Defencr of tijr C^imerniiieiit 
 
 ^ OP Tin: 
 
 rtpiS^rEPISCOFAL CHURCH. 
 
 ^ BY THE REV. JAMES L CHAPMAN, 
 
 IN HIS DEBATE WITH THE REV. J. R. GRAVES, AT CANTON, illSS 
 MAY, 1855. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY E. STEVENSON & J. E. EVANS, AGENTS, 
 
 FOR THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH. 
 
 1856. 
 
Mtima d tlje #nnenitiieEt 
 
 METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 
 
 BY THE REV. JAMES L. CHAPMAN, 
 
 IN HIS DEBATE WITH THE REV. J. R. GRAVES, AT CANTON. MISS 
 MAY. 1855. 
 
 KasfibiUe, Cenn,: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY E. STEVENSON & J. E. EVANS, AGENTS, 
 
 FOB TaE METHODIST EPISCOPAl OHUSCH, SOUTH. 
 
 1856. 
 
• 
 
 'if 
 
DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 OF THE 
 
 METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH. 
 
 BY THE REV. JAMES L. CHAPMAN. 
 
 m HI8 DEBATE WITH THB REV. J. iU GKATES, AT CANTON, MISSISSIPPI, MAY, 1865 
 
 Moderators, Ladies, and GtENTLemen : — We are now 
 before you to prove, whatever maybe the opinions and doubts 
 of some, that the government of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church, whether we refer to the writings of the fathers, or 
 the judgment of moderns, is not only scriptural, but repub- 
 lican. In advance of this, we beg leave to state, wishing to 
 bring the points at issue fairly and plainly before all, that 
 every form of government, sanctioned by inspiration, must be 
 duly respected by the followers of the patriarchs, prophets, 
 and apostles. From this there is no appeal. The voice of 
 Scripture demands obedience ; and the teachings of the age-8 
 of faith, as handed down to us, are not less imperative. Wc 
 ai*e not at liberty to make war on the despotism of the Per- 
 sian, the democracy of the Greek, or the republicanism of the 
 Roman, favoring and advocating the theocracy of the Jew. 
 In proof of this, we shall here give the exhortation of Peter, 
 First Epistle, chapter 2, beginning with the thirteenth, and 
 ending with the seventeenth verse : " Submit yourselves to 
 every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake, whether it be to 
 the king, as supreme, or unto governors, as unto them that 
 are sent by him for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the 
 praise of them that do well. For so is the will of God, that 
 with well-doing ye may put to silence the ignorance of foolish 
 
 8 
 
DEFENCE or THE G0VER:<ME>'T 
 
 men : as free, and not using your liberty for a cloak of mali- 
 ciousness; but as the servants of God. Honor all men. Love 
 the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the king." 
 
 We can safely allow this to pass without comment. Its 
 true and full sense stands out boldly on its Heaven-sanctioned 
 outlines. 
 
 In a word, inspiration tolerates republicanism, and ventures 
 not to dethrone the king. 
 
 We are now read}^, having made the preliminary remarks 
 deemed necessary, to take up the first point in the question, 
 and to place it above the possibility of contradiction : namely, 
 that the Methodist Episcopal Church is scripturally organized. 
 Without circumlocution or equivocation, we confidently assert 
 that Wesley, the father of Methodism, the most efficient form 
 of Christianity since the days of the apostles, was a scriptural 
 bishop. 
 
 The word bishop, properly speaking, simply signifies an 
 overseer : that is, one who has the inspection and oversight 
 of any thing. With this the testimony of Nehemiah agrees, 
 ch. xi. 22: "The overseer of the Levites at Jerusalem." The 
 most common acceptation of the word, however, we have in 
 Acts XX., and in Paul's Epistles. Peter, in his first Epistle, 
 ii. 25, calls Christ the Bishop of souls. Isaiah speaks thus, 
 ch. Ix. 17 : "I will also make thy officers peace, and thine 
 overseers (bishops) righteousness." Such is the use and 
 meaning of the word. 
 
 We shall now direct your attention to the persons to whom 
 it was applied in the days of the apostles. We read in Acts 
 XX.: "And from Miletus he (Paul) sent to Ephesus, and 
 called the elders of the church." What more ? This, that 
 he said to these elders : "■ Take heed, therefore, unto your- 
 selves, and to all the flock over the which the Holy Ghost 
 hath made you overseers, (bishops,) to feed the Church of 
 God, which he hath purchased with his own blood." 
 
