TheChurchofChrist

ATREATISEONTHENATURE,POWERS,ORDINANCES,DISCIPLINE,ANDGOVERNMENTOFTHECHRISTIAN

CHURCH

byJAMESBANNERMAN,D.D.,

PROFESSOR OF APOLOGETICS AND PASTORAL THEOLOGY, NEW COLLEGE,EDINBURGH;AUTHOROF"INSPIRATION:THEINFALLIBLETRUTHANDDIVINEAUTHORITYOFTHEHOLYSCRIPTURES.

EDINBURGH:

T.&T.CLARK,38,GEORGESTREET.

LONDON:HAMILTON,ADAMS,&CO.DUBLIN:JOHNROBERTSON&CO.

MDCCCLXVIII.

TableofContents

EDITOR'SPREFACE

PREFACEBYPRINCIPALCANDLISH

INTRODUCTION

PARTI.—NATUREOFTHECHURCH

CHAP.I.TheChurchasdefinedinScripture

II.TheChurchaDivineandSpiritualInstitution

III.TheChurchasVisibleandInvisible

IV.TheChurchasCatholicandLocal

V.The"Notes"oftheChurch

VI.TheMembersoftheChurch

VII.TheChurchinitsrelationtotheWorld

VIII.TheChurchinitsrelationtotheState

SEC.I.EssentialDistinctionandMutualIndependenceofChurchandState

II.LawfulnessoftheConnectionofChurchandState

SUBSEC.TheNon-IdentityofChurchandStateamongtheJews

III.DutyoftheConnectionofChurchandState

IV.NecessityoftheConnectionofChurchandState

V.SpiritualIndependenceandthePrinciplesofToleration

VI.LibertyofConscience;itsExtentandLimits

VII.DoctrineoftheWestminsterConfessiononChurchandState

PARTII.—POWEROFTHECHURCH

CHAP.I.TheSourceofChurchPower

SEC.I.TheHeadshipofChrist

II.OpposingTheories—ErastianandPopish

CHAP.II.TheRuleorLawofchurchPower

III.TheNatureandCharacterofChurchPower

IV.TheExtentandLimitsofChurchPower

V.TheEndandDesignofChurchpower

VI.ThePrimarySubjectsofChurchPower

PARTIII.—MATTERSINREGARDTOWHICHCHURCHPOWERISEXERCISED

DIV.I.—CHURCHPOWEREXERCISEDINREGARDTODoctrine

CHAP.I.ThePowerandDutyoftheChurchinregardtoMattersofFaith

CHAP. II. Church Creeds and Confessions: or, Subordinate Standards, theirLawfulnessandUse

CHAP.III.ObjectionstoCreedsandConfessions

DIV.II.—CHURCHPOWEREXERCISEDINREGARDTOOrdinances

SUBDIV.I.—THEPROVISIONFORPUBLICWORSHIP

CHAP. I. The Divine Origin, Permanent Obligation, and Legitimate Parts of PublicWorship

CHAP.II.RitesandCeremoniesinPublicWorship

SEC.I.ExtentofChurchPowerasregardsthePublicWorshipofGod

SEC.II.LimitsofChurchPowerasregardsthePublicWorshipofGod

CHAP.III.Liturgies,orPrescribedandImposedFormsofPrayer

SUBDIV.II.—THETIMEFORPUBLICWORSHIP

CHAP.I.TheChristianSabbath

II.EcclesiasticalHolidays

SUBDIV. III.—THE INSTRUMENTALITY FOR PUBLIC WORSHIP, OR THECHRISTIANMINISTRY

CHAP. I. The Ministry a Divine and standing Ordinance in the Church,—theMinisterialandPastoralTitle

CHAP.II.ApostolicalSuccession

III.TheIndependentTheoryoftheMinistry

IV.Ordination

SUBDIV.IV.—POSITIVEDIVINEINSTITUTIONSINADDITIONTOTHEORDINARYPUBLICWORSHIPOFTHELORD'SDAY,ORTHESACRAMENTS

CHAP.I.TheSacramentsinGeneral

SEC.I.NatureandEfficacyoftheSacramentsoftheNewTestament,andDifference

betweenthemandNon-SacramentalOrdinances

II.UnscripturalorDefectiveViewsoftheSacraments

CHAP.II.TheSacramentofBaptism

SEC.I.NatureoftheOrdinance

II.TheSubjectsofBaptismasregardsAdults

III.InfantBaptism

IV.ObjectionstoInfantBaptism

V.EfficacyofInfantBaptism

VI.TheModesofBaptism

CHAP.III.TheSacramentoftheLord'sSupper

SEC.I.NatureoftheOrdinance

II.Transubstantiation

III.TheDoctrineoftheRealPresenceandthePriestlyTheory

IV.TheSacrificeoftheMass,andotherformsoftheSacrificialTheory

DIV.III.—CHURCHPOWEREXERCISEDINREGARDTODiscipline

CHAP.I.Nature,Design,andLimitsoftheDisciplineoftheChristianChurch

PART IV.—PARTIES IN WHOM THE RIGHT TO EXERCISE CHURCH POWER ISVESTED

CHAP.I.DivineAppointmentofaFormofChurchGovernment

II.TheExtraordinaryOffice-BearersoftheChristianChurch

SEC.I.OfficeofApostles

II.OfficesofProphetsandEvangelists

CHAP.III.ThePopishSystemofChurchPolity

CHAP.IV.ThePrelaticSystemofChurchPolityasopposedtothePresbyterian

SEC.I.NoEvidenceinScripture,butthereverse,fortheAppointmentbyourLordorHisApostlesofanOrderofBishopsasdistinctfromPresbyters

SEC.II.NoEvidenceinScripture,butthereverse,oftheExerciseofthePowersofaDiocesanBishopby anydistinct andpermanentOrder ofOffice-Bearers, apart fromthatofPresbyters

CHAP.V.TheIndependentSystemofChurchPolityasopposedtothePresbyterian

SEC.I.TheCongregationalPrincipleasopposedtoPresbyterianism

SEC.II.TheIndependentPrincipleasopposedtoPresbyterianism

APPENDIX

A. Bearing of Scripture Principles on the Lawfulness and Duty of Union betweenseparateChurches

B. Doctrine of the Confession of Faith as to Recognition and Endowment of theChurchby the State;Articles ofAgreement andDistinctiveArticles of theChurchesnowNegotiatingforUnioninScotland,withrespecttotheCivilMagistrate

C.NoteontheHistoryofVoluntaryism

D.PracticalAspectsoftheRelationbetweenChurchandState

E.RelativeObligationofScripturePrecept,Example,andPrinciple

F.ScriptureConsequences

G.TheBookofCommonOrder

H.TheImpositionofHandsinOrdination

I.NotesontheLiteratureoftheSubjectofthisTreatise

EDITOR'SPREFACE

THIS treatise is made up of the Lectures delivered by Dr. Bannerman during eachWinterSessionoftheNewCollegetothestudentsofthefourthyear.TheMS.wasleftbyhiminaveryperfectstate,thecoursehavingbeenfullywrittenoutfromthefirst,andthechangesandadditionsmadeoflateyearsbeing,sofarastheEditorisaware,confined tomattersofdetail.Thecompletenessandsymmetryof theplanonwhichtheLectureswerearranged,andtheintimaterelationoftheseveralpartstothewholewhich theymake up, left room for littlemodification in preparing thework for thepress,saveinthewayofomittingrecapitulationsandafewpurelyacademicallusions.InnocasehasanyfreedombeenusedwiththeAuthor'slanguagewhichcouldintheslightest degree alter or obscure his meaning. Notes and references added by theEditoraremarkedwithbrackets.

The following analysis of the work may be here inserted, for which the Editor isindebtedtoProfessorRainy:—

"InthistreatisetheprinciplesandleadingapplicationsofthedoctrineoftheChurchare discussed; the Church being here considered chiefly as it becomes visible, andexercises definite appointed functions; and the fundamental principles laid downbeingthosecommonlyreceivedamongScottishPresbyterians.Theimportanceofthetopic, and its eminently practical character, will not be disputed.Questions such asthoseregardingthesenseinwhichtheChurchisaDivineinstitution,—regardingthepowers entrusted to her, the principles on which they are to be exercised, and thevirtue to be ascribed to her action in the use of them,—the various controversiesregarding offices, discipline, sacraments, schisms, and the like,—these are not onlyimportantatalltimes,butatthepresenttimetheybecomecontinuallymoreurgent.Itwillperhapsalsobeadmitted, that thosewhohave tohandle themdonotalwaysgiveevidenceofmaturethoughtandofaconsistentschemeofprinciples.Hence,thedifficultiesnecessarilyarisingfromconflictsofopinionareaggravatedbythosewhichresult merely from perplexity and confusion. The eminently clear and connectedtreatment which the subject here receives, will therefore, it is believed, reward theattention of careful readers. Even those who belong to other schools, and do notconcurwiththeAuthorinhisconclusions,maybenefitbythespecimenheregivenofacoherentschemeofdoctrine,andbytheobligationswhichitmaybefelttoimposeonanyonewhosetsforthacounterscheme.

"Thearrangementofthecourseissimple;andaverybriefexplanationwithrespecttoit will suffice. In contemplating the Church, it is natural to ask, first, under whatauthority this Society has been constituted, what is its essential nature, what itspeculiarcharacteristics.Thesetopicsaccordinglyarefirsttakenup;andtheynaturallyleadtotheinquiry,howthisSocietystandsrelatedtotheothergreatandpermanentformsofhumanfellowship,and,inparticular,totheState.Next,thefunctionsoftheChurchcomeintoview.Butbeforeenteringupontheseindetail,apreliminarysetofquestions present themselves as necessary to be determined. In discharging her

functions, the Church professes to exercise some kind of power and authority. Butmuchdependsontheviewthatmaybetakenofthenatureofthispower,andoftheefficacytobeascribedtoit.Thesecondgeneralhead,therefore, isoccupiedwiththesubjectofChurchpower,—itssource,nature,limits,andends.Noristhisall;foritisanold,andnotinallrespectsaneasyquestion,inwhom,i.e.inwhatmembersoftheChurch, this powerhas its primary residence and seat.Thediscussion, therefore, ofthe question touching the primary subject of Church power follows, and closes thesecondhead.TheprinciplessofarestablishedhavenexttobeappliedindetailtothevariouskindsofmatterinandaboutwhichtheChurchexercisesherpowers,andherspecific rights anddutieswith respect to eachhave tobe considered.Thesemattersmaybereducedtothreeheads:Doctrine,OrdinancesorWorship,andDiscipline.Eachoftheseheadsinvolvesavarietyofsubordinatepoints.Thesecondofthem,Worship,isespeciallycomprehensive.TheChurchdischargesimportantfunctionswithrespectto the various parts of worship, the seasons for it, and the agents who ought toconductit;and,inparticular,thepeculiarinstitutionscalledSacramentsgiverisetoalargeclassofquestionswhichrequireseparateanddetailedconsideration,—sovarioushave been the apprehensions ofmen concerning their nature, and the office of theChurch in connection with them. These topics, then, constitute thematerial of thethirdgeneralhead.Finally, thequestionregardingthepersonstowhomtheexerciseofChurch power ought to be committed, leads into the discussion of the ScripturalformofChurchgovernment.Thisconstitutesthefourthgeneralhead,andcompletesthescheme.

