national than it became by the exclusion of such Dissenters; but probably this course would have been attended with great dissensions within the Church itself.

1027 The Polity of an Established National Church was cast in such a form that Dissenters were at first punished as such. This kind of Polity was in England (in 1688) soon succeeded by one in which Toleration was granted to Dissenters, including liberty of worship under certain conditions; but the exclusion of Dissenters from many offices in the State was continued, as a protection to the Church of England. This exclusion has now in a great measure been abolished; yet still the Church of England, by the possession of most of the property, dignities, and functions, which have in former times belonged to the Established Church, continues to be preserved as the Established Church.

1028 In some other countries in Europe, and in America, the Difficulties attendant upon the maintenance of an Established National Church, among a people divided by various religious opinions, and possessing free institutions, have led to forms of Ecclesiastical Polity in which there is no Established Church which can be called National. In some of these forms of Polity, all the principal prevalent forms of religion are recognized by the State, and receive pecuniary support from the State, as in France. In other cases, no form of religion receives such support, as in the United States of North America.

1029 In all such forms of Polity, the greater part of the advantages which we have noted as belonging to the Polity of an Established Church are forfeited; but as we have said, the question regarding the Ecclesiastical Polity of each country depends upon the history of that country: and it may easily be that in these cases, the Polity which has been selected has been determined by sufficient, or at least by weighty historical reasons.

1030 We may remark, however, that the establishment of either of these forms of Ecclesiastical Polity;-the System of Indifferent Protection, which supports the ministers of several religious sects, or the Voluntary System, which supports none, leaving them to be maintained by the spontaneous contributions of their own flocks, does not appear necessarily to remove the difficulties and contentions which arise from the existence of an Established Church in a nation containing a large body of Dissenters. In the former system, the Clergy, though paid by the State, do not necessarily use their authority to uphold the Government. The Clergy of the principal sect may think the Govern

ment irreligious, and unworthy of their support, precisely because it does not recognize any distinction of true and false among rival religions. And their influence, in the business of Education, which is precisely that which ought to make their existence useful and valuable to the State, may really be used so as to be dangerous and subversive. And if any attempt be made to avert this danger, by making the support which they receive dependent upon their fidelity to the Government, the consequence will naturally be that they will lose the confidence of their flocks, and with this, their power and their value.

1031 Again, as to the Voluntary System of providing for religious ministrations and religious Education;-if it were introduced so as to supersede an Established Church, it would be likely to lead to some of the difficulties just stated. Those who had considered the Established Church as one of the greatest national blessings, would necessarily have their regard for the Constitution much weakened, when the nation no longer pretended to give a preference to true religion over false. They would consider that by such a step, the nation had repudiated its higher duties. And such an opinion, prevailing extensively among the People, could not fail to shake the security of the State and endanger the permanence of its institutions.

1032 If indeed we imagine to ourselves a nation where there prevails a strong feeling of pride in the national history, and of confidence in the national institutions;-the course of the history having been such as to dissociate these patriotic feelings from all ecclesiastical establishments; and where there prevails also a strong religious feeling among individuals: the Voluntary System may in such a case be quite reconcileable with the permanence of the political constitution and the stability of the Government*.

Yet even in such a case there must, it would seem, be serious defects in the religious condition of the country:—for instance, a necessity on the part of the clergy, of courting the favour and adopting the prejudices of their flocks, on whom they depend for their maintenance: and the absence of all provision of religious ministrations and religious instruction for those who do not make such provision for themselves. And this want is no small social evil, since they who need religion most are they who are unconscious of their need; and if there be a large body of the people who, from poverty, or from whatever cause, remain without reli

• This, there seems good reason to hope, is the condition of the United States of North America.

gion, and therefore, as we have said (1008), without effectual moral instruction, they cannot fail to be dangerous to social order. And if it be said that these classes will be provided with religious instruction by their neighbours, who have Christian zeal, and more abundant means; and who, perceiving and compassionating their needs, will teach them and establish teachers among them :-we may remark that such a system, so far as it tends to completeness and permanence, and has its established order sanctioned and secured by law, becomes of the nature of an Established Church. It was by such steps as these that the Christian Church was originally established among the nations of Europe.

We have hitherto considered the question of an Ecclesiastical Polity as it concerns the State :-as it is determined by considerations drawn from the Duty of the State to aim at its own permanence and at the moral and religious culture of its citizens. But there are also questions concerning the Duty of the Church, as determined by the precepts of its Founders and Teachers, and these we must briefly consider.

CHAPTER XVII.

DUTIES OF THE CHURCH AS TO ITS RELATION TO THE STATE.

