Quest. Who have a right to preach the gospel and dispense the public ordinances of religion?
Ans. Without some proper furniture, it is absurd to imagine any should be sent of God to the ministerial work. When the ascended Jesus gave to the church apostles, evangelists; pastors and teachers, he gave gifts to men.Who, saith he,goeth at, any time a warfare on his own charges?What is the furniture, the qualifications prerequisite, according to the Holy Scriptures? A blameless conversation, a good report; experience of the self-debasing work of the Spirit of God; compassion to the souls of men; a fixedness in the Christian doctrines; a disposition faithfully to perform his vows; an aptness to teach the ignorant, and convince gainsayers. Knowledge of languages, knowledge of the history and sciences of this world, are useful handmaids to assist us in the study of divine things. To preach from the oracles of God, without capacity to peruse the original, especially if versant in romances and plays, we abhor and detest. This aptness to teach, however, consists not chiefly in any of these, but in a capacity to conceive spiritual things, and with some distinctness to express their conceptions to the edification of others, in that energy and life, whereby one, as affected himself, declares the truths of God, in a simple, serious, bold, and conscience-touching manner. The difference of this, from human eloquence, loud bawling, and theatrical action, is evident. These may touch the passions, and not affect the conscience: they may procure esteem to the preacher, none to Christ. These are the product of natural art: this the distinguished gift of God, without which, in a certain degree, none can have evidence that he was divinely sent to minister the gospel of Christ.
No appearance of furniture, real or pretended, can warrant a man's exercising of the ministry, unless he have a regular call. Thatall may prophesy one by oneis indeed hinted in the sacred records: but there it is evident inspiration treats of what pertains to extraordinary officers in the church; hence there is mentionedthe gift of tongues, extraordinarypsalms, revelations: theallthat might prophesy are, therefore, notallthe members of the church; notwomen, who are forbid to speak in the church; butallthe extraordinary officers called prophets, 1 Cor. xiv. 31. Theallthat were scattered abroad from Jerusalem, andwent about preaching the gospel, Acts viii. 2, could not beallthe believers; for there remained at Jerusalem a church of believers for Saul to make havoc of. It must therefore have beenallthe preachers, besides the apostles. To strengthen this, let it be observed, that the word here renderedpreachingis nowhere in Scripture referred to one out of office: that every one of this dispersion, we afterward hear of, are represented as evangelists, pastors, or teachers, Acts ix. 1, 11, 19, and xiii. 1. Parents and masters convey the same instruction that ministers do; but with a different authority: not as ministers of Christ, or officers in his Church. If other gifts or saintship entitled to preach the gospel, wo would be unto every gifted person, every saint, that did not preach it. If our adored Redeemer refused the work of a civil judge because not humanly vested with such power, will he allow his followers to exercise an office far more important, without any regular call? His oracles distinguish between the mission of persons, and their gifts, sometimes called a receiving of the Holy Ghost, John xx. 21, 23.
To render the point incontestably evident, he demands, how men shall preachexcept they be sent? declares, thatno manrightlytaketh this honor to himself but he that is called of God, as was Aaron. "I sent them not, therefore they shall not profit this people at all, saith the Lord." The characters divinely affixed to ministers, preachers, or heralds, ambassadors, stewards, watchmen, angels, messengers, brightly mark their call and commission to their work. The inspired rules for the qualifications, the election, the ordination of ministers, are divinely charged to be kept tillthe day, the second comingof Jesus Christ. For intermeddling with the sacred business without a regular call, has the Almighty severely punished numbers of men. Witness the destruction of Korah and his company; the rejection of Saul; and the death of Uzza; the leprosy of Uriah; the disaster of the sons of Sceva, &c., Num. xvi.; 1 Sam. xiii.; 1 Chron. xiii.; 2 Chron. xxvi.; Acts xix.
To rush into it, if gifted, or to imagine we are so, at our own hand, introduces the wildest disorder, and the most shocking errors: it did so at Antioch, and the places adjacent, where some falsely pretended a mission from the apostles. This, too, was its effect with the German anabaptists, and with the sectaries of England. Aversion at manual work, pride of abilities, a disturbed imagination, a carnal project to promote self, prompts the man to be preacher. Such ultroneous rushing is inconsistent with the deep impression of the charge, and the care to manifest their mission, everywhere in Scripture obvious in the ministers of Christ. However sound his doctrine, great his abilities, warm his address, where is the promise of God's especial presence, protection, or success, to the ultroneous preacher? Where is his conduct commanded, commended, or unmarked with wrath, exemplified in the sacred words? How then can the preaching, or our hearing, of such, be in faith? How can it be acceptable to God, or profitable to ourselves? Forwhatsoever is not of faith is sin. Falsely this preacher pretends a mission from Christ: wickedly, he usurps an authority over his Church: rebelliously he deserts his own calling, and attempts to make void the office his Saviour has appointed; to frustrate the dispensation of the gospel committed to his faithful ambassadors. For how can they fulfil their ministry, if others take the work out of their hand? How can theycommit it to faithful men, if, not waiting their commission, men rush into it at pleasure?
