Scott
Puritan Board Graduate
The Puritan's Mind has an interesting excerpt from Francis Turretin's Institutes of Elenctic Theology in which Turretin defends the calls of the first Reformed ministers:
http://www.apuritansmind.com/FrancisTurretin/francisturretincallingreformers.htm
There is another portion of the work that is not online but addresses the issue of independency more directly.
In summary, the calls of the first Reformers were valid for one of two reasons: (1) ordination in the Roman Catholic church or (2) extraordinary ordination through unavoidable necessity. It is interesting the Turretin noted that Catholicism retained a legitimate call (although corrupted). More interesting to me is that in ordinary conditions Turretin denies the lawfulness of a minister who is not called through the established church. In other words, the minister must be ordained by someone else who has already been ordained and otherwise follow the rights and procedures of the church. The only time this is not the right way to handle the matter is in "unavoidable necessity," such as during the time of the Reformation when the Church hid the gospel and led men to hell.
This requirement leads to a form of apostolic succession modified by the unavoidable necessity exception. What is interesting to me is that most modern evangelical criticisms of apostolic succession that I see simply deny its concept outright, not relying on the narrow exception Turretin maintains. In my area we have so many churches where people just get together and start up. These would be most any kind of congregational church.
Please note also that Turretin does not state that self-formed congregations don't have the saving gospel, just that their ministers are unlawful. He distinguishes between the two.
Note also that his conditions were much different than ours. He faced largely established churches, whether state churches or otherwise. We face enormous division, with rampant denominationsalism and independency (I see independents as denominations of one).
Scott
http://www.apuritansmind.com/FrancisTurretin/francisturretincallingreformers.htm
There is another portion of the work that is not online but addresses the issue of independency more directly.
In summary, the calls of the first Reformers were valid for one of two reasons: (1) ordination in the Roman Catholic church or (2) extraordinary ordination through unavoidable necessity. It is interesting the Turretin noted that Catholicism retained a legitimate call (although corrupted). More interesting to me is that in ordinary conditions Turretin denies the lawfulness of a minister who is not called through the established church. In other words, the minister must be ordained by someone else who has already been ordained and otherwise follow the rights and procedures of the church. The only time this is not the right way to handle the matter is in "unavoidable necessity," such as during the time of the Reformation when the Church hid the gospel and led men to hell.
This requirement leads to a form of apostolic succession modified by the unavoidable necessity exception. What is interesting to me is that most modern evangelical criticisms of apostolic succession that I see simply deny its concept outright, not relying on the narrow exception Turretin maintains. In my area we have so many churches where people just get together and start up. These would be most any kind of congregational church.
Please note also that Turretin does not state that self-formed congregations don't have the saving gospel, just that their ministers are unlawful. He distinguishes between the two.
Note also that his conditions were much different than ours. He faced largely established churches, whether state churches or otherwise. We face enormous division, with rampant denominationsalism and independency (I see independents as denominations of one).
Scott