SEASONS OF COVENANTING.
The duty is never unsuitable. Men have frequently, improperly esteemed
the exercise as one that should be had recourse to, only on some great
emergency. But as it is sinful to defer religious exercises till
affliction, presenting the prospect of death, constrain to attempt them,
so it is wrong to imagine, that the pressure of calamity principally
should constrain to make solemn vows. The exercise of personal
Covenanting should be practised habitually. The patriot is a patriot
still; and the covenanter is a covenanter still. "It is not enough that
the heart be once given to God; when this has really been done it is a
great attainment; but it must again and again be surrendered in renewed
acts of self-dedication, in order to the maintenance of any thing like
fidelity and steadfastness in his service. A daily recognition of our
relationship to Christ, is full of comfort and encouragement, and is at
the same time invaluable as a means of sanctification. How precious the
privilege of being able in all difficulties and dangers, to speak of the
great Jehovah in the language of Paul,--'God, whose I am, and whom I
serve!'[785] How powerful the argument, in applying for deliverance from
evil of whatever kind, employed by the Psalmist,--'_I am thine_, save
me.'[786]"[787] And though the exercises of Social Covenanting are not
practicable so frequently as those of that which is personal, there is
no reason why they, any more than the other, should be reckoned as
incumbent only on occasions of an extraordinary nature.
But special seasons do give peculiar calls to the duty in all its
variety. Times of hazard and distress, by displaying in relief, the
vanity of all the aids that mere creatures could afford, and finding men
looking around for comfort and support, invite, with a power peculiar to
themselves, to look to Him who is a present help to his people in every
time of need, and cordially, by Covenanting, to respond to his
invitation,--"Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver thee,
and thou shalt glorify me."[788] When religion is low, and error and
vice and ungodliness prevail, the hosts of darkness are successful; but
their clamour is unfit to drown the cry, so fitted to inspire with holy
zeal, then urging to special devotedness to the Lord's cause,--"Who is
on the Lord's side?"[789] In times of reviving, there are transmitted by
every gale from heaven, the words of the Redeemer, inviting his
Spouse--his Church, individually and socially to the holy duty of
acknowledging Him as her Lord,--"Rise up, my love, my fair one, and come
away."[790] When the friends of truth unite for its maintenance, either
in an incorporate or other capacity, they are called to follow the Lord,
the "Leader." Is it said of the wicked,--"They are confederate against
thee (or, against thy Covenant they shall covenant)"? What ought to be
the conduct unitedly of those, who individually are interested in the
Lord's Covenant? Are they not urged, to declare most explicitly by
formally taking hold upon it, that they have come up to the help of the
Lord, to the help of the Lord against the mighty?[791]
FOOTNOTES:
[785] Acts xxvii. 23.
[786] Ps. cxix. 94.
[787] "Enter into thy Closet." By the Rev. James M'Gill, Hightae,
Lochmaben. Glasgow: David Bryce, 1843;--a most valuable work on the
secret duties of religion.
[788] Ps. l. 15.
[789] Exod. xxxii. 26.
[790] Song ii. 10.
[791] Appendix C.
CONCLUSION
Hence the exercise of Covenanting has powerful claims. It is important.
It is unfolded by a flood of light from the page of Divine truth. It is
intimately connected with the manifestation of the glory of God. It is
related to every other duty incumbent on men. It contemplates the best
interests of society at present and to come;--it bears upon the
maintenance of the just rights of mankind, and the glory of the Church
in Millennial times. And it is an important means of sanctification, and
of perseverance in grace. By means of it, each one of the glorious
community of which Christ is the Head is called to manifest attachment
to him; and through it to become more and more like unto him: so that
the whole body of the faithful, each one having been taken into God's
Covenant, and enabled to abide by it,--the Church, as the Lamb's wife,
may be presented faultless before the presence of his glory with
exceeding joy.
It is advantageous. Preparation for it leads to accurate apprehensions
of duty. It tends to cherish a devout solemnity of mind. It leads to the
comforts of habitual holy communion with God. It impresses with a sense
of increased obligation, that furnishes an ardour of mind, powerfully
impelling to duty. It tends to unite many in affection, and sentiment,
and zeal for truth. It presents instruction most solemnly to the young
and rising race, led to inquire concerning it, "What mean ye by this
service?" It is calculated to arrest for good the attention of society
at large. And it provides benefits the most valuable and extensive, for
generations unborn.