In vain pleads the ultroneous preacher, that a particular mission to the office of preaching and dispensing the sacraments was only necessary, when the gospel was preached to the heathen. From age to age, it isas new, to childrenas new, to such as never heard it. Nor, when hinting the necessity of a mission, does the inspiring Spirit make any distinction, whether the gospel be newly dispensed or not.What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. In vain he pleads an immediate commission from God: in his infallible statutes, having fixed standing rules of vocation to the ministry, by the mediation of men, God gives us no command, no encouragement, to hope for an immediate call, till the end of time. Absurdly then we allow any to have such a call, till we seethe signs of an apostle wrought in him. It is not sufficient he be sound in his doctrine, exemplarily holy in his life, active in his labors, disinterested in his aims, seeking not his own, but the honor of Christ, not his own carnal profit, but the spiritual welfare of men: every ordinary preacher is, or ought to be so. But, to this claimant of a mission uncommon, working of miracles, or such extraordinary credentials, must demonstrate he hath not run unsent.
In vain the ultroneous preacher boasts of his feelings; his success; his moving his audience; his reforming their lives; as if these demonstrated his call from God. On earth, was ever delusion carried on without pretence to, or without appearances of these? Let them, who know the history of Popery, of Mahometanism, Quakerism, &c., say if they were. Who knows not, that the Pharisaic sect pretended far more strictness, far more devotion, than the family of Christ? Who knows not, that Satan may, and has ofttransformedhimselfinto an angel of light; his ministers into the form of inspired apostles; and his influences, almost indiscernibly similar to those of the Spirit of Jesus Christ? Who knows not, how oft vain-glory, proud and falsely extolling of himself and party, in their number, their spiritual experience and high advances in holiness, mark the distinguished impostor? How oft his sermons are larded with these!
No more tell us, if the sermon be good, you do not regard who preach it. If God has prescribed a method of call, has stated the qualifications of the candidate, has warned against preachers unsent, has oft marked their guilt with visible strokes of his wrath, be ashamed to talk at so arrogant, so careless a rate. Lay it not in the power of the Mesopotamian wizard! Lies it not in the power of a Romish Jesuit, nay, if permitted, of Beelzebub, for a time to preach to you many truths of the gospel, in the warmest strain, the loftiest language? Would you acknowledge thethreefor honored ambassadors of Christ? Tell us not your preacher is wonderfully pious and good: perhaps you have only his own attestation; when better known he may be a drunkard, a swearer, a villain, for you. Suppose he were pious, so was Uzziah; yet it pertained not to him to execute the priest's office. Say not he is wonderfully gifted—speaks likenever man: perhaps so was Korah, a man famous and of renown: such perhaps were the vagabond sons of Sceva. Say not his earnestness in his work marks his heavenly call: no, such were the Satanic exorcists just mentioned; such was Mahomet, the vilest impostor. To abolish the idolatry, and various other abominations of his country, he exposed himself to cruel reproach, to manifold hardship and hazard of life; about fourteen years almost unsuccessful he persevered in this difficult, but delusive attempt. What hunger, what cold, what torment and death have some Jesuitic and other antichristian missionaries undergone, to propagate the most ruining delusions of hell; all under the pretence of earnestness to gain sinners to Christ and his church. The Scripture, however, nowhere saith, how shall they preach except they be gracious? except they be gifted? except they be in earnest? But,how shall they preach except they be sent?
It is expressly enjoined in the word of God that we should earnestly contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. This faith includes all the ordinances, as well as all the doctrines of Christ; and it is no less our duty to contend for the former than for the latter. They have been equally opposed, and there is the same necessity why we should contend for both. Among the ordinances of Christ, the preaching of the gospel holds a principal place, and it hath accordingly, in all ages, met with considerable opposition. Like other ordinances, it hath been often grievously abused, and perverted to the most unworthy purposes. By many who would be esteemed the wise of the world, it is counted unworthy the attention of any but the vulgar: it has been called the foolishness of preaching. The infidels of our time, and some who, by attachment to the Arian and Socinian system, are in a progress to infidelity, cry it down as a human device or piece of craft. This need not, however, occasion any great surprise: the spirit of the world savoreth not the things that be of God, and the enemies of the truth naturally wish to have full scope to propagate their delusions. But it is matter of regret that the preaching of the gospel is, by many who attend upon it, too little regarded as an ordinance of Christ. And some of the professed friends of gospel doctrine so far mistake the nature and institution of preaching, as to engage in it without any other call than their own abundant zeal, and even to plead that all should do so who find themselves qualified. To show that such a sentiment and practice have no warrant from the word of God, the following observations are offered.
