A Study In The Westminster Doctrine Of The Relation Of The Civil Magistrate To The Church (Continued) -- By: Robley J. Johnston

Journal: Westminster Theological Journal
Volume: WTJ 12:2 (May 1950)
Article: A Study In The Westminster Doctrine Of The Relation Of The Civil Magistrate To The Church (Continued)
Author: Robley J. Johnston


A Study In The Westminster Doctrine Of The Relation Of The Civil Magistrate To The Church
(Continued)

Robley J. Johnston

THE most basic principle for the government of the church which Gillespie sets forth is that there is a government by officers of the church which is distinct from the government of the state. This principle finds succinct expression in the sixth proposition of Gillespie’s treatise One Hundred and Eleven Propositions concerning the Ministry and Government of the Church. Here he says: “The same Lord and our Saviour Jesus Christ, the only Head of the Church, hath ordained in the New Testament, not only the preaching of the word and administration of baptism and the Lord’s Supper, but also ecclesiastical government, distinct and differing from the civil government; and it is his will that there be such a government distinct from the civil in all his churches everywhere, as well those which live under Christian, as those under infidel magistrates”.1 This note is pervasive in all that Gillespie wrote and said on the subject of church government. This was the thrust of his answer to Selden on Matthew 18:17 and it is determinative for his argument in his Aaron’s Rod Blossoming. In this last named work Gillespie puts the matter very pointedly when he says: “The question is not, 1. Whether the magistrate be God’s deputy or vicegerent, and as God upon earth; for who denies that? Nor, 2. Whether the magistrate be Christ’s deputy… Nor, 3. Whether the Christian magistrate be useful and subservient to the kingdom of Jesus Christ … for in this also I hold the affirmative… But the question is, Whether the Christian magistrate be a governor in the church vice Christi, in the room and stead of Jesus

Christ, as he is Mediator? … I am for the negative.”2 Here Gillespie puts himself on record as opposing unconditionally the Erastian contention that there is but one government and that residing in the state. To this end he argues for the necessity of a government in the church which is different in kind from the rule of the civil magistrate when he says: “Church censures must needs be dispensed by ministers and elders, because they are heterogeneous to magistracy: For, first, The magistrate by the power which is in his hand, ought to punish any of his subjects that do evil, and he ought to punish like sins with like punishments. But if the power of church censures be in the magistrate’s hands, he cannot walk by that rule; for church censures are only for church members, not for all subjects.”

visitor : : uid: ()