It is necessary. It forms a part of the system of means devised by
Jehovah for carrying forward his work; and it must be observed. His
work, by this and other means, will be completed. Though the evils that
have occurred in the world have been permitted, yet some are chargeable
with blame for committing them, and others are culpable for not having
used various means, of which Covenanting is one, in order that they
might have been prevented. Though the Romish apostacy was permitted, yet
who can tell how far the Church of God was culpable in not using
extensively enough for its prevention, Covenanting--one means directly
adapted to that purpose? And who can tell what effect the performance of
the duty will have in leading to the good in store for the Church, even
on earth, and to the prevention of evil which, if allowed, would arise?
The duty, therefore, should be observed.[792] It is irreligion that
disregards it. Superstition and infidelity alike trifle with an oath;
for Satan hates and tries to discredit this institution of heaven. Who,
by not observing the ordinance of Covenanting would practically say,
that it ought to be abolished? Who would say that one flower of the
field should cease to exist in the vegetable world, because that many
others emit a fragrance whose elements are the same as those of the
sweets which it breathes, or display tints due to the same colours that
afford its glorious hues? And who would say that this part of the
glorious system of the means of grace is unnecessary? Let this Ordinance
be observed, that evil, as a corrupt thing under the atmosphere and sun
of heaven, may perish before it; that many may enjoy the blessedness of
the inheritance of the saints; and that God may be glorified through
Jesus Christ, the Mediator of the New Covenant.
FOOTNOTES:
[792] Appendix D.
APPENDIX.
A.
Every species of co-operation with the appointed functionaries of an
immoral and unscriptural civil government, may not imply the recognition
of that power to be the ordinance of God. To co-operate with these for
example, in the execution of justice, is not necessarily to acknowledge
that the power is of God. If the forms of procedure be in themselves
proper, and the laws just, the carrying of them into effect for the good
of society and for the glory of God, is in itself right. But it is one
thing to say that justice should be done in society, and also to aid in
the execution of it, and it may be quite another to acknowledge that the
civil rulers of the given society have a right to do so in virtue of
authority from God. Justice should be done, by a civil power--agreeable
to God's preceptive will. If no such power exist, the community are to
blame for not originating such a power. And if justice be not done, they
are also culpable;--because of the want of such a power justice is not
to be undone. Were such to be allowed, the community would be chargeable
with the crimes of both remaining without a proper civil power and
permitting evil to be committed with impunity. To co-operate with an
unlawful civil power in doing justice, is therefore to do less evil, yea
more good, than would be done by refraining from co-operation.
The swearing of an oath by those called to testify to truth, or to act
in the weighing of evidence, as on a jury, in order to the execution of
justice, does not necessarily imply a recognition of the authority that
calls to do so, to be of God. It is the using of a lawful means of
giving assurance regarding truth necessary to be ascertained, but does
not essentially imply that the claims of those exercising power to the
use of that power, are good. A lawful constituted authority, whether
civil or ecclesiastical, has a right to claim an oath for proper
purposes. But an oath may be sworn to others besides. It may be sworn
for a good end, even to those whose pretensions to power and authority
may not be well founded, but not as if they had a right to claim it,
but merely because of the giving of it being in itself right. The oath
may be sworn for a proper purpose before an individual who has correct
impressions of its sacredness, even though he may be acting for an
unwarranted civil authority. It is not easy to conceive, however, how
one could swear an oath to an infidel, or to any other who regards not
the oath as a solemn religious engagement. The giving of an oath before
a judge and jury, or on a jury before a judge, under an unscriptural
government, does not include the recognition of those as using a power
deputed by God; but contemplates them as Christian men, though mistaken
as to their power, yet doing what is in itself right, and which, if done
by those possessed of authority from God, would be done in all things,
though imperfectly, according to his will. To swear to do justice, is
not to swear an oath of allegiance to an evil power. The one is a duty;
the other would be sinful. It is because that no better means of doing
justice can be employed, that oaths to do justice in the said
circumstances should be given. For the assumption of power which does
not belong to them, those who make it, but not those who even make oath
before them to do what is in itself good, while they protest against
their unlawful claims to authority, are responsible.
A civil government must either be the ordinance of God or not. It cannot
be viewed as acting, in some things, in the character of a power
ordained of God, but in others, as not possessed of authority from him.
