Mistakes to be guarded

Reformers

and to avail themselves of whatever advantages may lie within their reach. If they have among their number, Christian Ministers of several Orders, or of one Order,-if they can obtain a supply of such from some other sound Church,or if they can unite themselves to such a Church with advantage to the great ultimate objects for which Churches were originally instituted,—all these are advantages not to be lightly thrown away. But the unavoidable absence of any of these advantages, not only is not to be imputed to them as a matter of blame, but, by imposing the necessity, creates the right, and the duty, of supplying their deficiencies as they best can. Much as they may regret being driven to the alternative, they ought not to hesitate in their decision, when their choice lies between adherence to the human Governors of a Church, and to its Divine Master ;-between "the form of godliness, and the power thereof;"—between the means and the end;-between unbroken apostolical succession of individuals, and uncorrupted Gospel principles.

$37. Persons so situated ought to be on their against by guard against two opposite mistakes: the one when com- is, to undervalue the privileges of a Christian Community, by holding themselves altogether debarred from the exercise of such powers as

pelled to

separation.

naturally and essentially belong to every Community; the other mistake is to imagine that whatever they have an undoubted right to do, they would necessarily be right in doing. In no other subject perhaps would such a confusion of thought be likely to arise, as is implied by the confounding together of things so different as these two. Although the legislature (as I have above remarked) has an undoubted right to pass, or to reject, any Bill, a man would be deemed insane who should thence infer that they are equally right in doing either the one or the other. So also the Governors of a Church are left, in respect of ordinances and regulations not prescribed or forbidden in Scripture, to their own judgment; but they are bound to act according to the best of their judgment. What is left to their discretion is not therefore left to their caprice; nor are they to regard every point that is not absolutely essential, as therefore absolutely indifferent.

They have an undoubted right according to the principles I have been endeavouring to establish, to appoint such Orders of Christian Ministers, and to allot to each such functions as they judge most conducive to the great ends of the Society; they may assign to the whole, or to a portion of these, the office of ordaining others as their successors; they may appoint one superintendent of the rest, or several ;

Province of discretion.

under the title of Patriarch, Archbishop, Bishop, Moderator, or any other that they may prefer; they may make the appointment of them for life, or for a limited period,-by election, or by rotation, with a greater, or a less extensive, jurisdiction; and they have a similar discretionary power with respect to Liturgies, Festivals, Ceremonies, and whatever else is left at large in the Scriptures.

66

Now to infer that all possible determinations of all these and similar points, would be equally expedient, and equally wise, and good, would be an absurdity so gross that in no other case not connected with religion, would men need even to be warned against it. In fact, it would go to do away the very existence of any such attributes as "wisdom,”—“ prudence,”—“discretion,” -" judgment," &c. altogether: for there is evidently no room for the exercise of them in matters not left to our choice, and in which the course we are to pursue is decided for us, and distinctly marked out, by a higher Authority; nor again is there any room for them in matters where there is not a right and a wrong,―a better and a worse; and where the decision is a matter of total indifference; as in the choice between two similar sheets of paper to begin writing on, when both are lying within one's reach. The sole province of prudent and cautious delibera

tion is in cases which are left to our decision, and in which we may make a better or a worse decision.

of the above

The mistakes, however, which I have been Instances alluding to, have been not unfrequently made in mistakes. what relates to the powers possessed by Christian Communities, and the mode of exercising these powers. For instance, at the time of the great Reformation, some Bodies of Christians found themselves without any Bishop among their number; and formed what are called Presbyterian Churches. Some members accordingly of these Churches have felt themselves called upon in self-defence to decry Episcopacy, as a form of Government not instituted by the Apostles, and, consequently, as one which all Christians are bound to reject. Erroneous as, I am convinced, their premiss was, they were, on the above principles, still more erroneous in drawing that conclusion from it. Others of them again lamented their want of Episcopacy; considering that form of government as having the apostolical sanction, and consequently, as obligatory and indispensable to be retained, when possible; but to them, unattainable, from the interruption of episcopal succession. And while some presume to exclude all Presbyterians from the pale of Christ's universal Church-professing at the same time, in words, what they virtually nullify by their inter

pretations, that "Holy Scripture contains all things necessary to salvation," others again compassionate and sympathize with the supposed unavoidable deficiency in the Presbyterian Churches.

It

Now that all these parties are mistaken in their views (though a mere mistake, when not accompanied with a want of charity, is not deserving of severe censure) must be evident to any one who embraces the principles which in the outset I endeavoured to establish. follows from those principles, that the Bodies of Christians we have been speaking of, had full power to retain or to restore, or to originate, whatever form of Church-government they, in their deliberate and cautious judgment, might deem best for the time, and country, and persons, they had to deal with; whether exactly similar, or not, to those introduced by the Apostles; provided nothing were done contrary to Gospelprecepts and principles. They were, therefore, perfectly at liberty to appoint Bishops, even if they had none that had joined in the reformation; or to discontinue the appointment, even if they had: whichever they were convinced was the most conducive, under existing circumstances, to the great objects of all Church-government. And though their decision of this point ought to have been very greatly influenced by their belief as to what were the forms adopted by the