Page images
PDF
EPUB

that is, a member of his visible body. "The Child of God"—that is, adopted into God's visible family" and an inheritor of the kingdom of Heaven," that is, by covenant relation made an inheritor of the promises. The same language we find in the Heidleburgh Catechism 27th Lord's day-In Hellenbrook's Catechism p. 55, and in the Dutch Church Confession of Faith, article 34.

In short, there can be no question, but that all the standards of the Presbyterian, as well as other Churches-that all our best and most learned authors support the position, that baptism is the only door of admission into the visible Church of Christ.

I have dwelt the longer upon this point Sir, because I wished to give my Rev. Brother, distinct ideas of the views I entertain on the subject, and because I wished the question to be settled on the permanent grounds upon which the gospel has placed it.

Chairman. Are there any other gentlemen who have any remarks to make?

Doc. Bishop.-I have only to say Sir, that I have followed the Rev. Gentleman in his speech with equal pleasure and interest. Truly sad has been the havoc which has been made of the visible institutions of Christ by some modern writers,

and I do think the evil required an antidote. None certainly can be more effectual, than an appeal to Christ, his apostles, and the Christian Church. This, I am happy to observe, has been done in a very plain and logical manner by the gentleman who last spoke.

The question being now called for was put, when it was unanimously determined, that Water baptism constitutes the only membership in the visible Church of Christ.

ADJOURNED.

FOURTH DAY.

MET ACCORDING TO ADJOURNMENT.

Chairman. Gentlemen, we have progressed in the business before us to the final question, viz. "What is the precise nature of the constitution of the visible Church of Christ. ?"

The assembly are now prepared to hear this interesting question discussed, and I do hope it may be settled with that clearness and precision, which have marked the decision of those already disposed of.

Presbyter Primus. Sir, my present impressions are, that this question is so decidedly settled in

E

the scriptures, that the business of this convention, may now soon be brought to a close. It is pretty generally granted, and has already been decided by this assembly, that the constitution of the Church of Christ is of divine authority and appointment. This constitution recognizes a priesthood, possessing powers to perpetuate the Church by ordination, and to govern the Christian community. It is the precise nature of this priesthood, ordained by Christ and perpetuated by succession, from him to the present day, that we are to enquire into. The question is not, whether there is such a priesthood, or whether it has been continued by succession. These questions are already settled. The question is, what is the regimen of this priesthood? Are there grades of power in it, or does it consist of one order? The latter, I presume, we shall find to be the true and apostolic constitution of the Christian ministry.

It is well known, that the Church of Rome, together with some others, sets up for an imparity in the ministry; but it must be recollected, that that church has sought out many new inventions. The question under consideration should be tried not by her example, nor by the example of any

other community of people, but by the only true standards, the scriptures, and antiquity. And what can be plainer sir, than parity in the ministry-than the presbyterian government of the Church, as held forth in the bible? There was indisputably an equality, as it respects authority, among the apostles. They ever acted in union, and never in any one instance claimed a superiority, one over the other. Those whom they ordained were brethren were their equals. Timothy was in nothing below the apostle St. Paul, and he was ordained, not by a bishop, but" with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery," 1 Tim. iv. 14. His ordination was presbyterian in every sense of the word. If none but bishops might ordain, how came it to pass that the holy apostle St. Paul, encouraged this prominent instance of ordination by presbyters Presbyters are sometimes called bishops in the New Testa ment; and from this community of names it has been plead, that there was an higher order of church officers. But as bishops are sometimes called presbyters, as well as presbyters bishops, we may as well infer presbyterian government, as others episcopal-so that this community of names amounts to nothing. But the scriptures are not

alone upon this subject. The voice of antiquity supports the position which we have taken, and teaches us that there was no imparity in the ministry for at least 300 years from the days of our blessed Saviour. It is needless for me at present to adduce authorities-but they are at hand if necessity requires them.

To me Sir, this question appears so plain, that I deem it needless to enlarge upon it at present→ I will only state what seems very evidently, to me, to be the true ministry and government of the Christian Church. It is this-In the apostolic age, every regularly organized congregation of christians were furnished with three classes of church officers; only one of these classes however, purely priestly, or empowered to administer the word and sacraments. The first of these classes consists of the bishops, or presbyters, or pastors; the second, of the ruling elders; and the third, of the deacons.

The bench of elders, with the pastor or bishop, as their standing moderator or president, constitutes the spiritual court, for directing all affairs purely ecclesiastical, in the congregation. These bishops of the several congregations, with a delegation from the eldership of each church, are to

« PreviousContinue »