Page images
PDF
EPUB

by their Divine lawgiver. With a national form of civil government, God also established a national form of ecclesiastical government; thus confirming by Divine example the deductions of sound reason. He establishes it with every possible solemnity, and lays down exact rules for its ministrations. He actually incorporates it with the civil government, or state; and the laws of the civil government are made to uphold the regulations of the Church, as the denunciations, instructions, and sanctions of the Church support obedience to the laws. Far from regarding such an establishment, or such support of it, as an invasion of the privileges of individuals, or as an encroachment on the rights of private judgment, Jehovah ordains it as a matter of course, as an establishment, of which the general benefits, nay absolute necessity, are self evident. He establishes without question a national Church; yea, an endowed Church, with positive, legal, and compulsory provisions, for its maintenance and conduct. Its whole apparatus of ordinances, its means of public worship, the calling, consecration, descent, and succession of its Priests; its tithes and cities appointed as the property and inheritance of its ministers; its gifts and offerings are made the subject of positive laws, with rewards for the observance, and penalties for the breach and contempt, of them. This is, we think, the course that common sense and sound policy would point out. And certainly this is the course, which He, in whose sight the fancied wisdom of the wisest is folly, by His own practice stamped as true wisdom, and recorded "for our learning."

There are, indeed, in modern times those, whọ think themselves wiser than God, and presume to condemn, (howsoever sanctioned by His example, as well as our reason and policy) any support of the Church by the State; as though such support ren

dered the whole Church system one of compulsion. They speak of their system as the "Voluntary System"; sometimes they ignorantly or hypocritically taunt the Church, when it calls upon its members for voluntary support, as though it were thereby violating, or at least surrendering, its peculiar principle ; which principle, they would hereby insinuate to be only compulsion. And, on the other hand it is intended thus to deceive the people, by a confusion of ideas, into a notion that only the system of Dissent receives voluntary support, and that it also refuses support from state laws or endowments.

The Church has in all ages not only allowed, but encouraged and required voluntary support. The materials of the tabernacle of the Jews were contributed by the voluntary piety of individuals, and so have most of the Parish Churches in our own Country been built, and endowed, from the same source. Yes! and they have been freely given up for ever, to the national Church; not built on speculation or for profit; nor to be turned to any form of worship, that will pay; or even to a theatre, or any thing else that will bring money. The Dissenting system is, so far, no more voluntary, than the Church system. Its boasted voluntary system is a barefaced imposture. In the regium donum, in the Maynooth grant, in the missionary, and colonial settlements, whenever they can get grants and endowments they appropriate them without scruple. They have no objection to Churchmen being compelled to pay to these and other sums expended to gratify their wishes. The real distinction between the Church and dissent is this, that the Church accepts the aid of the state, openly affirming, that it is both lawful and due; while dissent freely pockets it, exclaiming all the time that it is unlawful. The Church acknowledges, that it can exist and act without the support of the state; but alleges that, with such support, its sphere and means of usefulness may be enlarged; and that to promote this enlarge

ment is not only the interest, but the duty of the state. The voluntary piety and liberality of the Church has provided nobly (though not sufficiently) for the religious necessities of the State; and the State ought gladly to aid in extending the means both of salvation, and of social order and happiness, which are prepared by the Church. The State owes this to God and man-to the just claims of the Church in return for aid and benefits rendered by her to the State-to its own hope of Divine blessing—and to those interests, in which are involved both the present, and future well-being of its subjects. It is a national sin to neglect making a public provision for the maintenance and diffusion of religion; or to sacrifice such a provision to satisfy the visionary scruples of fanatics, the clamours of ignorance, or the envious cavillings of avarice and faction. The Divine Wisdom never has sanctioned as a principle, that religion ought to be committed, either in its means of support, or in its conduct, solely to voluntary efforts, or to unauthorized regulation. The history of the Church is wholly opposed to such a notion. Even in those cases most favourable to the voluntary system, (as we shall hereafter shew) the want of national support arose not from choice, but from necessity. God Himself sets an example of a directly opposite policy. He accepts and invites gifts to aid the national Church -but He also makes laws to uphold, to extend, and to perpetuate its ministrations. There is nothing here like what the advocates of the pretended "voluntary system” demand. While the exercise of the liberality and piety of individuals is encouraged, the positive duty of the State is asserted. At the same time and under the same authority as laws for the maintenance of the civil, are established laws for the maintenance of the ecclesiastical, institutions. The main principles of both Communities must be the same; to both a certain order and established laws are essential. And though the chief end of

one may be temporal and of the other spiritual, the principles of regulation must be the same in substance, and even both indirectly promote the same end—the civil government in some degree promoting spiritual, and the ecclesiastical promoting temporal, improvement and blessings. In both respects the nation has a duty to perform, and interests most important to promote. Neither are to be left to popular caprice or private wilfulness. This is God's mode of proceeding. Political economists, sectarians, projectors, infidels, or miscalled philosophers, may regard this wisdom as exploded, or these views as narrow and bigoted; but we are content to take the Divine Wisdom as our guide and model-and we recommend all to ponder carefully the nature and the end of man's devices, before they prefer them to the policy of the King of kings.

Nay, even the State itself is voluntary in this; acting through its ordinary and legal means of action. And long may it by this will consecrate its labours, and be blessed in its operations; notwithstanding the outrages, with which, under the delusion, or the pretence of conscience, and in defiance of the plain exhortations of Scripture, many have endeavoured to force, against the laws of the nation, their individual wills or fancies.

This modern pretension, of leaving every thing connected with religion at the mercy of private caprice, is contradicted in every part o Church History, as will appear in our progress. Each example, taken by itself may not be regarded as a decisive proof of this—but the reader will bear in mind the continued stream of such evidence that we shall produce the plain marks of one concurrent principle visible in every part of the course of Church history, and clearly shewing the Divine intention and policy; which gave to the Church authority, and indicated that no authority could be assumed by self-constituted bodies and individuals, but only by those, to whom it

was given from the Supreme Source and Arbiter of all power.

In the case of Moses all was settled either directly from God, or by the authority delegated by God to Moses. The power and commission of the latter would not be acknowledged unless he could give proof, how and whence he derived it. On the very first reception of his commission from Jehovah, he mentions the self-evident claim of the people to demand his credentials; and to seek some legitimate source of the authority, on which be requires their submission to his direction. He asks the reasonable question; how is he to satisfy his countryman, that God bath sent him? It would not be enough for him to say, that he had been sent by God. And as he came directly from God, he could not refer to the visible sign of a succession, which, when the authority of the first appointed servant had been established, would have been a reasonable testimony. It might be sufficient, (as in the case of the lawful priesthood afterwards it was known to be) for those succeeding in an order originally of Divine institution, to trace their descent or succession from him, who first proved. his own appointment from God. No other proof of their commission could be requisite. But it was not so with Moses. Jehovah, therefore, condescends immediately to remove this difficulty, which so naturally presented itself to the mind of His servant. He not only promises that He will furnish him with the proper evidence, but also gives immediate proof of His power, as well as of His will, to do so. He instantly performs two miracles. (Exodus, IV., 3-9.)

Thus armed with unquestionable testimony of his commission, this faithful servant of his Lord goes forth to declare, that he came as a deliverer, "called and sent" by the eternal and self existent Godthat "I AM "-the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob-the God of their fathers had sent him.

(To be continued.)

« PreviousContinue »