racy, or a republic, so far forth as it does not conflict with their duties to God.* We do not, therefore, teach, that because presbyterianism, as an ecclesiastical system, is republican in its character, and most perfectly harmonizes with republican institutons, that presbyterians are less faithful, loyal, or true, as subjects of any other form of civil government, than are the members of any other church.

It is no part of our intention to authenticate, as of divine right, the republican form of civil government, or to allege that this form alone can characterize the ecclesiastical government of a true church. On the contrary, while we believe human government to be an ordinance of God, its particular character is, we think, left to the determination of human reason, under the control of whatever light God has given it in his word and providence. And in conformity with this arrangement, the ecclesiastical government of the church has been so moulded by its divine head, as to be capable of administration under every mode of government, from the absolutism of a despotic monarchy, to the untrammelled liberty of democratic freedom.

We do not, therefore, design to cast any shadow of dark imputation upon the character of church members in other countries and ages, and under other governments than our own happy republic; nor to bring their loyalty and true-hearted allegiance into question. As it regards the presbyterians of Britain, there never have existed a more loyal and devoted race of subjects, nor one more patriotic and true to the best interests of their country.†

But assuming that the republican form of civil government, as it exists in this country, is best adapted to secure the greatest

*See on this point Christ. Indep. of Civil Govt.; Brooke's Hist. of Relig. Lib. vol. i. pp. 4, 6; Lectures on the Headship of Christ, Glasg. 1840. &c. &c.

†The confessions of faith of all protestant churches which were drawn up not by moderates but by evangelical men, teach the same. Accordingly, christians, who have been reviled as rebels, have uniformly proved the most enlightened friends of loyalty, and have been most useful in seasons of national danger. The christians of apostolic and primitive times were distinguished for their loyalty. Proofs to the same effect might be quoted from the history of the protestant churches of France, and Piedmont, and America. Louis XIV. repeatedly testified to the loyalty of his protestant and evangelical subjects, declaring that they had given proof of their fidelity and zeal for his service beyond all that can be imagined, and contributed in all things to the welfare and advantage of his affairs.' The Duke of Savoy himself gladly acknowledged the loyalty of the Vaudois as quite remarkable. The eminent loyalty and fidelity of presbyterians in contrast with the disloyalty of prelates, has been demonstrated from the facts of English and Irish history, by almost all the old writers. See Prynne's Antipathy of the English Lordly Prelacy both to Regal Monarchy and Civil Unity, &c. Lond. 1641, 2 vols. 4to. Milton's Reason of Ch. Govt. in Works, vol. i. p. 29. &c. Lord Brooke on Episcopacy, ch. vii. and ix. p. 38. Jameson's Fundamentals of the Hierarchy, part i. § 2, pp. 5 and 17. Baxter on Episcopacy. Calamy's Defence. Pierce's Defence, &c. &c. See also Lorimer's Manual of Presbytery, ch. v. p. 207, &c. Campbell's Vindication of the Principles and Character of Presbyt. Ch. in Ireland. Lond. 1787 third ed. and Plea for Presbytery.

[The Church called a Republic. Gillespie's Miscellanies, p. 15.]

amount of personal liberty, social enjoyment, and political prosperity; and that it most fully embodies and exhibits the spirit of liberty; our inquiry shall be, whether, and how far, the presbyterian form of church polity is analogous to our civil constitution; whether the genius of presbytery and of republicanism are found to be in strict alliance; and whether, in this respect, our form of ecclesiastical polity does not eminently commend itself to the admiration and regard of every American citizen, to whatever religious denomination he may belong. It will be our object, therefore, to make it appear, that the platform of the Bible, while limited to principles so general as to accommodate it to any order of civil institutions, is yet pregnant with the spirit of liberty; and, when allowed its full development, illustriously displays its essential affinity to whatever is most promotive of human happiness and the liberty of mankind; and that the presbyterian form of ecclesiastical polity most readily adjusts itself to republicanism, and is free from any thing which might justly excite jealousy, distrust, or apprehension on the part of the governing authorities of the land, or of a justly watchful people.