"Itwouldnotbe easy, it isbelieved, topoint toanyonework inwhich this classofsubjects is treated so comprehensively, andwith the unity and thoroughnesswhichcharacterizetheseLectures.Intheoldersystems,theheadDeEcclesiâcomprehendedtopics all of which fall within Dr. Bannerman's scheme; but only some of themreceived full and satisfactory treatment. Separate works of amore exhaustive kind,suchas thePoliticaEcclesiasticaofVoetius,didnot cover,norprofess to cover, thewhole ground. InmodernGermanwritings the discussion of thesematters, thoughoftenvery learnedandable,willnotbe regarded in this country as satisfactory,noreven very helpful as regards the questions which are most important for us. TheconditionoftheGermanChurchesisnotfavourabletoanequalandsearchingsurveyof the whole field. Moreover, in their Theological systems, the topics, so far asdiscussed,are takenuppartlyunderSystematicandpartlyunderPracticalTheology,andthetreatmentsuffersfromthisdispersion.InourowncountrythediscussionofChurchquestionshas been extremely active, and it is likely to continue.Many ablewritings have appeared, bearing on larger or smaller sections of the field.Withoutwishingtodetract fromtheirvalueandability, itmayperhapsbefairlysaidthattheobjectswhichthewritershadinviewhavegenerallyledthemtospendtheirstrengthchiefly on those questionswhich arematters of exciting discussion, and to pass byothers,morereconditeperhaps,or lessdebated,butwellentitled toaplace ina full

surveyof thisgreatsubject.Acomparisonof the topicsdealtwith in thevolumesofLitton,orofPalmerandWordsworth(tonamerepresentativesofdifferenttheologicalschools), with those comprised in this volume,will illustrate the remark. From thePresbyterianpointofview,Dr.Bannerman'sworkhasofcourseaspecialinterestandvalue.Itisafreshstatementofourfundamentalprinciplesintheirapplicationtothewhole range of questions; and it is carried through with an eye, not only to thepermanent conditions of the discussion, but also to the form which recentcontroversieshaveassumed."

TheEditor'sbestacknowledgmentsareduetotheVeryRev.PrincipalCandlishforhiskindnessinundertakingthePrefacetothiswork.HewishesalsotoexpresshiswarmthankstotheRev.JohnLaing,ActingLibrarian,NewCollege,forthelabourandpainsbestowed by him upon the Index, and for occasional help in verifying the fewreferences, to identify which it was necessary to travel beyond the shelves of Dr.Bannerman'sownlibrary.

Inthusendingthetaskentrustedtohim,theEditorcannotrefrainfromsayinghowverygreatlytheimpression,strongasthatwas,leftuponhismindbytheseLectures,whenhefirsthadtheprivilegeoflisteningtothemafewyearsagointheNewCollegeofEdinburgh,hasbeenstrengthenedbyacloserstudyoftheircontents.Hehasbeenledtoappreciate,asheneverdidbefore,thedepthandthoroughnessandextentofalearningthatneverencumbersitspossessor,thatshowsitselfnotinanypurposelessparade of quotation and authority, but in the unfailing grasp taken of the wholequestionatissueinallitsbearings,intheclearnessanddecisionwithwhichallthatiscentral and essential in the controversy is singled out and separated from what issubordinate or irrelevant, in the ease and certainty with which the argument iswielded.Hehasbeen taughtafreshandmore intelligently to recognise theunionofhigh and rare qualities, not too often brought to bear together on this field ofTheological discussion,—the unvarying fairness and courtesy to controversialopponents,thecalm,judicialwisdomwithwhichevidenceissiftedandreasoningsaresummedup,thepowerandeffectwithwhichgreatleadingprinciplesofDivinetrutharegrasped,andestablished,andvindicatedintheirrighttorulethecontroversy,themasterly precision and clearness of insight with which the lines are drawn roundsomeofthemostdelicateanddifficultquestionsinallTheology,thereverencefortheWordofGod.Butofthesethingsitmaybemorefittingthatothersshouldspeak.

TheseVolumeswillfindacceptance,theEditorbelieves,withallwhoarecompetenttoformajudgmentregardingthem,andwho,whetheragreeingornotwiththepositionsmaintainedbytheAuthor,lovetoseeagreatsubjectworthilyhandled.Theywillhaveamorepowerful intereststill,he iswellassured, tomanynowscatteredthroughoutalmost all parts of Christendom, who trace some of their strongest and highestimpulses in the work of the ministry to the Chair in the New College which Dr.Bannermanfilledsolong,wholearnedthere,perhapsforthefirsttime,somethingof

theworthandmeaningofTheology,andofthespiritinwhichthestudyofitoughttobepursued,whohavecausetoremembernotonlytheweightandpowerofhispublicteaching,butwordsofwiseandreadycounselanddeedsofefficienthelpintimesofprivate difficulty and questioning, towhom thewritten argument of theseVolumesseemsalmosttocarryapersonal influence,andtowhoseearsthemusicof itsgraveandstatelyeloquenceisdeepenedbythememoriesofavoiceandabearingnotoftenequalledamongmen.

D.DOUGLASBANNERMAN.

ABERNYTEHOUSE,INCHTURE,

October1868.

PREFACEBYPRINCIPALCANDLISH

IHAVEbeenasked to introduce theseVolumes to theChristianpublic,andIgladlyconsenttodoso.Theydonotindeedrequireanyintroductionoutsideofthemselves;nor, if they did, couldmine be ofmuch avail, for I cannot pretend to anything likesuch a systematic and scholarly acquaintance with the department of Theology towhich they belong, as might give me a right to speak with authority. The book,therefore,astoitsintrinsicmerits,mustspeakforitself,sofarasIamconcerned;itwill do so all the better for the brief analysis of its contents which Dr. Rainy hasfurnished. I may be allowed, however, to say that, whether exhaustively orsuggestively,Dr.Bannermanseemstometohavemasteredtheentirefield,notonlyinthewayofageneralsurvey,butinthewayofinsightalsointoalldetails.

Exhaustively or suggestively, I have said; for these would seem to be two differentmethods of professorial prelection.Of the two, the suggestivemethod is clearly thepreferableone.Tosendstudentsawayundertheimpressionthattheyhavegotallthatneedstobegotforsolvingeveryproblemandsettlingeveryquestioninthebranchofstudytowhichtheyhavebeengivingoneortwoyearsofattendanceonprofessoriallectures,isaseriousmistakeonthepartoftheChair,andasoreeviltoitsvictims,—discovered often onlywhen it is too late to have it remedied.No such fault can befound with these Lectures. But a special good can be found in them. They areexhaustive, in the right way of exhaustively mapping out the entire ground to besurveyedminutelyandparticularly;while at the same time theyarenot exhaustive,butthereverse,asregardstheactualsurveyingofthegroundthusmappedout.Theyare suggestive, and highly suggestive, in themselves and in their references, on all

questionsofdetail,whileatthesametimetheybringoutclearlyandfullytheentiredoctrine as a whole, and the bearing of these detailed questions upon the entiredoctrineasawhole.

ButImaybeallowedafewwordsabouttheAuthor,ifnotaboutthisworkofhis.

Icantestify,withtheutmostconfidence,tohisbeingcompetent,andadmittedonallhandstobecompetent,togiveafairandfullrepresentationofthetheoryofChurchpolity, all but unanimously adopted in Scotland at and after the Reformation,—notunder influences from without, such as regal supremacy or papal dictation; butinwardlyanddirectlyfromthestudyoftheDivineWord,andthehonestapplicationofitsprinciplestotheproblemsofDivineProvidenceastheycameup.Forthatiswhatwe claim to be the characteristic of our Scottish Reformation,—that in all thedepartmentsofdoctrine,worship,andgovernment,itwasnomeremodificationoftheRomishsystem, inaccommodation toalteredcircumstances,buta reconstructionoftheDivineplan,freshlybasedontheoldfoundation.

FortheexpositionofthedoctrineoftheChurchuponthatfooting,andinthatview,Dr.Bannermanwaseminentlyqualified.Hewasacloseandthoroughbiblicalstudent;andhewasanauthorityinecclesiasticalhistoryandlaw.

IcanrecallhisfirstpublicandprominentservicerenderedtotheChurchintheyears1839–41,whenitfelltohimmainlytoconductacaseofheresy,involvingverydelicateanddifficultpointsinTheology.AndIcanrecallalsohisvaluableservicerenderedinconnectionwiththegravestquestionraisedinthecourseofour'tenyears'conflict,'—thatof theStrathbogie interdicts. Inboth instancesDr.Bannermanwon forhimselfthe full confidence and esteem of the whole Church; and it was felt to be only asuitableacknowledgmentofhisworthandhisworkwhenhewascalledtooccupytheprofessorialChair.

OfhismannerofoccupyingthatChair,Ineednotspeak.ButImustexpressthedeepfeelingofregretwithwhichallpartiesintheChurchreceivedthetidingsofhisdeath,at the very time when he was coming forward more than his special professorialengagementshadpreviouslypermitted,inthediscussionofmatterswidelyanddeeplyaffectingthegeneralinterestsofChristianpeaceandunionintheChurchcatholic,aswellasinourownbranchofit.Inthatview,oneisconstrainedtowonder,andstandinawe,andsay,'ItistheLord.'

R.S.C.

THECHURCHOFCHRIST

INTRODUCTION

THE Bible is a revelation from God of truths immediately bearing on the state bynature,andtherecoverybydivinegrace,ofindividualmen.Butitismorethanthat:itis also a revelationof truthsbearingon the character and conditionofmen formedintoasocietyofbelievers,andconstitutingonecollectivebody,holdingtogether thefaithofChrist.Thedifferencebetween these twoaspects inwhich theBiblemayberegarded, marks the point of transition from the departments of Apologetical andDoctrinal Theology to the department on which we are now about to enter,—that,namely,ofthenature,powers,andconstitutionoftheChristianChurch.Toindividualmen,whether in a state of sin or a state of salvation, theBible is a communicationfrom God, telling them of truths and doctrines, through the belief and renewinginfluenceofwhich theymay individuallyberecovered fromthespiritual ruinof thefall, and made partakers, under the Divine Spirit, of complete and everlastingredemption.Buttothebodyofbelievers,notindividually,butcollectively,theBibleisalso a communication fromGod, telling them of truths and doctrines, through theright appreciation of which they may be fashioned into a spiritual society, withdivinelyauthorizedpowersandordinancesandoffice-bearers,—anoutwardandpublicwitness forGodon theearth,andan instrument for theedificationof thepeopleofChrist.

