national church of Scotland, as then represented by her judicatories, had not a just claim to these notes of a true church of Christ: and I cannot say, I have, as yet, learned, that there is a real reformation of that church, with respect to those evils, which led to that conclusion.

Arminian, and other false doctrine, is still propagated in the Protestant churches. This is likely to be the case, while the influence of opinions in favour of the catholic scheme of church communion, incapacitates the churches for giving any effectual check to the progress error, by the faithful exercise of discipline.

of

§ 41. I may observe, that the marks of a true church, as including the principles of the Reformation, harmoniously stated in their confessions, hold forth, not only what, in a lax sense, may be called a true church; but one which, as to the general tenor of her doctrine and administration, is sound and pure: a church, which is not only opposed to assemblies of heathen idolaters, or unbelieving Jews, or to such as have lost the faith of the Trinity and the atonement; but to churches which, as Turretine says,* are true churches, though they are not to be reckoned pure.

The obstinate attachment of such corrupt churches to their wood, hay and stubble, may render it necessary to withdraw from their sacramental communion, and to endeavour to preserve the ordinances of God pure and entire in a separate society. Such a society, having the marks of a true church, according to these confessions, is indeed a true church, to which we ought to join ourselves. Nor, in this case, is our declining to have communion with a corrupt Protestant church, which obstinately refuses to be reclaimed, any more inconsistent with our relation to the catholic church, than our declining to have such communion with the church of Rome.

Alex. The Belgick Confession, i. e. the Confession of the Protestant Calvinists, in the United Provinces, in 1561, thus lays down their faith respecting the church. We believe and confess one catholic or universal church; which is the true congregation of all faithful christians. We believe that, since there is no salvation out of it, no person, of whatever rank or dignity, may withdraw himself therefrom, so as to live separately, contented with his own custom only. But, on the contrary, that all are bound to join themselves to this assembly, and carefully to preserve the unity of the church; and freely submit themselves to her doctrine and discipline, bowing their neck to the yoke of Christ.-It is the duty of all believers, to disjoin themselves from those who are without the church, and to join themselves to this assembly and congregation of the faithful, wheresoever God has settled it. Whoever, therefore, forsakes that true church, or do not join themselves to it, resist the commandment of God.

The marks, by which the true church is known, are the pure preaching of the gospel; the legitimate administration of the sacraments, according to the command of Christ; and ecclesiastical discipline, for the coercion of vice. It is a church which adjusts all things to the rule of God's word; rejects whatever is contrary to it, and acknowfedges Jesus Christ as her only Head. By these marks, the true

* Institutione Theologie. Loc. xviii. Quæst. 12. sect. 7.

church, from which it is not lawful for any one to separate himself, may be certainly known.*

Ruf. This is agreeable to what I have observed, that a church, which exhibits the marks of a true church of Christ, though imperfect, has attained, through the goodness of God, such a measure of conformity to the pattern of his word in doctrine, worship and government, that, compared with a corrupt or backsliding church, and with regard to her ruling character, she may be justly called a pure church; and that, in joining ourselves and adhering to the communion of such a church, even when separating from a more numerous body, on account of prevailing defection, we do not separate from the catholic or universal church; but adhere to it more closely than we would do, by continuing in the communion, and conniving at the evils of the more numerous body.

Alex. Rufus, you mistake the meaning of the Belgick Confession; for, according to that Confession, it is the duty of every one, who loves the Lord Jesus, to hold communion with the catholic church, through the medium of any one of her branches, to which he may have access, in any part of the world. If there be but a true church, that is enough to justify his participation of her ordinances; and, if she be the only true church there, to render such participation, his bounden duty. It is true, the Confession does speak of the preaching of the gospel in a true church being pure; of the administration of the sacraments being according to the command of Christ; of her discipline being sincere and faithful; and of every thing being reduced to the rule of God's word; and of her rejection of every thing contrary to it: but this must be understood, not so much of the actual attainment of scriptural perfection, by any churches whatever, as of their avowed standard; of the test, to which they submit their pretensions; and of their substantial character; whatever, in other respects, might be their failings or differences. The Belgick churches themselves had not then, and have not since, arrived at such purity as their own confessions, according to certain expressions separately taken, seem to require: and they did not intend to say, that they had not themselves true churches, and were unworthy of communion with others.+

Ruf. With regard to the avowed standard, or test to which churches submit their pretensions; an acknowledgment of the holy scriptures, as the standard and test of religious truth is, no doubt, necessary to the character of a true church of Christ. But this cannot be justly considered a sufficient ground for the denomination of a true church of Christ, without any consideration of what conformity to the scriptures she has attained, in particular articles of doctrine and worship: otherwise, even those churches which have lost the faith of the Trinity and the atonement, may be allowed to be true churches.