I. The preaching of the gospel is an ordinance that Christ hath appointed for the gathering and edification of his Church; and, being a matter of positive institution, all that belongs to the administration of it can be learned only from the rules and approved examples recorded in the New Testament. It is not like those duties that are incumbent upon all, according to the opportunities they have in providence for the performance of them, and which, without any express commandment, could be urged upon Christians by the common principles of moral obligation, such as to teach and admonish one another. And because the obligation to such moral duties depends not upon positive institution, it must equally extend to all, and no person whatever can be free from it. But it is otherwise as to the preaching of the gospel, which is a positive institution of Christ; for it is a duty enjoined upon some only; yea, some are even absolutely prohibited from intermeddling in it, 1 Cor. xiv. 34; 1 Tim. ii. 12: and this could not be the case if it were a matter of common moral obligation. All arguments therefore taken from general principles, to prove the obligation that Christians are under to exert themselves for promoting the cause of religion, are to no purpose here, as they do not prove that the preaching of the gospel is one of those means that all are warranted to use.
II. There is an instituted ministry of the ordinances of Christ unto his Church, by such ministers and office-bearers as he hath appointed. And the preaching of the gospel is frequently referred to as a principal part of that ministry. We read of a ministry of the word, Acts vi. 4; a ministry received of the Lord Jesus to testify the gospel of the grace of God, Acts xx. 24; a ministry of reconciliation, 2 Cor. v. 18; and a ministry into which some are put by the Lord Christ, 1 Tim. i. 12. This ministry is not left open to all the members of the church, in such a manner as that everyone who finds himself disposed, of supposes himself to be qualified, may engage in it as he finds opportunity; but office-bearers are appointed for it by the Lord Christ, Eph. iv. 11,12: "And he gave some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, and for the edifying of the body of Christ." Some of these officers were extraordinary and temporary; they had an extraordinary call, and were endued with miraculous powers, which are now ceased: but the work of the ministry, and particularly the preaching of the gospel, is to continue to the end of the world, as appears from the promise given for the encouragement of those that are employed in it, Matt, xxviii. 20. There are accordingly ordinary officers, pastors, and teachers, appointed for the continued exercise of that ministry.
To these instituted office-bearers is this ministry exclusively committed, Mark xvi., Matt, xxviii. The gospel of Christ, in respect of the public ministry thereof by preaching, is frequently mentioned as a special and peculiartrustcommitted unto them, 2 Cor. v. 18-20; 1 Tim. i. 11, and vi. 20. In all the passages of Scripture where we have any mention of a charge or commission to preach the gospel, it would be easy to show that it is directed only to persons in office; and a variety of names are given to those that are employed in a ministry of the word, all of which are expressive of their peculiar office. They are called ministers, 1 Cor. iii. 6; officers and stewards, 1 Cor. iv. 1; ambassadors for Christ, 2 Cor. v. 20; heralds (so the word preacher signifies) and teachers, 2 Tim. i. 11.
There is no room to plead here, that though a constant ministry of the word, in a pastoral charge, belongs only to persons in office, yet all may occasionally exercise their gifts in preaching the gospel. The word of God acknowledges no such distinction as that between a constant and an occasional ministry of the gospel. It enjoins upon those who are called to the work of the ministry, not an occasional, but a constant exercise of that ministry; so that whether they be paid pastors, or itinerant preachers, they are not to entangle themselves with the affairs of this life, but must be devoted wholly to the work of the gospel, 1 Tim. iv. 13-16; 2 Tim. ii. 4, and iv. 2. And because they must thus devote their time and attention to this work, the word of God also enjoins that a maintenance be given them by those to whom they exercise their ministry, 1 Cor. ix. 7-14; Gal. vi. 6; 1 Tim. v. 17. This is a farther evidence that the ministry of the word is restricted to persons in office, and that they are to devote their time and attention to it, not entangling themselves in the prosecution of a secular business.
III. Those only can be warrantably employed in a ministry of the ordinances of Christ, and particularly in preaching the gospel, who are thereunto called by him, and admitted according to the rule laid down in the word. And none can be warrantably acknowledged and received as office-bearers, to whom that ministry is committed without some proper evidence of their being called and sent by Christ. "How shall they preach except they be sent?" Rom. x. 15. How, without this, can they do it warrantably or profitably? And, without some evidence of this, what ground have we to expect a blessing in waiting upon their ministry? It is not a mere providential sending that is here meant, as if there were no more necessity than abilities, and an opportunity of exercising them; for so the ministers of Satan may be sent, and a lying spirit was thus sent among the prophets of Ahab. But this sending means the call of Christ, intimated in such a way as to warrant the preacher, and with such evidence as may satisfy the conscience of the hearers, in receiving his ministry as the ordinance of Christ. A zeal for God, a strong desire of being useful to souls, and even a persuasion of having the call of Christ, cannot be sufficient warrant to the preacher; far less can the hearers, in receiving him, proceed upon grounds so uncertain.
The apostles, and some other ministers in the beginning of the Christian dispensation, had an extraordinary call and immediate mission by Christ, and this was evidenced to all by the miraculous powers bestowed on them. These powers are now ceased, and it is vain to plead any such immediate call. The ordinary call of Christ to the work of the ministry is intimated by or through the church, judging thereof by the rules laid down in the word; and according to these rules, they that are found qualified and called, are to be admitted to the ministry by them who are already invested with it. The charge is given to the office-bearers of the church, to commit that ministry which they have received "to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also," 2 Tim. ii. 2; Tit. i. 5. And for their direction in this matter, the qualifications necessary, both as to character and abilities, are laid down in the Word, particularly in 1 Tim. iii.; of these qualifications they are required to make an impartial and deliberate examination, so as tolay hands suddenly on no man, 1 Tim. iv. 22, but to admit to the office of the ministry those only, who, by this trial, they have reason to judge are called and sent by Christ.