PerhapstherearefewwhoconfessJesusChristtobetheAuthorandFinisheroftheirfaith,whodonotalsoconfess,inonesenseorother,thatHeistheFounderandHeadof a society destined to embrace all His followers, and fitted to be of permanentcontinuance. Men may differ widely as to their notions of the kind of communitywhich Christ has actually established; but few, if any, will be found to deny thatChristianity was designed to be something more than the religion of individuals,bound together by no tie, and gathered into no outward society. In its primary andmost important aspect, indeed, the revelation of God contained in the Bible is arevelationtomeindividually.Itsdiscoveriesofsinandannouncementsofjudgment,its intimations of grace and its proclamations of a Saviour, its offers of an atoningblood to expiate, and a regenerating Spirit to purge, transgression,—these areaddressedtomeindividually;andifIdealwiththematall,Imustdealwiththemasifthere were no other in the world except myself and God. Alone with God, I mustrealizetheBibleasifitwereamessagefromHimtomysolitaryself,singledoutandseparated fromothermen,and feelingmyown individual responsibility inreceivingor rejecting it. But the Bible does not stop here: it deals with man, not only as asolitary unit in his relation to God, but also as a member of a spiritual society,gathered together in the name of Jesus. It is not amere system of doctrines to bebelieved and precepts to be observed by each individual Christian independently of

others,andapart fromothers: it isasystemofdoctrinesandprecepts,designedandadaptedforasocietyofChristians.Thisagreementandco-operationofmenholdingthesamefaithandthesameSaviourisnotanaccidentalorvoluntaryunionwhichhasgrownupofitself:itisauniondesignedbeforehand,appointedfromthebeginningbyGod, and plainly contemplated and required in every page of the New TestamentScriptures.TherearepreceptsintheBibleaddressed,nottobelieversseparately,butto believers associated together into a corporate society; there are duties that areenjoineduponthebody,andnotuponthemembersofwhichitiscomposed;therearepowers assigned to the community, to which the individuals of the community arestrangers;thereisagovernment,anorder,acodeoflaws,asystemofordinancesandofficers described in Scripture, which can apply to none other than a collectiveassociationofChristians.WithouttheexistenceofaChurch,orofabodyofbelievers,ascontradistinguishedfrombelieversindividually,verymuchofwhatiscontainedintheBiblewouldbeunintelligible,andwithoutpracticalapplication.

There are two aspects in which the Church, as a society of believers, incontradistinction from individualbelievers, is represented inScripture, that serve toplaceitinanimportantandsolemnpointofview.

I.Inthefirstplace,theChurchisspokenofas"thebodyofChrist,"inasenseinwhichthe words cannot be applied to the individual believer. It cannot be said of anyindividual Christian, however richly endowed with spiritual gifts from the Saviour,thathe is "thebodyofChrist."But in somesense,not the samewithbut similar tothatinwhichthehumannatureofChristwasHisbodyduringHislifeonearth,cantheChurch,andnotindividuals,besaidtobeHisbodynow.AndjustastheindwellingoftheSonofGodinthehumannatureofChristrichlyendowedandgloriouslyexaltedthat nature with all spiritual graces and gifts and powers unknown to any otherperson,sotheindwellingofChrist inHisChurch, inawayandmannerunknowntoindividualbelievers,exaltsandendowstheChurchwithgiftsandgracesandpowerswhich no Christian individually possesses. The Church is "the fulness of Him thatfillethallinall."2

II.Inthesecondplace,theChurchisspokenofinScriptureastheresidenceorearthlydwelling-placeoftheSpirit,theThirdPersonofthegloriousGodhead.ItisnodoubttruethattheSpiritofGoddwellsineachindividualbeliever,makinghissoulandbodyHis temple,andglorifyingtheplaceofHispresencewithallheavenlyandsanctifiedgraces.But,overandabovethis,andinahighersensethancanapplytoanyindividualChristian,theSpiritofGodmakesHisdwellingintheChurch,enrichingthatChurchwith all the fulness of life and power and privilege, which no single believer couldreceiveorcontain.AsthebodyoftheSonofGod,astheearthlydwelling-placeoftheSpirit of God, the Church more than the Christian—the society more than theindividual—is set forth to us as the highest and most glorious embodiment andmanifestationofDivinepowerandgraceupontheearth.Anditisinreferencetothe

society,andnottotheindividualsofwhichitiscomposed—totheChurchandnottoitssinglemembers—thatverymuchofthelanguageoftheBiblerefers.

The fieldofdiscussionopenedupbya considerationof theBible, as a revelationoftruthsbearingonbelieversnotindividually,butasformedintoacollectivebodyandconstitutingtheChurchofChrist,isaverywideandimportantone.Itembracesavastvarietyof topics,manyof them involvingdiscussions themostdelicateanddifficultwithin the whole range of theology. It is a field which, in so far as regards acomprehensive and separate survey of it, is comparatively new and untrodden. It isindeedbrieflyadvertedtoinmostoftheordinarysystemsoftheology,andparticulardepartments of it have been traversed, to a greater or less extent, on particularoccasionsofcontroversy;yet,asawhole,ithasseldombeenopenedupatlength,andsystematically.

Itwaswithnoordinaryfeelingsofdoubtanddistrust inmyownpowers,thatI firstsetmyself tocopewith thishighargument.With thatmeasureofabilitywhichGodhasgivenme,andwhich theChurchhas calleduponme toexercise in theChair inthisCollegetowhichtheDoctrineoftheChurchbelongs,Ihaveendeavouredtoopenup the general principles of a subject, almost entirely new in academic prelections,andespeciallyarduous.

Ihavefoundthetasktobeonebesetwithdifficultiesneitherfewnorsmall.Nottheleastofthesehasbeentheentireabsenceofanyadequateguide—oroftenofanyguideatall—toaidmeinshapingmycourseandformingmyopinionswithrespecttomanyof themost difficult anddelicate questions connectedwithmy subject. I have beencompelled to take up these opinions very much at my own hand, and to becomemyself a learner before I could attempt to teach; and upon such points as these itwouldbetheveryreverseofwisdomtodogmatize.

I shall be more than rewarded for the time and labour spent upon this great andarduoussubject,ifIhavebeenenabled,inhoweversmallameasure,toimpartsomeknowledgeofthetruths,ortosuggestsomeofthegrandprinciples,oreventoawakensomeinterestintheargumentofadepartmentintheology,athoroughacquaintancewith which is so essential for those who hope to occupy, or who already fill, thathonourableyetresponsibleplace,heldbythosewhoareputintrustwiththeworkoftheministryintheChurchoftheLordJesusChrist.

THECHURCHOFCHRIST

PARTI.—NATUREOFTHECHURCH

CHAPTERI:THECHURCHASDEFINEDINSCRIPTURE

MANY, perhaps indeedmost, of the controversies which have arisen in connectionwith ecclesiastical theology, are to be traced back to fundamental differences ofopinionregardingtheessentialnatureandcharacterofthatsocietywhichChristhasinstituted.ThedifferentoroppositenotionswhichmenhaveprofessedtogatherfromScripture,inregardtotheoriginandessentialprinciplesoftheChristianChurch,havenecessarilyledtoconclusionswidelydifferentinregardtoitsfunctions,itsauthority,itsordinances,anditsgovernment.Itishighlyimportant,therefore,tolaydownattheoutset those scriptural principles as to the nature and character of the Church ofChrist,whichmayprovetousguidingprinciplesinoursubsequentinvestigationsintoitspowers,and theoffices it isappointed todischarge.And the firstquestionwhichnaturally arises is regarding the meaning which ought to be attached to the word"Church." Different societies or associations of Christians are found claiming tothemselves,anddenyingtoothers,thecharacterandprivilegesofaChurchofChrist;and opinions widely differing from each other are held as to the meaning of thedesignation. In such circumstances wemust have recourse to theWord of God, inorderthat,byanexaminationofitsstatements,wemayascertaininwhatsense,orinwhatsenses,thetermChurchistobeunderstoodbyus.

Thewordἐκκλησια,whichistranslatedChurchinourversionoftheNewTestament,in itsprimarymeaningdenotesanyassemblygatheredtogetherfromapromiscuousmultitude,whether itbeorbenotregularlyorganized,andwhether itbe forcivilorecclesiasticalpurposes.Examplesbothinclassicalandinspiredwritersareathandtoprovetheextensivemeaningoftheterm;andthesamewidesignificationbelongstothe correspondingword in theHebrewof theOldTestament.2 In the applicationofthetermtosecularassemblies,wefinditusedtosignifythecitycouncil,convenedinanorderlymannerbythemagistrateforthedeterminationofcivilmatters;asinActs19, where the town-clerk of Ephesus is represented as addressing the citizens: "IfDemetrius,andthecraftsmenwhoarewithhim,haveamatteragainstanyman,thelaw isopen,and therearedeputies: let them impleadoneanother.But if ye inquireanythingconcerningothermatters,itshallbedetermined(ἐντῃἐννομῳἐκκλησιᾳ)ina lawful convention." In a similar application of the term to secular assemblies,wefind it employed to denote a riotous assemblage of people, gathered together in adisorderly crowd, for purposes of tumult; as in the same chapter of theActs of theApostles, when it is said, in regard to the mob who assaulted Paul and hiscompanions:"Somethereforecriedonething,andsomeanother,for(ἡἐκκλησια)the

assemblyorcrowdwasconfused."Withthiswideuseoftheterm,asappliedtosecularassemblies,itisplainthattheprecisesignificationoftheword,inanygiveninstance,istobegatheredfromthemannerinwhichitisemployed,andfromthecontext.Thesame is true in regard to the use of the term ἐκκλησια, when applied to sacred orecclesiastical assemblies of people. Here, too, the range of its application is a wideone;andtheprecisemeaningoftheword,inanyparticularcase,mustbeascertainedfromthegeneral senseof thepassageand fromthecontext.Thereare fivedifferentbutcloselyalliedmeaningsoftheterm"Church"tobegatheredfromScripture.

I.ThewordChurchsignifiesthewholebodyofthefaithful,whetherinheavenoronearth,whohavebeenorshallbespirituallyunitedtoChristastheirSaviour.

TherearemanyexamplesinScriptureoftheuseoftheterminthiswidesense.ThefirstoccasiononwhichthewordoccursintheNewTestamentisoneofthese,whenour Lord declares that "the gates of hell shall not prevail against His Church,"—language which plainly refers to the society or association of all those who hadbelieved or should believe in Him. All history proves that particular and localChurchesmayfallawayfromthefaithintocompleteandfinalapostasy.ThepromiseofourLordcanapplytonospecialcommunityexcepttheuniversalChurchofChrist,invisibletohumaneye,andknownonlytoHis,consistingofalltruebelievers,andofnone else.Again, in theEpistle to theEphesians,we are told thatChrist "loved theChurch, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with thewashingofwaterbytheWord,thatHemightpresentittoHimselfagloriousChurch,nothavingspotorwrinkle,oranysuchthing,butthatitshouldbeholyandwithoutblemish."2 That society of men for whom Christ died, and who shall, each one ofthem,bepresentedat lastholyandwithoutspotbeforeGod, isplainlyasociety themembersofwhichnomancannumberordeclarebyanyexternalmark;whichcanberestrictedtonogeographical locality,andcanberecognisedbynofeaturesvisibletothe outward eye. It is the society of the elect, and not identical with any outwardChurchorChurchesofwhatsoevername.ItisthespiritualandinvisibleChurchoftheRedeemer, known only to Himself, of which Scripture thus speaks; and in entireaccordance with this use of the term Church in Scripture to denote a societycomprehendingthewholebodyoftheelect,andnoneelse,areothernamesortitlesgiven to it in the New Testament. The Church is at one time spoken of under themysteriousnameoftheBrideorSpouseofChrist,—anexpressionwhichcaeapplytono localorparticularChurch—tonosociety, indeed,atall,measuredandrecognisedby theeyeofmanunderany form,orunderall forms,ofChristianprofession,—butmust be intended to mark out those, and those only, who have been espoused toChristthroughtheholyunionofHisSpiritwiththeirs.Atanothertimeitisspokenofas"thetempleoftheHolyGhost,""aspiritualhouse,""anhabitationofGodthroughthe Spirit,"—language plainly designed tomark out a society defined byno outwardlimits, but identical with the whole number of spiritual Christians of whatsoeversocietythroughouttheworld,whohavebeenquickenedbytheSpirit.