 In the language of Dr. Campbell, we would say: "Here 
 there can be no question that the same persons are denomi- 
 nated presbyters and bishops." This distinction, however, may 
 be made — they were presbytei-s by virtue of ordination, bishops 
 on account of having charge in the Church of Christ. Wesley 
 was a presbyter by virtue of his ordination, and scriptural 
 biishop on account of the charge over which he presided. 
 
OF THP; M. r.. CHURCH. 
 
 6 
 
 Here, ^vith great propriety, we may ask, Have we not, in the 
 ;:bove quotation, a clear precedent for calling Wesley a bishop, 
 a scriptural bishop ? 
 
 Dr. Clarke justly observes : Bishops and presbyters were, 
 at this timt\ of the same order/' See his note on Acts xx. 28. 
 
 In a word, the man who had charge of a church, or 
 churches, was called a bishop. Elders or presbyters, indeed, 
 might have been in the same church, or churches, officiating 
 by the bishops' permission or request, to whom the word 
 could not have been properly applied, they not being directly 
 in charge. The relation of a local elder in our church to one 
 of cur bishops, may be looked on as a practical illustration of 
 the view advanced on this feature of the subject. 
 
 Paul, in his first Epistle to Timothy, ch. 3, speaks thus : 
 This is a true saying, if au}^ man desire the office of a bishop, 
 (not the order of a bishop,) he desireth a good work. A 
 bishop, then, must be blameless : the husband of one wife : 
 vigilant, sober, of good behavior, given to hospitality, apt to 
 teach : not given to wine.'' The apostle, after giving direc- 
 tions respecting the bishop, proceeds to give directions respect- 
 ing deacons ; but does not give the slightest intimation of the 
 existence of a middle order, now known by the name of priest 
 or elder — a fact which clearly demonstrates that no such order 
 then existed. All will please remember that the apostle 
 speaks of the office of a bishop, not of the order of a bishop. 
 He wrote, knowing that the office of a bishop included the 
 order of the elder. 
 
 Was not Wesley a bishop in this sense ? Most assuredly. 
 
 Paul, addressing the Philippians, says : To all the saints 
 in Christ Jesus which are at Philippi, with the bishops and 
 deacons." (Ch. 1.) Here we have again bishops and dea- 
 cons, but not one word respecting the "middle order," priest 
 or presbyter. Wesley, in view of this, declared : I firmly 
 believe that I am a scriptural bishop — as much so as any 
 man in England, or in Europe ; for the uninterrupted succes- 
 sion I know to be a fable, which no man ever did or can 
 prove." See Watson's Wesley, p. 247. 
 
 The following passage, from the fifth chapter of Peter's first 
 Epistle, will show that our position respecting bishop and 
 elder cannot reasonably be disputed : The elders which are 
 k amoug you I exhort : feed the flock of God which is among 
 
i) DErENOE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 yon, taking the oversiglit thereof." ''That is/' says Richard 
 AVatson, " discharging the office of bishops/' 
 
 We shall now invite special attention to the charge of Paul 
 to Titus, concerning Crete : " For this cause I left thee in 
 Crete, that thou shouldst set in order the things that are 
 wanting, and ordain elders iu every city, as I had appointed 
 thee." Titus i. 5. 
 
 Homer, speaking of Crete, says : 
 
 "Crete awes the circling waves, a fruitful soil, 
 And ninety cities crown the sea-born isle." 
 
 Though he only attributes to the island iu this quotation 
 ninety cities, yet in another place he speaks of one hundred 
 cities. Whether we contemplate ninety or one hundred 
 cities, Titus was instructed to ordain elders in every city. 
 Here we have a missionary bishop, his power extending over 
 one hundred cities. These elders, when appointed to their 
 respective charges and places, were called bishops : hence we 
 read in the seventh verse : "For a bishop must be blameless." 
 
 Did not Paul instruct Titus to ordain elders in one hundred 
 cities ? Did not Wesley see in this a precedent for setting- 
 Coke apart, to set in order the things that were wanting in 
 the American societies ? Did not Coke act in America, as 
 Titus acted in the island of Crete ? Wesley cannot be cen- 
 sured for what he did in this instance, except at the expense 
 of censuring Paul too. Nor can Coke be censured, without 
 censuring Titus also. 
 
 Thus we prove that Wesley was a scriptural bishop, and 
 that he only followed an example set by Paul, when he acted 
 as he did in reference to the American societies. 
 
 He who would demand additional proof, might, with equal 
 m'opriety, demand confirming evidence, the sun shining, of 
 .AC existence of day. 
 
