Southern Christian Advocate

SOUTHERN CHRISTIAN ADVOCATE:
CHARLESTON. SEPTEMBER 11, 1846.

THE NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH.
III. NOTES OF THE CHURCH: I. DIVINITY-SEEN IN ITS LAWS.
Continued.

To the same category belongs the exercise of Social Prayer. This excellent service, which solicits performance and needs no other patronage, is thus recommended by the Savior: "If two shall agree on earth as touching any thing that they shall ask, it shall be done for them of my Father which is in heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them," Matt. xviii. 19, 20. Indeed this is the leading act of social worship, and we cannot conceive of any acceptable act of devotion, whether secret or social, in its absence. "In every thing," says Paul, "by prayer and supplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto God," Phil. iv. 6. The first believers illustrated this precept in the beautiful examples which have been placed on record for our instruction. When their Master was taken from them they returned to Jerusalem, and went up into an upper room, and there the twelve apostles, "with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brethren, continued with one accord in prayer and supplication," Acts i. 12-14. One of their prayers is recorded by the historian, having been offered by them in reference to the election of an apostle to supply the place of Judas, the traitor, Acts i. 23-26. The 3000 that were added to their number continued steadfastly not only in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, but also in prayers, Acts ii. 42. And that was a social prayer too which they offered in reference to their persecutors-it concludes, "Now Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant unto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word, by stretching forth thine hand to heal; and that signs and wonders may be done by the name of thy holy child Jesus. And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness," Acts iv. 24-31. And when Stephen and his colleagues were elected to office, "they were set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them," Acts vi. 5, 6. When Peter was liberated from prison, he sought the disciples, and found them holding a prayer-meeting at a sister's house, having special reference to the apostle's deliverance, Acts xii. 5-12. When Barnabas and Saul were to be sent on a foreign mission, the prophets and teachers at Antioch offered solemn prayer on the occasion, laid their hands on them, and sent them away, Acts xiii, 1-3. How touching is the closing interview of St. Paul with the Ephesian elders--after he had spoken his moving valedictory, "he kneeled down and prayed with them all!" Acts xx. 36. And when he was about to separate from the disciples at Tyre, "we kneeled down upon the shore," says St. Luke, "and prayed," Acts xxi. 5.

With regard to the Posture of Social Prayer, there is no commandment. The Jews of our Savior's time furnished a precedent for standing, Mark xi. 25. Luke xviii. 11, 13. The apostolic church, in the passages, which I have just cited gives us a precedent for kneeling, perhaps in compliance with the Psalmist's exhortation, which had reference to public service, "O come let us worship and bow down: let us kneel before the Lord our maker," Ps. xcv. 6. And this posture seems to be suggested by the very genius of prayer. But the New Testament gives us no precept on the subject.

The Lord Jesus has furnished us with one form of prayer, which may be used verbatim, Luke xi. 2, "When ye pray say, Our Father, &c.," or merely as a model, Matt. vi. 9, "After this manner therefore pray ye, Our Father &c.," the same as before, with some verbal differences, and a doxology appended, thereby showing that it was designed more as a model than as a precise form to be used on all occasions; and to this agree the example of Christ and that of his apostles. Besides this, there is no prescribed form laid down in the Word of God, and no command touching the subject. In the case of primitive prayers which I have already cited, it is the height of absurdity to suppose that any precomposed liturgy was used by the disciples. At the same time it must be admitted, that there is no interdict prohibiting the use of printed forms.