It is vain to distinguish here between a pastor of a congregation and an itinerant preacher; as if the call of the church was necessary only to the former and not to the latter. If by the call of the church is meant only the choice and call of the people, it is admitted, that this is only necessary to fix a pastoral relation to that part of the flock; but a regular admission to the work of the ministry, by the office-bearers of the church, is equally necessary in the case of all that are employed in it, whether they have a fixed charge or not. Timothy, who had no fixed charge, and though pointed out by prophecy as designed for the ministry, was ordained and admitted to it by the presbytery. And though Paul and Barnabas had an extraordinary call, yet the prophets and teachers of the church at Antioch are directed to separate and send them out, according to the call of the Holy Ghost, to preach the gospel unto the Gentiles, Acts xiii. A principal design of this seems to have been, to set an example of procedure to the church in after times.
It appears, then, that the preaching of the gospel is an ordinance or institution of Christ—that the ministry of that and other ordinances belongs only to those office-bearers whom he hath appointed and commissioned for that end—and that in ordinary cases, none can be acknowledged as sent by him, but such as are admitted to the ministry in the way above mentioned. These observations would have admitted a much larger illustration; but as they are, they may assist an attentive reader to consult his Bible for further satisfaction. It is necessary, however, to take some notice of the arguments urged in support of the opposite sentiment, and of the attempt to prove that every man who is qualified has a right to preach the gospel, without any regular call and admission by the church. And,
1st. It is pretended that this is enjoined upon all that are qualified for it, because Christians are called to teach, exhort, and admonish one another. But even supposing that this were to be understood of preaching, or a public ministry of the word, such directions, though expressed generally, would not apply to all, but to those only who are called to the ministry, according to the limitation and restriction that is laid down in other places of Scripture. There is, however, no necessity of understanding these directions in that sense. The Scripture evidently distinguishes the preaching of the gospel, or that public teaching which belongs to an instituted ministry, from that private teaching which is competent to, and obligatory on, all Christians by the law of love; the latter is enjoined upon some to whom the former is absolutely prohibited: compare 1 Tim. ii. 12, with Tit. ii. 3, 4. Christians in a private station have abundant opportunity, and ordinarily much more than they improve, to exercise their talents in teaching their families, friends, and neighbors, without interfering with that public ministry of the word which is committed to those who are especially called thereto.
2d. Some passages of Scripture are urged, wherein it is supposed all Christians are enjoined to exercise their qualifications in public teaching or preaching: particularly Rom. xii. 6-8; 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11. These Scriptures, on the contrary, restrict the public ministry of the word to those invested with an office, and it is that ministry which belongs to their office that is spoken of. In Rom. xii. persons in office are exhorted to apply themselves faithfully and diligently to that ministry to which they are called, whether it be a ministry of the word, and of spiritual things, or a ministry of temporal things, and that without envying others who have a different office and ministry. And, to enforce this exhortation, the apostle compares the Church to the natural body, ver. 4, in which all members have not the same office, but one member is appointed to one office, and another member to a different office: and so it is in the Church of Christ, ver. 5. The same allusion is applied more largely, 1 Cor. xii. 27, 28, to illustrate this very point. The other passage, 1 Pet. iv. 10, 11, is of the very same import: those in office are called to exercise their ministry faithfully, whether it be in spiritual or temporal things, and are addressed as stewards, ver. 10; "As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another as good stewards of the manifold grace of God." Some are led to mistake the meaning of these Scriptures, by misunderstanding the wordgift, as if it meant only talents or qualifications; whereas, in these and many other passages, it means a certain office and ministry to which one is appointed. Eph. iv. 8, 11: He gave gifts unto men; he gave some apostles, some prophets, &c. 1 Tim. iv. 14: "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Timothy was ordained to the office of the ministry in consequence of special direction of the spirit of prophecy. See 1 Tim. i. 18.
3d. It is also supposed and much insisted on by some, that both precept and example for the preaching of the gospel, by what they call every gifted brother, may be found in 1 Cor. xiv. 31, which is particularly urged in support of their opinion: "For ye mayallprophesy, one by one, thatallmay learn, andallmay be comforted." But universal terms, such as are here used, are limited or extended according to the subject; and that even in the same verse, as in chap. xv. 22. In like manner here, theallthat may prophesy are not the sameallthat may learn and be comforted. The latter may extend to all the members of the church, and even to strangers who might come into their assemblies; the former could apply only to a few. Some members of the church are expressly prohibited from public teaching, ver. 34. Besides, all were not prophets, chap. xii. 29, and therefore all could neither prophesy, nor could warrantably attempt it. The state of matters referred to in that chapter seems to have been this: The church at Corinth was numerous, and had many ministers, of whom the most, if not all, were endowed with some miraculous power, such as that of prophecy, of speaking strange languages, and the like; they were proud of these gifts, and forward to show them, ver. 26, which occasioned disorder in their assemblies for worship; those that had the gift of tongues prevented the prophets, and did not modestly give place to one another. These disorders the apostle reproves, and exhorts them to exercise their gifts in a more regular and decent manner, for the edification of the church. This being the case, it is strange to plead this passage as a warrant for the preaching of the gospel by those who are in no office, and who neither have any miraculous power to prove their immediate call by Christ to the work of the ministry, nor are admitted thereto by the call of the church.