WE have seen that the State had originally strong reasons for establishing the Christian Church; and that still, where an Established Church exists it must be looked upon as one of the greatest of national blessings. We have seen that the State has grounds for offering to the Church many temporal benefits, in order that the Church may co-operate with the State, both in its lower and in its higher objects.

1034 But here the question occurs, Whether the Church can properly accept these offers? The Church must direct her conduct by the commands of Christ and his Apostles, and by the Spirit of their teaching. And there are texts which express, or seem to imply, directions to the Christian Minister, not to mix himself with the business of the State. His concern is with men's Souls, not with their bodies or worldly condition. Christ says, My kingdom is not of this world. He commands his disciples,

when they go forth to preach his Gospel (Matth. x. 9; Mark vi. 8; Luke ix. 3), To provide neither gold, nor silver, nor brass, nor scrip, nor two coats. He warns them against taking authority upon themselves (Matth. xx. 25; Mark x. 42), Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them; but it shall not be so among you. So Matth. xxiii. 10, Be not ye called masters. And the general tendency of the teaching of Christ and of the Apostles is, to inculcate, both an indifference to human riches and possessions, and a humility, which shrinks from human honours and political power. It may therefore seem to be inconsistent with the Christian temper of the Church, to accept such offers, of maintenance and authority, as we have shown reason for the State making to her.

1035 But we may remark, in the first place, that the injunctions, to disregard earthly possessions and earthly honours, are given, not to Christian ministers in particular, but to Christians in general. We have already (506) considered the importance of these warnings against covetousness; but we have shown (509) that these warnings do not prohibit, and did not in the first ages prevent, distinction of property, and differences of wealth among the Christians. Nor did they prevent property being held in a permanent form. The injunction to take no thought for the morrow, was always understood of such thought as might interfere with religious care about spiritual things. There is no religious reason why Christians, and the Clergy as well as the rest, should not possess property on which they may depend for their subsistence and power of action, while they devote their time and labour to their own spiritual progress, and to the teaching and assisting

of others.

1036 That the Christian Teachers ought to be supported by their flocks, was a rule which prevailed from the earliest times of the Church. St Paul says expressly (1 Cor. ix. 14), The Lord hath ordained that they which preach the Gospel should live of the Gospel; and he then quotes Christ's expression, used when the Apostles were sent forth (Luke x. 7), The Labourer is worthy of his hire. He further urges, as proof of the reasonableness of this Rule, both the ordinances of the Mosaic Law, and the general practice of mankind; according to which, the soldier, the wine-grower, the grazier, live by their respective employments. This he urges, entirely for the sake of establishing the Rule; for, as he says, here and elsewhere, he rejects the benefit of it in his own case

(1 Cor. ix. 7 and 15; 2 Cor. xi. 9; Gal. vi. 6; 2 Thess. iii. 9; Acts xx. 33).

In the earliest times of Christianity, the Ministers received their maintenance from the Hospitality of the Christians, dispersed through all parts of the Empire: but when the Empire itself became Christian, Churches and religious bodies were invested with the right of holding property. And it has been shown that such a maintenance of the Clergy in the form of permanent property, free from the uncertainty and distraction of casual contribution, is opposed to no dictate of religion: if offered by the State, it may be accepted by the Church.

1037 In the next place, as to Dignity and Power conferred upon the Christian Clergy, it is evident that the injunctions above referred to, containing warnings against ambition and rivalry among Christians, do not apply to cases in which the Christian Minister is requested by his Christian brethren to exercise authority in worldly matters, in virtue of the confidence they have in his ministerial character, and in authority exercised according to Christian principles. St Paul rebukes the Corinthians (1 Cor. vi. 1), while they were but a small part of the Community, for going to law before unbelievers. If, then, he had lived in a Community altogether Christian, it may be inferred, that he would have invested Christians as such with judicial powers, in the name of the State. The Bishops and Presbyters were Judges and Legislators for Christians then; why should they be less so now, when all persons profess Christianity? If the State, on the part of the Christian Community, offer, to the Bishops and Presbyters, such dignity and authority as may make them valuable helpers in the business of the State, there appears to be no ground, nor valid excuse, for their rejecting the offer; especially when it also tends so much to forward that religious Duty, of bringing men to the knowledge of Christ, which is the highest object of their lives.

1038 With regard to such passages as have been referred to, where Christ says that his kingdom is not of this world, and warns his disciples against exercising authority; it is plain, from the context, that these expressions were employed to correct erroneous views of the nature of his kingdom, and of the office of his Apostles and Disciples. When he told Pilate that his kingdom was not of this world, it was in order to disclaim his being a king, in that sense of rivalry to the Roman imperial authority, which would have made him criminal in Pilate's eyes. Accordingly, Pilate, after hearing this declaration, said (John xix. 4), I find no fault in him.