Part 66

III. It is farther observed, in this answer, that Christ is the Saviour only of his body the church. This seems to obviate an objection that might be brought against the impossibility of attaining salvation, without faith in Christ; for some will be ready to conclude, that Christ may be a Saviour by his death, to those who are strangers to him, and not members of his body the church, and therefore it is added, that he is the Saviour only of such; which is what several understand, when they say, that there is no salvation out of the pale, or inclosure of the church. This is rather to be explained than denied; and it will appear, from what is said in the following answers, wherein the visible church is described, as including in it those who profess the true religion; and the invisible church is called the _body_, of which Christ is the _Saviour_, Eph. v. 23. and the members thereof are said to be made partakers of union and communion with him, and to be inseparably joined to him, as their head and Husband, when they are effectually called; so that these have an interest in that salvation, which he has procured. From hence we have ground to conclude, that he will save none by his merits, but such who are made partakers of the internal graces of the Spirit, and are united to him by a lively faith, founded on divine revelation; which is agreeable to what has been before maintained in this answer, which establishes the necessity of divine revelation, or the impossibility of persons attaining salvation by framing their lives according to the light of nature, who never heard of the gospel, nor of Jesus Christ, the sum and substance thereof.

If this be reckoned an hard saying, tending to lessen the mercy of God, with respect to the objects thereof, it must be considered, that we have no other rule of judging concerning this matter, but what is contained in scripture. If God has therein made known to his people the only way of salvation, we have no warrant to extend it farther than he has done, or to say, that because he can apply his grace in such methods, as are altogether unknown to us, that therefore he will do it, is no just or conclusive argument. And the great design of all that has been said, in this answer, is to induce us to set the highest value on Christ, and his gospel; to adore and magnify him for the privileges which we enjoy, in being favoured with it, and to put us upon improving it to the best purposes; for, if they are excluded from the benefits thereof, who never heard of it, _How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation?_ Heb. ii. 3.

Footnote 250:

_See Quest. LXXXIX._

Footnote 251:

_It is a rule in logic_, A quatenus ad omne valet consequentia.

Footnote 252:

υπεριδων.

Footnote 253:

το γνωστον του Θεου.

Footnote 254:

_See page 266-268._

Footnote 255:

_See I. Vol. 458, 459._

Footnote 256:

_Vid. Bez. in loc._

Quest. LXI., LXII., LXIII., LXIV.

QUEST. LXI. _Are all they saved who hear the gospel, and live in the church?_

ANSW. All that hear the gospel, and live in the visible church, are not saved, but they only who are true members of the church invisible.

QUEST. LXII. _What is the visible church?_

ANSW. The visible church is a society made up of all such as, in all ages, and places of the world, do profess the true religion, and of their children.

QUEST. LXIII. _What are the special privileges of the visible church?_

ANSW. The visible church hath the privilege of being under God’s special care and government, of being protected and preserved in all ages, notwithstanding the opposition of all enemies, and of enjoying the communion of saints, the ordinary means of salvation, offers of grace by Christ to all the members of it in the ministry of the gospel, testifying, that whosoever believes in him shall be saved, and excluding none that will come unto him.

QUEST. LXIV. _What is the invisible church?_

ANSW. The invisible church is the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head.

They who are made partakers of Christ’s redemption, and are brought into a state of salvation, have been before described, as members of Christ’s body the church; and we are now led to consider them as brought into this relation to him, and accordingly are to enquire in what sense they are members of Christ’s church, and so to speak of this church as to its nature, constitution, subjects, and privileges. And,

I. What we are to understand by the word _church_, as we find it applied in scripture.

1. It is sometimes used to signify any assembly that is met together, whatever be the design of their meeting. Though, indeed, it is very seldom taken in this sense in scripture; nevertheless, there are two or three places in which it is so understood: thus the multitude that met together at Ephesus, who made a riot, crying out, _Great is Diana of the Ephesians_, are called _a church_; for the word is the same, which we generally so render, in Acts xix. 32. Our translators, indeed, render it, _The assembly was confused_, and, in ver. 39. it is said, _This matter ought to be determined in a lawful assembly_, that being an unlawful one; and, in ver. 41. _The town-clerk dismissed the assembly_; in all which places, the word, in the Greek[257], is the same which we, in other places, render _church_; and the reason why our translators have rendered it _assembly_, is, because the word _church_ is used, in a very uncommon sense, in these places: and we do not find it taken in that sense in any other part of scripture.

