The central Presbyterian. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1856-1908, 1869-12-22

THE BOOK OF CHURCH ORDER.
The New Book has no proof texts or quo
tations from the Scriptures attached to it.
This is manifest defect, and certainly con-
stitutes a point of inferiority to the Old
Book
Chapter 1, section 2. Of the Minister Of
the Word. This section differs greatly from
chapter 4-of the Old Book-"0f bishops
or pastors. 1t ought to be scrutinised we'll
by the Presbyteries before they adopt it.
We are especially doubtful about the pro-
priety of adopting the following passage;
SO. The doctor or teacher is he whom the
Church appoints to teach in schools of divin-
ity, or to give instruction in the doctrines
and duties of religion to youths assembled
in Colleges and Universities. We object
to this that the name teacher is given in the
Nes0 Testament to the minister, and that it
does not there indicate one who is appointed
to teach in schools of divinity, and in Col
leges and Universities Which of the Apos-
ties, or of the pastors in the Apostolic age
taught in these schools or colleges? Paul,
in l Tim. ii: 7, calls himself "a teacher of
the Gentiles in faith and verify, but in
what school of divinity or university did he
teach? 1t is very difficult to determine what
was the work of the teacher in the early
Church. From l Cor. xii: 29, We should
infer that it was preaching the Word. Nor
is there anything in Eph. iv: II, to induce
us to think otherwise. 1t was, probably, ex-
pOsitory preaching as distinguished from
other kinds of preaching If it was, as it
might have been, the giving Of instruction
in the Scriptures in the mode in which it is
now given in Bible classes, it was performed
for all the disciples and not for any particu-
lar class of them. The passage under con-
sideration limits the work of the teacher to
schools of divinity, colleges, and universities;
then the teacher in the Apostolic Church
had no work to perform-if it be pretended
that the work assigned to each is the same.
1t may be replied to what has been said, that
there is no intention in the passage quoted to
define the work of the teacher named in the
New Testament-but that its design is only
to show that ministers may be employed in
the work indicated. If this be all, we object
to the use of the Scriptural word, as adapted
to lead men into error; we object also to its
being in connexiOn with accurate and Scrip
toraI definitions Of the work of pastor and
that of an evangelist. Let US ask why pri-
mary schools and academies were not in
cluded? May not minister be appointed
to give religious instruction in them as well
as in colleges? Or is it designed to include
them in the word colleges? We must con,
tend that the Apostle Paul, when he uses
the word teachers with reference to the min
istry, never thought of school of divinity,
a college, or an university. If there be
Scriptural authority for schools of divinity,
and for ministers imparting religious instruc-
ton in colleges, it must be derived from some
thing more than the word teacher" and
''teaching," as applied in the New Testa-
ment to the ministry. We are willing to
give to the minister every name which the
Scriptures give him, but we wish to under
stand each name as including also that, and
no more than was included in it as it was
used at first. The New Books definition of
doctor and teacher does not include all the
work of the Seriptasral teaehsr-and ought
not to be adopted, because it is defective.
1t, probably, includes more, and ought not
to be adopted because it contains what is
false.
Chapter 6, section 5. IA. On the subject
of the resignation of pastoral charge, it is
proposed, eff the congregation fail to ap
pear, or if its reasons for retaining it's pastor
be deemed insufficient, his resignation shall
be accepted" In this it is certainly implied
that when the pastor and people concur III
requesting it, the pastoral relation shall be
dissolved. But if this concurrence of people
and pastor binds the Presbytery to dissolve
the connexion, let that fact be distinctly
stated, that there may be no longer contrO
versy on the subject. We fully believe that
the Presbytery ought to have no power tc
continue pastoral relation when both par
ties consent to its dissolution. If, however
the Presbyteries think otherwise, let the
book be so changed as to express the fac
that Presbytery has right to cOntinnt
the pastoral relation even when preacher anC
people agree to a separation. Let this sub
ject be made plain in the book.
Chapter TO- l. We propose that this bC
SO altered as to read "The censure of in
definite suspension may be intimated to tn,