There is nothing more painful to one who has the Spirit of Christ, than misplaced truth. To see a servant of Christ advancing that which is abstractedly true, and most precious as the portion of the children of God, and then either giving it to the world, or some evil system of the world's raising, is a most grievous spectacle; but one frequently presented to us in the present day. This is the painful impression left on my' mind after reading Mr. Tucker's sermon.
In the sermon before us, the Church of the living; God and the Establishment are treated as identical, so that for the sake of his argument, what can be predicated of one can also be predicated of the other. Although it be a humbling and painful task to seek to expose the inconsistency of such an argument, yet it does appear that the Lord mercifully permits even His own servants, when advocating a system and not the truth, so palpably to err in their statements, that the absurdity becomes apparent to every one but themselves, who are to a certain point, blinded by the object they are pursuing; so that they cannot discern things that differ. Surely it would be the simplest method to inquire what were the principles, and what the practice of the Apostolical Church; and what are the principles, and what the practice of the Church of England; and if we could thus prove their identity, then indeed, we might safely predicate anything of the one as applicable to the other. But in this sermon as well as most of the kind, the author starts on a "petitio principii." The objection not being that the Church of England is corrupted, or has declined, but that it never was as a Church constituted according to the principles of the Apostolical Church, or walking according to the commandments of the Apostles of the Lord Jesus Christ. And I do maintain, that for the settlement of this question, an appeal to scripture is quite sufficient; and that until this question be settled, the value of tradition "as a help," cannot be allowed for a moment to be debated. Little did many a godly man think when "tradition" was first advanced as an auxiliary, and the scriptural ground of the Church of England thus virtually surrendered as untenable, that they who thought it at first to be the whim of a man of talent and keen debater, would so soon be led to follow in his wake, and to assert the very thing which at first so greatly alarmed their minds, Even when first the Oxford Tracts boldly put forth the pretenses of the Clergy connected as that pretension ever must be with invalidity the doctrine of justification by faith alone, the godly ministers of the Establishment who knew the truth, and held very dear and precious, that of a sinner's justification before God, did not boldly controvert this assumption, because they were clergy; and the maintenance of this was one of common interest to those who held the truth and those who were darkening it. But this departure from the simplicity which is in Christ Jesus, has led them on in the way of error, and many of them now are among the assertors of the divine and therefore exclusive authority of the clergy, which but a short time since they would have protested against. This is a subject of general interest to the Church, for it shows that there are principles at work which must speedily lead to their respective results, and it is very easy to see that the upholding office, apart from spiritual qualification, or which is the same thing, that man by conferring office, necessarily imparts the spiritual qualification, must speedily issue in the assumption of priesthood, from the thraldom of which, the reformation was once looked upon, as a deliverance. We cannot regard Mr. Tucker but as one who follows the Oxford School, and we thus get another testimony, that in every place where the scriptural authority of the Establishment is questioned, the defense is tradition or derived authority, to the virtual abandonment of the scriptures.