Neither is it any part of our design to criminate other denominations, or to hold up what is distinctively called the presbyterian church, as the only one that is analogous to that form of republican government under which we live, much less to imply that others are hostile to 'the powers that be.' On the contrary, we rejoice in believing, that, to a great extent, there is a harmony of spirit and of order between the ecclesiastical system of our various christian denominations, and those of the civil commonwealth, and that the members of all desire to emulate the highest attainments in patriotic devotion to the interests of our country. But in the strength of this analogy, as exhibited in different churches, we believe there is a great diversity, some being more republicanized than others. The degree of approximation to a republic, found in the numerous leading forms of ecclesiastical polity, we shall have occasion to point out; and while we believe that any form of church government will consist with any form of civil government, which does not, by any of its principles, interfere with the authority of that government in civil matters,* fidelity will require us to point out the dangerous character of popery, which binds all its members in subjection to a foreign potentate, and to a despotic hierarchy.

To such a comparison we are urged by the zeal with which all denominations are pressing their claims to a republican character, upon the attention of a people, to whom such a recommendation justly gives a most hearty welcome. 'We have repeatedly,' says the New England Puritan, 'recorded our con

*Brooke on Episcop. pp. 39, 40, 47.

viction, that congregationalism is not only more in harmony with the teachings of the New Testament than any other system of ecclesiastical polity, but also more purely democratic than any other. We, of course, use the term 'democratic' in its original signification, and not as descriptive of the tenets of any political party.' Similar, and as exclusive claims are made, by the baptist denominations. The unitarians, who are also congregationalists, make their devotion to the interests of civil liberty a fundamental article in their' popular creed. The protestant methodist church has separated from the episcopal body on this very ground, that it was in its polity anti-republican, and opposed to the just rights of a large portion of the clergy, and the whole of the laity. The methodist episcopal church, however, is not bashful in proclaiming 'the republicanism of methodist polity.' The episcopal church is also heard proclaiming aloud her merits as the most purely republican of all republics. Nay, even the Romish church, not satisfied with her infallibility, and other unapproachable excellencies, sets all her rivals at defiance, by the assertion, that her system is most favorable to equality of conditions.'§

It is, therefore, a time for presbyterians to speak, and not be silent. We say, audi alteram partem.' We also would give our reasons for the hope that is in us, that, when weighed in the balances against all others, we shall not be found wanting. And what we speak, we speak as unto wise men, judge ye what we say.

Neither is any one justified in supposing, that this is a useless question, or one which leads to no practical results. We believe and affirm the contrary. As well might it be said that the forms of civil government have no practical influence upon the manners, morals, and habits of a people, as that different ecclesiastical systems will not exercise a similar influence. 'Every religion,' says Tocqueville,** 'is to be found in juxtaposition to a political opinion, which is connected with it by affinity. If the

*See Questions and Answers explanatory of the Government of this Church. Charleston, 1837. The History and Mystery of Methodist Episcopacy, by Alexander M'Carne. Balt. 1827. Also his Defence, &c. Balt. 1829.

†See recent articles in the Christ. Advoc. and Journal, and several also in the Southern Christian Advocate.

Bishop White, in his Memoirs of the Episcopal Church in this country, declares, 'that episcopacy, as now settled in America, must be confessed at least as analogous as presbytery-the author thinks more so-to the plan of civil government which mature deliberation has established over the union. Mem. of Prot. Ep. Ch. p. 55. But perhaps Bishop White was not the best judge of such an analogy, since he openly states, that 'in consequence of an impartial comparison,' he prefers the laws and the manners of the British nation to those of any other. Ibid. p. 57. See also the Comprehensive Church, by Rev. Thomas H. Vail, Hartford, 1841. Tocqueville's Democracy in America, vol. i. pp. 328, 329 and 332. **Ibid, p. 328. See also p. 334. See this also illustrated in 'Foreign Conspiracy against the Liberties of the United States,' p. 34, and note B.

human mind be left to follow its own bent, it will regulate the temporal and spiritual institutions of society upon one uniform principle, and man will endeavor, if I may use the expression, to harmonize the state in which he lives upon earth with the state he believes to await him in heaven.'