4th. Further, we are referred to Acts viii. 1-4, for an example of the preaching of the gospel by persons not in office. We are told, ver. 1, that "there was a great persecution against the church which was at Jerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad—except the apostles." And it is said, ver. 4, "they, that were scattered abroad, went everywherepreaching the word." From this it is argued, thatthe Church in generalproclaimed the gospel of the Lord Jesus. But why mention the Church in general, when the method of reasoning used would equally prove that the Church universally did so; and the absurdity of such reasoning must be evident upon a very little consideration of the subject. How absurd to suppose thatallmentioned in ver. 1, refers to and comprehends all the members of that church, and that all the thousands and ten thousands belonging to it were all scattered abroad, or that they all, men, women, and children, wenteverywhere preachingthe word! Are we not told, ver. 3, that some of them, probably many of them, both men and women, were haled and committed to prison? Or, had all the members of the church been driven from Jerusalem, how were the apostles to be employed? Did they only tarry to gather a new church? When it is said, ver. 3, that Saul entered into every house, how absurd would it be to suppose that it is meant every house in Jerusalem, or even every house in which there was a Christian! The expression, also,everywhere, ver. 4, must be limited. It would therefore be unreasonable to object against a proper limitation of the wordall, ver. 1. And about the just limitation of it we need be at no loss. They were all scattered abroad—except the apostles. What reason can there be for mentioning only the apostles as excepted, while there were so many other members of that church still remaining at Jerusalem, but this, that the persons referred to were of the same description in general with the apostles, persons in office, ministers of the church? Others might also be scattered, but these are here spoken of; and Philip, an evangelist, and endowed with miraculous powers, is mentioned as one of them.
5th. As to the case of Apollos, which some urge as affording irresistible evidence to prove that all who are qualified may preach the gospel, a few words may suffice. He spoke boldly in the synagogue, the practice of which is no rule to the Christian Church. He was not yet acquainted with some important doctrines of the New Testament Church, much less could he be acquainted with the ordinances of it. Two intelligent Christians instructed him more perfectly in the way of God. He was recommended by the brethren to the church at Corinth, and there he labored successfully in the work of the ministry. And what is all this to the purpose for which his example is urged? We have no information, indeed, of what time, nor in what manner, he was called and admitted to the work of the ministry, more than we have about many others mentioned in Scripture: but he is expressly called a minister, and is, once and again, classed with the chiefest of the apostles, 1 Cor. i. 12, iii. 5, 22.
Lest these and the like arguments should be found insufficient, recourse is had by some to the plea of pure motives and good designs, with a kind of appeal to the judgment of the great day, and profession of trust, that they are such as will not then be condemned. It is a great satisfaction to have the testimony of conscience to the purity of motives in every part of conduct that is warranted by the word of God, and also to know that the judgment of the saints at the great day will be a judgment of mercy. But every part of the truth of Christ will be determined at that day in exact conformity to what is now declared in the word. And the purest motives and most noble designs are no rule of conduct to any; much less can they give satisfaction to others.
These observations concerning the institution of a gospel ministry, the writer is persuaded, are agreeable to the word of God: if they be not, it would be idle to appeal to his motives in support of them. But he can freely say that they are here offered to the public, not from a desire of controversy, but from a conviction, that at this time it is necessary, on different accounts, to call people's attention to the mind and will of Christ, as revealed in the word concerning this subject. Let not such of the friends of religion, as may be of different sentiments from what are here expressed, be offended at an attempt, in the spirit of meekness, to remove their mistakes: nor let them impute it to envy, pride, or selfish principles. In a perfect consistency with all that he hath advanced, the writer can say, "Would to God that all the Lord's people were prophets."
It is a necessary consequence of what is advanced on this subject, that all should be careful that the ministry of the ordinances they attend upon be such as is warranted in the word. If none can warrantably preach except they be sent, we cannot warrantably attend on the ministry of any but those who we have reason to believe have Christ's call and mission. And if it be an objection against a pastor of a congregation, that he is imposed upon the flock without their choice, it is no less an objection against a preacher, if he be not admitted to the ministry of the word by those whose office it is to examine his qualifications, and judge of his call. It must, however, be acknowledged, that to have gone through the ordinary forms of admission is no sufficient evidence of one's having the call of Christ. The outward forms may be observed, while the spirit and design of them is neglected, and the rule of the word transgressed. Nor can any be acknowledged as sent by Christ, unless their character correspond with that pointed out and required in the word, and unless the doctrine they teach be the gospel of Christ. None can be supposed to have a mission from Christ, who do not bring his message, 2 John ver. 10: "If there come any unto you and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed." But when we are favored with the pure gospel, and an administration of it agreeable to the word, let us wait upon it diligently; regarding the preaching of the gospel as an ordinance of Christ, and depending on his promised blessing to make it effectual: for when "the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God, by the foolishness of preaching, to save them that believe," 1 Cor. i. 21.
