ARTICLE XII.

VOLUNTARY ASSOCIATIONS.

A Plea for Voluntary Societies and a Defence of the Decisions of the General Assembly of 1836. By a member of the Assembly. New York: John S. Taylor, 1837, pp. 187.

By the Editor.

THE principal topic handled in this volume is one of common interest. Its connection with the conversion of the world is intimate and even fundamental. If ecclesiastical organizations are the most scriptural and efficient mode of conducting missions, every religious sect is deeply interested in the question. If voluntary societies are susceptible of all the bad consequences said to flow from them, they ought to be abandoned, and some safer channels sought for the diffusion of religious charities. Congregationalists and Presbyterians have a common concern in the subject. The former have been connected for a long time with many of the latter, in mutual and strenuous efforts for the promotion of the kingdom of Christ. This connection, while it has not brought into hazard the peculiar rights and privileges of either denomination, nor impaired the stability of the christian doctrines, has cemented the bonds of affection; has concentrated a great amount of practical experience for the benefit of the world; and has communicated the delightful impression in pagan lands that the Christians of this country are anxious, not so much to diffuse denominational peculiarities, as the glorious gospel of our common Lord and Saviour.

We do not wish to forego these advantages. We are unwilling to break up this connection. We desire that this golden chain of affection may be lengthened and brightened. That the two denominations should be merged in one or two great associations is no plan or intention of ours. Let them maintain their distinctive existence unimpaired. At the same time, why should they not join in exertions to diffuse widely the blessings which flow to them from their glorified Head?

For these reasons, we undertake, in our humble way, the discussion of this matter. We have no intention to give it a disproportionate share of attention, nor to plunge into an angry con

troversy. If it cannot be canvassed amicably, let it be thrown aside. Towards those who differ from us, we desire to entertain no other feelings but those of the most cordial good-will.

The argument in the volume before us is conducted, in our opinion, with uncommon fairness and candor. The writer is very careful to sustain every important statement by documentary evidence. Large and correct quotations from printed papers are given, showing the various aspects of interesting questions, and the conflicting views of various parties. For general ability, knowledge of the points at issue, and clear exhibition of facts, the book is worthy of particular commendation. We propose to examine some of the positions of the author. Our limits will not permit us to go into much detail, nor even notice all the important points.

The book begins with a definition of the christian church :

The church, whose instrumental agency is to achieve the emanci pation of the world from bondage and its joyful reconciliation to God, is composed of all the sanctified in Christ Jesus,- all converted men, associated by a public profession and covenants, under whatever form, for the maintenance of the worship of God and for the advancement of his cause. It is wholly a spiritual society, for a spiritual work. This universal church of Christ exists elementarily in local organizations, with their members and officers for purposes of edification, worship and discipline. But for more general purposes, and especially for those aggressive movements which are necessary for the subjugation of the world to Christ, associated action is indispensable. The work to be accomplished is not only the most important, but the most arduous ever committed to men,-requiring a greater amount of cultivated intellect, glowing zeal, exuberant munificence, practical wisdom, self-denying toil and effectual prayer, than the world has ever seen.

This definition seems to us to be clear and sufficiently comprehensive. It asserts the spiritual character of the church, and consequently the impropriety of her connection with the State, and the bloodless nature of her triumphs. It recognizes her relation to Christ as the source of sanctification. It implies the importance of a public profession of the faith and of a common covenant. It defines the church as, in one sense universal, having for its object by associated action, the subjugation of the world to Christ; on the other hand, as existing in different denominations for discipline, worship, and the management of the whole internal economy.

Voluntary societies have sometimes been accused of interfering with the appropriate business of presbyteries, or of other ecclesiastical bodies. We admit that it is the presbytery alone, which, according to the Presbyterian form of government, has the right to give to any minister or evangelist, his authority as such, but further than this, we deny that the presbytery possesses any other of the powers sometimes claimed. They have a right, it is true, to conduct missions, under certain restrictions, but this is an entirely dis tinct matter from the ordination of evangelists, and the only paragraph in the "Form of Government," which recognizes this right, chap. 18, provides that all such missions shall be made with the consent of the parties appointed." And, with the same consent of the parties," any body of men that please, may "send missions to any part." A voluntary society may do it, as well as a presbytery. It is not, therefore, a point of presbyterial order that all missionaries in the presbyterian church must be sent by presbyterians; and much less have these courts a right to say to any minister whom they have licensed or ordained, "where he shall go, and where he shall remain." The ministers are the Lord's freemen. They are licensed by the presbyteries, (we use the words of the Book, chap. 14, "to preach the gospel, wherever God in his providence may them. And where they are ordained as evangelists, chap. 15, they are required to promise that they will "discharge the duties which may be incumbent on them, in this character, as God shall give them strength." In all this there is no authority conferred on the presbytery to determine where they shall go, and where they shall remain. They may go any where, may travel in any country, and reside in any State, provided they are about their Master's business, and honoring the credentials of the presbytery; and should the presbytery wish to employ them as missionaries, "in any part," it can be done only with their own consent.