 We shall now direct attention to the various officers found 
 .11 our fellowship, in order to show that they are fully covered 
 by the rich provisions of inspiration. In our organization we 
 have bishops, presiding elders, travelling preachers, stationed 
 preachers, local preachers, deacons, local deacons, exhorters, 
 and class-leaders. 
 
 Paul, in his first epistle to the Church at Corinth, chapter 
 xii. 28, says : "And Grod hath set some in the Church — first^ 
 
or THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 7 
 
 apostles; secondarily, prophets; thirdly, teachers: after that, 
 miracles; then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversi- 
 ties of tongues." 
 
 Here we observe with more than ordinary emphasis, wishing 
 to be distinctly understood, that our advocacy in this connec- 
 tion will be that of principles, not of names. To the former 
 we profcvss unyielding devotion, to the latter marked indiffer- 
 ence. For instance, might we not call the President of the 
 United States the Prince of the People, without the slightest 
 infringement on the principle involved in his office ? Cer- 
 tainly. 
 
 That this view of the case may appear remarkably obvious 
 to all, we shall resort to contrast. Did not the apostles travel 
 in certain districts, ordaining men for the work of the minis- 
 try ? Do not our bishops travel in certain districts, ordaining 
 men set apart for the work of the Lord ? Did not the pro- 
 phets, named above, teach ? Dr. Clarke responds : " The 
 word (prophets) is often applied to those who preached the 
 gospel. Do not our ministers teach the people by preaching? 
 Did not the teachers, mentioned in the quotation, instruct the 
 people in the elements of the Christian religion ? Do not our 
 local preachers perform a similar duty ? Did not the helps, 
 above designated, discharge ordinary duties for' the apostles ? 
 Do not our exhorters and class-leaders perform ordinary du- 
 ties ? Thus we see that the officers of the Methodist Episco- 
 'pal Church are in accordance with the principles of the « 
 Scriptures. The example before us is a self-obvious proof 
 of this. 
 
 The next item in order is, can the decisions of our bishops, 
 and the elements of our conferences, be defended by any 
 example in the Scriptures ? We answer yes — boldly say yes. 
 James, who was president of the council, the notable counoil, 
 at Jerusalem, pronounced the following decision: '^Where- 
 fore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from 
 among the Gentiles are turned to God." Acts xv. 19. Dr. 
 Clarke, whose critical knowledge commands the respect of the 
 learned world, thus expresses himself on this matter : ''James 
 determined what ought to be done." Again he says : " This 
 was the first council ever held in the Christian Church ; and 
 we find it was composed of the apostles and elders simply." 
 If our Annual and General Conferences are composed of 
 
8 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 bishops and ministers, do we not find an imposing example 
 for the whole, including the decisions of the bishops, in the 
 council of the apostles and elders at Jerusalem. 
 
 Thus we prove that the ofiicers of the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church are in accordance with the liberty and provisions of 
 inspiration — that the Church is scripturally organized in this 
 particular. # 
 
 We shall now direct attention to the writings of the early- 
 fathers, in order to show that our position respecting a bishop 
 is founded on transmitted truth — truth transmitted from the 
 apostles. From their writings, we shall be able to establish 
 the principle involved ; and here we remark, that this is all 
 we aim at, being aware that there are things contained in them 
 which cannot be defended. 
 
 Clement of Rome, A. D. 87, saj^s : ^'And thus preaching 
 through countries and cities, they (apostles) appointed the first 
 fruits of their conversions to be bishops and ministers over 
 such as should afterwards believe, having first proved them by 
 the Spirit. Nor was this any new thing, seeing that long 
 before it was written concerniug bishops and deacons. For 
 thus saith the Scriptures in a certain place, I will appoint 
 their overseers in righteousness, and their ministers in faith." 
 Epistle to the Corinthians, chapter xviii. 
 
 In chapter xxiv. he says : " It is a shame, my beloved, yea, 
 a veiy great shame, and unworthy of your Christian profession, 
 to hear that the most firm and ancient Church of the Corinth- 
 ians should, by one or two persons, be led into a sedition 
 against its priests." Again, in the xxi. chapter, he says : 
 " Only let the flock of Christ be in peace with the elders that 
 are set over it." He continues this subject thus : " Our apos- 
 tles knew by our Lord Jesus Christ that there should be con- 
 tentions on account of Episcopacy. And, therefore, having a 
 perfect knowledge of this, they appointed persons, as we have 
 before said, and then gave directions, how when they should 
 die, other chosen men should succeed in their ministry." 
 Lord Barrington expresses himself thus respecting the writ- 
 ings of Clement: Bishops with Clement are always the 
 same with elders or presbyters, as any one must see if they 
 read the epistle." Vol. 2, p. 154, ed. 1770. 
 
