SECTION I. The Visible Church of Christ the same, under every dis pensation, and in every age. "My Dove, my undefiled is but one; she is the only one of her Mother.” CANT. vi. 9. 1. THE identity of the visible church of Christ, in eve ry period of the world, may be argued from the identity and perpetuity of the real church. As a visible saint is one who appears to be a real saint, so the visible church, in its most extended sense, is a body which appears to be the real church of Christ. Can we, then, conceive of two distinct visible churches, while we admit the identity and perpetuity of the real church? In other words, can we conceive of two bodies visibly distinct, which yet appear to be the same ?*It is manifest, from the absurdity of such a supposition, that if the real church has been the same in all periods of the world, this must be true also of the visible church. 2. The visible church has ever been the same, since it has ever been a gospel church. That the visible church is at present on a gospel foundation, need not be proved. And that the church of Israel stood on the same founda tion, is as certain as that it was in any sense a church of God. For why should God separate any people from the world to be his church, and not place them on a gospel foundation, unless it were to damn them? But if the visible church has ever been a gospel church, has it not ever been essentially the same? 3. The visible church, under both dispensations, has been equally the church of Christ. Under both, it is represented as the bride of Christ.† Must it not, then, be the same, under both? Or did our adored Redeemer, publick appearance, cast off his anciently beloved Zion, on his Mr. J. admits the perpetuity and identity of the real church of God. (P. 28.) He admits, also, that there existed a visible church in the family of Abraham. (P. 29, et alibi.) Still he denies that this is the same body as the visible church under the present dispensation. (P. 28.) Here, then, are two distinct visible churches; or two bodies visibly distinct, which yet appear to be the same ? + Jer. iii. 14; Rev. xxi, 9. notwithstanding her elevated hopes and joyful songs, and notwithstanding his solemn protestations that he would never forsake her, and take to himself another bride ?" It is represented, under both, as the house of Christ. That same Jesus, "whose house are we" as Christian professors, builded and possessed that house or church in which "Moses, as a servant, was faithful." (Heb. iii. 2—6.) It is represented, under both, as the flock of Christ. He who is now styled "the great Shepherd of the sheep, is spoken of in the Psalms as "the Shepherd of Israel.”* Indeed it is represented, under both, as the property of Christ. The same glorious Personage who hath "bought us with a price," when he appeared in the church of Israel, is said to have "come to his own.”† But if the visible church, under both dispensations, has been equally the church of Christ, has it not been, under both, the same? 4. The visible church, under both dispensations, has professed the same religion. It will not be questioned that the Jewish brethren were professors of religion. Nor will it be questioned that they professed the true religion, which God gave them. "Thou hast avouched the Lord this day," says Moses, "to be thy God, to walk in his ways," to keep his commandments, and to hearken to his voice." (Deut. xxvi. 17.) I ask, then, has not true religion been invariably the same? Has there, since the fall, been more than one way from earth to heaven? If, then, the church, under both dispensations, has professed the true religion, has it not, under both, professed the same religion? Hence, has it not, under both, been essentially the same church? 5. The visible church has been constantly subject to essentially the same requirements. As God now requires his people to be holy, for he is holy; so he anciently required the same. "Ye shall be holy, for I the Lord your God am holy." As he now requires his people to love him with all the heart, soul, mind, and strength; so he anciently required the same. "Thou shalt love the Lord *Ps. Ixxx. 1; Heb. xiii. 20. t + John i. 11; 1 Cor. vi. 20. Mr. J. concédes that "the Jews, as a nation, professed to rest in Christ." (P. 29.) Dr. BALDWIN does the same. See his works on Baptism, pp. 240 and 242. 1 Pet. i. 16; Lev. xix. 2. the same. thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy might."* As he now requires his people to believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, so he anciently required Else why were the Jews cut off for unbelief? (Rom. xi. 20.) As he now requires his people to "do good to all," shun every vice, and "love their neighbour as themselves;" so he anciently required the same. "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself. Do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with thy God."+ Let us here stop one moment, to consider some of Mr. JUDSON's assertions respecting the qualifications for membership in the church of Israel. "To be descended from Abraham," says he, "in the line of Isaac and Jacob, was sufficient to introduce the subject into this church.” (P. 30.)-If it was sufficient to introduce him, it was not suf ficient to continue him there. The Jews were not broken off because they were not the "descendants of Abraham, in the line of Isaac and Jacob;" but "because of their unbelief."-"Persons of Gentile extraction," he adds, "who were purchased by Jews, or wished to enjoy the privileges of Jews, could be introduced into this church by circumcision. Whether any other requisite to admission was aps pointed by God, we are not informed.” (P. 30.)