiſm of Chriſt; for it was not with the external waſhing, by whomſoever performed, but with the Eleven and their Succeſſors that Chriſt promiſed to be ‘always, even unto the End of the World.’
That the Eleven did not conſider this Promiſe, or the Commiſſion with which it was given, as terminating with their Lives, is evident from their admitting others into their own Order; for which they had competent Authority, as having been ſent by Chriſt, as he was ſent by his Father (St. John. XX. 21.)
When St. Paul (to magnify his office, and to procure to it from the Galatians that Reverence which, it appears, they had withdrawn from him, and paid to others, whoſe Doctrine was probably more palat⯑able) [27] ſtyleth himſelf ‘an Apoſtle not of Men, neither by Man, but by Jeſus Chriſt, and God the Father;’ He muſt have known ſome who derived their Apoſ⯑tolic Miſſion from Men, otherwiſe he could have claimed no particular Reſpect from what was in his own Apoſtleſhip no parti⯑cular Diſtinction. At that very early Pe⯑riod, therefore, there muſt have been in the Church, Secondary Apoſtles, (if I may ſo denominate them) upon whom by Impo⯑ſition of Handse, or by ſome other ſig⯑niſicant ceremony, the Eleven had con⯑ferred that Authority, which was given to them by their divine Maſter: Such were Matthias and Barnabas; ſuch likewiſe, were Timothy, Titus, and many others whoſe names are mentioned in the New Teſtament.
[28] That Matthias and Barnabas were of the Apoſtolic Order has, I believe, never been denied; and that Timothy, and Titus were ſuperior to modern Preſbyters is equally evi⯑dent: [29] Timothy was by St. Paul, empow⯑ered to preſide over the Preſbyters of Ephe⯑ſus; to receive accuſations againſt them; to exhort, to charge, and even to rebuke them; and Titus was by the ſame Apoſtle, left in Crete, for the expreſs purpoſe of ſetting things in order, and ordaining Preſ⯑byters in every city. Now to exhort, to charge, and (with Authority) to rebuke one's equal, is ſurely incongruous; and alto⯑gether inconſiſtent with that Parity of Order and Office, for which our Adverſaries ſo ſtrenuoſly plead.
Even the Commiſſion given to Titus ſeems, by much, too extenſive for a preſby⯑terian Miniſter; who after having ordained in one city, could not have proceeded to or⯑dain in another, without the Conſent and Aſſiſtance of his Brother and Fellow-La⯑bourer. In a word, no man, I think, who, without prejudice, reads the Epiſtles of St Paul, and the Apocalypſe of St. John, can ſeriouſly believe that Timothy, Titus, [30] Epaphroditus, Soſthenes, Silas, and the ſeven Angelsf of the ſeven Churches in Aſia, were mere Preſbyters; or that the Church was, in thoſe days, governed by a College of Elders.
If from the inſpired Penmen of the New Teſtament, we proceed to examine the ſuc⯑ceeding writers of the Chriſtian Church, we ſhall find ſuch multiplied, and concur⯑ring [31] evidence of the divine Inſtitution of EPISCOPACY, as it is impoſſible to reſiſt, without denying the Truth of all ancient Hiſ⯑tory, and even ſhaking the Pillars of Reve⯑lation itſelf: For ‘in the noble Army of Martyrs’ the Witneſſes of the Epiſcopal Government of the Church, are earlier, and more numerous by far, than thoſe who teſtify that the Goſpel of St. Matthew was written by that Apoſtle, or that the Book of the Apocalypſe is canonical Scripture.
But it may be ſaid, that although the Government of the Church, as ſettled by the Apoſtles, ſhould be granted to have been prelatical, there is nothing in the New Teſtament, or in the Nature of the Thing to make us imagine a different Con⯑ſtitution abſolutely unlawful. The Form of civil Government eſtabliſhed by God him⯑ſelf over the Children of Iſrael, was cer⯑tainly, Monarchical; and the ſame Conſti⯑tution obtained at firſt in every Nation un⯑der Heaven, of which Hiſtory giveth any [32] account: Yet no man, in the preſent Age, ſuppoſeth a republican, or an ariſtocratical Government inconſiſtent with the Order of Providence; and why, then, ſhould it be deemed contrary to the Spirit of Chriſtianity to vary the external Polity of the Church, in conformity to the Manners, or Preju⯑dices, or civil Conſtitutions of the different Nations in which it is placed?
This Reaſoning would be concluſive; were not the Polity of the Church, the Authority of her Miniſters, and the Validity of the Chriſtian Sacraments inſeparably united.
