Questions on Chapter 1.
QUESTIONS ON CHAPTER 1.
QUESTION 1. What is the distinction between a human and a divine institution?
2. Have a people the right to choose their own form of government?
3. In a divine institution, to what extent may the people shape their government as they choose?
4. How may an institution be divine in some respects, and human in other respects?
5. In what sense are the State and the family divine institutions?
6. In what sense is the Church a divine institution?
7. How has God been approachable by man since the Fall?
8. Was the Mosaic law a divine institution, and in what manner was it set up?
9. Who was the Agent, and with what authority was he vested, in setting up the Christian Church?
CHAPTER 2. — THE APOSTOLIC OFFICE.
I. WE CONSIDER ITS NATURE.
We see from the Scriptures that Christ, in the establishment and organization of his Church, called to his assistance the services of others, whom he called apostles; and we proceed to inquire into the nature of the apostolic office.
When was the apostolic office instituted? Some have supposed that when our Saviour appeared to his disciples after his resurrection, and delivered to them the command, “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature,” then, and in that act, originated the apostolic office, in the exercise of which the apostles proceeded in the establishment of the Christian Church. But this view of the subject we conceive to be erroneous. To suppose that the calling and commission of the apostles, which took place near the commencement of Christ’s public ministry, was only temporary, and ceased when Christ expired on the cross, and that the apostolic office commenced de novo, subsequently to the Saviour’s resurrection, though a very generally received sentiment, yet, we think, a little examination will clearly evince that it must have been adopted in haste.
In the first chapter of The Acts, we are presented with an account of the appointment of one to fill the place vacated by the apostasy and death of Judas. Peter on that occasion, speaking of Judas, said, “He was numbered with us, and had obtained part of this ministry;” plainly implying that the ministry pertaining to the apostles, subsequent to the crucifixion of Christ, was not a newly constituted one, but a continuation of the same ministry into which they, together with Judas, had originally been inducted. In confirmation of the same doctrine, Peter proceeds to quote from the Psalms the following words: “Let his habitation be desolate, and let no man dwell therein, and his bishopric let another take.” After this we find the apostles praying in the following words: “Thou Lord, who knowest the hearts of all men, show whether of these two thou hast chosen, that he may take part of this ministry and apostleship from which Judas by transgression fell.”
Now, to suppose that the apostolic ministry, in its history subsequent to the resurrection, was not a continuation of the same that had existed previous to the crucifixion, but that it is founded upon and originated with the grand commission given after our Saviour’s resurrection, seems obviously contrary to the plain import of the passages just adduced. We arrive, therefore, at the conclusion, that the apostolic office, in the exercise of which the apostles acted, when organizing the Christian Church, dates its origin anterior to the Saviour’s crucifixion. In the tenth chapter of St. Matthew we find Jesus calling his twelve apostles, and “sending them forth,” saying to them: “As ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand. Heal the sick, cleanse the lepers, raise the dead, cast out devils.” And in the same discourse the Saviour adds: “He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.” Here we find the foundation of the apostolic commission, and in reference to it we may notice that two things are clearly apparent:
1. It implied a commission to “preach,” and to confirm the same by the performance of miracles.
2. It implied a commission to act in the name and under the instructions of Jesus, with the same divine authority which he had received from the Father.
This is evident from the remarkable declaration, “He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent me.” As much as if the Saviour had said, “I delegate to you the same authority which my Father hath delegated to me.”
We find the establishment of the apostolic office recorded by St. Mark, in the third chapter of his Gospel, in the following words: “And he ordained twelve, that they should be with him, and that he might send them forth to preach, and to have power to heal sicknesses, and to cast out devils.” Here we perceive substantially the same account which is given by St. Matthew, with the more explicit announcement of the ordination of the apostles. On the subject now before us we may farther remark that, although we must date the original institution of the apostolic office from the first appointment and ordination of the apostles, and their commission to preach and work miracles, yet it must be confessed that while the commission they received was plenary, clothing them with divine authority to enter upon the great work for which they had been consecrated, it was circumscribed as to the field of its operation. Jesus said unto them. “Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not; but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel.” From this we infer that although the apostles were now fully invested with the authority and prerogatives of the apostolic office, yet this does not imply that the field of their labors might not subsequently be enlarged, and they be more fully and explicitly instructed as to the nature of their duties.
In the establishment of his kingdom our Saviour advanced step by step, unfolding to his apostles the great mysteries of his gospel and the ground-plot of the new institution, as they were able to understand and prepared to receive them. Hence it appears that even up to the hour of our Saviour’s crucifixion his apostles were greatly ignorant with regard to the laws and institutions of that kingdom, for the establishment of which they had been chosen and ordained as prime ministers.