You say, that this description, in the Belgick Confession, of true churches of Christ, as churches whose doctrine, worship and discipline are adjusted to the rule of God's word, is to be understood as their substantial character; that is, as applicable to churches so corrupt, that they have nothing more in respect of their public profession to entitle them to the character of churches of Christ, than their holding such doctrines as are absolutely necessary to be known and believed,

* Plea, &c. pages 148, 149, 150. Id. pages 152, 154.

in order to salvation, or what you call the essentials. But, though I own that such churches may be called, in a large sense, true churches; I am far from thinking, that it is the design of the Belgick Confession, in the passage under consideration, to describe such churches. For, in the first place, a church, having what you call the essentials, may be, as to the habitual and prevailing state of religion in it, the reverse of that which is described in the words of the Confession in this place: her doctrine may be corrupted by a mixture of error; her worship, by what is taken away from, or added to the Divine institutions; and her government may be tyrannical; and she may be continuing obstinate in these evils, after all ordinary means have been used to reclaim her. And her persisting in these evils may be peculiarly heinous and aggravated, as being an apostacy from great purity in doctrine, worship and government, formerly attained. Now, it is unwarrantable, to suppose, that this passage of the Belgick Confession, giving particular characters of that church of Christ to which we ought to join ourselves, should mean, that we are bound to join ourselves to a church of a contrary description.

The unreasonableness of this construction is more evident from what is added, in the same article of that confession, concerning the false church, from which we are to depart; "a church that sets the authori"ty of its own constitutions above that of God's word; that refuses "to submit to the yoke of Christ; that does not administer the sa"craments according to Christ's appointment." It is true, that by the false church here, the compilers of the confession immediately intended the church of Rome, which was the principal erroneous church, that our Reformers had to contend against. But they certainly meant, that the same evils in whatever church they might be found, would make her character so far as they prevailed, in her, differ from that of the true church of Christ. To the same purpose are the following words of the Confession of the cities of Argentor, Constance, Memingen, and Lindau. "They cannot bear the character of the church "of Christ who teach what is contrary to the commands of Christ. "Though they may be within the church; yet, being entangled in er"ror, the sound of the Shepherd's voice is not heard in them: they "cannot represent the church, the spouse of Christ."*

In the second place, though the Belgick Confession, in this passage, does not direct us to seek a perfect church on earth; yet it certainly directs us to seek a pure or faithful church; a church which is endeavouring to hold fast all the reformation already attained; and which does not refuse to be reformed more and more. In this light they certainly considered all their own churches; and the other reformed churches with which they had communion. They considered them as in a state of progressive reformation, not in a state of progressive defection. There is nothing in the words of this Confession implying, that it is our duty to have sacramental communion with a church which is in a state of progressive defection; or that our declining sacramental communion with such a corrupt church and our adhering to a church bearing testimony against such defection, is a separation from the catholic or universal church, out of which there is no salvation.

Cap. 15. de Ecclesia.

I add only one remark, which is, that what this Confession says of the true church, must here be understood of her actual attainment; for we cannot judge, whether a church be true or false, pure or corrupt, but by what she has actually attained. On the whole, it is evident, that the principles on which the Protestant churches left the church of Rome, and the marks of a true church of Christ stated in their Confessions, are altogether inconsistent with the scheme of catholic communion now pleaded for.

§ 42. The second reason, I offer, for my persuasion, that the scheme of catholic communion is contrary to the principles of the Reformed churches, arises from the design of their Confessions and from the harmony of their doctrines. It was the design of these Confessions, not only as has been just now observed, to shew, that these churches bear the marks or characters of true churches of Jesus Christ; but to serve as bonds of union among their members, and as tests of soundness in the faith, and means of keeping the erroneous out of their communion.

"It was the design of these Confessions," says Turretine, "that "they might be forms of agreement and serve as a bond of salutary "union, in which all the pious might coalesce into one body, and that "they might be means of preventing animosities, dangerous dissen❝sions and schisms tending to deprive the church both of truth and uni« ty.”