The second paragraph pp. 3, 4, is remarkable, and necessarily gives a character to the whole of his view of the Church. "That which gives this epistle its peculiar interest, is the view we find the Apostle taking of the then state of the Church I think we may call it a more chastened, settled, and calm contemplation of the Church; not as he would wish her to appear, as the bride adorned and waiting for the bridegroom, but as harassed with heresies and dissensions, and hereafter to be called to pass through greater dangers still." The Apostle did surely in this epistle, see the Church as "harassed with heresies and dissensions." -He saw the fearful tide of apostasy, even then setting in, as he had previously in addressing the elders of the Church of Ephesus; and in both cases he recommends the scripture as the safeguard (2 Tim. 3, Acts 20); and for a very simple reason, because the apostasy of the Church was before his eyes, and he could see in that, no safeguard for the truth. That very departure from her principles, which the Apostle saw thus commencing, is regarded as having taken place (Rev. 2); and the Church become first the subject of judgment (Rev. 2; 3), and then of prophecy (from Rev. 8 onwards). Now this last implies settled departure from its principles; for prophetic testimony has no place, while any dispensation stands on its proper ground before God but when it can be said "Remember from whence thou art fallen, and do thy first works"; then God raises His testimony against it, and at the same time by it, comforts the feeble remnant who remain true to the principles of the dispensation, which as a whole, has failed. There is no truth more difficult for us to receive, than that the dispensation in which we are, has failed; the failure began early in the Apostles' days and its consummation is shown actually and prophetically in the apocalypse. If Mr. T. recognized this truth, he would perceive that he was throughout this sermon, using the term "Church" ambiguously; and applying those characteristics which properly. belong to the Church of the living God, wherein He dwells by His Spirit, to that which ostensibly presents itself to the eyes of men, claiming the name, but which is in fact, the vine of the earth. about to be cast into the wine-press of the wrath of Almighty God. Surely it becomes the sheep of Christ to be careful whose voice they listen to, whether it be to that of the good shepherd, speaking through His Church by His Spirit to their souls, the words of scripture which are profitable and sanctifying; or the voice of the God of this world, speaking through the apostasy by tradition, to cause them to put away a good conscience, and then concerning the faith, to make shipwreck. It would save a great deal of needless controversy, if we were first to settle in what state the. scripture leaves the Church. For it appears almost as profitless to discuss the question with one who argues from present circumstances, back to scripture, as it is to set the plainest declarations of God's word, before the scoffer, who says all thing continue as they were from the creation of the world. And thus the question as to the value of tradition, would not be raised till after the state of the Church, according to the latest scriptural testimony, had been settled.
It will be now needful to advance some passages in which the sense in which the term "Church" is used, trust entirely affect the truth of the statement.
"That necessity is laid upon us as pastors of Christ's flock, that we be prepared for evils and difficulties, and endeavor to contemplate these evils with a chastened, sober, cautious, and watchful temper of mind; expecting to have our hearts wounded and our spirits grieved, and that with that expectation we learn "to endure afflictions," and at the same time with steadfastness of purpose, we engage heartily, entirely, and constantly in the blessed work allotted to us, and in every particular fill up the service assigned to us, i.e., perfecting the saints, the edifying of the body of Christ" (p. 6)."
The simple question here is, does Mr. T. mean to take his stand as a minister of Christ or a clergyman of the Church of England? In the former case all who love the Lord Jesus would gladly receive him, and esteem him very highly in love for his works sake; in the latter, the question as to any New Testament warrant for the title and office, is immediately raised. But besides this, does Mr. T. feel himself or will his system give him, liberty to exercise his ministry for the profit of the Church at large? Or does he really mean that the only ministers of Christ are those who have received episcopal ordination?
"It is on behalf of this Church, that new creation whereby God will be everlastingly glorified in Christ Jesus, that we are required to "watch in all things, to endure afflictions, to do the work of Evangelists, and make full proof of our ministry"; of His flock we are appointed the pastors, the stewards, of His mysteries to His family, the watchmen of His Zion wherein He delighteth. As all the graces of His Church flow from the love of the Father manifested in the grace of the Son, and communicated by the fellowship of the Holy Ghost, so does our authority proceed from the same source and from the same channel The Father is the head of all authority, and this authority He has given to His Son, whom He has constituted head of His Church; and His Son thus exalted, has by the Holy Ghost given authority also to us, "As my Father sent me, even so send I you." We are not merely preachers and teachers of religion, but we are called to this office, "to minister the doctrine and sacraments, and discipline, of Christ, as the Lord hath commanded. It was for this that we hesitate not to say, we have received the Holy Ghost for the office and work of priests in the Church of God, committed unto us by the imposition of the hands of the Bishop with his presbytery; so that we have "power and commandment to declare and pronounce to all God's people, who are penitent, the absolution and remission of their sins." As stewards, we affix the seal of the covenant of grace, and distribute to the Church of the blessed nourishment of Christ's body and blood, and all by the command, and with the blessing, and in the name of the Father and of the Son, wad of; the Holy Ghost."
Here again the question may be asked. Is this Church, that new creation whereby God will be glorified in Christ Jesus, the Church of England? And when Mr. T. says "we hesitate not to say, that we have received the Holy Ghost," &c. he is surely speaking of the clergy corporately, so that mere ordination gives the necessary spiritual competence. And then the exclusive claim, to minister the sacraments is superadded to countenance the notion of the so ordained multitude, being priests in the house of God.
But there is one statement in this paragraph which needs more especial attention. "The Father is the head of all authority." Now as a broad abstract statement there is nothing to be objected to, but in its application it makes the Clergy to be the Church, and attempts to supply by virtue of official authority, that which can only be supplied by the living energy of the Holy Ghost giving the needful wisdom under any special circumstances, for guidance and direction, and that too in matters of doctrine and discipline. Anything analogous to what took place either at Jerusalem (Acts 15), or what was commanded by the Apostle (1 Cor. 5), is rendered morally impossible by such an assumption of authority as here is claimed. And this is really the painful part of the subject, it makes the blessed covenant relation of our God, as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to become a mere abstract doctrine, since they have virtually ceased their agency, which is now only to be exhibited by a select body of men asserting pretensions which the Apostles never did. The abiding presence and living activity of the Comforter as a sovereign, dividing to every man severally as He will, is thus virtually set aside as a truth. The necessary consequence is, that the children of God are deprived of much of their present blessing, in not being taught to look to him as their teacher and admonisher, and consoler; and the felt responsibility of knowing, those who guide them and esteeming them very highly for their words sake, is supplanted by a cold and careless recognition of nominal office. There appears nothing available to recover the Church from its present blind clinging to office, short of the recognition of the faithfulness of the Lord to His promise, that the Comforter should abide in the Church throughout the dispensation. For the Lord and His Apostles having furnished a sufficient standard in the scriptures to which everything might be brought, and the latest testimony given by the Lard from heaven, being by His special commandment written (Rev. 1:1010I was in the Spirit on the Lord's day, and heard behind me a great voice, as of a trumpet, (Revelation 1:10)). The Church was not left to be guided by statute law, because there was the Holy Ghost to apply the all comprehensive principles already embodied in the word, to given circumstances at any time And if our brethren of the Establishment had only said, the word is not sufficient, we would not have differed; but when they say, tradition is the supplement, and thus bring the Church under statute law, we say the Holy Ghost is the applier of the Word, and thus bring it under the law of liberty. The question would not be, whether there are distinct offices in the Church, or whether all are alike competent to minister, for in this we should be agreed (1 Cor. 12:2828And God hath set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongues. (1 Corinthians 12:28)). But the difference between us, is as to the mode of the needed power being supplied, which we do assert to be in the way of special gift to distinct individuals from Jesus ascended, and therefore to be living energy, and not in the way of derived office, which however it may assert authority, has not the needful influence to make the authority itself to be grace in the possessor, and the acknowledgment of it grace in the subject. For real authority in the Church cannot be separated from real spiritual influence.
"And here I may observe generally, that considering the elements in the midst of which she abides, the existence of the Church is a perpetual testimony to the love, and power, and faithfulness of her Lord and God. Such is the enmity of the human heart to God that the world would, if it had been able, long since have destroyed the Church, because she bears the image of God, and is His chosen on the earth: "Because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you" (John 15:1919If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. (John 15:19)). And this is the Church's portion, until the coming of her Lord; as the one witness on her Lord's behalf, to have poured upon her the contempt and hatred of an ungodly world."
Surely the world supports the Church of England, and what its ministers are looking to is the world. Should the world withdraw its support, the consequence would be, that many of the formularies so highly extolled would be given up by their supporters. And we are constantly forced to ask the question, if the Establishment be the Church, what is the world? For in scripture the world is one system, and the Church another, each under their respective Lord and appropriate influence. But the most fearful statement of this Sermon remains to be noticed.
"2: "In discipline. -Here this spirit of independence, is perhaps, less subtle, and more easily recognized, both in its workings and in its origin."
"It is from the Father, through the Son by the agency of the Holy Ghost. that all authority of every kind flows, and man is commanded to obey in the Lord; "Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake" (1 Peter 2:1313Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; (1 Peter 2:13))."
"Proud man openly refuses to acknowledge and to obey the precept, but turns the stream of authority, back in an opposite direction -pronounces passive obedience an exploded doctrine; declares that kings reign not by the grace of God, but by the will of the people; and ministers are to preach by the same law. The same spirit is seen as more extensively prevalent, in the notions that are entertained of Christian unity, and the means of attaining to it (p. 14)."
I have read this several times over, fearing I had mistaken the author. It does seem so monstrous an assertion, to say that the kingly power is by the agency of the Holy Ghost. And it is only by calling to mind, the almost impossibility for a clergy-man, from the position in which he stands, and the habit of using the Liturgy, to distinguish, even in theory, between the nation and the Church; which makes me believe, I have caught his meaning.
I believe passive obedience to be the New Testament doctrine, but in a much larger sense than Mr. T. uses it; for it must be unto God, or else it becomes disobedience. In the case of kingly authority, passive obedience I believe to be our rule, since he is God's ordinance to us for good {Rom. 13}; but then we are left the alternative to obey or suffer, and if the king command us to do a thing contrary to the command of God, we must count it joy to be thought worthy to suffer for the truth's sake; and this will necessarily be the case, when the king interferes in the rule of the Church of God; for he is not a gift given from the ascended Jesus for the edifying of His Church; but whatever he may be esteemed by others, he is a gift given from God to His Church while in the world, for a restraint upon the evil of the world, until a given period. It is thus that Christians can most thankfully bless God for His gift, and pray too for the continuance of these authorities, and protest against the lie, that they are to be set up by the will of man.
Surely when the Apostle Paul wrote the epistle to the Romans, he recognized Nero as God's ordinance; but did he recognize God standing in the relation of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost to Nero? Is not such a relationship salvation? God was not revealed in this relationship, when He committed power to Nebuchadnezzar; yet he was God's ordinance. It is quite true that the same Spirit, which moved on the face of the waters (Gen. 1), and which gave Samson power to slay the Philistines, is the one whom we know, as dwelling in the Church. But now He stands in a different relation and office -as the Comforter; for previous to the ascension of Christ, the Holy Ghost was not {yet given, John 7:3939(But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.) (John 7:39)}. The accident of the power being nominally Christian, or really Christian, alters not the source of their authority, which clearly was of God, before His manifestation of Himself as Father, Son, and Holy Ghost. All real Church authority is derived from Jesus as ascended, and is only for edifying the Church. And here again we have a most grievous instance of the entire identification of the world with the Church, to the great detriment of the latter.
We are quite one with Mr. T., that ministers are not to preach by the will of the people, but by obligation laid on them by God who has given them the competency; and after that is given woe be to the man who preacheth not the gospel. He is not to wait for man's sanction, but being reconciled to God Himself, and God having put into him the ministry of reconciliation, he needs only the constraining love of Christ to set his gift in exercise. It is an awful thing for one to run who is not sent, but as awful to hinder one from going who is sent of God; a tendency of our minds, be it remarked, noticed in the scriptures for our admonition (Num. 11:2828And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his young men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid them. (Numbers 11:28); Luke 9:4949And John answered and said, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad him, because he followeth not with us. (Luke 9:49)). If preaching the gospel be not obedience to God, it is like every other sin, self-will; and this is the case when any one preaches merely as hired by the people, or is set up and paid by the authorities of the world.
So again, we are quite one as to the truth of the statement, "The same spirit is seen as more extensively prevalent in the options that are entertained of Christian unity and the means of attaining it."
Now we seek most strenuously to assert that we are not left to the guidance of our own wisdom, which is but self-will after all, as to the manner of Christians manifesting their oneness in Christ. We do believe that self-will has been abundantly displayed in the constitution of the several sects into which the Church is divided, and that the sin of schism has been made very light of, and that the right of private judgment has been carried to such an extreme, as to invalidate the authority of scripture and to deny the presence of the Holy Ghost. All this was the reaction occasioned by emancipation from the traditions of men. But while Mr T. can see clearly the spirit of disobedience in every other sect, he perceives it not in his own. And this is the solemn part of the question between us, the sin of rending the body of Christ must be chargeable on one of us, and it is a fearful sin, and a question which must not be approached with levity. It is surely right that the question should be simplified to the minds of Christians, and it comes simply to this -who is the schismatic, he who seeks to maintain the unity of the Church of England, or he who aims to promote the unity of the Spirit? {Eph. 4:33Endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (Ephesians 4:3)}. Now it is remarkable that Mr. T. should have ventured in the same paragraph to show the means of unity appointed in scripture, and the means of unity in the primitive Church, that is, after the Churches had lost the blessing of Apostolical care.
THE MEANS OF UNITY APPOINTED IN THE SCRIPTURE, ARE THESE: "Continuing steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine, and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers. The walking worthy of the vocation wherewith we are called, with all lowliness and meekness, with long-suffering, forbearing one another in love; endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. Obeying them that have the rule over us (in the Church) and submitting ourselves. Keeping the ordinances as they have been delivered to us, marking them which cause divisions and offenses contrary to the doctrine we have learned."
THE MEANS OF UNITY IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH, ARE THESE: " I exhort you (says Ignatius the martyr, and formerly disciple of St. John,) to be zealous to do all things in divine concord; the Bishop presiding in the place of God, and the presbyters in the place of the council of Apostles, and the deacons entrusted with the service of Jesus Christ. All of you follow the Bishop, as Jesus Christ followed the Father, and the presbytery as the Apostles, and reverence the deacons as God's ordinance. Be ye earnest to keep one Eucharist, for the flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ is one, and there is one cup in the unity of His blood, one altar, as one Bishop, together with the presbytery and deacons, my fellow-servants." Surely the parallel afforded by Mr. T. himself is a sufficient proof that the primitive Church has departed from scriptural simplicity. How important the word "the faith once delivered to the saints," "the acknowledgment of the truth according to godliness."
It is strange that Mr. T. should have overlooked those blessed unities, the knowledge of which maintains unity in the Spirit; "one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling; one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all, who. is above all, and through all, and in you all {Eph. 4:77But unto every one of us is given grace according to the measure of the gift of Christ. (Ephesians 4:7)}." I would solemnly ask myself, have I violated one of those unities in seceding from the Establishment, and I do before God, say no! and therefore that which I have left, has nothing to do with the maintenance of the unity of the Spirit; it may have to do with uniformity, and I do greatly tremble for Mr. T., and many of his godly brethren, because they are identifying two things wholly distinct, uniformity produced by the exercise of external authority and unity by the invisible energy of the Spirit; the one manifested in the long dark age of the universal sway of the Church in the world, the other for a little moment in the primitive Apostolical Church, and only to be fully displayed in that day of glory, when they shall be all one, and the world know that Jesus has been sent of the Father, and the disciples loved as Jesus Himself, of Him.
"Of independence as exhibited in practice, it is enough merely to advert to the general spirit of insubordination, the contempt that is manifested for everything old or established, the disregard of oaths, the crumbling into separate pieces of combinations that seemed almost indissoluble, and that which is most marked and most demands attention; the attempts that are making on a vast and comprehensive scale to hold up men as possessed of a machinery, moral and intellectual, by which to govern themselves, and to render them great, virtuous, and wise, independent of God. Our fathers in the childhood of the world built a visible tower that should reach to heaven, but this generation is engaged in a more awful scheme of apostasy, in building one that is invisible, not material, but moral, intellectual, and spiritual; equally founded upon earth, and doomed to more terrible destruction (pp. 16, 17)."
In this fearful anticipation, we do entirely coincide with Mr. T. And there is nothing we would more deprecate than while seeking real liberty in the Spirit, we should be found in any wise, to give a cloak to that spirit of independence, which we know as taught of God to be lawlessness. No; we do believe that nothing but the acknowledgment of God in all things, nothing but the simplest obedience as children, will prove really a preservative in these dark days of error and unrestrainedness. But the remedy against falling into this evil train, cannot be the attempt to subject man's mind to an authority, the assertion of which can only be made by justifying the most flagrant practical evil, and dulling the sense of individual responsibility. As a theory, what Mr. T. says, may be very beautiful; but the theory of the Church, as he has given it, is not even the theory of the Church of England. And it is constantly found when the Spirit is grieved in an individual by the practical evil and worldliness of the Establishment, that the way he is attempted to be silenced, is by an appeal to the authority of antiquity, or by the argument, that, as individuals they are not concerned in the evil of their system. How pointed a safeguard against such sophistry, is the almost latest warning from heaven: —"He that hath an ear, let him hear what THE SPIRIT says to the Churches."
The Christian Witness 5:99-110 (1838).