In respect to the language of social prayer, the church of Rome says, it must be the Latin, though not one person in a thousand can comprehend the meaning of a single sentence spoken in that ancient tongue. St. Paul, echoing the sentiment of common sense, says, "If I pray in an unknown tongue, my spirit prayeth; but my understanding is unfruitful. What is it then? I will pray with the spirit, and I will pray with the understanding also; I will sing with the spirit, and I will sing with the understanding also. Else, when thou shalt bless with the spirit, how shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned, say Amen at thy giving of thanks, seeing he understandeth not what thou sayest? For thou verily givest thanks well, but the other is not edified." I thank my God I speak with tongues more than ye all: yet in the church I had rather speak five words with my understanding, that by my voice I might teach others also, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue... If any man speak in an unknown tongue, let it be by two, or at the most by three, and that by course; and let one interpret. But if there be no interpreter, let him keep silence in the church; and let him speak to himself and to God." And he gives the reason, and the only reason, why they were to exercise their miraculous polyglottal endowments at all:--"Wherefore tongues are for a sign, not to them that believe, but to them that believe not," 1 Cor. xiv. Having merely quoted this sensible passage, I shall leave the Romans in the custody of St. Paul--no doubt they will receive ample justice from the apostle; sure I am they will find no mercy.

The performance of social or public prayer is no where restricted to the minister of the word. The private members are exhorted by St. James to pray one for another, and that under circumstances of social intercourse, James v. 16. St. Paul tells the Corinthian Christians how they should attend to this duty, as I have shown in the passage already cited, and there is more on the same subject in the eleventh chapter of the same epistle; in which he alludes to the praying of even women in their assemblies: "Every man praying or prophesying having his head covered, dishonoreth his head. But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered, dishonoreth her head: for that is all one as if she were shaven. For if the woman be not covered let her also be shorn: but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. Judge in yourselves; is it comely that a woman pray unto God uncovered? Doth not even nature itself teach you, that if a man have long hair, it is a shame unto him? But if a woman have long hair it is a glory to her: for her hair is given her for a covering. But if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, neither the church of God." These directions of the apostle do not militate with those found in ch. xiv. 34, "Let your women keep silence in the Churches; for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience, as also saith the law." For the very next verse shows that he was not alluding to the praying or prophesying spoken of in ch. xi--"And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church." The men had the privilege of analyzing each other's discourses, v. 29, "Let the prophets speak two or three, and let the others judge"--but this prerogative was denied the women. So 1 Tim. ii. 11, 12, "Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence." From these passages it appears that St. Paul denied women the right to debate, teach, or govern in the churches --with regard to all these points they were to keep silence--but he allowed them to pray and prophesy. Perhaps, as he alludes to prophesying, he might have had reference to those females who, like the four daughters of Philip, prophesied by miraculous endowments in verification of the promise which St. Peter quotes on the day of Pentecost, "This is that which was spoken by the Prophet Joel: 'And it shall come to pass in the last days, (saith God,) I will pour out my spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams: And on my servants and on my hand-maidens I will pour out, in those days of my Spirit, and they shall prophesy,'" Acts ii. 16-18. It is therefore evident that by denying women the right to debate, teach, govern, or to exercise any other clerical act, St. Paul did not deny them the right to pray or prophesy. He debarred them the exercise of the former functions, while he gave them specific directions for the decorous exercise of the latter. The faculty of prophesying, as here spoken of, may have been exclusively miraculous; if so, it ceased with the apostolic age; and therefore we have no use for prophetesses in the church at the present day. The gift of prayer is an ordinary endowment, and necessary in every age,--it was exercised publicly in the days of the apostles by women as well as men; and as there is nothing in the lapse of time to make it improper for women now, and as it is not prohibited them by any Scripture interdict, while it is not enjoined, they may feel themselves free to act according to their own judgment and feelings in this matter. No such freedom, however, is allowed to ministers-they must give themselves "continually to prayer, and the ministry of the word," Acts vi. 4. And though there is no command on the subject, it seems reasonable enough to devolve on them the responsibility of conducting, when present, all the supplications, prayers, intercessions, and thanksgivings of the whole congregation-and this is in accordance with apostolic precedent. See Acts vi. 6. xiii. 1-3. xx. 36.

