§ 1. HAVE THE PEOPLE AUTHORITY?

In civil government the people generally do not exercise authority. The power of ruling is intrusted to chosen representative officers for the good of the people. To suppose the contrary would be to indicate utter confusion and anarchy. Hence, it might be supposed, as the Divine Word is not in contradiction to the laws of God for other departments, that a similar order would be set forth for the regulation of the Church. It is, however, alleged that the kingdom of grace is totally distinct from the kingdoms of the earth, and that by the sanction of Scripture the people must exercise the power of rule.

CHRIST'S RULE FOR OFFENCES.

The directions of our Lord-Tell it unto the Church;'‘if ye neglect to hear the Church' (Matt. xviii. 15-17)—are thus declared to mean: Tell it to the whole congregation. Is this evident from the passage?

The law for the adjustment of private offences is here declared. Three stages are to be observed :-First, The offending brother is to be told his fault in private. Secondly, Again in the presence of witnesses. Thirdly, The Church is to be informed, and is to deal with him. If all these proceedings fail, then he is to be no longer regarded as a Christian brother. The Church possesses authority which is to be exercised as a last resort in dealing with members of a particular Church.

All this is clear. The only difficulty is the word 'church.' What is the meaning of this word in this particular passage? It is evidently used in a general sense. There is nothing in the context specially to define it. Whether the power is to be exercised by the people in common, with the elders simply presiding, or by the elders alone, in whose judgment the people are to concur, is not stated. The fact of a judicial procedure is, however, proved. Evidently the witnesses of the former proceeding must be called and examined. If not, their testimony were of no value. The offender must be heard for himself, then

judgment must be given. If conviction follows, exclusion from church fellowship is the necessary consequence. This much is established, but nothing more, namely, that the Church has a power of government over her members.

Supposing that this power is vested in the entire membership, still it must be asked, by whom is it to be exercised? There are two sources of information that must be appealed to for an answer :-(1.) The procedure to which Christ referred; and (2.) The practice of the apostolic Churches. In these cases, was the government exercised by the people, or by their officers alone?

1. The Procedure in Jewish Courts

'The allusion of Jesus,'

Iwas that to which the Lord referred. says Dr Goodwin, 'is to the synagogues in every town which were the ecclesiastical state. .. To tell the Church, therefore, was to tell that particular synagogue of which they were members.' 'Let him be to thee as a heathen man and a publican,' imports the same thing as let him be cast out of the synagogue. The word (ouvaywyn) 'synagogue,' and the word (xxλnoia) ‘church,' are, in many instances, all one in the Septuagint. The apostle James uses 'synagogue' to denote the Christian congregation, or the place where they met: If there come into your synagogue' (James ii. 2). The same term is used by Paul exhorting, Forsake not the assembling of yourselves together' (mi ovvaywyn). When our Lord gave this law, no Christian congregation, as such, existed, if we except Himself and His disciples. They and He together conformed to the synagogue and temple worship. Presently, to practise His direction, His hearers could only tell the matter to the Jewish synagogue. What, then, was the practice to which our Lord referred?

The rulers of the synagogue alone administered its affairs: 'The rulers of the synagogue sent unto Paul and his companions' (Acts xiii. 15). These had a president: The ruler of the synagogue answered' (Luke xiii. 14). These rulers,' Goodwin says, were never less than three, that a major vote might cast it among them.' From their determination there was a right of appeal to the great Sanhedrim or council of seventy. In that

6

council the people were not allowed to be present. 'When they had commanded them to go aside out of the council, they conferred among themselves' (Acts iv. 15-17). Then they decided that, while the miracle could not be denied, preaching in the name of Jesus must be prohibited.