A good government, like a true Christian, often does what is evil. But a
bad government, like the wicked, even though it do what in itself is
right, cannot be viewed as in possession of privilege from God, or as
acting for his glory. Yet the inflicting of a just penalty, even by an
unwarranted power, is not to be reckoned as injustice, or--if a capital
punishment, as murder. It is the claim to power which is made, but not
the accomplishment of the deed of retribution--which in itself is just,
that is faulty. Take for example the execution of justice on a murderer.
Murder is not the crime to be laid to the charge of those who, acting
for or under the authority of a power that is not of God, on proper
evidence put to death one who has unjustly taken away the life of a
fellow creature. If a government not authorised by God, after due
investigation put a murderer to death, they do what in itself is right;
but if they do so as those who in their incorporate capacity act for
Him, they do what is wrong. By the deed they are chargeable with the
sin, not of murder, but of assuming to themselves a designation which
they do not sustain. No man in society should take upon him by himself
to execute justice for the shedding of blood, whether he live under a
good or a bad government, except the government refuse to defend the
lives and properties of subjects, and even as some, nay, many
governments have been, be chargeable with oppression and bloodshed. The
reason why none should so interfere, is, that it is likely that the
whole community would execute justice with more propriety than an
individual. Yea, a whole community under an improper civil power should
not of itself execute justice, if there were an accessible power apart
from or connected with it, in which were lodged authority from God.
Those, however, who would in such circumstances claim that power, may
often be looked upon with a jealous eye, as in general they would be
found least entitled to the possession of it. Those who have most
warrantably declaimed against evil constitutions, have been among those
who were least given to assume to themselves a title to power;--they
have been found to defend themselves, but not rashly to usurp authority.
If there were but one individual who could avenge bloodshed, and were
his mind in a proper state, he would seem to have a call addressed to
him to do so; failing to attend to it he would err. Were a community
under an authority not of God, to fail to execute justice, they would be
chargeable with two sins,--that of letting the murderer go unpunished,
and that of not, in recognising the law of God, forming a constitution
or government gifted with power lawfully to proceed against the
criminal. Thus were either an individual or a community to avenge
bloodshed, a lawful power being awanting, such would not be chargeable
with murder. Were a community to do so without acknowledging themselves
to be possessed of authority from God, they would be chargeable with
sin, for not endeavouring to constitute an authority having attributes
which He would recognise as in accordance with his will. Were they to do
so as if possessed of that authority, while destitute of it, they would
be chargeable with the sin essentially of usurpation; and with them,
because of this, others acting so as to support their claim, would be
guilty.
B.
Reflecting on the descending obligations of the British Covenants on the
people of these lands, by the current of an eventful providence we are
conducted to the consideration of the circumstances of the "Free
Presbyterian Church of Scotland." The events in the National Church of
Scotland which have led to the separation from her communion, of the
Protesting Church, and finally, the disruption itself, cannot be
forgotten. The struggle that was maintained for the rights of the
Christian people, for the independence of Christ's house, and the glory
of the Redeemer as King of Zion and King of kings, is worthy of the most
cordial approbation. With those who were employed as the willing and
honoured instruments of emancipating the Church from the tyrannical
restraints under which she so long groaned, and effected a dissolution
of a connection with the State, fraught with so many evils as have been
long felt by her, there ought to be but one feeling of Christian
sympathy. A testimony for the truth, calmly, and effectively, and
devotedly, has been borne by her, to her lasting honour. The Church has
declared that the government has acted a tyrannical and wicked part by
interfering with her privileges; and the people of Scotland have
practically and memorably said, that it is sinful for the Church of
Christ to be connected with an anti-christian State. The government of
the land has been baffled. The rulers were not overborne by the voices
of a majority in either House of Parliament; but by a calm and efficient
resolution, we do not say, becoming the Scottish people, but worthy of
Christian men, they have been defeated; and that would be wise policy,
indeed, which would remove the shame of their overthrow. For the steps
of reformation taken, for the noble sacrifice made by those who gave up
their emoluments that they might be faithful, commendation is due; and
that the Free Protesting Church may come to maintain, to its utmost
extent, not merely doctrinally but practically, the testimony of Christ,
is ardently to be desired. The accession of a great proportion of the
youth preparing for the ministry, and of those engaged as itinerants in
preaching the gospel, is a token for good; and the devotedness of the
people of Scotland on the great emergency, in adhering to the
"Protesting Church," and in yielding of their substance for it, is
peculiarly cheering to the mind. The countenance given by those of the
Presbyterian Church in England who were present, was encouraging and
estimable, as it might have been expected; while the approving
sentiments expressed by those from the Presbyterian Church in Ireland,
in their circumstances, were truly honouring to them, and to that
community. It was becoming others that by deputation they testified to
their approval of the step taken at the great disruption. And, though
what is here said is asserted on individual responsibility alone, it is
declared, without fear of being in error, that another Community in the
land--who consider it to be their duty to adhere to the whole of the
Second Reformation, and to the testimonies of the martyrs who suffered
after it, though not present by representation at the memorable
secession, in order to signify their approbation, do rejoice at the
step, and trust to see it followed by other procedures alike faithful.