 Ignatius, A. D. 107, says : "And blessed be God, who has 
 granted unto you, who are so worthy of him, to enjoy such an 
 
OF THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 9 
 
 excellent bishop. For what concerns my fellow-servant Bur- 
 rhus, and your most most blessed deacon in things pertaining 
 to God : I entreat you that he may t^rry longer, both for yours 
 and your bishop's honor." See Epistle to the Ephesians, first 
 chapter. 
 
 Again he says : ''And that being subject to your bishop and 
 presbytery, you may be wholly and thoroughly sanctified.'' 
 He shows in the following language that all these were of the 
 same Church : " Wherefore it will become you to run together 
 according to the will of your bishop, as also ye do. For your 
 famous Presbytery (that is, of the Ephesian Church) worthy 
 of Grod, is fitted as exactly to the bishop, as the strings are to 
 the harp. Therefore in your concord and agreeing charity, 
 J esus Christ is sung, and every single person among you makes 
 up the chorus.'' 
 
 In his epistle to the Magnesians, first chapter, he says : 
 " Seeing then I have been judged worthy to see you, by 
 Damas, your most excellent bishop ; and by your very worthy 
 presbyters, Bassus and Apollonius ; and by my fellow-servant 
 Sotio, the deacon, in whom I rejoice, forasmuch as he is sub- 
 ject unto his bishop as to the grace of Grod, and to the Pres- 
 bytery as to that of Jesus Christ : I determined to write unto 
 
 . ... 
 
 His language in the second chapter is : " Your bishop pre- 
 siding in the place of God, your presbyters in the place of the 
 council of the apostles ; and your deacons most dear to me. 
 As therefore the Lord did nothing without the Father, being 
 united to him; so neither do ye do any thing without your 
 bishop and presbyters." 
 
 In his epistle to the Trallians, first chapter, he speaks thus : 
 ''It is therefore necessary, that as ye do, so without your 
 bishop, you should do nothing: also be ye subject to your 
 presbyters, as to the apostles of Jesus Christ our hope; in 
 whom, if we walk, we shall be found in him. The deacons 
 also, as being the ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, 
 must by all means please all. In like manner let all reverence 
 the deacons as Jesus Christ, and the bishop as the Father, and 
 the presbyters as the Sandedrim of God, and college of apos- 
 tles." 
 
 From these quotations we clearly prove that bishops, 
 presbyters, and deacons were known to the organization of the 
 
10 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 Church at a very early period of her Christian history. The 
 cause of truth, however, demands that we should here state, 
 that the genuineness of the epistles of Ignatius is doubted by 
 many. 
 
 Let us now direct your attention to testimony which will 
 not be questioned — testimony which will clearly show what 
 bishops, presbyters, and deacons were in the first ages of the 
 Christian Church. 
 
 Clement of Alexandria, A. D. 175, says : I take the pro- 
 gression of bishops, presbyters, and deacons to be imitations 
 of the angelic glory.^^ Strom. 6 p. 667. 
 
 Clement, in the seventh book of the same work, gives us 
 his meaning respecting officers in the Church : One part of 
 it (public worship) is performed by superior ministers, another 
 part by inferior ministers. The superior part is performed by 
 presbyters, the inferior, or servile part, by deacons." These 
 presbyters were bishops : presbyters by ordination, bishops by 
 office. 
 
 Irenagus, A. D. 178, says : " AYe can enumerate those who 
 were appointed by the apostles, bishops in the churches, and 
 their successors, even unto us." Adv. Heer. 4, 63. 
 
 He again says : " The apostles wished those to be very 
 perfect and irreprehensible in all things, whom they left 
 their successors, delivering to them their own place of govern- 
 ment." 
 
 And again he says : But when we appeal to that tradition 
 which has been preserved us by the successions of presbyters 
 in the churches, they presume they are wiser not only than 
 the presbyters, but even than the apostles, and that they have 
 found the truth in a purer form.'' Lib. 3, ch. 2. 
 
 Here, if we deemed it necessary, we could show that the 
 action of Wesley is fully covered by the testimony of Irenaeus, 
 which is in agreement with that of inspiration. 
 