And,finally,theChurchisdescribedas"thebodyofChrist,"allthemembersofwhichareunitedtoHimastheHeadoflifeandinfluenceandgracetothem,—adescriptionnot applicable to any outward body of professing Christiansmade up of any or allcommunions,butonlytoberealizedinthatgreatmultitudewhichnomanhasseenornumbered,whomakeuptheinvisibleChurchoftheRedeemer,andwhosenamesarewritten inheaven. In thesepassages,and inmanyothers,wehavea societydefinedanddescribed,whichembracesthewholenumberofChrist'select,andnonebutthey,—a society not identicalwith any known on earth, and not to be recognised by anylocal names or notes or boundaries,—a society marked out from any other by thepossessionofcertainhighandmysteriousprivileges,andstandinginaverycloseandpeculiar relation to Christ, but unseen and unknown of man,—a society whosemembers are unreckoned and unobserved on earth, but all of whom are numberedandknowninheaven.SuchistheinvisibleChurchoftheRedeemer."Thecatholicoruniversal Church," says the Confession of Faith, "which is invisible, consists of thewholenumberoftheelectthathavebeenorshallbegatheredintooneunderChrist,theHeadthereof;andisthespouse,thebody,thefulnessofHimthatfillethallinall."

II.ThetermChurchismadeuseofinScripturetodenotethewholebodythroughouttheworldofthosethatoutwardlyprofessthefaithofChrist.

Overandabovethatunseensociety,consistingofthewholenumberoftheelect,whoare spiritually united toChrist, there is set forth to us in Scripture another society,externallyconnectedwithChrist,andstandingoutvisiblybeforetheeyesoftheworld.ThisisthevisibleChurchofChrist,knowntomenbytheoutwardprofessionoffaithinHim,andbythepracticeofthoseChurchordinancesandobservanceswhichHehasappointedforHisworshippers.ItisnottobeidentifiedwiththeinvisibleChurch,formenmay belong to the one society, who do not truly belong to the other; and therelationinwhichtheonebodystandstoChristisdifferentfromtherelationoccupiedbytheother.Neitherarethetwotobewhollyplacedinoppositiontoeachother;fortheyform,notsomuchtwoseparateChurches,asoneChurchundertwodistinctanddifferent characters or aspects,—the invisible Church being spiritually united toChrist, the visible being externally united to Him for the sake of the other. Thisoutward society of professing Christians is frequently spoken of and delineated inScriptureunderthetermChurch.ItisspokenofintheActsoftheApostles,whenitissaidthat"theLordaddedtotheChurchdailysuchasshouldbesaved."Itisspokenofin the Epistle to the Corinthians, when mention is made by Paul of the outwardprovisionwhichGodhasmade for the order and government and edificationof theChurch: "AndGod has set some in the Church, first apostles, secondarily prophets,thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healing, helps, governments,diversitiesoftongues."2Itisspokenofagain,inreferencetothesamematter,intheEpistletotheEphesians,whenthesameinspiredwritersaysthatChrist"gavesome,apostles;andsome,prophets;andsome,evangelists;andsome,pastorsandteachers;

for theperfectingof the saints, for theworkof theministry, for the edifyingof thebody of Christ." In such passages, it is plain that a visible society of professingChristians is referred to, known and marked out among men by certain outwardordinances and observances peculiar to them, but not to be confounded with theinvisibleChurchmadeupoftheelect.UndertheoutwardformofthevisibleChurch,the invisible societyof truebelieversmay to a great extent lie concealed;butunderthat outward form theremay bemultitudes also, not trulymembers of the body ofChrist,andonlyjoinedtoHimbyexternalprofessionandexternalordinances.

That a Church visible and outward, known and recognised by the profession of thefaith of Christ and the administration of Christ's ordinances, and yet not to beidentifiedwiththeinvisiblesocietyoftruebelievers,isacknowledgedanddescribedinScripture,may be distinctly ascertained, from a careful consideration of the variousacceptations inwhichthewordChurch ismadeuseof in theNewTestament.But ifadditionalevidenceweredesiredonthispoint, itwouldbefoundinvariousparablesof our Lord, in which He more especially describes the visible Church under theexpressivetitleof"thekingdomofheaven.""Thekingdomofheaven,"saidourLordononeoccasion,"is likeuntoanetthatwascast intothesea,andgatheredofeverykind:which,whenitwasfull,theydrewtoshore,andsatdown,andgatheredthegoodintovessels,butcastthebadaway."Thisseparationofthegoodfromtheevil inHiskingdomor visibleChurch is to takeplace, asHe expressly adds, "at the endof theworld," when "the angels shall sever the wicked from among the just,"—the visibleChurch in this world being made up, in the meantime, of a multitude of true andfeignedbelieversunderonecommonprofession,andyetbeingrecognisedbyChristasHisChurch."Thekingdomofheaven,"saidourLordinanotherparable,"islikeuntoamanwhich sowed good seed inhis field: butwhilemen slept, his enemy came andsowedtaresamongthewheat,andwenthisway.Butwhenthebladewassprungup,andbroughtforthfruit,thenappearedthetaresalso."Andwasthisintroductionofthetares into the visible Church inconsistent with its character as a Church, andimmediately to be remedied by their removal? "Nay," continues the parable, "lest,while ye gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both growtogetheruntiltheharvest."2Toexactlythesameeffectisthatremarkablesimilitude,inwhichourLord likens therelationbetweenHimselfandHisChurchto theunionsubsistingbetweenthevineandthebranches."Iamthetruevine,"saidHe,"andmyFatheristhehusbandman.EverybranchinmethatbearethnotfruitHetakethaway;andeverybranchthatbearethfruitHepurgethit,thatitmaybringforthmorefruit.""Iamthevine,yearethebranches.""Ifamanabidenot inme,he iscast forthasabranch, and is withered." It is plain that in such language our Lord recognised atwofolduniontoHimself,—one,alivingunion, likethatofthefruitfulbranchinthevine; theother, adeadormereexternalunion, suchas theunfruitfulbranch in thevine, thatwascast forthandwithered;andsuchprecisely is thetwo-foldconnectionwith Christ, exemplified in the case respectively of the invisible and the visible

Church. Those who are united to the Saviour by a living union,—unseen indeed ofmen,butknowntoHim,—constitutethatsocietyofbelieversspokenofinScriptureasthespiritualorinvisibleChurchofChrist.Those,ontheotherhand,whoareunitedtotheSaviourbyanexternalunionofoutwardprofessionandoutwardprivileges,knownand seen of men, numbering among them the true believers in Christ, but notexclusively made up of true believers, constitute the visible Church. "The visibleChurch,"saystheConfessionofFaith,"which isalsocatholicoruniversalunderthegospel (not confined to one nation as before under the law), consists of all thosethroughouttheworldthatprofessthetruereligion,togetherwiththeirchildren,andis thekingdomof theLordJesusChrist, thehouseand familyofGod,outofwhichthereisnoordinarypossibilityofsalvation."

III. The term Church is frequently employed in Scripture to denote the body ofbelieversinanyparticularplace,associatedtogetherintheworshipofGod.

This third meaning of the word lies on the very surface of Scripture, and requiresalmost no illustration. Even in the case of two or three professing Christians, mettogether for prayer and worship, whether publicly or in private houses, the termἐκκλησια is applied to them in the New Testament; and that, too, before such acongregation might be organized, by having regular office-bearers and ministerappointedoverthem.IntheActsof theApostleswearetoldthatPaulandBarnabas"ordained them elders in every Church" as they journeyed through Lystra andIconium and Antioch,—language which plainly recognises the congregation ofprofessingbelievers as aChurch, evenpreviously to theordinationof office-bearersamong them. The body of believers in any particular place associating together forworship, whether numerous or not, have the true character of a Church of Christ.Thus the Apostle Paul on some occasions recognises as a Church the meeting ofbelieversintheprivatehouseofsomeoneorotherofhisconverts."Greet,"saysheintheEpistletotheRomans,"PriscillaandAquila,myhelpersinChristJesus;likewisegreet theChurch that is in their house." In hisEpistle to theCorinthians the sameapostlesendstohisconverts,first,thesalutationoftheChurchesofAsia,andsecond,the salutationof thecongregationorChurchassembling in thehouseofAquilaandPriscilla."TheChurchesofAsiasaluteyou.AquilaandPriscillasaluteyoumuchintheLord,with theChurch that is in theirhouse."2 In likemanner, in theEpistle to theColossians,wehear,"SaluteNymphas,andtheChurchwhichisinhishouse;"andintheEpistletoPhilemon,"TotheChurchinthyhouse:graceandpeacefromGodourFather, and from the Lord Jesus Christ;"—so numerous and distinct are thetestimonies to this thirdmeaning of the term Church, as a company of professingChristians,however small, associated together in anyoneplace for theworshipandserviceofGod.

IV.ThewordChurch isapplied in theNewTestament toanumberofcongregationsassociatedtogetherunderacommongovernment.

Itisnotnecessarytosupposethattheterm"Church,"whenusedinreferencetothesociety of professing Christians belonging to one locality, was limited to a singlecongregation meeting in one building. On the contrary, there seems to be thestrongestevidenceforassumingthatapluralityofcongregations,meetingforworshipin separate houses, but connected together under one ecclesiastical order, wasdesignatedbythegeneraltermofaChurch.Itisnotnecessaryatthisstagetoenteratlengthintothediscussionofapoint,whichwillmorenaturallyfalltobearguedwhenwe come to speak of the government of the Church. It may be enough at presentsimply to indicate the kind of argument by which it can be shown that the wordChurch is not restricted in its application to a single congregation, but is used inreference to more than one connected together under one common ecclesiasticalarrangement. This will sufficiently appear if we take the case of the converts atJerusalem,whoarespokenofunderthegeneralnameof"theChurchatJerusalem,"butwho,nevertheless,musthaveconstitutedmorethanonecongregationinthatcity.There is enough recorded in the Acts of the Apostles regarding the vast number ofChristians at Jerusalem, to forbid the supposition that they could have met alltogetherinonecongregation,orunderoneroof,fortheirordinaryreligiousservices.Ononeoccasion—thatoftheoutpouringoftheSpiritonthedayofPentecost—weareexpressly told that "there were added" to the number of believers previously atJerusalem"aboutthreethousandsouls."Afterthis it isdeclaredthat"daily theLordaddedtotheChurchsuchasshouldbesaved."Atalaterperiodstill,whenPeterhadpreachedafterhealingthelamemanatthegateofthetemple,wearetoldthat"manyofthemthatheardthewordbelieved;andthenumberofthemen(ἀνδρων)wasaboutfive thousand,"—a number evidently exclusive ofwomen. Even this vast number ofconverts was still further augmented; for in the next chapter we are told that"believerswere themore added to theLord,multitudesbothofmenandwomen."3AndatasubsequentdatewehavethetestimonyofJames,speakingtoPaulrespectingthe converts at Jerusalem: "Thou seest, brother, how many thousands (literally,myriads,ποσαιμυριαδες)ofJews therearewhichbelieve."Withsuch factsas thesebeforeus regarding themultitudesof converts at Jerusalem, it seems impossible tomaintainthattheChurchthereconsistedofnomorethanonesolitarycongregation,worshipping togetherundera single roof.Noonebuildingcouldhavecontained themanythousandsofbelieversthatcrowdedJerusalematthattimeinthefulnessofaPentecostalharvest;norisitpossible,exceptundertheinfluenceofsomemisleadingtheory, tobelieve that they formednomore thanonecongregation.Theconclusion,then,seemstobeinevitable,thatwhenwereadoftheChurchatJerusalem,wefindthe term applied, not to a single congregation of believers, but to a plurality ofcongregations, connected together as one body or Church by means of a commongovernment.AnexaminationofthecasesoftheChurchatCorinthandtheChurchofEphesuswouldleadtoasimilarconclusion,andwouldjustifyusinaffirmingthattheword Church in these instances also denotes, not a single congregation ofworshippers, but several congregations associated together by vicinity of place, but

still more by a common ecclesiastical rule and order. I do not stop at present toinquireunderwhatformofgovernmentseparatecongregationswerethusconnectedtogether.ThefactthattheyweresoisallthatisnecessaryforustoknowinassigningtothetermChurchthisfourthsignification.

