PLEA FOR THE REFORMATION

OF THE

CONGREGATIONAL CHURCHES.

LECTURE I.

THE CORRUPTED CHURCH DETECTED.

I AM about to enter upon a threefold expression of sentiment, that of complaint, of desire, and of advice. To complain of the present Congregational Churches, to delineate what is to be desired in them, and to advise as to the best mode of accomplishing the good object of fully, fairly, and freely paying strict attention to apostolic precept and example in the constitution and order of our Churches. I will not make complaints of evils which are only partial in their extent, or which operate only in secresy; but will procure the materials for lamentation from those doings which are public, general, and of which every one who is cognizant of our Churches (at least those in London) must be aware. I have no intention of

prying into secrets, or of pursuing faults into all the destructive range of their ramifications. Enough stares me in the face to warrant the conclusion that the present Congregational Churches do not strictly adhere to apostolic rule.

They walk by a perverted rule of their own devising, and not by that of the Apostles :

I. In their neglect of Communion.

II. In paying a decided preference to the spirit of the world in their financial affairs; and

III. In curtailing the means for the edification of their Churches.

The first remarkable dereliction from apostolic example appears in the non-observance of the Lord's Supper every Lord's day. The history of the early Churches in the New Testament intimates that they observed it every Lord's day (Acts ii. 42, xx. 7; 1 Cor. xi. 17-34). There are but few who will attempt to shield the true cause of the dereliction of duty from view, by controverting the propriety of so doing. But it is well known our Churches do not find it convenient to attend to it so often. But why should it be more convenient for our Churches to elevate one Lord's day in the month to the rank of communion days, than to commemorate their communion on every one of these days? What should be the rule and limit of convenience but principle? and what more suitable principles can we take in these matters than those which we find in the New Testament? A dereliction of duty, from whatever cause it may arise, while it may prove in a given

instance the impossibility of the obedience, will not destroy the imperative character of the duty, or shield the delinquent from blame. And a Church of Christ, formed by means of a collection of persons who bear the image of the Redeemer, should constantly hold themselves in readiness to obey in all things. They should not by any means contentedly suffer themselves to be warped from their privileges by circumstances of their own creation. But, on the contrary, should unitedly present, by a reverential obedience to collective duties, a fit pattern, after which their members individually might safely copy, in their respective family and personal manifestations of obedience to God's will.

II. The spirit of the world predominates in their principal financial arrangements. I do not mean to object to Christians taking a lesson from the wise men of the world, when that is altogether compatible with their religious duties; nor do I make it a subject of complaint that they take care to commit their temporal matters, the carnal things of the Church, to a college of deacons, for I wish the same degree of wisdom were displayed in their other and more important matters. What I complain of in the financial arrangement is, that they partake of that which is worldly, so as to defeat, to a great extent, the grand object of their incorporation as Churches. The instance which I shall produce of this class of practical errors, is the system of seat-renting. That there should be any plausible necessity for such a mode of obtaining support for religion so much like taxation,

argues a depraved state of affairs. But more particularly this system presents objectionable features,— 1. In its injustice towards individuals.

2. In its injuriousness to the real interests of the Church; and

3. In its being detrimental to the cause of the Gospel; impeding its advancement, and casting an unjust suspicion over the real object of its publication.

1. It is unjust in principle towards individuals; for while it may be easy for the one to pay for his one seat, the head of a large family must, for the very same opportunity, pay five or six times more, yet families do not instinctively bring with them five or six times more pecuniary means for the display of liberality. Then why carry on a system which must either raise unequal claims, and tempt some to the unworthy resort of seeking to evade the tax, or to proclaim themselves, on account of their families, the poor of the congregation? In cases where the opulent individual is the one seat-renter, and the other with cramped means the individual who pays rent for a family, the discrepancy more evidently appears. Yet it must not be forgotten that these payments are to be understood to be voluntary contributions! And so also is a congé d'élire to be understood to be a voluntary election. But who that knows anything of the wise instructions of the Apostles will conclude that such absurdities can be the legitimate fruit of apostolic precept?

2. Let us suppose the case, that the opulent one seatrenter is the mere hearer, but the other, who has a

large family, the poorer person, and poorer still on account of his family: the injustice assumes a further degree of turpitude in becoming injurious to the real interests of the Church. Those who are the contributors to the maintenance of public worship for themselves or others, have a right to determine what that worship shall be, and who shall be its ministers. And, however this principle may be repudiated, facts are continually occurring which demonstrate the reality of its operations.

If circumstances are so arranged that the chief dependence must be placed upon the will of the mere hearer, there is nothing to prevent the Church from being dictated to by those who are either unworthy to make a part of it, or scorn to become such. Besides fostering a worldly spirit in the officers of the Church, this system tends to create a classification or caste amongst the members of the Church, diametrically opposed to that spirit of brotherhood

which members of the same Church should bear towards each other; and exactly of the same character with that which predominates in the world. Why should the Christian be distinguished in the Church, for the purpose of degradation, because his worldly portion is scanty? That fact is galling enough, without adding insult. "My brethren, have not the faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Lord of glory, with respect of persons. For if there come unto your assembly a man with a gold ring, in goodly apparel, and there come in also a poor man in vile raiment; And ye have respect to him that weareth the gay