'Who,' asks Dr. McCrie,† 'that has duly reflected on the subject, can be ignorant that forms of government exert a mighty influence, both directly and indirectly, on the manners, and habits, and sentiments of the people who live under them; and that some of these forms are unspeakably preferable to others? That they are better adapted to impose a check on ambitious or corrupt rulers-prevent or correct the abuses of maladministration-provide for the impartial distribution of justice-preserve the spirit and perpetuate the enjoyment of liberty-promote education, virtue, and religion; and, in fine, to secure to the people at large all that happiness which it is the original and proper design of government to procure and bestow. These remarks apply with greater force to ecclesiastical than to political government. The advancement of the interests of religion, the preservation of purity, of faith and morals, the regular dispensing of religious instruction and of all divine ordinances, and, in general, the promoting of the spiritual improvement and salvation of the people, have always depended, and must always depend, in a high degree, on the form of government established in a church, and on the rules by which discipline is exercised in it.'

It is on these grounds we attach importance to the present inquiry. God forbid, that we should pursue it with any sinister or political ends. But the ecclesiastical system of the presbyterian church, we conscientiously believe to be eminently adapted to advance these glorious objects. Although it takes no direct part in the government of society, it must nevertheless be regarded as the foremost of the political institutions of this country; for if it does not impart a taste for freedom, it facilitates the use of free institutions.* To it Scotland has been indebted for other blessings besides the efficient support of the gospel, of a collateral kind, and of the highest importance. To it she owes that system of education which has extended its blessings to the lowest class in the community. To it she owes the intelligence, sobriety, and religious principle which distinguish her commonality from those of other countries. To it she owed a simple, unambitious, laborious, and at the same time independent order of ministers. And to it she was indebted for that public spirit which has resisted manifold disadvantages in her political and religious institutions; disadvantages, which otherwise must have reduced her to a state of slavery, and made †Life of Melville, vol. ii. p. 470. *Tocqueville, i. 334.

her the instrument of enslaving the nation with which she became allied by the union of the crowns.†

We have only one other preliminary observation to offer. When we affirm that presbyterianism, as the form of ecclesiastical government prescribed in the New Testament, is republican, we contemplate the church in its mundane or visible administration. We inquire not from whom is the authority to govern derived, but to whom on earth is this authority delegated. Considered in reference to its totality, and to Christ its head, the government of the church is an absolute monarchy. Christ is head over all things to the church; and hence, is it one and universal, under Him as its Sovereign.* The question, therefore, now before us, does not affect the church, in itself considered-in its complete development-in its universal extent-and in its relation to heaven as well as to earth. In this view, as are republics themselves, it is a theocracy, a divine spiritual monarchy, of which Christ alone is Head, Lawgiver, and King. But the question is, what is the character of that delegated government, intrusted by the King of Zion to his ministers and people here on earth? what is the character of that administration under which the visible church is placed, in this sphere or province of Christ's dominion, and in subordination to his celestial royalty? The relation between the ruling part and the ruled, in any community, constitutes the character of its government. Viewed, therefore, as subject to Christ, the christian church is a monarchy, just as the Jewish was in its relation to God. But, considered as governed by the laws of Christ, and the representative officers authorized by Him, it is, as we shall endeavor to prove, just like the Hebrew commonwealth, a republic.

SECTION. II.

The principles of republicanism.

All forms of government are reducible to five; the despotic, the monarchical, the aristocratic, the republican, and the democratic. A despotic government is that in which a single person directs every thing by his own will. A monarchy is that in

+ Life of Melville, ii. 471.

*Ephes. 4: 15; 1: 22; Col. 1: 18; 2: 19; Eph. 5: 23; Col. 3: 15; Rom. 12: 4, 5; 1 Cor. 10: 17; Eph. 2: 16.

This is an old and useful distinction. In 'Syon's Royal Prerogative,' Amsterd. 1642, p. 31, we find, that Peter Martyr, in his common places, making the church a monarchy, in respect of Christ, an aristocracy in respect of the elders; addeth, also, that because there are matters of great weight and importance referred unto the people, as excommunication, absolution, choosing of ministers, and the like; it hath also a consideration of a popular government. Of the same judgment was Junius.