Solemn Psalmody belongs to this catalogue of social duties. It is inculcated in Eph. v. 19:--"Speaking to yourselves in Psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing and making melody in your heart to the Lord." And again, Col. iii. 16:--"Let the word of Christ dwell in you richly in all wisdom, teaching and admonishing one another in psalms, and hymns, and spiritual songs, singing with grace in your hearts to the Lord." This exercise, so reasonable, so delightful, so profitable, so heavenly, needs no illustration in this place. Our great Master has hallowed the songs of the temple by singing a hymn with his disciples at the celebration of the Holy Supper Matt. xxvi. 30. I leave those who never sing the praises of God, or only sing by proxy, to settle the matter with the great apostle and his greater Lord. I fear theirs is not always the "expressive silence" by which they "muse" the Savior's praise.

The scriptures also enjoin Mutual Exhortation as another of these social duties:--"Let us consider one another, to provoke unto love and to good works; not forsaking the assembling of ourselves together, as the manner of some is; but exhorting one another: and so much the more as ye see the day approaching," Heb. x. 24, 25. So also Mutual Confession: "Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed," James v. 16.

I have now enumerated all the components of Social or Public Worship. I know of no other in the sacred Scriptures, The ministry of the word, the administration of Baptism, the celebration of the Lord's Supper, Prayer, Praise, Mutual Exhortations and Confessions-these are all explicitly taught by Christ and his apostles, and sure I am that these duties, properly attended to, are all-sufficient for the worship of God. Do any say that I have forgotten the "Sacrament of Matrimony?" I have done no such thing. I have seen St. Paul's famous prediction concerning "this sacrament," 1 Tim. iv. 3, and how it has been fulfilled. And I remember, too, that he tells us that we are to marry "only in the Lord," 1 Cor. vii. 39. But that it is a part of Public Worship I deny: though I think it very proper indeed for the church to solemnize Matrimony by appropriate religious services.

There is also the "Sacrament of Holy Orders." Of this "sacrament" too the Bible is silent. It is not silent, however, with regard to the office of the Ministry. And, indeed, it would seem that the public recognition of the Divine call to this holy work was sometimes accompanied with "the laying on of hands." If "the gift of God" that was in Timothy is to be considered the ministerial office, then this office was given to the Evangelist by the laying on of hands. But the apostle having spoken of the gift of God which was in Timothy by the putting on of his hands, immediately adds, "For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind," 2 Tim. i. 6, 7. Compared with 1 Tim. iv. 14. 1 Tim. v. 22. From this I should be led to conclude that "the gift of God" here spoken of was rather the Divine qualification, or miraculous endowment for the Ministry, than the office itself; and this construction agrees better than any other with the exhortation,"Stir up the gift of God which is in thee." Still, as the apostle instructs Timothy to "lay hands suddenly on no man," it is possible he may have had reference, in this caution, to the recognition of ministers-whether elders or deacons no man can tell. But then it is to be remembered, 1, There is nothing said about this ceremony in the appointment of Matthias, Apollos, and others: 2, It was used in the case of ministers, nay apostles, who had long been in the ministry, when they were despatched on a particular ministerial errand, Acts xiii. 1-4: 3, There is no precept requiring its constant use in the public recognition of the ministerial call: 4, It is therefore no essential part of the social worship of the church.

The foregoing, so-styled, Sacraments-Matrimony and Orders--are considered, by the Roman doctors, ordinances of the church, necessary to salvation, though not necessary to every individual. But they tell us there are three more Sacraments-exclusive of Baptism and the Lord's Supper--all necessary to salvation, and that to every individual. Let us examine them.