2. It is frequently used, by the Fathers, metonymically, for the place in which the church met together for religious worship, and so it is often taken among us, and some other reformed churches, as well as the Papists; but it does not sufficiently appear that it is ever so understood in scripture. It is true, some suppose, that it is taken in this sense in 1 Cor. xi. 28. where it is said, _When ye come together in the church, I hear that there are divisions among you_; and, they think, it is farther explained, and proved to be taken in this sense, from what the apostle adds, in ver. 20. _When ye come together in one place_; and also from what is said in ver. 22. _Have ye not houses to eat and drink in, or despise ye the church of God?_ From whence they conclude that the apostle means nothing else but the place where they were convened together, and, more especially, because it is here opposed to their own _houses_.

But to this it may be replied, that, in the first of these verses but now mentioned, viz. _when ye come together in the church_, it may be very easily understood of particular persons met together with the rest of the church; and when it is said, in ver. 20. that _when ye come together into one place_, this does not refer to the place in which they were assembled[258]; but to their meeting together with one design, or accord. And when it is said, in ver. 32. _Have ye not houses to eat and drink in, or despise ye the church of God?_ the opposition is not between their own houses and the place where they were together; but the meaning is, that by your not eating and drinking in your own houses, but doing it in the presence of the church, or the assembly of God’s people that are met together, you are not only chargeable with indecency and interrupting them in the work which they are come about, but you make a kind of schism among them, as doing that which they cannot, in conscience, approve of, or join with you in; and this you are ready to call caprice, or humour, in them, and hereby you despise them. And, indeed, the place of worship cannot properly speaking, be said to be the object of contempt; therefore the apostle does not use the word, in this metonymical sense, for the place of worship, but for the worshipping assembly.

_Object._ The word _synagogue_ is often taken metonymically, in scripture, for the place where persons were assembled to worship: thus our Saviour is said sometimes to _teach in the synagogue of the Jews_, Matt. iv. 23. and elsewhere we read of one, concerning whom the Jews say, _He loveth our nation, and hath built us a synagogue_, Luke xii. 5. and elsewhere the Psalmist speaking of the church’s enemies, says, they _have burnt up all the synagogues of God in the land_, Psal. lxxiv. 8. and the apostle James, adapting his mode of speaking to that which was used among the Jews, calls the church of God _a synagogue, If there come unto your assembly_, or synagogue, as it is in the margin, _a man with a gold ring_, &c. James ii. 2. where the word is taken for the place where they were assembled; therefore we have as much reason to understand the word _church_ for the place where the church meets together.

_Answ._ It is true, the word _synagogue_, in most of these scriptures, is taken for the place where persons meet together on a religious account, though it is very much to be doubted whether it be to be understood so in the last of the scriptures referred to, and therefore our translators render it _assembly_; and so the meaning is, when you are met together, if a poor man come into your assembly, you despise him: but suppose the word _synagogue_ were to be taken in this, as it is in the other scriptures, for the place of worship, and that, by a parity of reason, the word _church_ may be taken in the same sense; all that can be inferred from hence is, that they, who call the places of worship _churches_, speak agreeable to the sense, though it may be not the express words of scripture: but this is so trifling a controversy, that it is not worth our while to say any thing more to it.

The learned Mede[259] insists largely on it, in a discourse, founded on those words of the apostle before-mentioned, _Have ye not houses to eat and drink in, or despise ye the church of God?_ in which he attempts to prove, that the apostle, by _the church_, means the place of worship, from the opposition that there is between their _own houses_ and _the church of God_, the inconclusiveness of which argument has been before considered. What he farther says, to prove that there were places in the apostle’s days, appropriated, or set apart, for divine worship; and, in particular, that the room in which they met together, on the days of our Saviour’s resurrection, and eight days after, in which they were honoured with his presence, was the same in which he eat his last Passover with them, and instituted the Lord’s Supper, and that it was in that place that they constantly met together for worship, and that therein the seven deacons were afterwards chosen, mentioned in Acts vi. and that after this a goodly church was erected on the same spot of ground; these are no other than uncertain conjectures. That they met together in an apartment, or convenient room, in the dwelling-house of some pious disciple, is very probable; but his observations from its being an upper room, as freest from disturbance, and nearest to heaven, seems to be too trifling for so great a man. And what he says farther, in defence of it, as supposing that this is what is intended by their _breaking bread from house to house_, in Acts ii, 46. is not so agreeable to the sense of the Greek words[260], as our translation, which he militates against, and supposes, that it ought to be rendered _in the house_, that is, in this house appointed for the same purpose.