V. The word Church is applied, in the New Testament, to the body of professingbelieversinanyplace,asrepresentedbytheirrulersandoffice-bearers.

The principle of representation is fully and frequently recognised in Scripture ashavingaplaceinthedispensationsofGod,aswellasintheordinarytransactionsoflife; nor can it seem anything new to find the body of believers in any given placerepresented by their office-bearers, and the term primarily descriptive of the oneappliedtotheother.AnexampleofthisapplicationofthetermChurchistobefoundinMatthew 18, when our Lord is laying down the principles on which a Christianought to proceed in the case of a brother who has trespassed against him. If, afterdealingwiththeoffenderastohisfault,firstinprivatewithhimselfalone,andtheninthepresenceoftwoorthreewitnesses,heshallstillneglecttohearandacknowledgehis offence, the command of our Lord is to "tell it to the Church." In such aninjunction our Lord referred to the synagogueCourt known and established amongthe Jews, which had its elders and officers for the decision of such matters ofdiscipline;andintheexpression"theChurch,"whichHemadeuseof, theJewswhoheardHimmusthaveunderstoodtheauthorizedrulers,asdistinctfromtheruled,tobe the parties who were to determine in such controversies. An impartialconsiderationofthistextinitsconnectionseemstojustifytheassertionthatthewordChurch is inScripture, among itsothermeanings, employed todenote the rulersoroffice-bearersoftheChristiansociety.

Such are the five different senses in which the word Church is used in the NewTestament Scriptures; and it is not unimportant to remark the connection betweenthem, and the order in which they stand related to each other. The primary andnormalideaoftheChurch,assetforthinScripture,isunquestionablythatofabodyofmenspirituallyunitedtoChrist,and,inconsequenceofthatunion,onewitheachother,astheyareonewithHim.FromthisfundamentalideaoftheuniversalinvisibleChurch of Christ, all the others are derived. Add to this first idea of a Church, asindicated in Scripture, an outward provision of government, ordinances, and office-bearers, appointed for the purpose ofministering to the edification of itsmembers,and you have the visible Church, as laid down in theNew Testament,—an outwardsocietyformedupontheinwardandspiritualone,andestablishedandmaintainedintheworld for its benefit. Add to this second scriptural idea of a Church the furthernotion of locality, so that instead of being viewed in its universal character asextending over all theworld, it is viewed in its local character as existing in certainplaces,andlimitedtothem,—andyoulearnthethirdmeaningofthetermasfoundintheNewTestament,namely, abodyofprofessingChristians assembling together in

oneplacefortheworshipandserviceofGod.Furtherstill,annextothisthirdnotionoftheChurch,asexistinginparticularlocalitiesandcongregations,theadditionalideaofco-operationandunionundersomeoneformofecclesiasticalgovernment,andyouarriveatthefourthmeaningofthewordChurchinScripture,—anumberofparticularcongregationsassociated togetherunderoneChurchorderandauthority.And lastly,to this fourth idea of a Church conjoin the principle of representation, so largelydevelopedboth in thedispensationsofGodand in thearrangementsofcivilsociety,and you reach the fifth and final use of the term as found in the Bible, namely, todenote a societyor societiesofprofessingChristians, as representedby their office-bearersandrulers.Fromthesinglegermofonebelieverorofseveralbelievers,vitallyunitedtoaSaviour,andintheenjoymentoftheprivilegesbelongingtothatunion,itisnotdifficult to trace theChurchofChristunderall thedifferentyet closelyalliedcharactersinwhichitisdefinedanddelineatedinScripture.

It is of great importance, at the outset, to fix with somemeasure of precision thedifferentsignificationsinwhichthewordChurchisusedinScripture,becauseoftheoppositeopinionsentertainedbydifferentpartiesas to thismatter,—opinionswhichcannot fail to bear directly or indirectly upon every step in our subsequentdiscussions.Forexample,theRomanistsetshimselfinoppositiontothefirstofthosemeaningswhichwehavefoundtobeattachedinScripturetothetermChurch.Heisprepared todenyaltogether,or, ifnot todenyabstractly, yetpractically to set aside,theideaofaninvisibleChurchastheprimaryandfundamentalone,andtosubstitutethat of a visible Church in its stead. Bossuet, in his Variations of the ProtestantChurches,goessofarastochargeupontheReformerstheinventionoftheideaofaChurch invisible, with a view to meet the alleged difficulty, so often urged byRomanists,ofthevisibleexistenceofnoChurch,identicalinprinciplesandcharacterwith the Reformed before the Reformation. And more recent Romanistcontroversialists, if they do not in so many terms deny the existence of a Churchinvisible,endeavourtosubstituteinitssteadthatofavisiblebodyastheleadingandnormalideaoftheChristiansociety.Now,concedetoRomaniststhepositiontheyaresoanxioustoassume,anddenythatthereisaninvisibleandspiritualChurchatall,oratleastthatthisistheprimaryandleadingideaoftheChristiansociety;grantthattheoutward and visible Church is the source from which the inward and invisible isderived,—and you open up the way for some of the worst and most characteristicerrorsofPopery.That single admissionwith respect to the fundamental ideaof theChristiansociety,prepares theway formakingcommunionwithanoutwardChurchtaketheplaceofaspiritualreality,andsubstitutingtheexternalcharmofpriestlyartsandsacramentalgraceforthelivingunionofthesoultotheSaviour.2

Or,takeanotherexamplefromthecaseoftheIndependents.Independentsdenythesecond of the five meanings which we have found ascribed to the word Church inScripture. They repudiate altogether the idea of a visible Church, sustaining a real,although external, relation to Christ, and composed of His professing people. Now,

concedetotheIndependentsthisposition,andsetasidethe ideaofavisibleChurchwith itsoutwardorderandprivileges,andyouconcede to themat thesametimeallthatisnecessarytodetermineintheirfavourthequestionregardingthecharacterandqualificationsofChurchmembers,andtoestablishtheirprinciplesonthesubjectof"pure communion." In like manner the Independents reject the fourth and fifthmeaningsofthewordChurch.Theydenythat it isever foundinScripturetosignifyeither a plurality of congregations under one government, or simply therepresentativesoroffice-bearersofthecongregationascontradistinguishedfromthecongregation itself. Here, too, the difference of opinion in regard to the use andmeaningoftheterminScriptureisafundamentalone,givingrisetootherandnolessfundamentaldifferencesatfuturestagesofthediscussion.AdmitthenarrowpositiontakenupbytheIndependentsinregardtothetruemeaningandnatureofaChurchasdefinedinScripture,restrictthetermtooneorotherofthetwosignificationsofeitherthe invisible Church at large, or a single congregation of believers in a particularlocality, and you, in fact, concede every principle that is necessary for them toestablishtheirviewsastotheformoftheChurch,andthenatureofitsgovernment.There cannotbe, in fact, amore importantquestion,orone in thedeterminationofwhichmorefundamentalprinciplesareinvolved,thanthatinregardtotherealnatureof the Christian Church, as delineated in Scripture; and if we have succeeded indiscoveringthemeaningofthetermaccordingtoNewTestamentusage,weshallhavedonemuchtopreparethewayforourfuturediscussions.

CHAPTERII:THECHURCHADIVINEANDSPIRITUALINSTITUTION

ALTHOUGHitiswiththeChurchinvisible,—thewholebodyoftheelectvitallyunitedtotheSaviour,—thattheideaofaChurchbegins,yet,inproceedingtoinvestigateintothe form, ordinances, and government of the Christian society, we shall find itnecessary to view theChurchmainly, if not exclusively, in its character as a visiblesociety. To the Church visible belong the privileges, the character, the order, aboutwhich it is our duty to inquire.Our future discussions, therefore,will consist in anexamination of the nature, powers, and ordinances of the Christian society as anoutward and visible institute, standing in a certain external relation to Christ,—whether you regard it as universal or local, as an association made up of manycongregations under one government, or an association represented by its office-

bearersandrulers.

What, then, are the primary characteristics of theChristian society,madeup of theprofessingdisciplesoftheSaviourinthisworld?

I.Inthefirstplace,theChurchisaDivineinstitution,owingitsoriginnottoman,buttoChrist,andassociatedtogethernotinconsequenceofhumanarrangement,butbyChrist'sappointment.

No doubt there is a foundation laid in the very nature of the religionwhich Christcame topromulgate, for theunionofHisdisciples inonebodyor society.The faithwhicheachmanholdsforthesalvationofhisownsoulisafaithwhichjoinshimtoevery other believer. The close andmysterious union which is constituted by faithbetweenhimandhisSaviour,isaunionthatconnectshimthroughthatSaviourwitheveryotherChristian.InbecomingonewithChrist,hebecomesatthesametime,inacertain sense, onewith allwho are Christ's. The spiritual fellowship that a believerenjoyswithhisRedeemer, isnotasolitaryoraselfish joy,butonewhichhecannotpossess alone, or except in common with other believers. It is the very nature,therefore, of theGospel tobenot a solitary religion, but a social one.WhenChrist,through the mighty operation of His Spirit, brings a sinner into reconciliation andcommunionwithHimself,He ushers him also into the fellowship of reconciliationandcommunionwithallotherChristians.Whentheworkofgrace isdoneuponthesoul of man, and the barriers of separation between him and his Saviour are castdown,andthesinnerwhowasafaroffisbroughtneartoGod,theverysameworkofgrace removes the obstacles that hindered his union with other men; and in thefellowship of one faith and one Lord he discovers a new and mightier bond ofattachment and union to his fellow-believers. Were there no positive command orappointment,therefore,requiringChristianstounitetogetherandtoformonearthasociety joined together by the profession of the same faith, the very nature ofChristianitywouldforcesucharesult.Intheprofessionofitincommon,menwouldfind themselves insensibly drawn to other believing men with a power not to beresisted;andinthebondsofthesameSaviourandthesameSpirittheywouldfeelandownanearertiethanthatofkindred,andaholierrelationshipthanoneofblood.Inthecommon joysandsorrowswhichChristians,andnonebutChristians, share,—intheonefaithandoneSaviourinwhichtogethertheyrejoice,—inthesamehopesandfears, the same sin escaped, and the same salvationwon, inwhich they participate,thereisaunionofthemostintimatekindproducedandcemented,whichisnotwiththemamatterofchoice,butamatterofinevitablenecessity.