2. The Practice of Apostolic Churches.

In the Church at Jerusalem the highest acts of government were performed by church officers alone. Three thousand members were admitted in one day. No meeting or deliberation of members is so much as hinted at. In Samaria very many, and on the way to Gaza the Ethiopian treasurer, were admitted by Philip, when he administered to them the ordinance of baptism. So in Damascus Paul was admitted to the same privilege of Christ's house by Ananias. So Lydia and the Philippian jailer by Paul and Silas. Whether the Church was in course of formation, or already existed, no instance is on record of reception to Christian fellowship after judgment asked and obtained of the membership generally. It is true that Paul was not recognized when first he came to Jerusalem, until his conversion and sincerity had been declared by Barnabas. This was because of his previous persecution, and because they had no knowledge of his discipleship. But this was not his first reception into the Church. That had already been consummated elsewhere. All that remained was, that he should be accredited in Jerusalem. In the same manner would every Church of the present day act. The admission of the converted persecutor to sealing ordinances and fellowship on the spot, is one thing; his recognition as a disciple in a Church that had not heard of the reality of his change, is another. The addition, then, of these converts to the Church by baptism was not by the general judgment of Church members, but by the responsible action of Church rulers. And so admitted, Scripture proves that they had at once the fullest fellowship.

The ordination of officers is another principal act of government, which, as recognized in our inquiry, was conducted solely by the hands of the Presbytery.

And so, in like manner, the exercise of discipline; that is specially committed to those in office in His Church. Jesus said, 'Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. Whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained' (John xx. 21-23). Such emphatic declarations were not only given to the apostles; they themselves give as emphatic directions in the epistles for the guidance of the eldership in all places and times. Against an elder receive not an accusation, but before two or three witnesses. Them that sin rebuke before all, that others may fear' (1 Tim. v. 19, 20). A man that is an heretic, after the first and second admonition, reject' (Tit. iii. 10). No such explicit directions are given indicating that the people are themselves to exercise these powers.

In admission, ordination, discipline unto exclusion from fellowship, the elders are observed to govern in every Church. These facts, added to the practice of the Jewish synagogue, to which our Lord alluded, sufficiently explain in what sense the word 'church' is here to be understood. To tell a matter to the church'-where judicial investigation, decision, and execution are all necessary-can only mean to bring it before the eldership of the congregation with which the parties are connected.

It cannot mean tell it to the Church universal, for that were impossible. Neither can it be understood of one man as 'the bishop of a diocese ;' one member cannot be the body. Nor of 'the Christian magistrate,' for this is not a civil matter of outward personal injury, but of scandal and spiritual offence. Further, it is not the entire membership of the congregation. Church power has its seat in the entire membership, but the exercise of judicial functions has not been committed to them promiscuously. It must therefore be, 'Tell it to the officers who represent and govern the Church.' This is a common form of speech, to give the name of the thing represented to that which represents it. The Lord said to Moses, 'Speak ye unto all the congregation of Israel.' Then Moses called for all the elders of Israel, and said unto them' (Exod. xx. 3, 21). So the congregation are directed to restore the manslayer; and yet the thing commanded was done by the elders (Num. xxxv.; Deut. xix.) As the eye is said to see, the ear to hear, while it is the

mind that sees and hears by these organs; so the Church is said to be told and to be heard, while this is by means of the servants of Jesus Christ, and of the Church. Evidently, not to the multitude, but to selected officers, did Christ speak, at the same moment, 'Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.' This explanatory verse shows whose official actions were to be heard and obeyed. If it be contended that this belonged only to the apostles, then 'the church,' of whose power this is the definition, must also be restricted to them, and to their time. If the church' extends to all time, the exercise of disciplinary power must also extend to the eldership.

DISCIPLINE IN THE CORINTHIAN CHURCH

is represented as favouring the views of Congregationalists. Four positions are stated. First, That the whole Church is blamed for not censuring the incestuous person (1 Cor. v.) The reproof of the apostle is not, however, because the members themselves had not judged and excluded him. It is because 'ye are puffed up, and have not rather mourned;' while the result of this mourning was awanting—namely, 'That he that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you.' This language does not necessarily imply that the members individually were to take part in the exclusion. The guilty one might be taken away as effectually by the action of the 'prophets,' 'teachers,' 'governments,' God had set in the Church (chap. xii. 28, 29). And all were not prophets or teachers any more than apostles. Although the guilty should not be taken away by the officers, it is yet possible, and the part of all the membership, to mourn because of the absence of effective discipline, and to stir themselves up to seek reformation.

Secondly, It is asserted that they are all commanded, when they are gathered together, to proceed against him. But this does not expressly warrant every member of the Church to adjudicate. For

(1.) The language is in general terms:- In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are gathered together to deliver such