The importance of the effects that are possible to follow from the
disruption, demands the exercise of great wisdom on the part of the
Protesting Church. Not less than the power to originate the great
movement that has taken place, is requisite ability to direct it aright.
The people of Scotland, like a mighty mass, have been brought to act;
much depends upon the plan according to which the moving body may be
made to bear. The future interests of the land, under Providence, would
seem to be in the hands of those who now guide the ecclesiastical
movement. The destinies of Scotland were in the hands of a few in days
of peril. They were not unworthy of the trust committed to them. By the
adoption of the same principles which the martyrs practically
illustrated, be it the honour of the Protesting Church, free from
persecution, if the Lord will, but still faithfully, though called to
suffering, to transmit to posterity a legacy, ennobling and beneficial
as that which those left.
It is necessary that the Church of Christ should proceed on principles
laid down in the Divine word. When it does not do this, it acts not in
character, but gives the enemies of the truth occasion to load it with
reproach. The "Free Presbyterian Church" sustaining, as we conceive, the
character of a Church of Christ, should do so in all things.
It is Presbyterian, and is therefore called to base its attachment to
that form of government, on the principle, that it is of Divine right.
To maintain, or admit, that other forms of Church government are of
Divine original, is to surrender a scriptural truth, to act as if facts
in providence could modify the institutes of that society which is
essentially spiritual, to become liable to inefficiency in the
maintenance of the truth, and to give scope to the unworthy suggestions
of those who would contend, that what right even the Church maintains on
an improper ground, other communities besides could claim as well as
she. The state has no right to claim the prerogatives of the Church, nor
to dictate to her the form of her government, or prescribe for her in
other matters. The State has no right to say to the Church, that,
because she does not hold presbyterianism on proper grounds, therefore
it might declare that her government shall be prelatic. But, by holding
Presbytery as alone of Divine origin, she would most effectively
discountenance such unjust claims.
The Church, by a noble act, has thrown off the fetters of erastianism
that had for so long been fastened upon her; let her act so as to be on
her guard against every encroachment of that nature that might be
proposed by the civil power. The struggle for the independence of the
Church was resolutely maintained, and the yoke of those who attempted to
diminish it, was dutifully thrown off. Let not any overture hereafter,
ranging between complete submission to the State, and the mere use of
the veto, on the part of the civil power, upon the appointment of a
given minister to a congregation, though made by the State in the most
attractive manner, be entertained. But let it be practically shown, as
well as solemnly resolved by her, that she recognises only one
Master--who is in heaven.
During the last few years, an arduous struggle has been maintained, in
order to secure, as far as possible, the rights of the christian people.
Now, it is possible to put the people in possession of the unfettered
privilege of electing their own office-bearers; but to put any other
party in possession of that right, would be to do those injury. The
claims of lay patrons are without foundation in the word of God. The
claims of presbyteries, or any other parties than the members of the
Church themselves, are alike unsupported there. In order that the Church
may act in character, her procedure in regard to the election of pastors
and elders, must be scriptural. It is true, that whether the Church act
scripturally or not, no civil class are warranted to usurp her rights;
yet, were her procedure not according to the law of Christ, she would
act undutifully, and would give advantage to enemies to declaim against
her, to the diminution of her influence for good. Though the Church were
to declare for _The Call_, merely on the principle of expediency, but
not as if according to the will of Christ, the State would have no
proper ground for affirming, that therefore it had a right to use
patronage--its principle of expediency; for a right of the Church can
never be transferred to a civil power; yet the Church, by not
legislating on scriptural grounds, could not act in such a manner as to
deserve the recognition of her by the people as proceeding according to
her true character.
