Oldalképek
PDF
ePub

or Statutes of the Scribes; another, the mentioning of the name of God rashly, or a vain oath; another, the tempt ing of others, or presenting to them occasion to profane the name of God; another, making them to eat holy things without the temple; another, the preventing of them from fulfilling the commandments; another, a presenting a profane offering, according to Buxtorf, or a sickly animal, according to Coch.; another, a priest's not separating the gifts of an oblation, &c.; in all of which instances, as well as others which might be stated, it is plain that it was not civil injuries, but religious scandals, that were the grounds of the excommunication, and consequently that the synagogue and sanhedrin, which pronounced this excommunication, must certainly be viewed as ecclesiastical courts.

Thus, then, it appears that the synagogue and sanhedrin, whatever connection they might have in another view with civil matters, must be considered as ecclesiastical courts— that they were instituted, if not upon explicit divine warrant, yet with the express permission and approbation of the Deity -and that the allusion of our Saviour, in Matth. xviii, to these Jewish courts, whatever of them is intended, fully warrants the deduction of Presbyterians from this passage, that similar courts should exist also in the Christian church, and the government be vested in their hands, unless it can be proved from other passages, that it is not merely ecclesiastical rulers in particular, but the members of every Christian congregation in general, who are now to govern the church of God.

APPENDIX II.

REMARKS ON A VIEW OF SOCIAL

WORSHIP, &c.

BY

JAMES ALEXANDER HALDANE.

SINCE the preceding Vindication of Presbytery was written, a book, by the author now mentioned, has been published in defence of Independency. Expecting to find in it an abler, or at least a fuller defence of the principles which are here controverted than is contained in the publications of Messrs. Innes or Ewing, I read it with avidity, but must confess that I have been completely disappointed.. For any additional argument which it brings forward, it might, as far as I can judge, have remained unpublished, without any material injury either to the reputation of the author, to the instruction of the world, or to the particular cause which it is meant to serve. It abounds with professions of candour, of the most liberal charity, and of the most serious and disinterested regard for truth. And yet while Mr. Haldane avowedly examines Presbytery in general, and points out the evils which he thinks result from it, he almost uniformly improves it into a pretext for haranguing, chiefly against our Established Church, and for exhorting her members to renounce her communion. Were there not other churches however, as the Relief, and Burgher, and Antiburgher, which are equally zealous in supporting Presbytery, and which, of course, equally merited his censure? How comes it then, that, in his impartial and unbiassed representation of truth, the evils which he supposes necessarily to result from this scheme in general, should be urged, with such zeal, as reasons for separation, only from our Presbyterian church? Is the very same plan worse when found in the Church of

[merged small][ocr errors]

Scotland than in other societies? Besides, if he was induced by any particular reasons to be peculiarly zealous against this Church, why did he not uniformly guard against misrepresentations, and strictly adhere to that truth for which' he so frequently professes his regard?

66

Of the justice of this stricture, I shall at present mention one instance, taken from a Note, p. 409. " Every one," says he, “who dies in the communion of the Church of England is committed to the grave as a dear brother, of "whose resurrection certain hope is expressed. Although "this is not the form in Scotland, yet the spirit of the con "stitation is the same. All are Christians, and conse.

66

quently all go to heaven." Now, let me ask Mr. Haldane on what ground he rests his assertion, that the consti tution of our church on this point, is the same with that of the Church of England; or that it is one of the articles of its constitution, that all within its pale are Christians, and consequently that all of them go to heaven? Is it not an opinion which she has uniformly and publicly held, that neither in her communion, nor in that of any church upon earth, are all Christians, nor will all go to heaven; for if in the little company of the twelve apostles there was one traitor, will there not be many such in more numerous societies? And does she not in her Confession of Faith, chap. xxix. sect. viii, expressly delineate, in terms which completely con tradict his assertion, the character of those who are worthy communicants, and shall finally be saved?« Although ig “norant and wicked men receive the outward elements in

[ocr errors]

this sacrament," (and here it is plainly supposed that they may receive them in her communion as well as in that of other churches)" yet they receive not the thing signified thereby; but, by their unworthy coming thereunto, are "guilty of the body and blood of the Lord, to their own "damnation. Wherefore all ignorant and ungodly persons, "as they are unfit to enjoy communion with him, so they "are unworthy of the Lord's table, and cannot, without

great sin against Christ, while they remain such, partake "of these holy mysteries, or be admitted thereunto." Since it is affirmed then, in this and other passages, that ignorant and ungodly men may be found in her communion, and that such are utterly unfit to partake of the supper, and conse quently no less unfit for heaven, how could this writer, when conscious of these facts, so confidently assert that it is the

spirit of her constitution," that all who die in her connec"tion go to heaven, and that of their happy resurrection "no doubt can be entertained?"