 Tertullian, A. D. 100, speaks thus : The highest priest, 
 who is the bishop, has the right of administering baptism. 
 Then the presbyters and deacons, yet not without the authority 
 of the bishop, because of the honor of the Church. This 
 being preserved, peace is preserved. Otherwise the right 
 belongs even to laymen. However, the laity ought especially 
 to submit humbly and modestly to the discipline of the 
 Church in these matters, and not assume the office of bishop, 
 
OF THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 11 
 
 seeing their superiors and deacons submit to the same." De 
 Baptismo, ch. 17. 
 
 We shall now hear what he says respecting the principal 
 officers — bishops: "Approved elders or presbyters preside 
 among us, having received the honor, not by money, but by 
 the suffrages of their brethren. Ch. 39. 
 
 Are not our bishops elected in a similar way ? 
 
 The true position of a bishop is thus explained by Cyprian, 
 who wrote 250, A. D. : " Our Lord gives to all the apostles 
 an equal power, and says : ^As my Father sent me, even so 
 send I you : receive ye the Holy Ghost : whosesoever sins ye 
 remit, they shall be remitted to him, and whosesoever sins ye 
 retain, they shall be retained.' Certainly the other apostles 
 also were what Peter was — endowed with an equal fellowship 
 of honor and power. No one ought to make himself bishop 
 of bishops, or pretend to awe his brethren, for every bishop is 
 at liberty to do as he pleases. Primitive Church by Chapin, 
 p. 258. 
 
 Cyprian, in another place, calls the bishop a president. His 
 language is : " Those who have been baptized in the Church 
 are brought to the president of the Church, that by our prayer 
 and imposition of hands, they may receive the Holy Ghost.'' 
 Ep. 73. 
 
 , Were not our bishops originally called superintendents ? 
 Justin Martyr, who wrote 140, A. D., uses similar language. 
 His words are : " To him who presides over the brethren bread 
 is brought, and a cup of wine mixed with water. He who 
 presides having given thanks, they who are called amongst us 
 deacons give to each of those present a portion of the bread 
 and of wine mixed with water, over which the thanksgiving 
 has been made, and carry away a portion to those who are 
 absent." Apol. 1, ed. Bened. Paris, 1742. 
 
 In another place he calls the bishop a president, saying : 
 "The president delivers a discourse." And again: "The 
 president offers up prayers and thanksgiving." This proves 
 that in their days the highest officer was called a president of 
 the assembly, that is, an elder by ordination, and a bishop by 
 office. 
 
 Firmilian, 250, A. D., says: "All power and grace is in 
 the Church in which presbyters preside, and have the power 
 of baptizing, confirming, and ordaining." Have we not 
 
12 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 proved that AV^esley was a presbyter and a scriptural bishop ? 
 And here, we ask, what does the far-famed Firmihan, Bishop 
 of Cesarea, say respecting a presiding presbyter? He has 
 " the power of baptizing, confirming, and ordaining." Euse- 
 bius thus speaks of him : " He was very famous." Eccles. 
 ch. 2r> Howel presents him in this light : He made a much 
 more considerable figure in the Church at that time than the 
 Bishop of Rome." See Howel's Pontificate, p. 24. 
 
 In a commentary on St. Paul's Epistles, published in the 
 works of Ambrose, who flourished A. D. 370, we have the 
 following information respecting church officers : The pres- 
 byters and bishop had one and the same ordination. The 
 bishop is the chief among the presbyters. Com. on 1 Tim. 3. 
 ^'As one departed, the next succeeded to the office " — was 
 " constituted such by the judgment of a number of the pres- 
 byters." Com. on Ephe. cap. 4. 
 
 In like manner we elect our bishops. 
 
 The thirteenth canon of the Council of Ancyra, A. D. 315, 
 reads thus: ''^Tis not allowed to village bishops to ordain 
 presbyters and deacons ; nor is it allowed even to city pres- 
 byters to do this in another diocese without the license of a 
 bishop." 
 
 This canon not only maintains the office of a bishop, but 
 the right of a presbyter to ordain. Methodism can quietly sit 
 down under its protection, feeling that its claims, however 
 viewed, are in accordance with the precedents of the history 
 of the church. 
 