The last few years have added to the Church of Scotland a high
proportion of godly and devoted ministers. Errors, that would have been
winked at in previous periods by some in her Assemblies, have been
brought to light, and the laws of Christ's house have been brought to
bear on those who maintained them. Purity of doctrine was a jewel among
the late reforming majority. The orthodoxy of the ministers in general
of the separated Church is undoubted. She adheres to the Confession of
Faith. It is requisite that she direct a testimony against unsound
doctrine, including the errors prevalent now in Churches called
Christian; and that whatever scheme of co-operation with other
Christians she may embark in, may be consistent with her regard for the
truth.
The Headship of Christ over the nations is maintained by the Protesting
Church; on that is founded the principle of the establishment of
religion by the civil magistrate; that, was recognised in the late
contendings with the civil powers, and especially in the second series
of resolutions made at the Convocation of November; on that principle
these resolutions were carried into effect at the late disruption;--it
is desirable that, in the progress of the newly modelled community the
principle be properly applied. The important application of that, which
is now necessary, is the lifting up of a protest against the civil
power, as immoral and unscriptural, and a consistent course of procedure
in consequence. What justifies the disruption requires a dissent from
the civil power, as a power not of God. That State with which the Church
could not be connected, so as to enjoy her own privileges, cannot be the
ordinance of God. If the government has been guilty of violating the
rights and privileges of the Presbyterians of Scotland, has it not been
acting in opposition to the will of Christ, and setting at nought his
authority? Were the civil government possessed of less influence than it
really has, men would likely be disposed to esteem it more agreeably to
its true character, than they really are. Is an individual denounced for
an act of injustice or oppression? And why should not a government? Even
is a government, acting for the time being, worthy of being denounced
for some things, and yet worthy of approbation, as if acting for God?
Yea, is that constitution sound which admits of tyranny over the
Church--injustice of a highly aggravated character, to be cordially
supported by those who complain of its oppression? The same pretensions
to power over her, that were put forth in acts of parliament,[793] when
the Church was disorganised, and for acting on which the house of the
Stuarts was driven from the British throne, have been of late made in
the councils of the nation. Can the power that would do so be approved?
Why should any cling to an oath of allegiance to a power that, in this
particular, as well as in others, is anti-christian? All have reason to
beware of the attractions of such civil powers. What is it that gives
evil governments their influence, but their power to terrify, and their
wealth and honours to seduce? In one case, the ministers of the
Community to whom we now direct our thoughts, have nobly cast the latter
aside. It becomes her to act in other matters consistently with this.
There are those who would overthrow the institutions of the land, that
are noble, and plant anarchy where oppression flourished. But her
principles, yea, the principles of all who hold the truth, are the
reverse. These would wish that good men in power should be brought to
see what is duty. They would not refuse to obey laws that in themselves
are right. But they should not do so from a regard to the authorities in
the land that enjoin them. If the present system of civil government
cannot stand of itself, why should the people of Scotland, escaped from
the trammels of tyranny, pledge themselves to support it? They ought not
to bring in revolution, but neither ought they to continue, by adhering
to their oath of allegiance, to give countenance to an unlawful civil
power. Let their determination, and that of their brethren in the other
parts of the empire, prove itself to be of a nobler order than what will
be abated by unfavourable circumstances. Let it be put forth in leading
to abstain from countenancing an evil constitution, and to raise above
the fear of consequences. Arising from Christian principle, deep hid in
the breast, let it give an energy which opposition would only increase,
and which death itself would not subdue, but hand over with increased
vigour to others.
The Free Presbyterian Church of Scotland should recognise the
attainments made during the Second Reformation. Whatever steps of real
reformation have been taken of late, have been in accordance with some
of these. It is desirable that all of them should now be adopted. Tho
Revolution Settlement suffered not the Church to advance beyond the
Reformation made at 1592. Now that that compact has been abandoned by
the Church herself, let her occupy fully the ground on which the
Reformers, between 1638 and 1649, so honourably stood. By some laws of
the land, indeed, many of these are condemned. But these laws are
monuments of the tyranny and oppression of the government that made
them. The Revolution Church of Scotland never recognised, as a whole
the brightest attainments made in the history of the Church in the
land. During the late contest, indeed, the Act of Assembly, 1647,
adopting the Westminster Confession, has been pleaded as the Act of the
Church of Scotland at the Revolution, which had been made by the same
Church before. But though that could not have been properly maintained
without admitting that other laws of the former era, not
ecclesiastically repealed, were also the law of the Church at the
latter,[794] let the Church, now that she is completely unfettered, by
ecclesiastical legislation solemnly adopt all the distinct attainments
of the second reforming period, and thus serve herself an heir to the
highest privileges enjoyed by the Church in our land.