Subsequent to our Saviour’s resurrection farther light was shed upon this subject. We read (Matthew 28:18-20): “Jesus came and spake unto them. saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and. of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you; and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” It is recorded (Mark 16:15): “And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature,” etc. In John 20:21-23, we read: “Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you; as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.” From the scriptures above quoted, it appears that after our Saviour’s resurrection from the dead he enlarged the boundaries, and more fully explained the character of the apostolic mission. Hitherto the apostles had been restricted in their labors to the Jews, but now the “middle wall of partition,” which had separated the Gentile from the Jew, is demolished, and “all the world” is the divinely-assigned field of apostolic evangelism and jurisdiction. The plenary powers of the apostles are here distinctly and emphatically stated. The words of the Saviour are: “As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you.” The Father had sent the Son, clothed with “all power in heaven and in earth,” “even so” doth the Son “send” the apostles. So that as the Son was invested with all the authority of the Father, in like manner were the apostles invested with all the authority of the Son; hence it is clear that all the acts and doings of the apostles, under the commission in question, are of divine authority.
It is not, however, to be inferred from this that the apostles were invested with the authority of Christ to perform any part of the peculiar mission he received of the Father; but that they were as truly sent as truly authorized to perform the work assigned them, in establishing and organizing the gospel-Church, as the Son had been sent and authorized by the Father to perform the work for which he came into the world.
II. Another important and obvious inference from the apostolic commission, as here enlarged and explained, is its perpetuity. This the general tenor of the gospel would strongly indicate. It is plain that the Christian religion is designed, for universal dissemination. It is intended for all people in all ages; hence it would appear that it should be sent to all as an authoritative message from God. But the express language of the commission, in its enlarged and more explicit form, as already quoted, sets the point in hand in a light not easy to be misunderstood: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.” And again: “Go ye therefore, and teach all nations.” Now, we ask, if the apostolic office terminated with the lives of the then existing apostle, how was it possible for them to fill the mission with which they were intrusted? Could the twelve, in their own persons, “go into all the world”? Could they “preach the gospel to every creature”? Could they “teach all nations,” of every age, and of every clime? It is most evident that they could not. But again, the Saviour adds: “Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.” Now, we demand, can this apply exclusively to the ordained twelve? Are they to be continued as the personal agents in carrying out this commission “to the end of the world”? No one can so understand the passage. And we may confidently ask, How, therefore, can the passage be consistently interpreted, unless we infer that the apostolic office is to be perpetuated, and this commission to he carried out by the apostles’ successors?
Notwithstanding the plain, and to our mind unavoidable, inference from the words of Christ, that the apostolic office is perpetual, yet many are slow to admit the truth of the inference. We are met by the objection, that the apostles were endued with plenary inspiration to write the New Testament Scriptures, and with miracle-working power. And it is argued that as it is not contended that the supposed successors of the apostles have been endued with these powers, therefore the apostles can have no successors. We will calmly consider this objection, as it is the main, if not the sole, reliance of those who restrict the apostolic office to the New Testament twelve. Our first remark is, that the objection in question is based upon and derives all its force from what we conceive to be a false assumption. It assumes that the apostolic office, in order to be perpetual, must be unchangeable — that is, that a material change in the power and prerogatives of all office cannot take place without the destruction of that office. But why, we ask, must such a result ensue? Does perpetuity in itself necessarily imply unchangeableness? Surely it does not. The existence of man is to be perpetuated forever, but who can tell “through what new scenes and changes we must pass”? Even so, may not the apostolic office still be perpetuated, in all that is essential to its existence, while it may undergo changes in its features?
But we are not left to mere reasoning on this subject. We have the plain Bible-statement of facts. As we have already seen, the mission of the apostles, after the resurrection of Christ, was greatly changed from what it had been before. It was enlarged in its sphere, modified in its character, and more explicitly unfolded in its functions, yet all that was essential to its identity was preserved. It was still the same ministry and apostleship. If, then, so great a change as was realized in the functions and prerogatives of the apostles, in passing from the period of their original call and ordination up to the full exercise of their high prerogatives, in the establishment and organization of the gospel-Church, subsequent to the resurrection of Christ, did not destroy the identity of the office, why should it be argued that the same office cannot be perpetuated, unless precisely the same prerogatives and powers be continued with it?
We do not contend that that part, or, more properly, that appendage of the apostolate, which implied plenary inspiration and miraculous endowments, was to be transmitted to their successors. This is not the matter in dispute. The only question here before us, is whether those extraordinary powers were a necessary part of the office essential to its very existence? We see no evidence that they were. Miraculous powers were no doubt possessed by numbers having no claims to be apostles. And moreover, it is clear that, so far as plenary inspiration is concerned, this was not possessed by the apostles till they were “endued with power from on high” on the day of Pentecost. It was not till then that the Spirit “led them into all truth,” bringing to their minds the past instructions of Christ, and enabling them to