III. The authority of the ministry. This is discussed in inseparable connexion with the duty of the lay-members of the Church towards their ministers. The duty of obedience to the ordinances of God is not disputed among the members of the Churches of Christ. Concerning the nature of those ordinances, the best mode of their administration, and the gracious benefits or dangerous responsibilities, or both, to be derived from them, great differences of opinion exist, and might have been reasonably anticipated; but upon the question of obedience itself, wherever it can be shown that God has commanded, there is no difference. All, or nearly all, agree that the Lord Jesus Christ instituted baptism and the Lord's Supper, and that consequently it became the duty of His disciples to observe those ordinances.

But another question arises when we approach the ordinances of man; because here the sources of authority enjoining the observance being fallible, and therefore in any one particular instance possibly in error, the duty of obedience seems in every instance suspended upon the result of a preliminary inquiry as to whether the thing enjoined be right or wrong. And this seems to imply that all parties have one common standard of reference, in the light of whose permanent authority that inquiry is to be conducted.

Upon the general duty of obedience to the lawfully-constituted ministry of the Christian Churches, St. Paul's language is plain: "Obey them that have the rule over you, and submit yourselves; for they watch for your souls, as they that must give account." 1 And the spirit in which this obedience is to be rendered is beautifully described by the same apostle in his first epistle to the Church of the Thessalonians: "We beseech you, brethren, to know them which labour among you, and are over you in the Lord, and admonish

interpretation, the words are used by our own Church, a candid comparison of her offices does, I think, make abundantly clear. It should, however, be borne in mind that the words were not introduced into the ordinal of the Church until the twelfth century."-The Author's Lectures on the Church, pp. 91, 92. Eighth edition.

Heb. xiii. 17.

you; and to esteem them very highly in love, for their work's sake."

1

Nothing can be more obvious than that these instructions were given to the Christian laity, concerning the first pastors or angels of the Churches. Obey your Church rulers, and submit yourselves, for they are over you in the Lord. Their official authority, in virtue of which they require your obedience, is not arrogated by man, but ordained of God, and therefore submission is inculcated as a matter of conscience towards God.

As a general principle this is felt, and cannot but be felt, by all who will yield consistent deference to the Holy Scriptures. By many, however, it is felt to be inconvenient; and the favourite mode of evading it as a divine ordinance, and reducing it to a human compact, is to say, first, that the pastors here spoken of by the apostle were all men of personal piety, and preachers of scriptural truth; and then, secondly, that obedience to them is enjoined in virtue of their character altogether, and not at all in virtue of their office. Thus, restraining the precept to such pastors as they are pleased to consider faithful men, and to them only as long as they continue to give satisfaction to their judges, whose competence to form a sound judgment is quietly taken for granted; they get wholly rid of the constraint of the divine injunction; which, by this interpretation and this limitation, they render as nugatory as any of their own maxims; and thereupon find their conscience perfectly at ease while they make free, in word and deed, with bishops, and Churches, and ordinances.

It is highly probable that most, if not all, of the first pastors of the Churches were men of personal godliness, and preachers of sound doctrines; but it does by no means follow that their character was their entire qualification as pastors. Nay, the very existence of pastors, as distinct from their flocks, proves the contrary; or else it proves that in each church there was but one godly man possessing the gift of speech. For if all, or most of, the members of a church were

1 1 Thess. v. 12, 13.

of that character, and if character, without ordination, qualified for the ministry, then all, or most, were ministers, and the distinction disappears. But we have already seen that the distinction is scriptural, and therefore this interpretation of the separatists must disappear. I earnestly disclaim any design or desire to depreciate character, or to justify the wicked; far otherwise; but personal character is not my present subject: I am proving the reality and the authority of the pastoral office. I deny not that this office has been too often intrusted to unfit hands, and abused to the worst of purposes. It has been in such sort abused as to be made the instrument of lust and ambition, of avarice, and injustice, and sloth. But still the office exists, and in those deplorable cases weighs down the wretched renegade who holds it, under its increased responsibilities and aggravated judgments. It will be said that this is to ascribe an opus operatum to a mere manual ceremony. But let us not be deterred by hard words. If the opus referred to be an increased responsibility, then truly there is an opus operatum in the reception of every Christian privilege, and of this among the rest. The privilege of instruction in our Lord's will incurs the penalty of many stripes if that will be not obeyed. The privilege of Christian ordinances transfers a community from the more tolerable condition of Tyre and Sidon, into the more intolerable responsibility of Chorazin and Bethsaida. And the privilege of the Christian ministry exposes the unworthy intruder to a deadlier condemnation. This is not merely gathered by general inference, but seems to be the direct and obvious meaning of St. James, where he says in his catholic epistle to the twelve tribes, My brethren, be not many masters, knowing that we shall receive the greater condemnation.