It is good that the Free Presbyterian Church contemplates the erection
of a Theological Seminary for a rising ministry. May it be called into
operation, and greatly prosper; and may her youth--kept from the
chilling influences of error, evangelically instructed and eminently
pious, prove the means of diffusing widely the truth, in consequence of
a momentous reformation.
And, above all, it is necessary that the Free Presbyterian Church should
have regard to explicit solemn covenant obligations. The vows of God,
made by the Church in this land, are upon her; these she ought to
acknowledge, and to endeavour to renew. Though these covenants were
condemned by the laws of the land, they are still binding. The act of
Queen Anne was against the Revolution Settlement, and, therefore, the
reforming party in the Church of late declared that it was
unconstitutional. The Revolution Settlement itself was based upon the
overthrow of the whole of the Covenanted Reformation; and no more than
the act of Queen Anne, regarding patronage, ought the sinful parts of it
to be regarded. Popery exists, and Prelacy, absorbing Popery, exists.
Would that the Free Presbyterian Church, by recognising the binding
obligation of the covenants, National, and Solemn League and Covenant,
and by adding to the binding obligations of these, engagements suited to
the times, were to go forth in opposition to all evil, in all the
gracious vigour of a faithful witness for the whole truth.[795]
The movement that has been lately made, contemplated in its highest
character, appears the work of God. By a wondrous providence he has shut
up the Church to a course of duty, and has plainly indicated the
necessity to persevere in it. On the other hand, contemplating the human
instrumentality called to accomplish an estimable work, and approving
much of the agents immediately employed, we should not be forgetful of
the corresponding efforts made in time past, even in the National
Church. Our heart is to the memory of such as had in their view the
objects lately contended for, and in a day when the rights of the people
were trampled on without remorse, willingly lifted the voice in the
Assembly against patronage, and otherwise laboured for the removal of
its flagrant enormities. There was good principle in the National
Church, but evil caused much of it to be unseen, though some of it
remained manifest. Gold may be dissolved by a compound acid, and for a
time may cease to be observed, but not beyond the power of re-appearing.
The gold cannot be decomposed: let a test be added, and the
indestructible ore will re-appear. By a powerful solvent the noble
principle in the National Church became nearly all invisible, though
some of it could not be dissolved. A test has been added, and the whole
has been precipitated, and nearly all of it has come out.[796] The sound
principle and piety in the Church were the gold; moderatism, including
erastianism and patronage, was the solvent; a wondrous providence
applied a test; and the gold of true excellence shines forth. Let it be
united by Covenanting, into one glorious mass, and be exhibited for
beauty, and glory to God. Let the Free Presbyterian Church, remembering
the past, wisely look forward to the future; and, reflecting upon what
may be the effect of its procedure on other nations of the world, now
act so as to present an example worthy the imitation of all. And it is
humbly presumed that the standing of the Church, in the days of her
greatest glory and efficiency in the land, in preference to every other,
claims her adoption. The position, ecclesiastical and civil, of the
friends and followers of the Second Reformation, like an ancient
fortress held by comparatively few, but venerable from its eventful
history, remarkable amid the ruin which time has laid around it, and
displaying a massive grandeur as it rests on its broad and solid
foundations, which had, during periods not very remote, been
contemplated more as an affecting memorial of the past, than as a
strength which should be available in time to come, has of late, while
tyranny made progress, been somewhat approached, as it stands begirt
with its gigantic bulwarks, surmounted with the banner of the Covenant,
manifestly high above all other means of defending the Church; and it
faithfully promises a vantage-ground, noble from its commanding
altitude, and unassailable within its high defences, to which all in the
land who love the truth should come, that to whatever outward peril they
might be brought, they might maintain their christian warfare, to their
continued honour and final triumph.
C.