 Jerome, who wrote 400, A. D., speaks as follows on the 
 point at issue : " In both Epistles, (Timothy and Titus,) 
 whether bishops or presbyters, (although among the ancients 
 the same who were bishops were also presbyters,) they were 
 commanded to be chosen into the clergy, who had but one 
 wife." Again : " I hear that one was so impudent as to rank 
 deacons before presbyters, that is, bishops. Now the apostle 
 plainly declares the same to be presbyters who also are 
 bishops." And again, quoting from Caius, he says : "In the 
 Sec of Alexandria, from St. Mark, the evangelist, to Heraclas 
 and Dionysius, bishops, the presbyters always elected one from 
 among themselves, and raising him to a higher rank, they 
 called him bishop ; much as an army chooses an emperor, or 
 as deacon,s elect one from among themselves, and call him 
 
or THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 Archdeacon. Indeed, what can a bishop do, that a presbyter 
 may not do, except ordination ?" To this he adds : " Wherever 
 the bishop be, whether at Rome, or Eugubium, or Constanti- 
 nople, or Khegium, or Alexandria, or Tanais, he is of the same 
 degree, and of the same priesthood ; for all are successors of 
 the apostles. Presbyter is a title of age, bishop of office. 
 Wherefore (in the Epistles) to Timothy and Titus, is mention 
 made of the ordioation of bishops and deacons, but not of 
 presbyters ? Because in the bishop the presbyter is contained. 
 The same, therefore, is a presbyter, who also is a bishop ; for 
 before, by the instigation of the devil, parties were formed in 
 religion, and it was said by the people, I am of Paul, and I 
 of Apollos, and I of Cephas, the churches were governed by 
 the council of presbyters. But after some began to consider 
 those which he had baptized to be his own, not Christ's, it 
 was decreed throughout the whole world, that one be elected, 
 who should be put over the rest of the presbyters, to whom 
 the care of all the church should pertain; and thus the seeds 
 of schism were taken away. If any one esteems it not of 
 Scripture, but to be our opinion, that bishops and presbyters 
 are one, this being a title of age, that of office, he is referred 
 to the language of the apostle to the Philippians." 
 
 Does not Jerome state that bishop is a title of office ? And 
 does he not state that the presbyters of Alexandria elected 
 their bishops? Do not our ministers, in the General Con- 
 ference, elect our bishops ? And do we not agree with Jerome 
 in this, that bishop is a title of office ? 
 
 Thus we prove by the testimony of the early fathers that 
 our organization is in accordance with the Scriptures, so far 
 as our principal officers are concerned. 
 
 Having given the Scriptural view of church officers, also 
 the sense of the fathers on the same subject, we shall now 
 proceed to show that modern authors fully and clearly confirm 
 our position. 
 
 Wickliff, called the morning star of the reformation, says : 
 ^^I boldly assert one thing, viz., that in the primitive church, 
 or in the time of St. Paul, two orders of the clergy were suffi- 
 cient, that is, a priest and a deacon. In like manner I affirm, 
 that in the time of Paul the presbyter and the bishop were 
 name^ of the same office. This appears from the third chapter 
 of the first epistle to Timothy, and in the first chapter of tha 
 
DEFENCE OF THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 epistle to Titus. And the same is testified by that profound 
 theologian Jerome." (See WicklifiF's Trialogus, as quoted 
 by Yaughan in his Life of Wickliff, vol. 2, p. 275 ] Lou. ed. 
 1831.) 
 
 Critically speaking, the office of the bishop included the 
 order of the presbyter in the days of the apostles. This we 
 have placed beyond the possibility of contradiction. 
 
 Dr. Robertson says : " I do not think it absurd that a priest 
 should consecrate a bishop, it a bishop cannot be had. — {Foxoell 
 on Apostolic Succession, p. 150.) 
 
 Wesley's conduct, in setting Coke apart for America, could 
 be defended by this sentiment, but we have claimed for him 
 higher ground, that he was a Scriptural bishop. 
 
 Bishop of London : ''I think the bishops were first, and 
 yet I think it is not of importance, whether the priest then 
 made the bishop, or the bishop the priest; considering after 
 the sentence of Jerome, that in the beginning of the church 
 there was no (or if there were, very small) difference between 
 a bishop and a priest, especially touching the signification." 
 Ibicl,^. 150. The difference, as we have already shown, was 
 this : the ordination of a man made him an elder, and his 
 appointment to officiate made him a bishop. 
 
 Dr. Redmayne : They all be of like beginning, and at the 
 beginning were both one, as St. Hierome and other old authors 
 show by the Scriptures, wherefore one made another indiffer- 
 ently." Ibid, p. 150. This needs no comment. 
 
 Johnson, the translator of the canons of the universal 
 church, says : That opinion, that the order of priests and 
 bishops was the same, prevailed in the church at Rome for 
 four or five ages before the reformation." Ibid, p. 174. 
 
 Such are the sentiments of our best modern authors. 
 
 We shall now, however, allow Wesley to speak for himself : 
 " Bristol, September 10, 1784. 
 