-Does Mr. J: believe that a Philistine, for instance, who continued a professed worshipper of Dagon, could become a regular member of that church which, he admits, "professed to rest in Christ," merely by receiving the external mark of circumcision? In a word, the visible church has been subject to essentially the same requirements, under both dispensations. Is not this good evidence that it has ever been the same? 6. Essentially the same promises were made to the visible church under the former dispensation, which are made to it now. God now promises his people all needful temporal blessings; and to his ancient covenant people he promised the same. He now promises his church that he will never leave her, or cease to be her God; and to the church of Israel he promised the same. "Fear thou not, for I am with thee; be not dismayed, for I am thy God." He now promises to preserve and defend his *Mark xii. 30; Deut. vi. 5. ‡Matth. vi. 33; Lev. xxvi. 3–6, + Mark xii. 31; Lev. xix. 18; Mic. vi. 8. Matth. xxviii. 20; Rev. xxi. 7; Is. xli, 5. church; and under the former dispensation he promised the same. "The Lord of hosts will defend Jerusalem, and passing over, he will preserve it."* He promises to build up the present visible church; and to the church of Israel he promised the same.. "I will build thee, and thou shalt be built, O virgin of Israel! I have loved thee with an everlasting love." He has promised to give the kingdom to his little flock under the gospel; and to his ancient Zion he promised the same. "Kings shall be thy nursing fathers, and queens thy nursing mothers;" and "the nation and kingdom that will not serve thee, shall perish."Is it possible that the subjects of such similar promises should be perfectly distinct? 7. The church, under both dispensations, has been subject to similar discipline. The direction of Christ now is"If thy brother trespass against thee, go and tell him his fault." Formerly it was "Thou shalt not hate thy brother in thine heart; thou shalt in any wise rebuke thy neighbour, and not suffer sin upon him." The direction of Christ now is" If thy brother repent, forgive him.". Formerly it was-"When the offender shall bring his sinoffering, and in token of repentance lay his hand upon its head, the victim shall be slain, and he shall be forgiven." The direction of Christ now is" If the offender will not hear the church, but continues presumptuously obstinate, let him be cut off, and become to you as an heathen." Formerly it was" The soul that doeth aught presumptu. ously, and will not hearken to the priest, nor to the judge, the same hath reproached the Lord, and that soul shall be cut off from his people, "T-Does not this similarity of discipline under both dispensations very clearly indicate that the church has been essentially the same? *2 Thess. iii. 3; Matth. xvi. 18; Is. xxxi. 5. † Acts xv. 16; Jer. xxxi. 3, 4. Luke xii. 32; Is. xlix. 23, and Ix. 12. The apostle Paul frequently quotes the promises made to the ancient church, and applies them to the Christian church. See particularly 2 Cor. vi. 16-18, and vii. 1. Having quoted, in the last of the sixth chapter here referred to, some of the promises made to the ancient church, he begins the seventh by saying "Having, therefore, these promises, let us cleanse ourselves," &c. How could he represent the Corinthian church as having these promises, and as being under consequent obligations to cleanse themselves, unless he considered them the same body with the ancient church, to which these promises were made? Luke xvii. 3; Lev. iv. Matth. xviii. 15; Lev. xix. 17. 8. The church, both before and after Christ, has used, in some respects, the same forms of worship. We refer particularly to the Psalms. These were anciently the songs of Zion. They were statedly used in the church of Israel. Nor has the visible church ever laid them aside." Even the Baptists themselves, who seem so much interested to degrade the ancient church of God, have never ceased to sing her Psalms. Is not here striking evidence that the church has ever been the same? Can those religious bodies be perfectly distinct, which can consistently and statedly adopt the same forms of worship? 9. The visible church in all ages has consisted of simi lar characters, and been marked by similar vicissitudes. Both before and since the Christian era, it has been made up "of good and bad members-of real saints and hypocrites." Some of the best of men, and some of the worst, have from time to time, under both dispensations, been found within the pale of the church. Revivals and declensions, divisions and sects, defects and excellencies, have existed in it, and been common to it, in all past ages; which fact shows its identity in each and every period of time, from its commencement to the present moment."* 10. Under both dispensations, the church has been spoken of and addressed in similar language.-Christ said of his ancient covenant people-"I will declare thy name unto my brethren; in the midst of the congregation I will praise thee. Of his professing people it is still said He is not ashamed to call them brethren." In the following language God addressed his ancient church" If ye will obey my voice, and keep my covenant, then shall ye be a peculiar treasure unto me, above all people. And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation." In similar language he addresses his church now"Ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people."+ God said of his ancient church-"I will walk among you, and will be your God, and ye shall be my people." He says of his church now"I will dwell in them, and walk in them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people."-Is not the *D. PORTER'S Diss. on Baptism, pp. 24, 25. + Ps. xxii. 22; Heb. ii. 11. Lev. xxvi. 12; 2 Cor, vi. 16. Ex. xix. 5, 6; 1 Pet. ii. 9. |