To Perſons, who conſider the Religion of our adorable Redeemer, as a mere re⯑publication of, what is called, the Religion of Nature; nothing to be ſure can appear more trifling, or more juſtly ridiculous than Diſputes about the external Government of the Church. In the opinion of ſuch Men, it muſt be a matter of perfect Indifference, whether ſhe be governed by Biſhops, by [33] Preſbyters, or by the People at large; for the only thing in which they can be inte⯑reſted, is the Truth of the Doctrines taught, which reſts not upon the Authority of the Teacher, but upon Deductions of Reaſon, and the Declarations of Scripture, if indeed to the Scripture theſe Perſons allow any De⯑ference to be due.
Thoſe, however, who conſider Chriſ⯑tianity as an inſtituted Religion; who believe that ‘Chriſt Jeſus came into the world to ſave ſinners,’ and to reſtore to them that forfeited Inheritance, which by no human means they could ever have regained; Per⯑ſons, who conſider Baptiſm, and the Lord's Supper as of vaſt Importance in the great Scheme of univerſal Redemption; and who are convinced that thoſe ordinances derive their Importance, wholly from poſitive In⯑ſtitution, cannot think it a matter of Indif⯑ference, whether the Hand from which they receive them, be the Hand of an Ad⯑miniſtrator, who derives his Authority from [34] Chriſt; or of one, who derives it from the People.—VALIDITY or INVALIDITY is then the grand Queſtion; and until the Argument is wound up to this Pitch, little good can be done.
Now, it being certain that, from the Days of the Apoſtles to thoſe of Calvin, no man was authorized to miniſter in holy things, but by Ordination from the Hands of a Biſhop;g and it being equally cer⯑tain [35] that the Preſbyterians derive their Or⯑ders from no ſuch Source; it is ſurely not without Reaſon, that we doubt whether the ordinances diſpenſed in their Aſſemblies, be the ordinances of the Church of Chriſt; or that we conſider the Frequenters of ſuch Aſſemblies (eſpecially here in England) as guilty of Diſobedience to thoſe, to whom by every Law divine as well as human, they are in Conſcience bound to ‘ſubmit them⯑ſelves, as to Rulers who have Authority to watch for their Souls.’
Unimportant as this Controverſy has of⯑ten been repreſented, it appears to me of [36] much greater Moment, than many of thoſe, which make a mighty noiſe among the cold and philoſophical Chriſtians of the preſent Day.
In all Churches, with which I am ac⯑quainted, are to be found ſpeculative Opini⯑ons; (UNDER WHICH DENOMINATION I do not by any means include the Doc⯑trines of our Lord's eſſential Divinity, and the expiatory nature of his Sacrifice upon the Croſs) concerning which I may affirm that (although they have been often can⯑vaſſed with much bitterneſs of contention, and have ſometimes produced all the Evils of Schiſm) a Layman, who is not obliged to ſubſcribe the public confeſſion of Faith, needs give himſelf very little trouble to ex⯑amine whether they be true or falſe: But a DEFECT, in the of MISSION the Miniſters of the Goſpel, invalidates the Sacraments, affects the Purity of all Public Worſhip; and is therefore a matter which deſerves to be inveſtigated, by every man who is ſincerely a Chriſtian
[37] That it is particularly worthy of Inveſti⯑gation, at preſent, when the Church of England is aſſaulted on every ſide, ſome⯑times by clamorous Invective, and ſome⯑times by inſidious Stratagem, none of the children of that Church can poſſibly doubt. Her Faith, which we have every Reaſon to believe to be the ‘Faith which was once delivered to the Saints,’ is undermined by Sophiſtry, and vilified by Ridicule. Againſt her Conſtitution, a thouſand artful Cavils have been raiſed, as if it were unfriendly to civil and religious Liberty; and we have repeatedly been given to underſtand by men, who agree in nothing but oppoſition to us, that it would be expedient for the Legiſlature to aboliſh her HIERARCHY, and to eſtabliſh, in its ſtead, the eccleſiaſ⯑tical Government which prevails among the Preſbyterians, or Independents, or any other novel Sect which Fancy, fertile of innova⯑tions, might readily ſuggeſt.