In order to suggest a good basis, whereon all in the land who hold the
truth might unite in a capacity more or less intimate, the following
observations are humbly presented for consideration. The friends of
truth cannot justifiably persevere in supporting the British
Constitution as the ordinance of God. The government, in order to its
dignity and efficiency, proclaims itself to be worthy of cordial
support. The claims which it puts forth may not be regarded by itself as
of a very high order, yet it views them as indisputable; and even,
though manifestly not an ordinance of God nor friendly to true religion,
it seeks to strengthen its authority by availing itself of the use of a
most sacred institution in religion--the oath. The government itself,
though for certain ends it applies the oath, is not scriptural. And why
should good men claim for it the character of an ordinance of God, to
which even of itself it does not aspire? What right has an unscriptural
civil power, any more than a corrupt ecclesiastical constitution,--what
right has the British Constitution, any more than the Church of Rome, to
claim for itself in things civil, the title, such as that usurps in
things ecclesiastical, of an ordinance of God? Nay, the very fact of a
government in gospel times supporting Popery, must cut it off from the
title of a power delegated from above. It is simply because bad civil
governments have great influence, that they lead men to pay them a
deference which they would not yield to other systems charged with their
evils. Why is an evil government at one period viewed as the ordinance
of God, and at another as worthy of being overthrown? Does the character
of such change by the accumulation or the long pressure of the very
same--not new, evils? In the former case, the people who approve,
misapprehend its true character, while they are able to endure; in the
latter, they see it clearly, oppression having opened their eyes. Such
were the governments of Charles II. and James VII. Though some approved
of them as the ordinance of God, yet, at the Revolution, the nation
declared that they were not. And consequently they should never have
been acknowledged as such. Men acknowledge the British Constitution at
present as a power ordained of God. If Puseyism go on till the
Protestantism of the empire be swamped in an inundation of Popery, the
nation will form right views of the subject. May they soon entertain
such views, lest such an event arrive!
The friends of truth under the present government should say to it in
such a manner as not to be misunderstood,--We will obey your good laws,
because they are good; but by oaths or otherwise we will not recognise
your authority as of God.--We will co-operate with you in doing what is
good; but so long as you continue to support evil, we cannot swear
allegiance to you. Abolish all oaths of allegiance, and we will act
along with you in every right matter.--Were all those who hold the truth
in the united kingdom to do so, would not the request extort regard? And
might not rulers see the propriety of yielding? Were such oaths to the
present government abolished, then those who love the truth might enter
parliament, and act without being responsible for the evils of the civil
constitution and of the administration, and at the same time lead to
essential political reformation; and the people could with a clear
conscience return to parliament such men as might be possessed of proper
character, and be of known attachment to the truth. Were a door opened
in this manner for men consistently uttering their voice in the councils
of the nation, then means should be assiduously used, on the part of the
people and on the part of their representatives, for scripturally
reforming the State, and for giving to true religion that external
countenance and support which is due to it. The government would not act
a weak part in conceding the abolition of the oath in the said cases. It
would rather thereby attach to the support of what is good in it, men
who would be equally at least with all others, amenable to every good
law, but bound to duty by ties far stronger than those which human laws
themselves could fasten. A good government should maintain the oath; but
a government such as the British, ought not to claim it for the purpose
of securing allegiance. That government seems at present disposed to
concede the abolition of that oath to the Catholics of Ireland. Why
should not the friends of truth in the empire, strive for the abolition
of the oaths of allegiance sworn by themselves, in using which they,
directly or indirectly, support what is evil, while Catholics are
unwilling to swear, because, that by swearing they are in some measure
prevented from giving scope to their own cause?
Even in order to abolish these oaths, the going into parliament by
swearing any of them, cannot be recommended. But since legislators in
either house, having sworn oaths of allegiance--even not justifiable,
are in possession of privileges, for the time being, of which the
Legislature cannot deprive them, let such have put into their hands,
memorials on the subject, by the people, and let them use their
privilege in order to gain their object. It does not appear how any one
can act dutifully by remaining in parliament, except in endeavouring to
carry into effect this measure.
But should Popery continue to make progress, as it has done of late, and
receive more countenance from the civil power, the friends of truth
would find it difficult, in any way to co-operate with the government,
but would be urged to take higher ground, in opposition to error, or
even tyranny, than they have in general lately taken. They may even have
to confederate against powers that would seek to rob them of their
christian privileges--wherewith the Lord Jesus has gifted them. Should
they have to engage in a struggle for these, let their efforts be made
without hesitation or wavering. Let their minds be wholly devoted. Under
the influence of that faith which makes humble, but also enables to do
all things in the strength of Christ, let them enter on duty. Having
taken up their position, as if bound by the adamantine chain of
necessity, yet free as the orbs of heaven--under the influence of
gravity, let them, cordially engaged to one another, occupy that ground,
there to stand or fall together. Let there be taken by them the calm and
noble resolution, which knows not to fail; which fear cannot agitate,
nor outward evils diminish; which peril and distress would only display
in all its mighty strength; which, immovable as the pillars of heaven,
stedfast in the midst of opposition, as the summit of the mountain on
which the thunderbolts are expended in vain, would sustain undismayed
the assault of every foe; which though pressed to the utmost would not
desert the field; but which, though like the warrior, black and weary
through the toil of conflict, it might be misrepresented or not
recognised, would at some era, more or less remote, shine forth in the
glory of victory, to be celebrated and employed for good in all time to
come.