But to return to the authority of the ministry of the Churches although, as regards MATTERS of FAITH, we are bound to look upon ourselves as the immediate successors of the apostolical Churches, and utterly to reject any addition to the Scriptures, or any pretended development which amounts to an addition; yet as regards rites, and ceremonies, and forms

of worship, we are not, I conceive, at liberty to look upon ourselves as immediate successors of those first Churches, as though no ordinance of man had intervened.

This distinction between matters of faith to be believed for salvation, and rites and ceremonies instituted for the preservation of decency and order, is neither fanciful nor arbitrary. It is not a quibble of carnal men, conveniently invented for the propping up of a Babylonish fabric, as it has been rashly represented. It is strictly scriptural. The Bible proclaims its own sufficiency as regards matters of faith. Paul informs Timothy that the Holy Scriptures are able to make him wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus; and adds that all Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness; that the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works (2 Tim. iii. 15——17). But as regards institutions and ceremonies of order, the Bible proclaims its own insufficiency. The apostle enjoins upon the brethren to submit themselves to the rulers, which would be worse than useless if the rulers had no authority to command anything beyond the letter of the Scripture. To the Corinthian Church the apostle says, Let all things be done decently and in order; and again he says, The rest will I set in order when I come; and to Titus he says, For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest SET IN ORDER THE THINGS THAT ARE WANTING, and ordain elders in every city as I had appointed thee. The Scriptures contain no detailed description of how Paul set things in order at Corinth, or Titus in Crete; and the omission was designed that other Churches in different circumstances, and ages, and climates, might enjoy Christian liberty, while with wisdom and discretion they set things in order for themselves. The reason and the mercy of this are obvious, in a religion which was designed to extend to the north and to the south, to the east and to the west,-a religion which was to gather its converts from the most cultivated and the most barbarous of human tribes, and assemble its congregations in every varying latitude, from the burning

sands of Guyana and Peru to the icebergs on the coast of Norway.

It follows, then, that the Bible was never designed to be a sufficient guide in all the details of management in the Churches of Christ. It is all-sufficient in principle. It invests the Church rulers with true authority to enter into details; and it binds the members of the Church to yield submission to the details so prescribed, though they be not written in the Bible. In no case upon earth is it possible for the ultimate end of legislative authority to be the immediate director in every detail of the executive. Therefore general orders are indispensable as the groundwork of delegated authority. To THIS INFIRMITY OF HUMAN MANAGEMENT THE LORD HAS CONDESCENDED IN THE HISTORY OF HIS CHURCH. He has employed the instrumentality of human rulers. The rulers are those who in the providence of God have the rule, whatever may be the form of Church government. General orders are given in the Bible; delegated authority is intrusted to the rulers of the Christian Churches; and every regulation, every ceremony decreed by those rulers, (and not contradicted by Scripture,) comes to the mind, and commands the obedience, of a Christian Churchman upon the ultimate authority of Scripture itself.

To deny this power would be to supersede the use of the ministry as a standing institution for the preservation of decency and order; since those things which are in the Scriptures left at large, such as the mode, for instance, of celebrating the Lord's Supper, the times and places of joint religious worship, etc.,-if these, I say, unspecified points which must be determined by some one, are not to be determined by the ministry of the Churches, in each country respectively, one of the purposes for which Jesus Christ instituted this society is defeated; since if she has any authority at all (which He expressly gave her), and has none in matters determined in Scripture, she must have it in things undetermined in Scripture. . . . "In matters of discipline, the positive institutions of the Church make things right and wrong which