call"

The term, missions, then, as it is technically used in the presbyterian" Form of Government," and as it is generally understood, does by no means include the two very distinct functions, the strictly ecclesiastical and the secular. The licensing and ordination of ministers is no part of the work of missions. These acts are nowhere treated or spoken of as such, in the book of discipline, and who does not know that ministers in the presbyterian church, having been ordained, are perfectly at liberty to labor as pastors, evangelists or ministers,

as they shall choose, or wherever the providence of God may call them? The ecclesiastical act gives them their authority as ministers, and beyond this the control of the presbytery extends no further than to the exercise of a salutary discipline over them as members. The presbytery, it is true, may ordain evangelists for the purpose of their becoming missionaries, [see chap. 17.] but this does not make them missionaries; it only makes them ministers, with authority to preach the gospel and administer its ordinances, but still perfectly free to exercise their official functions, as evangelists, or as pastors or missionaries, on their own agreement with whatever individuals, congregations, churches or societies may choose to employ them, and they are responsible to the presbytery only for the correct discharge of their duties as ministers in whichever of these spheres of labor they may choose to engage. The whole work of employing and sustaining missionaries, either at home or abroad, is embraced in what is sometimes denominated the secular function, of the work. This, as we understand it, is the doctrine of the presbyterian system, and it is in full accordance with the views of the author of the "Plea," which are correctly and very clearly stated as follows:

A large majority of those who have, hitherto, been most actively engaged in promoting the cause of missions, and other objects of christian philanthropy, have regarded themselves as perfectly free to associate, for these purposes, in any manner which might seem best adapted to the object. The right of individual property being secured to them by the principles of the Bible, as well as the laws of the land, they have supposed that, by the laws of Christ's house, they possess entire personal liberty, and are under solemn obligations, to dispose of it according to their best discretion, for useful purposes. Their associations for such purposes have, accordingly, been free and voluntary, unsupported by civil or ecclesiastical power. Such are most of the great benevolent societies of this country, the Bible, the Tract, the Sunday School, the Education, the Home and Foreign Missionary and Temperance societies. The supporters of these institutions have been accustomed to discriminate between those duties which are appropriate to the official functionaries of the church, such as the preservation of doctrinal purity, the maintenance of discipline, the ordination and government of the ministry, etc., and those personal duties which are submitted to the discretion of individual Christians. To the latter class, in their view, belong the contribution and disbursement of money for the support of missions and other purposes of benevolence; and in the exercise of their individual discre

tion, guided by the light of God's countenance and favor, they have voluntarily associated in the missionary societies above named, whose operations are conducted by boards of trust, chosen annually for the single purpose of exploring and supplying, to the extent of the means placed at their disposal, the wants of the destitute. These boards are accountable only to the christian community, whose servants they are, and are dependent on their faithful and successful exertions for public confidence and patronage. They have no concern with the licensing or government of the ministry, nor with any thing that appertains to the authority of church courts, but are helpers of the church, as faithful members, by employing and sustaining such missionaries only as are approved by the proper judicatories and pronounced qualified for their work.

All then, that is claimed by voluntary societies is what is denominated the secular part of the work. This we maintain, is the whole of the work. At least it is all about which there is any dispute. The real question at issue is whether the presbyterian church, as such, and as she is represented in her ecclesiastical courts, is bound, by her constitution, to assume and conduct the work of inissions, as above explained in the "Plea," or whether this work may be conducted by voluntary societies?

On the other hand, it is the opinion of many, that efforts for the supply of the spiritually destitute and for the conversion of the world, ought to be submitted to the supervision and control of ecclesiastical bodies, and that the authority of these bodies to organize and direct such operations is the same as that which they possess for the preservation of doctrine and for the maintenance of discipline. Here it is proper to say that there is considerable diversity of opinion among the friends of ecclesiastical organizations as to the extent to which the authority of the church should reach in controlling benevolent efforts. Some Christians in this country, and more in Great Britain, contend that Bible and Tract societies, and even Temperance and other associations for the promotion of christian morals, should be amenable to ecclesiastical courts. Others are of opinion that societies for the advancement of objects which are in a degree secular, like that of the American Colonization society, should not be connected with the church. Bible and Tract societies, in the view of many, afford common ground for the united efforts of Christians of different denominations; while missions foreign and domestic, and the education of men for the ministry are matters which properly come within the precincts of ecclesiastical orVOL. IX. No. 26.

62