The Council of Trent says, "Whoever shall affirm that the Confirmation of the baptized is a trifling ceremony, and not a true and proper sacrament... let him be accursed. Whoever shall affirm that they offend the Holy Spirit who attribute any virtue to the chrism of confirmation; let him be accursed. Whoever shall affirm that the usual administrator of Confirmation is not the bishop only, but any ordinary priest; let him be accursed." This sacrament is sometimes called "the laying on of hands," and that not only in the Roman, but also in the Anglican church, because the imposition of the bishop's hands is considered essential to the ordinance. That there is no scriptural warrant for this sacrament will be abundantly evident upon the examination of all those passages in which mention is made of the laying on of hands. In Luke iv. 40, I read, "they brought those that were sick with divers diseases to Jesus, and he laid his hands on every one of them, and healed them." When "they brought little children to Jesus, he took them up in his arms, put his hands upon them, and blessed them," Mark x. 16. When Stephen and his associates were appointed to "serve tables," "the apostles laid their hands on them," Acts vi. 2-6. "When the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: who when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: for as yet he was fallen upon none of them; only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw, that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost. But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money," Acts viii. 14-20. When Saul of Tarsus was lying three days without sight, he saw, "in a vision, a man named Ananias, coming in, and putting his hand on him that he might receive his sight." His vision was realized; for under the Divine guidance, "Ananias went his way, and entering into the house; and putting his hands on him, said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost," Acts ix. 9-18. It does not appear that Ananias communicated to him the miraculous powers of the Holy Ghost,-this was a peculiar prerogative of the apostles, Acts viii. 17, 18. He merely performed a miracle of healing, as appears from the 12th verse-no doubt, however, the Holy Ghost was imparted at the same time; and that too in such a way and to such a degree, as was not realized by ordinary believers, as he was thereby divinely qualified for the work of an apostle. Comp. 1 Cor. ix. 1. Gal. i. When certain prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch would despatch Barnabas and Saul on a Missionary tour, "when they had fasted and prayed, they laid their hands on them, and sent them away," Acts xiii. 1-4. "When Paul had laid his hands upon the believers at Ephesus, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues and prophesied," Acts xix. 6. The great apostle, writing to Timothy, says, as we have already noticed, "Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery" 1. Tim. iv. 14. And again, "Lay hands suddenly on no man, neither be partaker of other men's sins; keep thyself pure," 1 Tim. v. 22. And still again, "I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands," 2 Tim. i. 6. And in his epistle to the Hebrews he puts "laying on of hands" among the principles of the doctrine of Christ, Heb. vi. 1, 2.

Here then we have the "laying on of hands," 1, For the healing of the sick: 2, For the blessing of children: 3, For the designation of men to the work of "serving tables:" 4, For the designation of apostles to some specific work: 5, Possibly, for the designation of Timothy to the evangelical, and others to the presbyterial office: 6, Especially, for the impartation of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost, Besides these cases there is not another specified in the New Testament; and in not one of these cases is the precedent binding upon the church by any precept.

Now is it not ridiculous, nay blasphemous, to found the "Sacrament of Confirmation" upon the laying on of hands, especially as it is the sixth instance alone which is pleaded in support of this superstitious rite? What arrogant assumption to affirm, as the churches of Rome and England do affirm, that the bishop can give the Holy Ghost by the laying on of his hands! This is an imposition indeed! When, did a Romish or an Anglican prelate impart to the disciples the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost? And remember none other are spoken of in this connection. Indeed, I might ask, When did one of our apostolics impart the Holy Ghost in any sense? but this I shall wave as not being relevant to my subject. True; the twelve apostles did confirm the churches, Acts xv. 41; but it is not said they did this by the laying on of hands, Επιστεριζω means to cause to stand firm, to establish, to strengthen; as it is rendered in Acts xviii 23, Paul went over all the country of Galatia and Phrygia in order, επιστεριζων strengthening all the disciples. And the manner in which they strengthened, or confirmed the disciples, is not left to conjecture; for it is expressly stated it was by "exhorting them to continue in the faith, and that we must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of God," Acts xiv. 22. Nor was this confined to the apostles, for Judas and Silas, in company with the Apostles, as prophets, "exhorted the brethren with many words, and confirmed them," Acts xv. 32. In fact. it is the grand end of all ministerial labor to make "the churches established in the faith," Acts xvi. 5; that they may "be steadfast, and unmoveable, always abounding in the work of the Lord," 1 Cor. xv. 58, Eph. iv. 11-16. To affirm that this scriptural confirmation has any affinity with the "sacrament" in question, with its "unction," "signing with the cross," "slapping on the cheek," "kissing," and other mummeries, is ineffably absurd-not to say supremely blasphemous.