What he farther adds, to prove that there were particular places appropriate for worship, in the three first Centuries, by referring to several quotations out of the Fathers, who lived in these ages, is not to be contested; though the objection he brings against this being universally true, taken from what Origen, Minutius, Felix, Arnobius, and Lactantius say, concerning the Christians, in their time, declining to build them, after they had been disturbed and harrassed, by various persecutions, seems to have some weight in it, and is not sufficiently answered by him. What he says on this subject, may be consulted in the place before-mentioned.

All that we shall say, as to this matter, is, that it is beyond dispute, that, since the church was obliged to convene together for religious worship, it was necessary that the usual place, in which this was performed, should be known by them. But it still remains uncertain, whether, (though, at some times, in the more peaceable state of the church, they met constantly in one place) they did not, at other times, adjourn from place to place, or sometimes convene in the open air, in places where they might meet with less disturbance from their enemies. All, who are conversant in the history of the church in those ages, know, that they often met, especially in times of persecution, in caves, and other subterraneous places, near the graves of those who had suffered martyrdom, in which their end was not only to encourage them to bear the like testimony to Christianity, that they had done, but that they might be more retired and undisturbed in their worship.

But, to add nothing more on this subject, as being of less moment, that which I would principally militate against is, what that excellent writer, but now mentioned, attempts to prove, in his following Dissertation[261], concerning the reverence that is due to these churches; not only whilst divine duties are performed therein, but at other times, as supposing that they retain a relative sanctity, which calls for veneration at all times. The main stress of his argument is taken from the sanctity of those places, which, by divine appointment, were consecrated for worship, under the ceremonial law; and the reverence that was expressed by persons when they entered into them, which, by a supposed parity of reason, he applies to those places which are erected for worship under the gospel-dispensation.

To which it may be replied, that it does not follow, that because the tabernacle and temple had a relative holiness in them, and therefore the same thing is applicable to the places of worship under the gospel-dispensation. For the temple was a type of God’s presence among men, and in particular of the incarnation of Christ, which was a glorious instance thereof; and it was an ordinance for their faith in this matter, and therefore holy. And besides, there was a visible external symbol of God’s presence in these places, whose throne was upon the _mercy seat_, between the cherubims, in the holy of holies; and therefore this might well be called _a holy place_, even, when worship was not performed in it: but it is certain, that other places of worship, and, in particular, the synagogues were not then reckoned so, when no worship was performed in them, though they were erected for that purpose; and our Saviour seems to insinuate, that the holiness of places is taken away under the gospel-dispensation, as appears by his reply to the woman of Samaria, when speaking concerning their _fathers worshipping in that mountain_, viz. in the temple that was erected on mount Gerizzim, he says, that _the hour cometh when ye shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship the Father_, John iv. 20, 21. that is, no place shall be so consecrated for religious worship, as that it shall be more acceptable there than elsewhere, and consequently no veneration is to be paid to any such place more than another, where the same worship may be performed[262]. But this is little other than a digression from our present design, which is to shew, that the word _church_, in scripture, is, for the most part, if not always, taken for an assembly of Christians met together for religious worship, according to the rules which Christ has given for their direction herein.

The Hebrew word, in the Old Testament, by which the church of the Jews is signified, is generally rendered the _congregation_[263], or assembly; so that in our translation, we never meet with the word _church_ in the Old Testament; yet what is there called the _congregation_, or assembly of the Israelites, might, very properly, be called a _church_, inasmuch as it is so styled in the New Testament: thus it is said, concerning Moses, that _he was in the church in the wilderness_, Acts vii. 38. But it is certain the word _church_ is peculiarly adapted, in the New Testament, to signify the Christian church worshipping God, according to the rules prescribed by our Saviour, and others, delivered by his apostles, under the Spirit’s direction; which is the sense in which we are to understand it, in speaking to these answers.[264] And this leads us to consider,