 " By a ver}^ uncommon train of providences, many of the 
 provinces of North America are totally disjointed from their 
 mother country, and erected into independent States. The 
 English government has no authority over them, either civil 
 or ecclesiastical, any more than over the States of Holland. A 
 civil authority is exercised over them, partly by the Congress, 
 partly by the Provincial Assemblies. But no one either exer- 
 cises or claims any ecclesiastical authority at all. In this 
 
OP THE M. E. OHUROH. 
 
 15 
 
 peculiar situation^ some thousands of the inhabitants of these 
 States desire my advice ; and in compliance with their desire 
 I have drawn up a little sketch, 
 
 '^Lord King's account of the primitive Church convinced 
 me, many years ago, that bishops and presbyters are the same 
 order, and consequently have the same right to ordain. For 
 many years I have been importuned, from time to time, to 
 exercise this right, by ordaining part of our travelling preach- 
 ers, but I have still refused, not only for peace' sake, but be- 
 cause I was determined, as little as possible, to violate the 
 established order of the national church to which I belonged. 
 
 But the case is widely different between England and 
 North America. Here there are bishops who have a legal 
 jurisdiction. In America there are none, neither any parish 
 ministers. So that, for some hundred miles together, there 
 is none either to baptize or to administer the Lord's Supper. 
 Here, therefore, my scruples are at an end ; and I conceive 
 myself at full liberty, as I violate no order, and invade no 
 man's right, by appointing and sending laborers into the har- 
 vest. I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Francis 
 Asbury to be joint superintendents over our brethren in North 
 America, and also Richard Whatcoat and Thomas Vasey to act 
 as elders among them, by baptizing and administering the 
 Lord's Supper. 
 
 If any one will point out a more rational and scriptural 
 way of feeding and guiding those poor sheep in the wilderness, 
 I will gladly embrace it. At present I cannot see any better 
 method than that I have taken. John Wesley.'' 
 
 Wesley, vindicating his authority to do what we have stated, 
 observed, in answer to his brother : " I firmly believe that I 
 am a scriptural bishop, as much so as any man in England, or 
 in Europe ; for the uninterrupted succession I know to be a 
 fable, which no man ever did or can prove." 
 
 Have we not proved from the Scriptures that he was a 
 bi«hop ? Have we not proved from the writings of the early 
 fathers that he was a bishop ? And have we not proved by 
 the statements and admissions of modern writers that he was 
 a bishop ? Does it not therefore follow, that he acted scrip- 
 turally in reference to the organization of the Methodist Church 
 in this country ? 
 
16 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE GOVERN MENT 
 
 The following declaration, which was signed by Cromwell, 
 vicar-general, Cranmer, and Holgate, archbishops, confirms, 
 if additional proof be needed from such quarters, the position 
 for which we so strenuously contend : " The truth is, there 
 is no mention made of any degrees or distinctions in orders, 
 but only of deacons or ministers, or of priests or bishops." It 
 is worthy of remark here, that Archbishop Usher's plan for 
 comprehending the Presbyterians and Episcopalians in the 
 time of Charles L, was also founded on the principle of bishops 
 and presbyters being one order. 
 
 Let it be remembered, however, that a man might have 
 been an elder or a priest in apostolic times, without being a 
 bishop; but let it also be remembered, that he, who was then 
 a bishop, was such by virtue of office, and not by virtue of a 
 distinct order. 
 
 On this principle Wesley acted, persuaded he was a scrip- 
 tural bishop. It now remains for us to say, that the consider- 
 ations and facts presented are sufficient, fully sufficient to 
 convince the reflecting mind, that Wesley acted in accordance 
 with the constitution of the Church, the Scriptures, when he 
 organized, through Coke and Asbury, American Methodism. 
 
 If it should be asked, How came Wesley to lay hands on 
 Coke, seeing he was as much a scriptural bishop as himself? 
 Our answer is, were not hands laid on Paul and Barnabas, in 
 order to set them apart for a particular work ? In this Wesley 
 saw a scriptural precedent in setting Coke apart for a special 
 work in America. 
 
 This precedent is thus given in the Acts of the xlpostles, 
 chapter xiii. : Now there were in the church that was at 
 Antioch certain prophets and teachers, as Barnabas, and 
 Simeon, and Lucius, and Manaen, and Saul. As they minis- 
 tered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said. Separate 
 me Barnabas and Saul, for the work whereunto I have called 
 them. And when they had fasted and prayed, and laid their 
 hands on them, they sent them away." 
 