The Council of Trent says, "If any one affirms that in the Catholic Church Penance is not truly a sacrament, instituted by our Lord Jesus Christ, to reconcile the faithful to God, as often as they sin after baptism; let him be accursed." "If any one denies that three acts are requisite in a penitent for the entire and perfect remission of sins, which are, as it were, the matter of the sacrament of penance, namely, contrition, confession, and satisfaction, which are called the three parts of penance, let him be accursed."

Now the Scriptures no where deny the former; they no where affirm the latter; consequently the "sacrament of penance," does not belong to the agenda of the church. Indeed contrition is necessary to salvation; but let it be free from Roman adulterations. Confession too is necessary: but auricular confession to a priest is made necessary by the fourth council of Lateran and the council of Trent; but it is not by the Bible. Perhaps the history of the confessional may furnish the reason why the holy Scriptures did not enjoin this part of the sacrament of penance. As it regards the blasphemous notion of satisfaction, if I were St. Peter I would place it among other "damnable heresies," and let it share their fate. Of course the incantations connected with priestly absolution are as unscriptural as the impious doctrine on which they are based, and as the latter must not be believed, so the former must not be practised. I shall give myself no further concern with the "sacrament of penance."

There is still the "sacrament of Extreme Unction;" concerning which the Council of Trent says, "Whoever shall affirm that Extreme Unction is not truly and properly a sacrament, instituted by Christ, our Lord, and published by the blessed apostle James, but only a ceremony received from the fathers, or a human invention, let him be accursed." "Whoever shall affirm that the sacred unction of the sick does not confer grace, nor forgive sins, nor relieve the sick, but that its power has ceased, as if the gift of healing existed only in past ages, let him be accursed."

Now I am bold to affirm all these points, and brave the Tridentine thunder. I am referred to Mark vi. 13, "and they cast out many devils, and anointed with oil many that were sick, and healed them:" and also to James, v. 14, "Is any sick among you? let him call for the elders of the church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the name of the Lord: and the prayer of faith shall save the sick, and the Lord shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him." Now if any one can see the slightest resemblance between the course here recommended and the Extreme Unction of the papists, he can discover an agreement between the most opposing principles. The unction spoken of by the evangelist and the apostle was designed for a miraculous cure-and answered its design: the unction of the papists is never administered only when they suppose the case is hopeless--they then anoint the patient-and put him into his coffin! Until I discover a cure, both of body and soul, effected by the holy oil and the Latin prayers, I shall consider the "sacrament of the dying" a ridiculous farce, a blasphemous perversion of a Divine, Miraculous institution, and a pernicious anodyne superstitiously administered to the dying sinner, instead of the Balm of Gilead, which is the only remedy for the sin-sick soul-the only true cordial in the solemn hour and article of death.

In reference to all other superstitious appendages to the worship of Almighty God, I shall remark in one word, they only rob it of its simple beauty, and detract from its Divine glory and perfection. It is dangerous to be wise above what is written. We have a great and important task assigned us by the Head of the Church. By the time we have faithfully discharged it, we shall have no leisure nor disposition to "offer strange fire before the Lord." I have no objection to "tithe mint, anise, and cummin," if we do not "omit the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith," Matt. xxiii. 23. But the superstitions to which I allude and which I denounce, are neither the weightier nor the lighter matters of the law--no, not even "mint, anise, and cummin"-they are nothing but the wild and worthless weeds of an unhallowed imagination. Let us take care how we bring such vile trash into the sanctuary of the Lord.

The Laws of the church which respect Polity, have reference to the recognition and appointment of Ministers--the reception, censure, and expulsion of Members. But as the Ministry and Membership of the church are to occupy separate chapters, I shall reserve for them the consideration of Church Politics.

*Sess. xiv. Of Ex. Unc. Canons 1st and 2d.