We may assert, therefore, that that Christian society which we call the Church ofChristisasocietyframedbyDivineappointment,evendidweseeinitnothingmorethan a body ofmen brought together by the constraint of the same faith and sameaffectionswrought in themby the Spirit ofGod. But there ismuchmore than this

intimatedinScripture,onwhichwegroundtheassertionthattheChurchofChristisa divinely instituted society. There are express commands in Scripture, leaving thebelievernoalternative in thematter,andrequiringhimtounite togetherwithotherbelieversintheoutwardandpublicprofessionofhisfaithbeforetheworld.Heisnotleftatlibertytohidethatfaithwithinhisownheart,andhimselftoremainaloneandseparated from his fellow-believers. It is the office of the Christian society to be awitness,bymeansofanoutwardandpublicprofession,forChristontheearth;anditisnotamatterofchoice,butofexpressobligation,withaChristianmantojoinwithothersinthatpublicprofession.Thecommandis"toconfessChristbeforemen;"andupon the ground of that command, then, is laid the foundation of a society, eachmember of which is called upon, whether he will or will not, to lift up a publictestimony for his Saviour jointlywith other believers; and that public profession isonetobemadenotmerelywiththelips,unitingwithothersinacommondeclarationof the faithbelieved.Theoutwardordinancesof theChristiansocietyare so framedanddevisedastobethemselvesasignificantprofessionoffaithonthepartofthosewho join in them; and communion in ordinances iswithChristiansnot amatter ofchoice, but of express command. Christ has judged it proper to appoint that HisdisciplesshallbesolemnlyreceivedintoHisChurchbytheinitiatoryriteofbaptism;so that the very entrance of life, or, at all events, the admission into the Christiansociety,shallbeitselfapublictestimonytoHim.Hehasenjoinedthepublicandopencommemoration of the central andmost characteristic doctrine ofHis faith, by thecelebration,atstatedintervals,oftheLord'sSupper;andasoftenasthefirstdayoftheweek returns, the disciples are commanded "not to forsake the assembling ofthemselvestogether,"buttouniteintheoutwardandjointworshipoftheSaviour.Inshort, in the whole divinely appointed institutions and ordinances of the Christiansocietyweseetheprovisionmadefor,andtheobligationlaidupon,Hisdisciplestobejoined together intooneoutwardbody,and to formacommonsocietyofprofessingbelievers.Thatcommunityisone,therefore,ofDivineinstitution;andinthedutylaiduponthem,notasamatterofchoice,butofexpresscommand,tobecomemembersofit,we see theordinanceofGod for the existenceandpermanent establishmentof aChurchonearth.AsolitaryChristianisseentobeacontradictioninterms,ifyouviewmerelyhis faithasaprincipleofaffinitynaturallydestinedtodrawto it the faithofotherbelievers.AsolitaryChristian isworse thanacontradiction,he isananomaly,standing out against the express institution of God, which has appointed thefellowshipofbelievers inoneChurch,andmadeprovisioninitsoutwardordinancesfortheirunionandedification.TheChristiansocietyisakingdom,setupbyexpressDivineappointment,anddiffersfromeveryothersocietyonearthinthisremarkablefact,thatthebuilderandmakerofitisGod.

The institution of a society by Christ under the name of a Church, and theestablishment and permanent continuance of that society as aDivine institution inthemidstofthisworld,isafactoffundamentalimportanceinallourfutureinquiries.

Thatfactstandsopposedtotheviewsoftwodistinctclassesofmen,who,differingintheir opinion as to the origin and nature of the Christian society, yet combine indenying or setting aside its claims to be regarded as of Christ, and owing itsappointmenttoaDivineauthority.

1st. There are those who regard the Christian Church simply as a human society,owingitsoriginandestablishmenttovoluntaryagreementamongitsmembers.

OfcoursetheideaofamerelyvoluntaryassociationofChristians,broughttogetherbythe common belief of the same doctrines and the common practice of the sameprecepts,istotallyopposedtothenotionofaDivineinstitution,claimingtobeofGod,and appealing to His authority for its existence and outward establishment on theearth. If the principles already laid down are correct, the theory which makes theChurchtobeamerelyhumanandvoluntaryassociationofChristiansmustcomeveryfarshortindeedofwhatthestatementsofScripturedemand.Nodoubtthereisinthevery nature of Christianity, viewed as a system of truth and duty, apart from anymention of a Christian Church, enough to have laid the foundations of a societyvoluntarily brought together among the men who should have embraced it. In thefellowshipofonefaithunitingthemtoeachother,andseparatingthemfromtherestof theworld,—in the observance of the sameworship and religious ordinances as adistinguishingmarkoftheirChristianity,—therewasenough,evenwithoutanexpressappointmenttothateffect,tohavegatheredtheChristiansoftheearlyagesintoonebody, and to have led them voluntarily to unite themselves into a distinct society.MorethanthatmayperhapsbeconcededtothosewhoviewtheChristianChurchasnothingbeyondavoluntaryassociation.Threethingsseemessentialtotheveryideaof a society,whateverbe its character orproposedobjects.Menbrought voluntarilytogether into any association are necessarily led, for the purpose of order and thebetter attainmentof the commonaim thatunites them, to appoint officers of somekind or other, to enact laws or regulations for the transaction of business, and toexercisetherightofadmissionorexclusioninregardtomembers.Allthisisimpliedintheverynatureofaregularandorganizedsociety,whethervoluntaryornot;andnocommunity can long exist without it. It may be granted, then, in the case of theChristian society, that the power of a common faith, and the affinity of a commonworship, would have been enough, without express Divine appointment, to havebroughtthebelieversintoone;andfurther,thattheverynecessitiesofthesocietysoconstitutedwouldhaveledthemtoadoptaformoforderandgovernmentforit,apartfromapositiveinstitutionbyChrist.ButallthisfurnishesnopresumptionagainstthefactofthepositiveappointmentoftheChristiansocietybyChrist.Overandabovethegeneral tendency of the Gospel to become a social system, and over and above thegeneralsanctionofaChristiansocietyimpliedinthattendency,ChristexpresslylaiddownthemainprinciplesoforderandgovernmentfortheformationofHisChurch.Hedidnotwait for thehistoricaldevelopmentof theChristian society,or leaveHisdisciplestoorganizeforthemselvesitssystemofgovernmentandoffice-bearersand

laws:HelaiduponHisdisciplestheexpressinjunctiontomeettogetherinHisname;andinorderthebettertoenforceit,annexedthepromise,thatwhentheywerethusassembled,Hewouldbeinthemidstofthemtoblessthemandtodothemgood.HecommendedtothemthedutyofconfessingHimbeforemen;andthemoresurelytopreventmistake,appointedcertainpublicordinances,suchasBaptismandtheLord'sSupper, through which that confession was to be made. He warned them "not toforsaketheassemblingofthemselvestogether;"2and,toprovideagainstuncertaintyandmisapprehension,Heappointedonedayinsevenforthismeeting,andinstitutedthe ordinance of public worship for their observance. He commissioned the firstoffice-bearersinHisChurch,Hegavethemthepowerofruling,andHeprescribedtheterms for the admission of members. In all this there is evinced or implied thepositive institution of a society by Christ Himself, having from Him a Divineauthority. The voluntary power of association, implied in Christianity as a socialsystem, is there, and isnotbyanymeans tobedeniedoroverlooked;but,overandabove that, the Christian society has the sanction and authority of a Divineappointment.

2d.TherearethosewhoregardtheChristianChurchasasocietycreatedbytheState,owingitsformandexistencetothoseregulationswhichtheStatemayenactinregardtoit.

The Erastian theory of the Church is no less directly opposed to the claims of theChurchasaDivine institution than the theoryofamerelyvoluntaryassociation. If,however, theprinciplesalreadyenunciatedbecorrect, theymayabsolveus fromthenecessity of entering into details in the consideration of such a system. If there bewarrantinScriptureforassertingthatChristhasnotmerelylentageneralsanctiontothe formation of a Christian society amongHis followers, but, as if to prevent thepossibility of mistake, has specified in His own words Himself, or by His inspiredservants,itsoffice-bearers,itslaws,anditsordinances,thenthisisenoughtosetasidebyanticipationtheErastianscheme.InvirtueoftheappointmentofitsDivineHead,theChurchhasanexistence,anauthority,agovernment, totally independentofanypower which it may or may not derive from the State; and the Church actuallyexercisedtherightsresultingfromitsDivineinstitution,andconferredbyChrist,bothinthetimesoftheapostlesandinsubsequentages,whenitreceivednogiftfromtheStateexceptthegiftofpersecutionandofblood.Itisnotnecessary,atthisstageofthediscussion,toanticipatetheinquirywhichwillafterwardsmeetus,astotheextentofthepowerortheformofgovernmentappointedbyChristfortheChristiansociety.Itisenoughforourpresentargumenttoknowthatsomekindofauthoritydoesbelongto theChurch invirtueof itsoriginalappointmentbyourLord; thatas it existedatfirstindependentlyofthefavouroftheState,andinthefaceofitshostility,soitmaycontinue to exist without any external connection or support; and that, for all thepurposesonaccountofwhich itwas established, it haspowers complete and entirewithin itself, the original gift and permanent endowment of its Head. As a Divine

institution, designed for a continued existence on earth, the Church is divinelyequippedwithallthepowersnecessaryforitsownbeingandwelfare,withoutowinganythingtoman.Withoutdoingmorethanmerelyglanceattheargumentatpresent,itisenoughtosaythattheErastiantheoryproceedsuponthemistakeofidentifyingtheChurchandState, anddenying those essential differencesbetween them,whichdemonstrate them to be distinct and separate ordinances of God, having each anindependentexistence.ApartaltogetherfromthedirectevidencewehaveinScripturefor theDivine institutionof theChurch,asasocietyowingnothing to theStateandeverythingtoChrist,thedifferencesbetweenthetwoprovethemtobeindependentofeach other. They differ in their origin, in their objects, and in themeans by whichthoseobjectsareattained.Theydifferintheirorigin,—theStatebeingtheordinanceofGod as universal sovereign, and appointed for all nationswhetherChristian or not;theChurchbeing theordinanceofChrist asMediator, andappointedonly for thosenationsamongwhomChristianityisprofessed.Theydifferintheirobjects,—theStatebeing intended to advance directly the secular interests of the nation, and onlyindirectly to promote its spiritual well-being; the Church, on the contrary, beingdesigneddirectlytofurtherthespiritualinterestsofitsmembers,andonlyindirectlyto contribute to their temporal or secular wellbeing. They differ in theirmeans forattaining the ends they have respectively in view,—the State being armed with thepoweroftheswordforsecuringitsobject;theChurch,ontheotherhand,beingarmedwithweaponsnotcarnalbutspiritual.These,andotheressentialdifferencesbetweentheChurchandtheState,evincethattheyareseparateandindependent institutionsofGod,andthattheonecannotoweitsexistenceorauthoritytotheother.