The Faith hath found many and able De⯑fenders [38] who, with ‘the Sword of the Spi⯑rit which is the Word of God,’ have completely routed that confederate Hoſt, which (with the ſpirit of ‘Gebal, and Ammon, and Amalek’ of old) hath lately appeared in Arms againſt the Divi⯑nity of our Lord and Saviour, and the Re⯑demption of the World. But the Conſti⯑tution of the Church (whether it be thought that the Subject is of little Importance, whilſt her Faith is at Stake; or for ſome other Reaſon—ſuch as the dread of the po⯑pular Cry of High Church,h or Prieſt⯑craft) hath not, for many years, attracted from thoſe faithful Soldiers of Chriſt, the Attention to which, in my opinion, it is juſtly entitled. It ſeemed therefore, that I could not employ myſelf with greater Pro⯑priety, than by ſhewing as fully as the [39] Time, uſually allotted to theſe Exerciſes, could permit, That OUR ECCLESIASTI⯑CAL CONSTITUTION hath its FOUNDA⯑TION in the HOLY SCRIPTURES, and in the UNIVERSAL PRACTICE of the PRI⯑MITIVE CHURCH; and that, although our Biſhops derive many civil immunities, much of their worldly Dignity, and per⯑haps their whole Revenues from the mu⯑nificence of the State,—the AUTHORITY to which, in my Text, OBEDIENCE is required, flows to them from ANOTHER SOURCE.
The Supreme Powers in this Kingdom have, in general, approved themſelves the nurſing Fathers of our religious Eſtabliſh⯑ment; and we may appeal to the Hiſtory of England, for Proof, that the Members of that Eſtabliſhment have, in return, been remarkable for their Loyalty and Attach⯑ment to the Conſtitution of their Country: whilſt the Sectaries, when they prevailed againſt the Church, prevailed likewiſe [40] againſt the State, and trampled, at once, upon the Mitre, and the Crown.
This conſtitutional Loyalty let it be our Care always to maintain, and to inculcate upon thoſe among whom we ‘labour in the word and doctrine.’ From us it is due, not merely by Ties of Allegiance, but as a Debt of Gratitude to that Govern⯑ment, by which we are protected; and to a Sovereign, who ſhines conſpicuous among the Rulers of the Earth, for his Piety, and for every perſonal and royal Virtue, and who is (by Inclination, as well as by Title) a Defender of the Faith. But, whilſt we acknowledge, with all thankfulneſs, that we are indebted for our Eſtabliſhment to the Laws of Man, let us never forget that the AUTHORITY, by which we miniſter in holy Things, cometh to us with the EPIS⯑COPAL ORDER from CHRIST and his APOSTLES; and that it is our bounden Duty to ſupport THAT AUTHORITY, and THAT ORDER againſt the attacks of theſe [41] who, like ‘wild Boars out of the wood, waſted our vineyard’ in the laſt Cen⯑tury; who in their Zeal for a purer, and more thorough Reformation ‘broke down the carved work (of the Church) with Axes and Hammers;’ and who have lately given pretty clear Intimations of their Readineſs (if they be not reſtrained within the Limits of Toleration) to work the ſame work again.
To a Tolerationi of their Worſhip, [42] Chriſtians of every Denomination have an indiſputable Right, not only by the Laws of England, but by the great original Law of the Creator, who hath conſtituted men's minds in ſuch a manner as that, on queſ⯑tions complicated and involved, Unifor⯑mity of Opinion is ſometimes hardly to be expected; and who has at the ſame time made it the Duty of every Man (after having been at the utmoſt pains to procure the beſt information) to regulate his Con⯑duct by his own Conviction of Truth and Rectitude.
[43] But if an eſtabliſhed Religion be neceſ⯑ſary to the Tranquility of a State (which hath been repeatedly proved by arguments that have not, yet, been overthrown); and if that Religion, which is eſtabliſhed, hath, likewiſe, the BEST Evidence of being TRUE, which, if I miſtake not, is, hap⯑pily, the Caſe in England; it is, ſurely, the Duty of thoſe, who are the Clergy of the Eſtabliſhment, to point out its various Excellencies; and it is as plainly the Duty of thoſe, who are its legal Guardians, to pre⯑vent its avowed Enemies from intruding into Stations, whence they might be able to aſ⯑ſail it with weapons very different from ‘the Sword of the Spirit.’
In all our Conteſts, however, with ſuch as oppoſe themſelves, let Scripture, Hiſ⯑tory, and Reaſon be our only Arms; for by theſe alone, can our Fortreſs be honourably defended; and it ſtands in need of no other Defence.
Let us never, in our eagerneſs to ſupport [44] the Cauſe of Truth, injure the equally im⯑portant Cauſe of univerſal, tender, heaven directed Charity towards all the Deſcendants of Adam. Let us remember, that the moſt vigorous mind, is, perhaps, not com⯑pletely fortified againſt the Power of Preju⯑dice; and that, if others differ from us, every Man in the Courſe of his Life, hath differed from himſelf.
Let us, therefore, extend to Sectaries, and Diſſenters of every Denomination, thoſe Indulgences which, (when they were tri⯑umphant, and the Church was in the Duſt) we did not enjoy; and whilſt Duty requires us to expoſe their Errors, and to repel their Encroachments; Let our Conduct convince ſuch of them as are open to Conviction, that we can love the Men, whoſe Principles we diſapprove.