66

He adds, "That they serve to guard against the introduction of "dangerous novelties, which corrupt the simplicity of the faith and "disturb the peace of the church." The obligation, which these Confessions were intended to have on church members, is defined in the following words of Spanheim: "These Confessions," says he, "oblige all, in respect of the conscience, no otherwise than hypotheti"cally, on account of the agreement of their doctrine with the holy "scriptures, on account of the manifestation of the truth in them to every conscience, 2 Corinth. iv. 2. Not as they are the words of men, "but as they are the words of God, 1 Thess. ii. 13. But all the mem"bers of the same society are fellow labourers in the same ministry "and in the same church, in the English church, for example, in the "Dutch, in the Helvetian, &c. are under an absolute obligation to the "Confessions or forms of doctrine adopted by their respective socie"ties or churches, as external or ecclesiastical bodies; as the stand"ards of what they have agreed to in the matters of faith, as the foun"dations of their external church union, as remedies against schisms; "as justly deduced, according to the public judgement of the church, "from the holy scriptures, the only principle and supreme standard "of the doctrines of religion; not, however, precluding any person "from the private examination or trial of these Confessions by the

* Ut essent formulæ consensus, et unionis salutaris vinculum, quo pii omnes in unum corpus coagmentarentur, et sic omnes distractiones, periculosi dissensus et schismata, quibus veritas et unitas Ecclesiæ laceratur, præcaverentur. De Potestate Eccl. Quæst. 30. Sect. 8.

† Ad præcavendas periculosas novitates, quæ fidei simplicitatem inficire poterant, et pacem Ecclesiæ turbare. Ibid. Sect. 12.

"touch-stone of the Divine word, in order to farther confirmation in "the faith."*

According to this design, every article of a scriptural Confession, which a particular church, has adopted, essential or non-essential, belongs to the bond of union among her members, and to the test of soundness in the faith. But if a particular church, or her members, have sacramental communion with the public and obstinate opposers of any article of such a Confession; that church and her members, in doing so, declare that such an article is no more any bond of their union. For it cannot be shewn, that the members of any particular church may warrantably have an article of a Confession of Faith, as a bond of union among themselves, which ought not to be so between them and all christians with whom they may warrantably communicate. Nor can any article of a Confession adopted by any particular church; while that church has sacramental communion with the open and obstinate opposers of it, serve in her for a test of soundness in the faith: for, in that case, none can be kept from partaking of sealing ordinances, nor consistently subjected to any censure, for rejecting it, or holding doctrine contrary to it.

Our Reformers, no doubt, allowed some articles of their Confessions to be more important and to lie nearer the foundation of our holy religion, than others; but that it consisted with their design, in framing and publishing their Confessions to the world, that a great part of them should not be considered, as belonging to the necessary bond of their ecclesiastical union, or to the test of soundness in the faith, in due subordination to the holy scriptures,. I have not, as yet, seen any ground to believe.

§ 43. Conformable to this design is the harmony of these Confessions. It is delightful to observe their agreement with the holy scriptures, and with one another. One cannot fail to have this satisfaction in comparing these Confessions with one another, on the following subjects; on the holy scriptures; on human tradition; on the Holy Trinity; on the Providence of God; on the person of Christ and his relation to the church as her only Head; on the justification of a sinner before God; on the fiducial nature of faith; on repentance and good works; on predestination and free will; on the sacraments; on the church and her ministers; on the resurrection and eternal life.

Hence it appears, that the sacramental communion, which the Reformed churches had at first with one another on the ground of their Confessions, could be no example of the catholic communion now pleaded for; that is, it was no example of any of them having such communion with the avowed and obstinate opposers of any scriptural doctrine, essential or non-essential, of their public profession.

Alex. According to these Confessions, differences as to rites, ceremonies, modifications of external order, ought not to hinder churches,

* Formulæ publicæ sane omnes obligant etiam in foro interno sed non aliter quam ex hypothesi ab doctrine homosephian cum scripturis sacris ob anerosin in iis ventatis pros pasan suneidesin, 2 Corinth. iv. 2, nec ut sunt verbum hominum, sed ut sunt verbum Dei, 1 Thes. ii. 13. Ast vero membra omnia ejusdem societatis et sunergous in eodem ministerio, eademque ecclesia, puta, Anglicana, Batava, Helvetica, &c. obligant formula doctrine absolute, in foro externo, seu civilis eu ecclesiastico; nempe, ut norma consensus, ut fundamentum unionis, ut remedia schismatum, ut quæ censentur judicio publico deducte ex principio unico scripturæ: non excluso tamen cujusque examine, et anakrisei privata et sungkrisei ad lapidem Lydiam verbi Divini.