Scriptures an infallible guide.

models after which, "for substance," all churches should be formed.

If the Scriptures furnish not an infallible directory to what is essential in the order and discipline of a Christian church, we certainly have no such directory. And, if we have no infallible guide to the constitution of a Christian church, how are we to know that any such thing as a church of Christ now exists in the world? The reception of the idea of a church, necessarily presupposes a knowledge of what constitutes a church; but if the Scriptures do not furnish this knowledge, then they do not furnish us with the means of forming any distinct idea of a Christian church. And if they fail in this particular, on what authority are any existing organizations called churches. of Christ? And by what authority can any person be required to unite with one of these organizations?

Now it will be admitted by all parties, that Christ and his apostles very often speak of Christian churches; and it will be further admitted, that the friends of Christ are required to come out from the world and to unite themselves with these churches; but, unless the general and essential principles on which these bodies are to be organized are given us in the Scriptures, how can any one know when he is complying with the Savior's requisitions, and the apostles' directions? Indeed, how can we prove that any such thing exists as a Christian church; since the very idea of such a body carries with it the idea of an organization which Christ has authorized and established ?*

*The learned Dr. George Campbell, though unwilling to ad. mit that any particular form of church government is binding up

Consequences of denying this.

Again, it will be conceded, that it is an important part of every Christian minister's duty, inasmuch as in him lies, to make disciples of all to whom he preaches (Matt. 28: 19), and to gather these disciples into Christian churches, and to administer to them the ordinances of baptism and the Lord's supper. Religion cannot long exist in the world, much less flourish, if these things are neglected. But how can the ambassador of Christ discharge these important. parts of his duty if the Scriptures furnish no infallible directions how to organize these bodies? If he is left in ignorance of the Divine will respecting these matters,

on all Christians, yet allows : **"That a certain external model of government must have been originally adopted [that is, by Christ and his apostles, as I understand him] for the more effectual preservation of the evangelical institution [the church] in its native purity, and for the careful transmission of it to after ages."-Lectures on Ecc. History, Lect. 4. p. 47. Phil. ed. 1807.

As I shall have occasion frequently to refer to the works of this learned and impartial writer, it may be well to state, for the information of any who may be unacquainted with his writings, that Dr. Campbell was a distinguished scholar, Principal of Marischal College, Aberdeen, Scotland. He is the author of a standard work on the Four Gospels, and of a celebrated answer to Hume's work on Miracles. Dr. C. was a Presbyterian by profession; yet, be seems not to have regarded any particular form of church order as essential,-" -"it affects not the essence of religion in the least,” he says. He supposed that one form of church government might be more convenient in one country, and another form in another country. (Lect. 4. p. 50.) With these views, he proposes in his Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, "to speak out boldly what appears to him most probably to have been the case, without considering what sect or party it may either offend or gratify." (Ib.)

The testimony of such a man certainly deserves great respect. The references in the following pages will show how his testimony corroborates the views of Congregationalists.

The term "Church" as used by Christ and his apostles.

how can it be true, as the Apostle asserts: All Scripture is given by inspiration of God **** that the man of God may be perfect [aguos prepared for], thoroughly furnished unto all good works; or, "every good purpose that his ministry is intended to answer,"* 2 Tim. 3: 16, 17. Indeed, would not the great end of the ministry of reconciliation fail, if "the house of God, which is the church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth" (1 Tim. 3: 15)-were not duly instituted, organized, and erected?

Another view of this subject may be taken. It will be admitted, that the apostles did organize what they called churches, in different parts of the Roman Empire; and that these churches were all formed upon the same general principles. Now, whatever these principles were, they may be fairly considered as descriptive of the term"church," as used by Christ and the apostles. Or, in other words, if we would understand what Christ and his apostles meant by a church, we must examine the principles of those bodies which they called churches.

And, since the duty of men to become church members now, is as imperative as when the apostles preached, and no intimation is given that the nature of a Christian church should be changed, it follows, that men should now become members of the same kind of churches, that is, churches built upon the same general principles, as those which are recognized in the Scriptures as Christian churches.

If then we can learn from the Scriptures what was the polity of the apostolic churches, cannot we ascertain what should be the polity of all churches, in all ages of the world?

*

See Dr. Bloomfield's New Testament, in loc.

Constitution of the Church unchanged.

Will it be said-in order to avoid the force of the above suggestions-that the circumstances of the apostolic churches were so unlike our own as to require an entirely different organization? If so, it may be asked in reply : In what respects were their circumstances peculiar ? Were they in their infancy? So is every church, when first formed." But, Christianity itself was then in its infancy." So it is in every heathen land when the first missionary church is organized. Should we, therefore, institute churches at our missionary stations, first, upon the primitive plan; and afterwards pull them down, and put up those of an improved model-improved, however, by man's wisdom solely?

If the churches, and Christianity itself, were in their infancy when the primitive models were erected, then, surely if ever, the churches should have been under governors and tutors ;" and should have enjoyed the least freedom of choice, and liberty of action. But instead of this, those who object to the apostolic churches as models for us, are for restricting the liberties of the churches; and for giving them less freedom rather than more; and to their governors more authority rather than less, as the churches and Christianity itself advance towards maturity. A strange procedure this surely. It is as though it should be said: When you are a child you may have your own way; but as you approach maturity, your liberty of choice and your freedom of action must be restricted.

2. Another objection to the primitive models, is, that they are not sufficiently attractive for the present prosperous state of the Christian Church. They answered very well when the Church was oppressed and persecuted; but now that she is in her glory, something more attrac

Primitive Churches models for all ages,

tive and imposing becomes desirable and proper. That is to say: God's work needs to be remodeled and improved by man's wisdom. But, have we any authority for such a procedure? Is there any intimation in the Scriptures, that God designed the apostolic model of church order and discipline to be merely temporary? It is true that the churches erected by the apostles were very simple in their order, and much less attractive to worldly eyes, than some of more recent date; and it is equally true, that this simplicity was in perfect accordance with the spirit of the Christian Dispensation; and that a departure from the apostolic principles of church order, has been followed by a parallel departure from the spirit of Christianity itself.

And, do we not greatly err, when we suppose that the circumstances of the primitive churches were so very unlike ours, as to authorize any material change in their polity? The difficulties which environed them were substantially the same which now oppose the prosperity of the churches of Christ. Human nature does not alter by the lapse of time. "The carnal mind is enmity against God" still. We e see not, every where, the same developments of this enmity; but the same spirit is every where displayed; and it requires only a change of circumstances, in any given case, to bring out the same developments of enmity against the Church of God now, which were witnessed in the days of Christ and his apostles.

The world is no more friendly to the Church now, than it was eighteen hundred years ago. The present state of society in nominally Christian countries, does not indeed admit of such bloody persecutions as once desolated the churches; and such as they are even now exposed to in heathen lands, and where anti-christian principles prevail.