It is further the duty of the church, so soon as any of her ministers are convicted of leading their churches off from the true doctrines of christianity, and of teaching things contrary to sound doctrine (1 Tim. 5: 19), earnestly to warn them (2 Tim. 2: 24 &c.) against every such deviation. 1 Tim. 1: 3, napayγειλης τισι μη έτεροδιδασκαλειν that you might charge some not to teach other (false) doctrines; and finally, if they will not be reclaimed by mild and friendly representations, to depose them from the ministry. For, however proper it is for a church to tolerate persons who entertain opinions differing from their own; the case is materially changed with regard to those who are not contented to enjoy their opinions in private, or to converse about them in a modest manner as private individuals; but who, under the cloak of an authorized public ministry, endeavour to impose upon their hearers, contrary to their will, or even without their detecting it, doctrines different from those which their church professes, and which they expected to be taught. The apostle says, Gal. 5: 12, οφελον αποκόψονται οἱ αναστατούντες ύμας (ταρασ σοντες—θελοντες μεταστρέψαι το ευαγγελιον του θεου ν. 9. 1: 7.)

66

may those who disturb you by endeavouring to obtrude circumcision upon you, be cut off from your church, (and be treated like those, spoken of Deut. 23: 1, who were not permitted to come into the congregation of the Lord.")1 And Eph. 4: 14, be no more children, tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine by the sleight and cunning craftiness of men.

If heterodox ministers are permitted to retain their opinions, and reject the received doctrines; why should not a church also enjoy their opinion, and rid themselves of such teachers? I admit it possible that those who depart from the public standard, may have the more correct opinions, that though they are

1 Dissert. De sensu vocis dixαcos, § xIx. in fine. Rom. 16: 17.

considered to be in error, truth may be on their side (2 Cor. 6: 8)—I admit, that for this very reason, it is the duty of those to whom the care of the church is committed, and who are qualified for the investigation, impartially to weigh the truth and importance of the disputed doctrine; and if it be found true, to incorporate it with the acknowledged standard; or if it seem doubtful which of the opposite opinions is more correct, to leave the adoption of either, optional with the ministers of the church. But as it is equally possible that a minister, who believes his opinions more correct than the doctrines of the acknowledged standard, and who has had address enough to succeed in raising his character and extending his influence among the people, may nevertheless entertain doctrines truly pernicious to a christian church (1 Cor. 3: 17 &c); it does not, on that account, become the duty of those who have the charge of the church, to view such a person as a new and great light risen amongst them, because he considers himself as such. Nor, if they believe his doctrines dangerous, are they bound to suffer the members of their church to be tainted by them, and led astray into dangerous errors. If the judges have been influenced by passion, or have decided with precipitancy, God will call them to account for the negligence and criminality of their conduct; and to this God ought those who suffer unjustly, with christian confidence, to commit their cause. But no society could retain any rights if we should take from them every privilege, which passion and prejudice may sometimes abuse to the detriment of individuals. Hence, a christian society has a right to reject a minister, whose ministrations they believe to be detrimental to the primary objects of the association: although their judgment may be erroneous, and his doctrines more agreeable to the Bible, which they themselves desire (§ 106) to follow, than their own opinions are. But those who reject the divinity of Christ, are in truth not Protestants; for it is essential to the character

of Protestants, that they not only reject all human authority, but more particularly, that they receive the Holy Scriptures as the only and the infallible criterion, by which they are to judge doctrines and ministers,' nay, they are not even christians: for the acknowledgment of the divine authority of Christ, is essential to the character of a christian.3 Such persons are at liberty to pursue their own opinions, and if they are desirous of being teachers of a church which rejects Christ, they may, in countries which tolerate such churches, collect disciples who desire a teacher of this cast. 2 Tim. 4: 3. But, to undermine the dignity of Christ and of the Holy Scriptures, under the deceitful mask of a Christian and Protestant minister, and to receive for his treacherous attempts to demolish the very pillars of Christianity and Protestantism, a salary which is appropriated

1 Comp. Büsching's General Remarks on the Symbolical Books, § 4 &c.

[2 The Unitarianism of this country, and the Neology of Europe, are, in their cardinal features, the same; and the position taken by Dr Miller, in his Letters on Unitarianism, is precisely similar to that here maintained by our author. In Letter VIII, pp. 284, 285, we find the following remarks:-"If they (Unitarians) reject every fundamental (distinguishing) doctrine of the religion of Christ, they, of course, reject christianity; if they reject christianity, they surely are not christians; their congregations evidently ought not to be called churches, nor their ordinances be considered as valid.—I have said, that Unitarians ought to be considered and treated as Deists in disguise. I beg that this language may not be misconstrued. It is by no means my intention to intimate, for I do not believe, that Unitarians are, as a sect, a set of hypocrites; that they profess one thing, and really believe another.-But my meaning is, that, while they assume, and insist on retaining the Christian name, their creed really does not differ much, in substance, from that of serious Deists. Now if this be the case, and if the fact that they are substantially Deists, be, in effect, concealed from popular view by the name which they bear, what is this but being Deists under the christian name, in other words Deists in disguise?" S.]