Somuch, then, for thegeneral fact that theChristiansociety isaDivine institution,owingitsexistencenottoman,buttoChrist,andnotmerelyavoluntaryassociation,orthecreatureofcivilappointment.

II.InthesecondplaceIremark,theChurchofChristisaspiritualinstitution;or,inotherwords, in itsprimarycharacter it isaspiritual instrumentality forworkingoutthespiritualgoodofman.

TheChristianChurchwhichChrist establishedon the earthbeforeHe left it, is thelastofthedispensationsofGod;and,inapeculiarsense,itisthedispensationoftheSpirit. The earthly and carnal elements of former dispensations were step by stepremoved, in order to make way for one more spiritual and inward, and fitted tominister, by a more entirely spiritual agency, to the souls of men. The era of theChristian Church is emphatically that of the manifestation of the Spirit; and theadministrationoftheChurchis,initsprimarycharacter,aspiritualone.Nodoubt,intheNewTestamentChurch,therearestillfoundoutwardordinancesandanoutwardservice,—an external provision made by rites and solemnities, that minister to thesenses,fortheedificationofthebodyofChrist.Perhapsitisnecessarilyimpliedinthevery condition of sense and sight in which Christians are in this world, that the

Church shouldnotbewhollywithout suchexternalprovision, and that theSpiritofChrist should minister to our spirits, not directly, but through the medium of theoutward word and the outward ordinance; but in its main character, theadministrationoftheSpiritthroughtheChurchisaspiritualone,totheexclusionofobservanceswhollyoutward, and influencespurely external.Thewrittenword isnodoubtanoutwardsign,speaking,inthefirstinstance,totheeye;butitisthetruthinthe letter, and not the letter itself—that is, the spiritual instrument—that operatesuponthesoul.TheexternalordinanceofBaptismortheLord'sSupperisnodoubtanoutwardprovision,ministering, in the first instance, to the senses; but it is not thesensible signs themselves, but the thing signified, that becomes, in the hand of theSpirit, the spiritual seal upon the soul. Even in the use of outward ordinances, theChurchemploysaninstrumentalitynotwhollyoutward,butonecapableofexertingaspiritualpowerupon the conscienceand theheart.Theordinance isbut theavenuethroughwhichtheSpiritofGodmorepowerfullyreachestothespiritofman.Thereisnovirtueandnopowerintheoutwardactionorthesensiblesigninitself,andapartfrom the Spirit of God, conveyed through it to the human soul. Even in theemploymentofanexternalprovision for thegoodofhermembers, theChurchdoesnotemployamereexternalpower;herprimaryinfluenceisaninfluenceofaspiritualkind,conveyedthroughthechannelofoutwardordinances;andhergreatministrationis, when the Spirit in the ordinance meets with the spirit in the heart, and theybecomeoneinthebeliever.Itis,then,thedistinguishingcharacteristicoftheChurchintheselatterdays,thatheradministrationisspiritualinitsnatureanditsaims;thatalthoughmakinguseofoutwardordinances,theinfluenceoperatinguponthesoulisnotoutward,butspiritual;andthat theadministrationof thiskingdomisaltogetherdifferentfromthatofthekingdomsoftheworld.

ThestandingordinanceofaspiritualChurchintheworld,distinctinitsorigin,initsobjects, in its instrumentality, from the kingdoms of this world, is the grand andpubliclessontaughtbyGodastothefundamentaldistinctionbetweenthingscivilandthingsspiritual.Todrawthelineofdemarcationbetweentheprovinceoftheoneandthe other, is the great problem that involves in it the question of freedom ofconscience on the one side, and the rights of the State on the other,—the spirituallibertyoftheChurch,andthelegitimateauthorityofthecivilmagistrate,—thethingsthat belong unto God, and the things that belong unto Cæsar. The grand fact, thatChristhasinstitutedaspiritualsocietyontheearth,anddestinedittobeperpetual,isonenevertobelostsightof,asaffordingasolution,andtheonlypossiblesolution,ofthese questions.The identification of this spiritual society in anymanner or degreewith the civil society, the annulling or confounding of the essential distinctionbetween the Christian Church on the one hand, and the civil State on the other,involvesiniterrorsequallydetrimentaltoboth.TheErastiantheoryisguiltyofthiserror, when it makes the Church the creature and portion of the State,—therebyconfounding two ordinances of God, essentially distinct and separate. But the very

sameerroriscommittedinasomewhatdifferentmannerbythetheoryofthelateDr.Arnold, where he affirms that, "in a country where the nation or government areavowedly and essentially Christian, the State or nation is virtually the Church."According to such a system, the State and the Church are, under certaincircumstances, identical, quite as much as on the theory of Erastians; although,according to Arnold, this identity is brought about by the State merging its ownexistenceinandbecomingpartoftheChurch;while,accordingtotheothersystem,itisaccomplishedintheoppositeway,oftheChurchmergingitsownexistenceinandbecoming part of the State. In neither system is that grand and fundamentaldistinctionrecognisedwhichGodhassetbeforeoureyessoprominentlyinthefactoftheordinationbyHimselfofthetwoseparateandindependentsocieties,—theoneforspiritual, and the other for civil purposes; and the forgetfulness ofwhich inevitablyleadstoerrorsruinousontheonesideortheother.Denyor ignorethatdistinction,andthereisnosecurityremainingagainsteithertheStatebecomingthetyrantoftheChurch, or the Church the tyrant of the State,—against a civil supremacy over theconsciencewhichwouldtrampleallspiritualfreedominthedust,oranecclesiasticalusurpation over our temporal rights that would lay all civil liberty in ruins. In theDivine institution of a spiritual society, distinct from and independent of the State,God has taught before our eyes the grand and vitally important lesson of thefundamental distinction between things civil and things spiritual; and has madeprovisionthattheChristianChurch,Hisownappointment,shallneverbecomeeitherthetyrantortheslaveofthekingdomsofmen.

CHAPTERIII:THECHURCHINITSTWOFOLDCHARACTERASVISIBLEANDINVISIBLE

IN attempting, as has been already done, to ascertain the various meanings of theterm Church in Scripture, I had occasion to speak of the distinction between theChurchinvisibleandtheChurchvisible.Thatdistinctionissoimportantinitself,andinvolves in it principles so fundamental in respect to our future discussions, that itmay be desirable to inquire into the grounds and nature of it at somewhat greaterlength.Tothissubjectthepresentchapterwillmoreespeciallybedevoted.

Now,attheoutset,itisnotunimportanttoremark,thatwhenwespeakoftheChurchinvisibleandtheChurchvisible,wearenottobeunderstoodasifwereferredinthese

designations to two separate and distinct Churches, but rather to the same Churchunder two different characters. We do not assert that Christ has founded twoChurchesonearth,butonlyone;andweaffirmthatthatoneChurchistoberegardedundertwodistinctaspects.AstheChurchinvisible,itconsistsofthewholenumberoftheelect,whoarevitallyunitedtoChristtheHead,andofnoneother.AstheChurchvisible, it consists of all those who profess the faith of Christ, together with theirchildren.TherearemanythingswhichcanbeaffirmedoftheChurchofChristunderthe one aspect, which cannot be affirmed of it under the other; and it is mostimportantthatthedistinctionbekeptinview,inordertoarightunderstandingofthedeclarationsofScriptureinregardtotheChurch.Therearetwothings,thestatementofwhichmayservetoexhibitanddefinethedifferencebetweentheChurchinvisibleandtheChurchvisible.

1st. The Church invisible stands, with respect to its members, in an inward andspiritual relationship to Christ, whereas the Church visible stands to Him in anoutwardrelationshiponly.InsofarastheChurchinvisibleisconcerned,thetruthofthisstatementwillbereadilyadmittedbyall.Therecanbenodifferenceofopiniononthepoint.Theproperpartywithwhomthecovenantofgraceismade,andtowhomitspromises and privileges belong, is the invisible Church of real believers. It is thisChurchforwhichChristdied.ItisthisChurchthatisespousedtoHimastheBride.Itis themembersof thisChurch thatareeachandall savinglyunited toHimas theirHead. The bond of communion between them and the Saviour is an invisible andspiritualone,securingtoallofthemtheenjoymentofsavingblessingshere,andthepromiseofeverlastingredemptionhereafter.NonebutRomanistsdenyorignorethis.

ThecaseisaltogetherdifferentwiththevisibleChurch.ItstandsnotinaninwardandsavingrelationshiptoChrist,butinanoutwardrelationshiponly, involvingnomorethanthepromiseandenjoymentofoutwardprivileges.Inthatmysteriouslymingledconditionofbeinginwhichbelieversarefoundhere,withsoulsinfellowshipontheone side with the Spirit of God, and on the other side with the body, an outwardprovision has been judged suitable even for their spiritual edification andimprovement, with a view to prepare them on earth for their destination in glory.There is an outward government established for the order and regulation of thesociety of the elect; there are outward ordinances adapted and blessed for theirimprovement;thereisanoutwarddisciplinedesignedandfittedfortheirpurificationandprotection.Allthisnecessarilyimpliesanoutwardandvisiblesociety,embracingandencompassingtheinvisibleandspiritualone;inotherwords,anoutwardChurch,within which the invisible Church of real believers is embosomed, protected,perfected.AdmitthatsomeexternalframeworkofprivilegesandordinanceshasbeenerectedbyChristaroundHisownelectpeopleinthisworld,andyouareleddirectlytothe idea of a visible society, distinguished from the invisible by the outward formwhichitbears,andtheoutwardrelationinwhichitstandstoChrist.Theformoftheinvisible Church cannot be distinguished by the eye of man, for the features and

lineaments of it are known only toGod;whereas the form of the visible Church ismarked out and defined by its external government, ordinances, and arrangements.Themembers of the invisibleChurch cannotbediscernedordetectedby the eyeofman,fortheircallistheinwardcalloftheSpirit,andtheirrelationtoChristaspiritualand unseen one; whereas themembers of the visible Church stand revealed to thesightofallbytheoutwardprofessiontheymake,andtheexternalconnectioninwhichtheystandtoChrist,astheyenjoytheprivilegesandordinancesofHisappointment.ThemembersoftheChurchinvisiblearejoinedinaninwardrelationshiptoChrist,inconsequence of having listened to His inward call by the Spirit, and being vitallyunited to Him through faith. The members of the Church visible are joined in anoutwardconnectionwithChrist,inconsequenceofhavingobeyedHisoutwardcallbythe Word, and being now made partakers by Him in the external privileges andordinancesofaChurchstate.

This external relationship, in which the members of the visible Church stand toChrist, ashavingbeenbrought into aChurch state fromout of theworld, hasbeenoften spoken of by theologians under the name of an external covenant or federalrelationship.Whatevernamemaybegiventoit,thereisnodoubtthatthereisarealand important relationship into which the members of the visible Church haveentered, tobedistinguishedalike fromthe stateof theworldwithout,and fromthestateoftheinvisibleChurchwithin.Itistobedistinguishedfromtheconditionoftheworld at large; for themembers of the visible Church have received and obeyed, atleastoutwardly, thecallofChrist,andhavemadeaprofessionof their faith inHim,and in consequence have entered into the possession and enjoyment of certainprivilegesandordinancesthatbelongtoaChurchstate.Itistobedistinguishedfromtheconditionof the invisibleChurchof truebelievers; foralthoughthemembersofthevisibleChurchmayhaveoutwardlyobeyedthecallandenteredintopossessionofthe external privileges of the Church, yet the inward grace and vital union to theSaviourmaybeawanting,andtheirsmaybearelationshipwhollyofanoutwardkind.Butalthoughitbeanoutwardrelationship,andnomore,itisneverthelessarealone,underwhatsoevernameitmayberepresented.

