Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

1. That Presbyters had, in apostolic times, as they now have, authority to preach the word, and administer sacraments, is universally allowed by Episcopalians themselves. Now, if we consult either the original commission, or subsequent instructions given to ministers, in various parts of the New Testament, we shall find these constantly represented as the highest acts of ministerial authority ; as the grand powers in which all others are included. Instead of finding in the sacred volume the smallest hint, that ordaining ministers, and governing the Church, were functions of an higher order than dispensing the word of eternal life, and the seals of the everlasting covenant; the reverse is plainly and repeatedly taught. The latter, we have already seen, are the most prominent objects in the original commission ; they formed the principal business of the apostles wherever they went; and all the authority with which they were vested is represented as being subservient to the promulgation of that Gospel which is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth. Preaching and administering sacraments, therefore, are the highest acts of ministerial authority ; they are far above ordination and government, as the end is more excellent than the means ; as the substance is more important than the form.

If then, Presbyters be authorized, as all acknow. ledge, to perform these functions, we infer that they are the highest order of Gospel ministers. Those who are empowered to execute the most dignified and the most useful duties pertaining to the ministerial office, can have no superiors in that office.' The Episcopal system, then, by depressing the teacher, for the sake of elevating the ruler, inverts the sacred order, and departs both from the letter and the spirit of Scripture. The language of Scripture is, Let the Presbyters who rule well be counted worthy of double honor, ESPECIALLY THEY WHO LABOUR IN THE WORD AND DOCTRINE. But the language of modern Episcopacy is, that labouring in the word and doctrine is a lower service in the Church, and government a more exalted: that bearing rule is more honorable and more important than to edifya language which to be refuted needs only to be stated.

From these premises I am compelled to conclude, that the officer of the Christian Church who is authorized to preach and administer sacraments, cannot be an inferior or subordinate officer, but must be equal to, or rather the same with, the scriptural Bishop. And in this reasoning I am supported by the judgment of Bishop Burnet, who declares—“ Since I look upon the sacramental ac“ tions, as the highest of sacred performances, I “ cannot but acknowledge those who are empower" ed for them, must be of the highest office in the “ Church*.”

2. The power of government, or of ruling the Church, is also committed to Presbyters. This is denied by Episcopalians ; but the Scriptures ex

Vindication of the Church and State of Scotland, p. 336.

a

pressly affirm it. The true meaning of the word Presbyter, in its official application, is a church ruler or governor, as Episcopalians themselves allow. Hence the oversight” or government of the Church is in Scripture expressly assigned to Presbyters as their proper duty. The Elders to whom the Apostle Peter directed his first epistle, certainly had this power. To them it is said, The Elders which are among you I exhort. Feed the flock of God, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; neither as being lords over God's heritage, but as ensamples to the flock. Scarcely any words could express more distinctly than these the power of ruling in the Church.

But, as if to place the matter beyond all doubt, these Elders are exhorted to use this power with moderation, and not to tyrannize, or “ lord it over God's heritage.” Why subjoin this caution, if they were not invested with a governing authority at all ?

The case of the Ellers of Ephesus is still more decisive. When the Apostle Paul was about to take his final leave of them, he addressed them thus- Take heed, therefore, unto yourselves, and to the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers, to feed the Church of God which he hath purchased with his own blood, &c. Here the governinent of this Church, as well as ministering in the word, is evidently vested in the Elders. No mention is made of any individual, who had the whole ruling power vested in him, or even a larger share of it than others. Had there been a Bishop

in this Church, in the Episcopal sense of the word, that is, a single person of superior order to these Elders, and to whom, of course, they were in subjection, it is strange that, in this whole account, we do not once find the most distant allusion to him*. When the Apostle was telling the Elders that they should never see his face more,

and that dissentions and difficulties were about to arise in their Church, could there have been a more fit occasion to address their superior, had there been such a man present ? To whom could instruction have been so properly directed, in this crisis, as to the Chief Shepherd ? On the other hand, supposing such a superior to have existed, and to have been prevented by sickness, or any other means, from attending at this conference, why did not the Apostle remind the Elders of their duty to him? Why did he not exhort them, in the strife and divisions which he foretold as approaching, to cleave to their Bishop, and submit to him, as the best means of unity and peace ? And finally, supposing their Bishop to have been dead, and the office vacant, why did not the Apostle, when about to take leave of a flock so much endeared to him, select a Bishop for them, ordain him with his own hands, and commit the Church to his care? But not a word of all this appears. No hint is given of the existence of such a superior. On the contrary, the Apostle declares to these Elders, that the Holy Ghost had made them Bishops over the Church at Ephesus ; he exhorts them to rule that Church ; and when about to depart, never to see them more, he leaves them in possession of this high trust.

* The reader will bear in mind, that the zealous advocates for Episcopacy suppose, and with one voice assert, that Timothy was Bishop of Ephesus at this time. On what grounds this assere tion is made will be seen in the next letter,

But the passage just quoted from 1 Tim. v. is absolutely conclusive on this point. Let the Elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor, especially they who labour in word and doctrine. Here the power of government in the Church is ascribed to Presbyters in terms which cannot be rendered more plain and decisive. Here, also, we find officers of the Church who are not recognized in the Episcopal system, but who are always found in the Presbyterian Church, viz. Rulling Elders, or those who are appointed to assist in governing the Church, but who do not preach or administer sacraments. But this is not all : bearing rule in the Church is unequivocally represented in this passage as a less honorable employment than preaching, or labouring in the word and doctrine. The mere ruling Elder, who performs his duty well, is declared to be worthy of “ double honor;" but the Elder who, to this function, adds the more dignified and important one of preaching the Gospel of salvation, is declared to be entitled to honor of a still higher kind.

As this passage is directly hostile to the claims of modern Episcopacy, great exertions have been made to set aside its testimony. To effect this

a

« PredošláPokračovať »