3 Rosenmüller's Reply to the question "why do we call ourselves Protestants?" Comp. § 99, 111. Ill. 3. Jerusalem's Posthumous Works, part I, p. 170 &c. The author's Dissert. on the Spirit of christianity, in Flatt's Magazine, Part I. p. 136 &c.

only for their preservation and defence, which can be merited only by ministers who are labouring (Tit. 1: 9) to accomplish that object (1 Cor. 9:7-11. 1 Tim. 5: 17 &c. Gal. 6: 6), and which traitors and enemies to the cause can never with good conscience accept; this I say is a course of conduct, of which no man of honour, no conscientious man, will suffer himself to be guilty.

On this subject, the reader may consult the following works : The author's dissert. "on the Spirit of christianity, in Flatt's Magazine, Pt. I. p. 151. Döderlein Theol. Journ. Vol. I, p. 131-163. Michaelis' Dogmatik, p. 679, 682 &c. Schwab, in the work referred to in § 51 &c. Köppen, " on the right of Princes to bind their ministers to a confession of faith." And "The Bible a work of divine wisdom," Part II. p. 596-624, (2d edit. 626, 715), "Unfug sogenannter Aufklaerer" against the new Prussian ordinances concerning spiritual things, by De Marées, Berlin, 1792. Brauer's ideas on Protestantism, Karlesruhe, 1802. In the "Allgemeine Deutsche Bibliothek," Vol. 114, Pt. 2. and Vol.115, Pt. 1, is contained a complete enumeration of the publications which were occasioned by the Prussian edict relative to the obligation of the clergy to be governed by symbols, from 1788. A brief view of the history and literature of former, as well as of the late disputes on this point, may be formed in Meyer's "Commentatio Librorum Symbolicorum Ecclesiae nostrae utilitatem et historiam subscriptionis eorundem exponens," a work which obtained the prize at Goettingen, in 1796. In Part I. Sect. III. Sect. I, II, are contained the arguments for the utility of symbolical books in general, and of the symbols of our church in particular; together with a refutation of the proposition so often made, "that ministers ought to be bound only by the Bible.”

III. The qualifications requisite for the ministry.--As it is

the will of Christ, that teachers should be placed over the churches (§ 102), and as he has, through his apostles, determined the qualifications of such teachers as he approves (1 Tim. 3: 2--7. 2 Tim. 2: 24 &c. Tit. 1:5-9. 1 Pet. 5: 2); all ministers who possess those qualifications, must be pleasing to the Lord of the church, although they were not appointed immediately by himself, but regularly inducted into the sacred office by the church, or by those to whom the care of the church is confided. In these qualifications, are included, not only doctrinal knowledge and a capacity to teach, but also and principally, true piety, a character and conduct conformable to the doctrines and precepts of our Saviour. Matth. 5: 19, os noinon και διδαξη (μιαν των εντολων τούτων των ελαχιστων), ούτος με γας κληθήσεται εν τη βασιλεια των ουρανων whosoever shall practise and teach even the least of these commandments, the same shall be highly esteemed in the reign of heaven. 1 Tim. 3: 2-4, δει τον επισκοπον ανεπίληπτον (ανεγκλητον Τit. 1 : 7 &c.) ɛıvaι x.v.λ. a bishop ought to be blameless. The good or bad example of the teacher has undeniably a very important influence (Matth. 5: 13-16. 1 Tim. 12: 16. Tit. 2: 7. 1 Pet. 5: 3); and his instructions are powerfully enforced by a conscientious and exemplary life. Tit. 2: 7, napeyouevos ev ty διδακαλια αδιαφοριαν, σεμνότητα “ showing in his instructions, an incorruptible love to truth and virtue; together with zeal and dignity." For, although integrity of character alone, is not sufficient to enable a man to discharge the duties of the ministerial office, in a manner pleasing in the sight of God; still, those who possess the ability to teach, will be the less inclined to detract from the sanctity of Christ's commands, in proportion to the zeal with which they are pursuing holiness themselves. Matth. 5: 19 &c. "The dixaloovvn which Jesus required of

1 Vid. Dissert. in Epist. Pauli Minores, p. 54. Comp. ch. I. II.

1