D.
The Reformed Presbyterian Church has for some time had in view the
performance of the duty of Covenanting in her social capacity. There are
the most abundant reasons why the object should be more and more
steadily contemplated, till it be attained. We profess that Covenanting
is a duty. We have not for a length of time engaged socially in the
formal discharge of it. We acknowledge ourselves to be bound by the
obligations of the Church of God in past times, especially of his Church
in these lands; and should view ourselves, as by these obligations bound
to the duty. An example should be set by us to others who do not
entertain the same views of the importance of the duty that we do. The
events of the age are arousing. Many are making efforts for the
maintenance of the truth. The enemies of true religion are on the alert.
Besides, within the last few years, many, some of whom, we should trust,
love the truth, though their views of parts of it would seem to be
inadequate, have acted as if men become engaged to a system of conduct
only when they promise to follow it; and have virtually acted as if
their own doings could bind them to a given course. Be it ours, by
Covenanting to testify practically, that we feel bound to pledge
ourselves to the service of God, not by caprice, but according to his
law,--commanding to vow, and finding those who enter into covenant bound
by his authority through their own deed. Let us not be undecided. There
is duty incumbent on us which we cannot devolve on others. Let us be
active, lest even the tide of liberalism, like a refluent wave, bring
society back to a sea of trouble, before the glorious work of
Covenanting which will be performed in future times will be begun, and
we who should have used direct means to lead to it will be dishonoured.
That some are engaged in making reformation, is no reason why we should
not be diligent. We have our duty to perform; and in being most active
ourselves, we would most heartily show that we approve of the faithful
exertions of these others. Our duties are peculiar. If we make no
progress, we encourage not the movements for good, of society around us.
While we rejoice to think of many maintaining truth, we also ought to
advance to duty. We would account it incumbent on us to stand
steadfastly by the side of all the lovers of true godliness in the
nation, in defending the interests of truth and righteousness. By doing
the service incumbent on us at present, we would most completely take
means to lead to union of purpose and exertion, the most effective. We
ought not to anticipate the good that may be done by others in such a
manner as to suppose, that little will be required at our hands.
Whatever step of obedience we take will aid in encouraging others; but,
wherein we may now fail to advance, when victory will be complete, we
will, like a squadron on the field, waiting for the success or aid of a
fellow-battalion, fail of attaining to the true honour that will be
shared in the triumph of truth.
FOOTNOTES:
[793] Of the years 1661, 1662.
[794] See a valuable pamphlet, entitled, "The Revolution Settlement
considered in reference to the independence and present position of the
Church of Scotland." Glasgow: 1840.
[795] For a luminous view of what would seem to be the Church's duty at
present, we refer to an article in the "Scottish Presbyterian" for May,
1843, entitled, "Friendly Hints to the projected Free Presbyterian
Church of Scotland."
[796] On the subject of the duty of those who still abide by the
Establishment, see three powerful and seasonable discourses, entitled,
"Come out and be separate," by the Rev. Dr. Bates. Glasgow, 1843.
ERRATA.
Page 145, line 12, for "requires," read "require."
Page 161, line 21, before "will persevere, &c.," put "that."
Page 174, line 14, for "unrevealed," read "revealed."
Page 198, line 17, for "even," read "view"; line 18, for "are," read
"as."
Page 205, line 11, for "share," read "shun."
Page 237, line 17, for "visitors," read "writers."
Page 340, line 20, for "his," read "their."
Transcriber's Notes:
Added footnote marker 637 after:
"four living creatures" of the New
Added footnote marker 641 after:
for a light of the Gentiles."
Removed unnecessary closing quotation mark after:
he might have the pre-eminence.
Added closing quotation mark after:
sacrifices God is well pleased.
Corrected "Jos" to "Job" in footnote 412.
The Errata listed above have been corrected in the text,
except for "requires," which does not occur in the text
as indicated.
End of Project Gutenberg's The Ordinance of Covenanting, by John Cunningham