Both parts of this number are recommended to the serious consideration of what are calledlay-preachers, and of such as favor that scheme. And let all intruders upon the office of the holy ministry, with their deluded votaries, beware lest it should be said to them,Who hath required this at your hands?
Quest. Have not the people a divine right to choose their own pastors and other church officers?
Ans. In those divinely qualified for the ministry, there are diversities of gifts, though but one spirit. As the same food, though abundantly wholesome and nourishing, is not equally suited to the taste, appetite, and constitutions of different persons and nations; so the same gifts in a candidate for the gospel ministry are not equally adapted to every person and place. To secure edification there must therefore be a choice of the gifts most suitable. And who fitter to make it than those who are to enjoy the use thereof, if their senses be exercised to discern good and evil? Can any man pretend to know better what gifts suit the case of my soul than I do myself?
Those ignorant of the fundamental truths of Christianity; those scandalous, profane deniers of the divine original of the Old and New Testaments, or of any truth therein plainly revealed; those neglecters of the public, private, and secret worship of God; those given to cursing, swearing, Sabbath profanation, drunkenness, whoredom, or other scandalous courses, are destitute of capacity and right to choose a gospel minister. The ignorant are utterly incapable to judge of either the preacher's matter or method. The openly wicked have their hatred of Christ, and a faithful minister, marked in their forehead; neither are such qualified to be visible members of the Christian Church. To admit them therefore to choose a Christian pastor would be a method, introducing ruin and we; a method equally absurd as for unfreemen to choose the magistrates of a burgh: rather, equally absurd as if ignorant babes, and our enemies the French, should be sustained electors of our members of parliament and privy council.
Whether visible believers, adults, and having a life and conversation becoming the gospel, have a right from God to choose their pastors and other church officers, must now be examined.
All along from the Reformation it has been the avowed principle of Scotch Presbyterians, that they have a divine warrant to choose their own pastors and other ecclesiastic officers. The first book of discipline, published A.D. 1560, declares the lawful calling of the ministry to consist in the election of the people, the examination of the ministry, and administration by both, and that no pastor should be intruded on any particular kirk without their consent. Their second book of discipline declares that the people's liberty of choosing church officers continued till the Church was corrupted by antichrist: that patronage flowed from the Pope's canon law, and is inconsistent with the order prescribed in God's word. From various documents the assembly of 1736 declared it obvious, that from the Reformation it had been the fixed principle of this church that no minister ought to be intruded into any church contrary to the will of the congregation. They seriously recommended a due regard hereunto in planting the vacancies, as judicatories would study the glory of God, the honor of God, and the edification of men. It is the law of heaven, however, the book of the Lord, that here and everywhere we intend to build our faith upon.
That of Matthias is the first instance of an election of an officer in the Christian Church. No doubt, then, it is marked in the sacred history as a pattern for the ages to come. Being an officer extraordinary, his call was in part immediately divine, by the determination of the lot. Being a church officer, he was chosen by the Church as far as consistent with his extraordinary office. The disciples about Jerusalem (120) were gathered together. Peter represented the necessity of filling up Judas's place in the apostolate with one who could be a meet witness of Jesus' doctrines, miracles, death, and resurrection. The one hundred and twenty disciples chose, appointed, or presented to whom they judged proper for that work. The office being extraordinary, and perhaps the votes equal, the decision which of these two was referred to the divine determination of the lot. After prayer for a perfectone, it fell upon Matthias, and he was, by suffrages, or votes, added to the number of the apostles.
Had the next election of a church officer entirely excluded the Christian people, one had been tempted to suspect that Matthias's extraordinary case was never designed for a pattern. Instead hereof, the choice being of an ordinary officer, is entirely deposited in their hands. Never were men better qualified for such an election than the inspired, the spirit-discerning apostles; yet when restrained by laborious attendance to their principal work, the ministry of the word and of prayer, from sufficient leisure to distribute their multiplied alms to their now numerous poor, and directed by the Holy Ghost, they ordered the Christian peopleto look out, choose seven of their number,men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom, who might be ordained to the office of deacons. Judging of the mentioned qualifications, the Christian multitude, entirely of their own accord, chose Stephen, Philip, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas. These they presented to the apostles, who immediately ordained them by prayer, and imposition of hands, Acts vi. 1-6. Here, by inspired appointment, the people had the whole power of electing their deacons. If they have the power of electing one ordinary officer, why not of all? If in the case of deacons they can judge of the qualifications ofhonest report, full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom, what hinders them to judge of these and the like of ministers? If Jesus and his apostles argued from the less to the greater, Matt. vi. 30,1 Cor. ix. 10, who can forbid us to argue so? If it be right and equal for the Christian people to choose deacons who take care of their sacred alms, is it not much more right and equal that they have the choice of their pastors, who take the oversight of their souls?