II. That the church is distinguished into _visible_ and _invisible_, each of which are particularly defined, and will be farther insisted on, under some following heads; but before this, we may offer something by way of premisal, concerning the reason of this distinction. The word _church_, according to the grammatical construction thereof, signifies a number of persons that are called; and, in its application to this present subject, every one, who is a member thereof, may be said to be called to be made partaker of that salvation which is in Christ. Now, as there is a twofold calling spoken of in scripture, to wit, one visible and external, whereby some are made partakers of the external privileges of the gospel, and all the ordinances thereof; the other internal, and saving, whereby others are made partakers of those special and distinguishing blessings, which God bestows on the heirs of salvation: the former of these our Saviour intends, when he says, _Many are called, but few are chosen_, Matt. xx. 16. the latter is what the apostle speaks of, when he connects it with _justification_ and _glorification_, Rom. viii. 30. Now they who are called in the former of these senses, are included in that branch of the distinction which respects the _visible_ church; the latter are members of that church which is styled _invisible_; the former are members of Christ by profession; the latter are united to him, as their Head and Husband, who are made partakers of spiritual life from him, and shall live for ever with him. The members of the visible church are the children of God, as made partakers of the external dispensation of the covenant of grace; such God speaks of, when he says, _I have nourished and brought up children_, Isa. i. 2. and elsewhere he says, concerning the church of the Jews, who were externally in covenant with him, _Israel is my son, even my first-born_, Exod. iv. 22. But the members of the invisible church, are the children of God by faith, Gal. iii. 16. and because children, in this sense, therefore _heirs; heirs of God, and joint-heirs with Christ_, Rom. viii. 17. These things must particularly be insisted on; and accordingly,

I. We shall speak something concerning the invisible church, which is described, in one of the answers we are explaining, as containing the whole number of the elect, that have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ their Head.

1. They are said to be elect, and subject to Christ their Head; upon which account, some have included, in this number, the holy angels, inasmuch as they are styled, by the apostle, elect angels, 1 Tim. v. 21. and Christ is, in some respects, their Head, as the apostle calls him, _The Head of all principality and power_, Coloss. ii. 10. and elsewhere the church is said to come to an _innumerable company of angels_, Heb. xii. 22. But though they are, indeed, elected, it may be questioned, whether they were chosen in Christ, as the elect among the children of men are said to be; and, though Christ be styled their Head: yet his Headship over them doth not include in it those things that are implied in his being the Head of his chosen people, as he is the Head of the covenant of grace, on which their salvation is founded; or _the Captain of their salvation_, as he is styled, chap. ii. 10. who, having purchased them by his blood, brings them into a state of grace, and then to glory. For these and such-like reasons, I would not assert that angels are properly a part of Christ’s invisible church, and therefore it only includes those that are elected to salvation among the children of men.

2. They are farther described as such, who have been, are, or shall be gathered into one, under Christ the Head; therefore there is a part of them that are not actually brought into him. These our Saviour speaks of under the metaphor of sheep, who were _not of this fold_, concerning whom he says, _Them also I must bring, and they shall hear my voice_, John x. 16. And there is another part of them, who are triumphant in heaven, as well as those that are actually called by the grace of God, who are in their way to heaven, struggling, at present, with many difficulties, through the prevalency of corruption, and conflicting with many temptations, and exposed to many evils that attend this present state. These different circumstances of those who are brought in to Christ, give occasion to that known distinction between the church triumphant and militant.

_Object._ To that part of this description of the invisible church, which includes in it those that shall be gathered unto Christ, it is objected, that no one can be said to be a member of this church, who is not actually brought in unto him; for that would be to suppose, that unconverted persons might be members thereof, and consequently that Christ is their Head, Shepherd and Saviour; though they be characterized, in scripture, as children of wrath, running in all excess of riot, refusing to submit to him, and neglecting that great salvation which is offered in the gospel: How can such be members of Christ’s church, and that in the highest sense thereof?

And it is farther objected, against the account given of the invisible church in this answer, that a part of those who are said, to be the members thereof, are considered at present as not existing; and therefore it must be a very improper, if not absurd, way of speaking, to say, that such are members of Christ’s church.

_Answ._ I am not inclined to extenuate those expressions of scripture, which represent unconverted persons as children of wrath, in open rebellion against God, and refusing to submit to him; nor would I say any thing from whence such might have the least ground to conclude that they have a right to any of the privileges of God’s elect, or Christ’s invisible church, or that they are included in that number; for that would be to expose the doctrine of election to one of the main objections that is brought against it, as though it led to licentiousness: nevertheless, let it be considered, that this answer treats of the invisible church; therefore whatever privileges are reserved for them, who, though elected, are in an unconverted state, these are altogether unknown to them; and it would be an unwarrantable presumption for them to lay claim to them. However, we must not deny that God knows who are his, who are redeemed by Christ, and what blessings, pursuant thereunto, shall be applied to them: he knows the time when they shall be made a willing people, in the day of his power, and what grace he designs to work in them: he considers the elect in general, as given to Christ, and Christ as having undertaken to do all that is necessary to fit them for the heavenly blessedness.