66

It is remarkable also, that when he professes to be very seriously searching after truth, and to present us with the evidence on both sides of the question, he should amuse himself and the reader with a silly and trifling sneer, while he passes very slightly over any thing like argument. This is particularly the case in p. 166, where he introduces a stale and inapposite witticism of Dr. Hardy, late Ecclesiastical Professor in the University of Edinburgh. "He was in "the use," says he, "of telling his students, that Synod"sermons used formerly to be divided into four heads, prov"ing the divine right, 1. Of Kirk-sessions-2. Of Pres"byteries-3. Of Synods-4. Of General Assemblies."What a pity, said he, that the preachers should have forgot to have proved the divine right of the Committees of Overtures and Bills!!" Now, on this it may be remarked that Independents can no more prove the divine right of their Committees, who inquire into the knowledge and character of any applicant for membership, than Presbyterians can establish, from explicit expressions, the divine right of the Committees of Overtures and Bills. Dr. Hardy's sneer therefore, if at all just, must fall with equal force upon these Independent Committees. Besides, as we have already attempted to shew that Kirk-sessions, Presbyteries, Synods, and General Assemblies, are authorized by scripture, and as Committees of Bills and Overtures consist only of certain members from the former, who are to prepare the business for more prompt decision-as the scripture enjoins also, that all things be done decently and in order, and as this plan appears often to be best fitted for this end, what is there either ridiculous or reprehensible in the adoption of it? Independents themselves, as was now said, appoint Committees, though no such institutions be specified in scripture, and why may not these Presbyterian Committees be likewise nominated, if conducive to the purposes of general utility. It would certainly therefore have been more beneficial, had Mr. Haldane, instead of quoting this very feeble witticism, at least, endeavoured, to answer a few more of the arguments. produced in favour of Presbytery, and to state some more forcible reasons in support of Independency.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

In p. 54, he quotes with applause the words of one who says, that he adores the fulness of scripture; and then adds, "This fulness, respecting every thing connected with religion, will be more evident the better we understand it. "When we come to speak of the order and discipline of the first churches, I hope it will appear that no case can occur in a church of Christ concerning which we have not "sufficient directions in the New Testament. These di"rections do not exclude the exercise of prudence and dis"cretion. Wisdom is necessary to apply the laws of Christ "properly; but to use our wisdom in the application of

[ocr errors]

laws, is widely different from assuming a right to add to, "or to alter them." Now, if it is here insinuated that every practice in a church of Christ must be enjoined by scripture in explicit terms, the assertion is inadmissible, be cause it supposes what is not only utterly impracticable, but contradictory to the acknowledged principles both of Presbyterians and Independents. Is every part either of the order or worship in the churches of the latter expressly prescribed in the sacred volume? Is there any passage, as was now stated, that appoints a committee of the members of the church to examine the knowledge and character of any person who applies for membership? or does it appear that this was done in any of the churches which are mentioned in the New Testament? Is there any passage which authorizes Independents to sing hymns, or paraphrases of scripture, in addition to the version of the Psalms of David? We are indeed exhorted by Paul, Col. iii. 16, as Mr. Haldane observes, p. 303, to sing, in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, but nothing certain can be deduced from this in support of that practice, for as all these names are applicable to the Psalms of David, many of which are hymns and spiritual songs, the apostle, for aught that can be ascertained from this place, might refer only to them*. Omitting other practices which might be mentioned, is there any passage which requires Christians always to stand while they sing? Mr. Haldane indeed says, p. 304, that praise is an imme diate address to God? But so also is prayer; yet, like our Saviour, we may certainly either stand and lift up our eyes

It is not intended by this to deny the propriety of singing such paraphrases, but only to shew that there is no express warrant, for the use of them from scripture.

« ElőzőTovább »