A third instance of the Christian people electing their ecclesiastical officers, relates to the joint travels of Paul and Barnabas at Lystra and places around, Acts xiv. 23. These two divinely directed messengers of Christ, having ordained (or, as properly translated from the Greek,through suffrages or votes constituted) them elders(presbyters)in every city, and prayed with fasting, commended them to the Lord. Here it is plainly marked that these elders,presbyters, were chosen bysuffrages (votes)in order to ordination. This the Greek word in our version, by the fraud of the English bishops renderedhad ordained, plainly imports. The root of this word is borrowed from the custom of giving votes at Athens and elsewhere in Greece, by lifting up of the hand. Wherever it is used in the Greek Testament, and for anything we know in every Greek author, not posterior to Luke, the writer of the Acts, it constantly impliesto give vote or suffrage. In the text before us it agrees with Paul and Barnabas; because they presided in the choice, and finished the design of it by ordination. Here, moreover, it is evident that the persons chosen for elders(presbyters)were set apart to their office, not by a hurried prayer and riotous banquet, butby prayer and fasting:and this manner of choice and ordination was used in every church. The very performance of the work of ordination in public conjunction with the church tacitly infers their consent.
Christ's commanding his peopleto try the spirits, to try false prophets, and to flee from them, 1 John iv. 1, 2, necessarily imports a right to choose the worthy, and reject the vile; to choose what suits our edification, and to reject what doth not; for, if we must receive whoever is imposed, there is no occasion for trial, we can have no other. The privilege of trial here allowed to his people by Christ plainly supposes their having some ability for it; and, by a diligent perusal of his word, and consulting his ministers, they may become more capable. Has our adored Redeemer thus intrusted to his adult members the election of their pastors? at what peril or guilt do any ministers or laics concur to bereave them thereof, thrusting men into the evangelic office by another way; thus constituting them spiritualthievesandrobbers? Instead of beinggentleto church members, as anurse cherisheth her children; instead ofcondescending to men of low degree, anddoing all things to the glory of Godand theedification of souls, is not this to set at naught their brethren; exercise lordly dominion over the members of Christ; and rule them with rigor?
In the oracles of God, where is the hint, that the choice of pastors for the Christian people is lodged in any but themselves?—Since men apostolic and inspired put the choice from themselves to the Christian people; who can believe that it belongs to the clergy? Acts i. and vi. When Christ avershis kingdom is not of this world; when he threatens judgment without mercy to such as in his worshipping assemblies more readily give a seat to the rich, with his gold ring and gay clothing, than to the poor; can it be imagined that he has intrusted the choice of his ambassadors to men, for their greatness?
There is indeed a haughty objection often stated against the people's choice: Shall a cottager, poor and unlearned, who pays not one farthing of the stipend, and at next term will perhaps remove from the congregation, have an equal choice of a minister with his master, a gentleman, a nobleman, of liberal education, of distinguished abilities, who is head of a large family, has a fixed property and residence in the parish, and furnishes almost the whole benefice? Will you fly in the face of our civil law? Will you plead for the method of choosing church officers, which already has produced so much strife, bloody squabbling, or riot? If Christ'skingdom, as himself when dying attested,is not of this world, how can outward learning, riches, settled abode, or any worldly thing, constitute one a member thereof? These do not make one a better Christian. No.Not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are calledwith a holy calling. How ordinarily do rich men oppress the saints, draw them before judgment-seats, and blaspheme Jesus' worthy name, by which they are called! If worldly privileges and endowments cannot make one a subject of the Mediator's spiritual kingdom, how can they entitle any to, or raise him above his brethren in, the privileges thereof? If by the Son of God the poor cottager has been made free indeed; has been taught to profit; is rich in faith; is a king and priest unto God; and hath received a kingdom that cannot be moved; in the view of the Omniscient and his angels, and every man wise to salvation, how little is he inferior to his rich, perhaps his graceless, master? Your rich man has college education, understands philosophy, history, law, agriculture; but will that infer that he understands his Bible, understands Christian principles, spiritual experiences, and what spiritual gifts best correspond therewith, better than his cottager, who daily searches the Scriptures, and has heard and learned of the Father? How oft are the great things of God hid from the wise and prudent, and revealed unto babes! Christ crucified was to the learned Greeks foolishness; but to the poorest believer the power of God and the wisdom of God. "The natural man," however learned, "receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, neither can he know them; for they are spiritually discerned," 1 Cor. ii. 14. How easy to find the herdman, or the silly woman, who will endure a trial on Christian principles to far better purpose than many of your rich, your great men!—Your great man is the head of a numerous family, and has great influence in the corner. That, no doubt, is a strong motive for him, if he is a Christian, to be exceeding wary in his choice: if he is so, no doubt his Christian judgment, as far as is consistent with spiritual liberty, is to have its own weight. But while Christ'skingdom is not of this world; while in him there isneither male nor female, bond nor free; headship over a family can found no claim to a spiritual privilege. Thousands of heads of families are plainlyaliens from the commonwealth of Israel, without God, and without hope in the world. Many are heads of families who, by neglect of the daily worship of God, of religious instruction, and by other unchristian conduct, ruin the same.