Therearetwothingsplainlyimpliedinit.Firstofall,thereisanexternalprovisionofordinances made by Christ in His Church, ensuring both outward privilege andblessing,notofasavingkind,tothosewhousethemaright;andwiththisthereistheinvitationaddressedtoallmentoenterinandtopartakeofthem;andsecondly,thereis a compliance with this invitation on the part of those who profess their faith inChristandjointhemselvestoHisChurch,andtheactualenjoymentandexperienceoftheprivilegessopromised,—insofar,at least,astheyareofanexternalortemporalkind.Allthis,themereprofessionoffaithinChrist,andtheactofjoininghimselfinexternalobservancetothevisibleChurch,willsecuretotheformalprofessor.HemaynotpossessthatfaithunfeignedandthatvitaluniontotheSaviourwhichwillobtainfor him the internal and saving blessing which the real believer will find in the

ordinances; but there are external privileges which he may and does obtain inconsequence of hismere outward profession and observance; and although he fallsshortofthesavingbenefitwhichthespiritualChristianfindsinChrist'sChurch,yetthebenefitsheactuallyenjoysarebothrealandimportant.ThisrelationofthemereformalprofessorandmemberofthevisibleChurchtoChristmaybecalledanexternalcovenantandoutwardfederalunion,ornot.Butunderwhatevername,itisimportanttobear inmind that there is sucha relationship, involvingbothreal responsibilitiesand real privileges; and that it is this relationship, as contradistinguished from aninwardandsavingone,thatmakesthedifferencebetweenthemembersofthevisibleandthemembersoftheinvisibleChurchofChrist.

2d.TheChurchinvisible ismadeupoftruebelievers,andofnoneelse;whereastheChurchvisibleiscomposedofthosewhooutwardlyprofesstheirfaithinChrist,andmayincludenotonlytruebelievers,butalsohypocrites.

This follows, as anecessary consequence, fromwhathas alreadybeen stated. If themembers of the Church invisible stand in an inward and spiritual relationship toChrist, theymustbe,allof them,His truedisciples,and in thenumberof theelect;and if, on the other hand, themembers of the visible Church stand in an externalrelation,andnomore,totheSaviour,theymayatleastincludeintheirnumberthosewho are in reality strangers toHim. If indeed the edification and perfecting of thebodyofbelieversweretobesecured in their journeythroughthisworldby thehelpanduseofoutwardordinancesandanoutwardadministration,thentheadmissionofformal professors as well as true Christians to the enjoyment of those externalprivileges, would seem to be a matter unavoidable. If a visible Church, with itsoutwardmeansofgrace, istobeestablishedfortheedifyingofthebodyofChrist, itwere impossible,without thehelpof some inspiredand infallible judge,qualified todetect the formal and feigned profession, to shut out from such a Church thehypocriteandtheformalist.AnoutwardChurch,administeredbyhumanandfallibleinstruments, must necessarily share its benefits of a mere external kind with thefeignedbeliever,aswellaswiththetrue.Uptoacertainpoint,theformalistandthespiritualmanwillpartake incommonof theoutwardprivilegeswhich itbestowsonall within its pale. Those privileges were indeed provided and intended, in the firstinstance,forthespiritualadvantageofthetruebeliever.ItisforhissakethatavisibleChurch, with its outward administration of word and ordinance, is established andkeptupintheworld.ButsidebysidewiththerealChristianwillbefoundtheformalChristianalso,—bothalikesharinginexternalordinances,andbroughtunderacertainexternal relationship toChrist;butoneof themcontentedwith thename,while theother only enjoys the reality of the saving privilege in addition. Such has been theconditionof theChurch in all ages, and suchwas it always intended tobe.Under aformereconomytherewereChurchordinancesofanoutwardkindsharedinbyIsraelaftertheflesh,nolessthanbyIsraelafterthespirit,—bythenaturalaswellasbythespiritualseedofAbraham.TherewasaChurchvisiblestandinginanexternalrelation

to God, and embracing in it many who belonged to God only after the flesh; andwithinthebosomofthatexternalChurchtherewasanother,theinvisible,standingina spiritual relation to God, and embracing in it none butHis spiritual people. Thatformerdispensationhaspassedaway,andanotherhassucceededtoit,ofwiderrangeandmoreelevatedcharacter.YettheprincipleofGod'sdealingswithHispeopleisstilloneandthesame,—GodstillprovidesforthebenefitofHisownbelievingpeopleanoutward framework, so to speak, of ordinances and external administration, withinwhich His invisible Church is hid. To the external privileges of that visible societyevensinnersareinvited,—notthattheymayrestthere,butthattheymaygoontotheinvisibleandspiritualsocietywithin.Andevenformalistsarepermittedtomingleinoutwardfellowshipwithtruebelievers,inorderthat,ifpossible,theymaybebroughttoseek forsomethinghigherandmoreblessed.Like the field inwhichtheresprangup themingled cropof tares andwheat, the visibleChurchwill ever reveal amixedcommunionofrealandmerelynominalbelievers.Itisnotuntiltheendoftheworld,when the harvest comes, that the invisible Church of Christ will stand disclosed incontradistinctiontothevisible,asacommunionoftheelectonly.

The difference, then, between the Church invisible and the Church visible, may beexhibited anddefinedunder these twoheads: 1st, The one stands in an inward andsaving relationship to Christ, whereas the other stands in an external relationshiponly;and,2d, theone ismadeupof theelectsolely,whiletheotherembraces in itscommunionnominalaswellasrealbelievers.Theprinciplesnowillustrated,inregardto the realdistinctionandyet the real connectionbetween theChurch invisibleandtheChurch visible, bearwith them very important consequences. Itmay bewell toindicate,withoutillustratingindetail,theirbearingsinfourdifferentdirections.

Inthefirstplace,thedoctrineinregardtothevisibleandinvisibleChurchwhichwehavelaiddown,ifitbeacorrectandscripturalone,hasamostimportantanddecisivebearingupontheprinciplesofIndependentsinreferencetoChurchcommunion.Idonotintendatpresenttoenteratlengthuponthisquestion,asitmaybenecessarytoadverttoitmorelargelywhentreatingofthemembersoftheChurch.Butitmaybewellatpresenttoindicatetheconclusionstowhichtheprinciplesalreadylaiddown,inregardtotheChurchinitstwofoldcharacterofvisibleandinvisible,seemtoleadon the subject of its membership. Independents in general have rejected thisdistinction,anddeniedthatthereisgroundinScriptureforassertingtheexistenceofanoutwardsocietyofprofessingChristiansstandinginanoutwardrelationtoChrist,andmade up of nominal aswell as actual believers. In hiswork onCongregationalIndependencyDr.Wardlawhasranked,underthetitleof"UnauthorizedUsesof thewordChurch,"theemploymentofit inthesenseoftheinvisibleandvisibleChurch;andherestrictsthemeaningsofthewordtothesetwo,—either"thewholebodyofthefaithful,theentirespiritualIsraelofGod,"or"asocietyofbelieversinanyplace."InDr. Samuel Davidson's work on the Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament wehavetheverysamestatement,andalmostinthesamewords.Hence,inrejectingthe

doctrineofavisibleChurch,anddenyinganyuseof the termChurch, except in thesense of the whole body of believers or a society of believers in one place,Independents are forced to takeup theposition thatnonebut truebelievers canbemembersoftheChurch.Andinordertocarryoutthisprinciple,theyareconstrainedto demand, as the only ground of admission to Church fellowship, positive anddistinctevidenceofgraceandregenerationonthepartofthecandidate.Thisprincipleof"purecommunion,"asitiscalled,besidestheinextricabledifficultiesofapracticalkind, in which it is involved, seems to be directly opposed to the views alreadydeducedfromScriptureastothenatureoftheChurchitself.It istotheChurchasavisible society that the ordinance of discipline has been entrusted; and it is inconformity with its character as the Church visible, that the administration ofdisciplineintheadmissionorrejectionofmembersmustbeconducted.IftheChurchvisiblestandsinanexternalrelationshiptoChrist,andismadeupnotmerelyofrealbutofprofessingbelievers,thentherecanberequiredforadmissionintothatsocietynoqualificationbeyondanoutwardprofessionoffaithinChrist,suchasinitself,andin the circumstances connectedwith it,maybe fairly regardedas a credibleone.Todemandmorethanthis,istodemandmorethanScripturewarrantsorrequires.Itisto confound two things which are essentially distinct from each other,—thequalificationandcharacternecessary toconstituteamanamemberof the invisible,with the qualification and character necessary to constitute him a member of thevisible,Church.IftheprinciplesinregardtotheChurchalreadyenunciatedbecorrect,the evidence on which a candidate for admission may be rightly received into thecommunionoftheChurchisnotapositiveproofofregeneration—whichnomancangivetoorreceivefromanother,—buttheevidenceofacredibleprofessionoffaithinChrist,andacorrespondingconduct.

Inthesecondplace,theprinciplesinregardtothevisibleandinvisibleChurchalreadyindicated have a very important bearing on the question of the lawfulness orunlawfulnessofInfantBaptism.Itwillbesufficienttopointoutthis,withoutenteringinto the general question, which will more naturally fall to be considered at asubsequentstageinourdiscussions.ButImayremark,thatthedoctrineofthevisibleChurchanditsexternalcovenantrelationshiptoChrist,laysthefoundationforthoseviewsofChurchmembershipwhich justifyus in regarding the infantsofprofessingChristiansasentitledtosharethecommunionandprivilegesoftheChurch.Accordingto that doctrine, a saving faith on the part of a man is the ground on which he isadmittedamemberoftheinvisibleChurchofChrist,nottheconditiondemandedforhisreceptionofChurchprivilegeswithinthevisibleChurch.Itisontheground,notofafaith,whichanunconsciousinfantcannothave,butofthatexternalrelationshiptoChrist,whichthechildmaysharewiththebelievingparent,thatwearewarrantedinholding that the infants of such as belong to the visible Church are themselvesmembers also, and therefore entitled to the enjoyment of its privileges and itsordinances along with the parent. The Independent view, which insists on the

possession of a saving faith in Christ as the only footing on which Churchmembership can be conceded, and the only title to the enjoyment of Churchordinances, tends very directly, if consistently carried out, to deprive the infants ofprofessingChristians of their right to be regarded asmembers of theChurch, or toclaim the benefit of its ordinances. The tendency of these views to lead to such aconclusion—notwithstandingofmanyexceptionstothecontrary—seemstobeevincedin the factof the largenumberof the IndependentbodywhoactuallyholdopinionshostiletoInfantBaptism;anditseemstobefurtherevincedbytheprogress,amongthesamereligiousdenomination,ofviewslikethoseofDr.Halley,inhisworkontheSacraments,inwhi