Thus we build no wall about our communion that Christ has not built. Our banner is inscribed with "Whosoever believeth, let him come." We bar out no Christian because of his intellectual doctrinal conviction. Instead, therefore, of our being bigoted and narrow, as is often charged, binding a rigid creed on the brow of every believer as a condition of church membership, there is scarcely so broad and free a communion in all the ranks of evangelical Christendom.

But still further did our Presbyterian Fathers lay down the principles of church government.

They are unanimously of opinion :

Third. "That our blessed Saviour, for the edification of the visible church, which is his body, hath appointed officers, not only to preach the Gospel and administer the sacraments, but also to exercise discipline for the preservation both of truth and duty."

They agree with the Westminister divines of a century and a half before them that, "The Lord Jesus, as King and Head of his Church, hath therein appointed a government in the hand of church-officers, distinct from the civil magistrate."

On the ground of antecedent probability they would reach this conclusion. The government, of God's Church would seem to be too vital a thing, of too vast concern, and covering too many interests to be left to the varying caprice and prejudice of even regenerated Christian men. Christ came to establish a kingdom. But a kingdom implies government. And a government without a form of government is impossible. Christ surely did not set up a kingdom, only to leave it with no regulative principles and no officers of rule, without order and without law. This would be to leave it a mob.

But these men were not content to rest so important a matter on the mere warrant of antecedent probability. So

they searched the New Testament Scriptures to ascertain the kind of government Christ left his Church. They found clear record of the following facts: that there were authorized rulers in the early Church; that these rulers were elders; that elders and bishops were identical, the titles being used interchangeably; and that there was a plurality of these elders or bishops in a church. And they came with overwhelming and unanimous conviction to the conclusion, that the government of the New Testament Church was a government by elders.

The record is unmistakeable. He that runs may read. The persons we meet oftenest in the inspired account of early church organization and activity are the elders. They come into view everywhere. There were elders in the church at Jerusalem (Acts 15:11); elders in the church at Ephesus (Acts 20:1); elders in the Church of the Dispersion (I. Peter 5:1); Paul and Barnabas, on returning from their first missionary tour "appointed elders in every church" (Acts 14: 21). Titus in Crete "appointed elders in every city." What were the duties of these elders? Just what they are now in the Presbyterian Church. They were rulers-officers of government. Paul in his letter to Timothy charged that the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honor (I Timothy 5:17). In his letter to the church at Rome, while speaking of different gifts in the Church, he says "He that ruleth," let him rule "with diligence" (Rom. 12:8). In his letter to the Thessalonian Church, he speaks of those that were "set over them in the Lord" (Thes. 5:12). In his talk with the elders of the church at Ephesus, he says, "Take heed to all the flock, in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops" (Acts 20:28). In the letter to the Hebrews, Christians are bidden to "remember" and "obey" and "submit to" those in the church who "had the rule over them" (Heb. 13:7-17). But ruling was not all. They were to "watch in behalf of souls" (Heb. 7:17). They

were to "speak the Word of God" (Heb. 7:17). Paul bids the elders of Ephesus "feed the church of God" (Acts 2028). Peter exhorts the elders to "tend the flock of God, exercising the office of bishop." James tells the Christians of the Dispersion, "Is any sick among you, let him send for the elders of the church." And Paul in his letter to Timothy commends especially those of the elders who "labor in the Word and in teaching."

This is the New Testament doctrine of the eldership. These following things lie on the very surface of Scripture, viz: There was a plurality of elders in every church, even. in the small mission churches; these elders all ruled; they were officers of government; they watched over the flock of God; they exercised the functions of a Bishop; and some of them, at least, not only ruled, but preached the Gospel, "labored in the word and in teaching." Surely our Presbyterian Fathers had a right to say, "The Lord Jesus Christ as King and Head of his Church, hath therein appointed a government in the hands of church officers." And for naming these officers "elders" they had a "thus saith the Lord."

But still further, in laying down the fundamental principles of church government, these Presbyterian Fathers are unanimously of opinion:

Fourth. "That truth is in order to goodness; and the great touchstone of truth, its tendency to promote holiness; according to our Saviour's rule, 'by their fruits ye shall know them.' And that no opinion can be either more pernicious or more absurd, than that which brings truth. and falsehood upon a level, and represents it as of no consequence what a man's opinions are. On the contrary, they are persuaded that there is an inseparable connection. between faith and practice, truth and duty. Otherwise it would be of no consequence either to discover truth, or to embrace it."

This admirable principle never had better expression.

ness.

The Church of God is put in trust of God's truth. But what profit is it that we keep his truth, if it is of no consequence what a man's opinions are, and there be no inseparable connection between faith and life. Paul's terrific arraignment of men was that they had "exchanged the truth of God for a lie." The consequence of that exchange was, that they became "vain in their reasonings" and "their senseless heart was darkened." Of course all truth is not in order to goodThe truth of the Copernican theory of the universe, or of the circulation of the blood, or of the correlation and conservation of force, or of a problem in mathematics, may be accepted or denied without making a man the better or the worse. But this is not the kind of truth these men of God were talking about when they were laying down the fundamental principles of church government. They meant the truth of revelation, the truth of God's Word, the truth that vitally touches life, and harnesses itself to the human will, and goes down into character. It was with this clear limitation, they said, "Truth is in order to goodness, and the great touchstone of truth, its tendency to promote holiness."

The principle needs no proof. Its statement is its demonstration. Under the conviction of this principle, they are unanimously of opinion:

Fifth. That "it is necessary to make effectual provision that all who are admitted as teachers be sound in the faith."

Here we see a marked and important difference between terms of admission to the Church and terms of admission to office in the Church. Ready as our Presbyterian fathers were to receive into church membership any and all whom they had reason to believe Christ would admit to heaven, they nevertheless thought it necessary to make effectual provision that the officers of the Church, to whom is entrusted the teaching and preaching of the Word, be sound in the faith. The reason for this necessity is not far to scek.

The Presbyterian Church stands for a certain system of doctrine and a certain form of government. She believes God's word teaches that system of doctrine and authorizes the government; she believes that these are nearer the mind of God as revealed in the word, than are the systems of doctrine and governmental forms of other evangelical faiths, and she believes the differences are so important, and affect Christian character and church efficiency so vitally, as not only to justify her separate and continued existence as a branch of the Church of Christ, but also to bring her to the maintenance of her faith with a mighty constraint of conscience.

This is her reason for being the only ground of her separate existence. If she has nothing distinctive in faith and government which she thinks her Lord has put her in trust. of she is guilty of schism, of dividing Christ's body without cause, and she ought not to maintain her separate organization, no, not for an hour.

But her martyrs have not died for nothing. She has not fought with the wild beasts of tyranny and intolerance, and yet had no stay and courage from her great truths. She has not grown oaks without congenial soil. She has gone through two and a half centuries thinking in her heart of hearts she saw in Holy Scripture some doctrines of sin and grace and some principles of government that needed to be embodied in a system, if all God's truth were to be told and used in making Christ's kingdom come. So she wrought out her Confession of Faith and her Form of Government and published them to the world. Who shall question her right to do this? Nay, who shall challenge her duty to do it. And conceding her right and her duty to who shall challenge her right to guard. and keep it? And by what better way can she keep it than by "making effectual provision that all who are admitted as teachers be sound in that faith"?

confess her faith,