Boast not of the great man's settled abode, boast not of to-morrow, for thou knowest not what a day may bring forth; how suddenly may disaster and death pluck him up by the roots! The rich fathers, where are they? Do the nobles live forever? Shall their dwelling continue to all generations? How often, in a few years, the rich inheritance changes its master, while the race of the poor hovers about the same spot for many generations! What if the cottager attend more to gospel ministrations, in one year, than the rich in forty! what if, removing at next term, he carry his beloved pastor in his heart, and by effectual fervent prayers, availing much, by multiplied groanings that cannot be uttered, he bring manifold blessings on the parish and ministry which he leaves; while your rich man, if wicked, if of the too common stamp, continues in it, for no better purpose than to distress the faithful pastor, corrupt the people, bring down a curse, and cumber the ground! The great man bears the load of the stipend no more than the poorest cottager. He purchased his estate with this burden upon it, and on that account had its price proportionally abated. Suppose it were otherwise, might not a poor widow'stwo mitesbe more in Jesus' account than all he gives? Will we, with the Samaritan sorcerer, indulge the thought that thegifts of God, the spiritual privileges of his Church,are to be purchased with money? For money to erect the church or defray the benefice we must not, with the infamous traitor, betray the Son of God in his church—his ordinance, his ministry, into the hands of sinners to be crucified.
It is in vain to mention the civil law: the very worst statute thereof, relative to the point in hand, indirectly supposes the consent of the congregation. It leaves to the presbytery the full power to judge whether the presentee is fit for that charge. If the congregation generally oppose, with what candor do the presbytery, in Jesus' name, determine that he is fit? The last statute relative hereto declared the presentation void, unless accepted. Nor is there in being any, but thelaw of sin and deathwithin them, the law of itch after worldly gain, that obliges candidates to accept. How unmanly, how disingenuous, to blame the civil law with the present course of intrusions!—Since the resurrection of Christ, we think we may almost defy any to produce an instance of bloody squabbling, or like outrageous contention, in the choice of a pastor, where none but the visible members of Christ's mystical body, adult, and blameless in their lives, were admitted to act in the choice. But if at any called popular elections, the power was sinfully betrayed into the hands of such baptized persons, as in ignorance and loose practice equalled, if not transcended,heathen men and publicans; into the hand of those who, to please a superior, to obtain a paltry bribe, or a flagon of wine, were readily determined in their vote for a minister; let the prostitutes of Jesus' ordinance answer for the unhappy consequences of their conduct. If they so enormously broke through the hedge of the divine law, no wonder a serpent bit them. But who has forgot what angry contentions, what necessity of a military guard at ordinations, the lodging of the power of elections in patrons or heritors,as such, has of late occasioned?
To deprive the Christian people of their privilege in choosing their pastor, and give it to others upon worldly accounts, is the grossest absurdity. It overturns the nature of Christ's spiritual kingdom, founding a claim to her privileges on worldly character and property. It gives those blessed lips the lie, which said,"My kingdom is not of this world."It counteracts the nature of the church, as a voluntary society; thrusting men into a momentous relation to her, without, nay contrary to, her consent. It settles the ministerial office upon a very rotten foundation: for how hard is it to believe the man is a minister of a Christian congregation, who never consented to his being such! to believe he has a pastoral mission from Christ, for whom providence would never open a regular door of entrance to the office; but he was obliged to be thrust in by the window,as a thief and a robber! If he comes unsent, how can I expect edification by his ministry, when God has declared,such shall not profit his people at all? It implies the most unnatural cruelty. If the law of nature allow me the choice of my physician, my servant, my guide, my master, how absurd to deny me the choice of a physician, a servant, a guide, to my soul; and to give it to another, merely because he has some more money, has a certainpiece of ground, which I have not! How do these qualify him, or entitle him to provide, what the eternal salvation of my soul is so nearly connected with, better than myself, if taught of God?
By patronage how oft the honor of Christ and the souls of men are betrayed into the hands of their declared enemies! If the patron is unholy, profane, how readily the candidate he prefers is too like himself! If a candidate be faithful, be holy, how readily, like Ahab in the case of Micaiah, he hates, he sends not for him! The complaisant chaplain, who almost never disturbed the family with the worship of God; who along with the children or others took off his cheerful glass; sung his wanton song; attended the licentious ball, or play-house; connived at, or swore a profane oath; took a hand at cards; or ridiculed the mysteries, the experiences, the circumspect professor of the Christian faith, is almost certain to have the presentation: perhaps he covenanted for it as part of his wages. For what simony, sacrilege, and deceitful perjury, with respect to ordination vows, patronage opens a door, he that runs may read. Shocked with the view, let us forbear!
N.B. The London ministers in the preceding treatise have a large note respecting the election of ministers, which does not fully invest this right in the people. The editor, therefore, omitted that note altogether, and has inserted this number, extracted from Brown's Letters, in the place of it, as better adapted to the nature of the gospel church, and to that liberty wherewith Christ has made his people free.