Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

PART V.

ADVANTAGES OF CONGREGATIONALISM.

HAVING discussed the principles and doctrines of the Congregational system of church government, and detailed, with some degree of minuteness, the ecclesiastical practice of the denomination, it will not be regarded as an inappropriate conclusion of this part of the work, to enumerate some of the advantages which, in the opinion of its advocates, this system of church order and discipline possesses over all others.

In saying what he may upon this head, the writer would not speak invidiously of other systems; much less, of those who have embraced them. He is happy to number among his personal friends those who have adopted almost every form of church government. He cheerfully yields to others, what he claims for himself-the right of private judgment. The pages of this work detail the reasons why he is a Congregationalist—a thorough and hearty Congregationalist; and why those with whom he is associated, have adopted the same system of church order.

Our adoption of these principles, and doctrines, and practice, implies that we suppose the system, as a whole, to possess advantages over any other. Some of these supposed advantages will now be briefly enumerated.

1. We regard Congregationalism as the most scriptural system of church government.

We do not assert that all other systems of church government are totally destitute of scriptural authority; nor,

Congregationalism the most Scriptural system.

that Congregationalism is exactly conformed to the polity of the apostolic churches,-but we do assert, that in our opinion, the order and discipline of our churches, is more nearly in accordance with the scriptural model, than that of any other denomination; and perhaps, as much so, as the difference in our circumstances will admit.

This consideration may be addressed equally to those who deny that the Scriptures furnish any model of church government, and to those who admit that the great outlines, if not the minute particulars of church polity are given in the Scriptures.

Those who deny that the word of God furnishes any pattern for church building, will not object to the admission, that the church which has most of scriptural architecture about it, best deserves their regard.

Now, if it has been shown in the preceding pages, that all the fundamental principles, and essential doctrines of Congregationalism, have the sanction of scriptural precept or apostolic usage; and that the authorized practice, of this denomination is in nowise inconsistent with the same precepts and example :-then certainly, Congregationalism is scriptural; the word of God allows, but does not require the adoption of it. And, if Congregationalism is scriptural, then it is more scriptural than any other system, in just so much as any other system differs from this in its fundamental principles and doctrines; unless it can be proved that the Scriptures equally countenance different systems.

But, in what particulars do other systems of church government differ from this? All governments may, I conceive, be classed under three heads: Monarchical, Aristocratical, and Democratical. The distinctive peculiarities

Episcopacy-Romish-English.

of these three forms may be intermixed in any given systein; but all governments, ecclesiastical as well as civil, may be resolved into three constitutent parts.

The Episcopal form of church government may be regarded as monarchical, the Presbyterian as aristocratical, and the Congregational as democratical. The predominating characteristics of these three forms of church government, are sufficiently expressed by the titles given them.

Episcopacy, strictly speaking, places the government of the church in the hands of one man. His power may be that of a despot, or of a limited monarch; according as the people are allowed more or less influence in the government. Romish Episcopacy may be considered a despotism. The pope, is the supreme, uncontrollable head of the church. The mere fact that he is an elected despot, does not alter the nature of his government when once established especially as the people have no voice in his election. His government is absolute, uncontrollable by any authority in the people. The pope's will is sovereign. His word is law.

Congregationalism differs heaven-wide from Romish Episcopacy. And if Congregationalism is scriptural, it is as much more scriptural than Romanism, as the difference between the two.

But, suppose we take the Episcopacy of the Church of England: Is not that monarchical? Not so despotic as Romanism; but, as really monarchical. The English church is but a modification of the Romish. At the refor

mation she merely changed heads; taking Henry VIII, instead of Clement VII, for her supreme head. The king of England became as truly pope of the English church,

English Episcopacy-its form-its expense.

as his holiness of Rome had been before. Henry claimed the right to regulate the Church of England as seemed good in his own eyes, and parliament sanctioned that claim. The successors of Henry, with the crown, inherited also, the Church of England. From Henry, the headship of the church has come down with the crown to the present monarch; and the church of England now has for her "supreme head". -a young, and gay girl, of two and twenty years of age. She " convenes, prorogues, restrains, regulates and dissolves all synods and ecclesiastical convocations;" and all archbishops and bishops are appointed by her. For, although there is the formality of an election of these functionaries by the clergy, yet this, is authorized only by what is called a congé d'elire, or leave to elect, which is accompanied by a nomination of the person to be elected.

The archbishops rank in ecclesiastical dignity next to the sovereign; and are supreme in their respective provinces. The archbishopric of Canterbury, comprehending twenty-one bishoprics, and that of York, four. Next to archbishops, come the bishops. Each bishop is sole judge in his own court of all ecclesiastical offences. The archdeacons, and priests, and deacons, and all the minor orders, are amenable to their respective metropolitans. This whole establishment the kingdom is taxed to sustain. And it is sustained at the enormous expense of nearly NINE MILLIONS OF POUNDS ANNUALLY: a sum greater, by nearly fifty thousand pounds, than the income of all the clergy in the world beside. But, in the government of this church, the people at large, have no voice whatever.

*

How far this system differs from Congregationalism, it is

* American Encyclopedia, Art.-Church.

American Episcopacy.

easy to see. The difference is so great, that if one be scriptural the other must be, in many important particulars, unscriptural. I speak simply of the polity of this church. The doctrinal articles are, for the most part sound and scriptural.

If we turn from English Episcopacy to American, what will be the result of the comparison? The Episcopacy of this country is a scion from the mother land; a continuation of the Church of England, under a new name. The early clergy of this denomination were conformnists to the English hierarchy-the very hierarchy, from the persecutions of which the Congregational fathers of New England fled-or, received ordination from the English and Scotch bishops. All their parishes were included in the diocese of London, previously to the revolution. The first Episcopal bishops of America, were consecrated by the archbishops of Canterbury and York ;* but not until these functionaries were assured, that no material deviation from the English hierarchy, in doctrine and practice, would be admitted into the American Episcopal church.

The nature of our government does not admit of a Supreme head" of the church; but if, by any revolution in politics, the republican, should be changed for the monarchical form of government, would it not be consistent with American Episcopacy to make the monarch of America the head of the church? Indeed, is not Episcopacy incomplete while destitute of a supreme head? Will it not be found indispensable to the perfect working of the system that this present deficiency should ere long be sup

* One American bishop had been previously consecrated by the non-juring bishops of Scotland.

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »