The Divine Right of Church Government: Wherein it is proved that the Presbyterian government, by preaching and ruling elders, in sessional, Presbyterial and synodical assemblies, may lay the only lawful claim to a divine right, according to the Holy Scriptures
Religion
The Divine Right of Church Government: Wherein it is proved that the Presbyterian government, by preaching and ruling elders, in sessional, Presbyterial and synodical assemblies, may lay the only lawful claim to a divine right, according to the Holy Scriptures
Presbyterian Church -- Government
That therefore it ought to be so among us, is as plain: for the dangers
and difficulties that they were involved in without a government, and
for which God caused that government to be set up among them, are as
great if not greater among us, and therefore why should we want the same
means of prevention and cure? Are not we in greater danger of heresies
now in the time of the New Testament, the churches therein being thereby
to be exercised by way of trial, as the apostle foretells, 1 Cor. xi.
19? Doth not ungodliness in these last times abound, according to the
same apostle's prediction? Is there not now a more free and permitted
intercourse of society with infidels than in those times?
Nor are the exceptions against this argument of any strength: as, 1.
That arguments for the form of church government must yet be fetched
from the Jewish Church; the government of the Jews was ceremonial and
typical, and Christians must not Judaize, nor use that Judaical compound
of subordination of churches: the Mosaical polity is abrogated now under
the New Testament. Not to tell those that make this exception, 1. That
none argue so much from the Jewish government as themselves for the
power of congregations, both in ordination and excommunication, because
the people of Israel laid hands on the Levites, and all Israel were to
remove the unclean; 2. We answer, the laws of the Jewish church, whether
ceremonial or judicial, so far are in force, even at this day, as they
were grounded upon common equity, the principles of reason and nature,
and were serving to the maintenance of the moral law. 'Tis of especial
right, that the party unjustly aggrieved should have redress, that the
adverse party should not be sole judge and party too, that judgment
ought not to be rashly or partially passed upon any. The Jewish polity
is only abrogated in regard of what was in it of particular right, not
of common right: so far as there was in their laws either a typicalness
proper to their church, or a peculiarness of respect to their state in
that land of promise given unto them. Whatsoever was in their laws of
moral concernment or general equity, is still obliging; whatsoever the
Jewish Church had not as Jewish, but as it was a political church, or an
ecclesiastical republic, (among which is the subordination of
ecclesiastical courts to be reckoned,) doth belong to the Christian
Church: that all judgments were to be determined by an high-priest, was
typical of Christ's supremacy in judicature; but that there were gradual
judicatories for the ease of an oppressed or grieved party, there can be
no ceremony or type in this. This was not learned by Moses in the
pattern of the Mount, but was taught by the light of nature to Jethro,
Exod. xviii. 22, and by him given in advice to Moses. This did not
belong unto the peculiar dispensation of the Jews, but unto the good
order of the church.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account