 In the light of this passage we not only see the act of 
 Wesley, in setting apart Coke, fully approved, but the very 
 manner of it. And so we close the argument on the first point 
 in the question, that the Methodist Episcopal Church is scrip- 
 turally organized. 
 
 The remaining point in the question to be established is, 
 
OF THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 17 
 
 that the Methodist Episcopal Church is republican in her or- 
 ganization. Webster defines the word Republic thus : ''A 
 Commonwealth ; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign 
 power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In 
 modern usage it differs from a democracy or democratic state, 
 in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in 
 person.'' From this we see that neither the government of 
 the United States, nor that of the Methodist Episcopal Church 
 can be looked on as being democratic ; that both are republi- 
 can in their character, sovereign power being lodged in their 
 representatives. 
 
 How often do we use words without seeming to be aware of 
 their proper meaning and application. For instance, Mr. A. 
 says, '^I am a democrat." This is easily said; but what is 
 the meaning of the word democrat ? Webster responds, " One 
 who favors the extension of the right of suffrage to all classes." 
 So far as the approval of this is concerned, we are all Know 
 Nothings" by profession, principle, and act. A democrat of 
 this class would be a very novel sight. In a word, we might 
 as well undertake to find some of the timbers of Noah's Ark, 
 or the needle with which Eve made her first fashionable dresses, 
 as to find such a democrat. 
 
 The character of democracy and that of republicanism 
 being stated, we are now ready to show that the principle of 
 the latter is embodied in the polity and policy of the Methodist 
 Episcopal Church. 
 
 Do we not in civil affairs lodge sovereign power in our re- 
 presentatives ? That is, after being elected, they exercise the 
 right of making laws, and of governing. Do not Methodists 
 elect all their officers ? The discipline respecting this fact is : 
 
 No person shall be licensed to preach without the recom- 
 mendation of the society of which he is a member, or of a 
 leaders' meeting." Page 34, ed. 1846. Every bishop of our 
 church was so elected to the ministry. Without this not one 
 of them could have been made a bishop. Let it be remem- 
 bered too, that our women, and those under twenty-one, arc 
 allowed to vote in our societies- Here we have republicanism, 
 granting liberties, which are not granted in State affairs. In 
 State affairs the women are not permitted to vote, nor are young 
 men under a certain age. The republicanism of the Me- 
 thodist Episcopal Church, all must see from these con- 
 2* 
 
18 
 
 DEFENCE OP THE GOVERNMENT 
 
 siderations, breathes a freer air than the republicanism of the 
 States. 
 
 The candidate, after being elected as above stated, appears 
 before the Quarterly Conference for license to preach. This 
 leads us to inquire into the character and power of the Quar- 
 terly Conference. The language of our Discipline is: "Of 
 whom shall the Quarterly Conferences be composed ? Answer. 
 Of all travelling and local preachers, exhorters, stewards, and 
 class-leaders of the circuits and stations, also Sunday-school 
 superintendents.'^ Here again we have the members of the 
 Church acting; that is granting license to preach, recom- 
 mending suitable persons to the Annual Conferences for dea- 
 cons' or elders' orders in the local connection, admitting on 
 trial in the travelling connection, hearing complaints, and 
 trying appeals. See Discipline, pp. 33, 34. 
 
 Are any of the members of the Commonwealth, after voting 
 for mayor and aldermen, or for members of the legislative assem- 
 bly, allowed to sit with them, exercising equal rights ? No — 
 no ! Members of the Methodist Episcopal Church sit in our 
 Quarterly Conferences, and exercise rights not granted to the 
 presiding ministers, who, in cases of trial, can only pronounce 
 their decisions — rights in common with all the local preachers, 
 though elected, as previously stated, by the societies, they 
 making a portion of them at the time of election. Now, what 
 think ye of our republicanism in this particular ? Does it not 
 extend beyond the republicanism we have glanced at in the 
 case of an election of mayor and aldermen, or of an election 
 of members for the legislative assembly? Most assuredly. 
 The extension is stated, yet we shall repeat it, that members 
 of our Church can sit with officers elevated by their suffrage, 
 exercising equal rights with them — a thing unknown to the 
 republicanism of the people in civil affairs. Here you have 
 the extension of our republicanism beyond that of the State — 
 our enlarged liberty. 
 
 What are the members of our Annual Conferences but the 
 representatives of our people ? They stand elected by the 
 members. It may be said that they try, censure, reprove, or 
 expel, without consulting the lay members of the Church. 
 Does not the legislature of each State act on a similar 
 principle ? 
 
 If our Annual Conferences elect the members of the Gene- 
 
OP THE M. E. CHURCH. 
 
 19 
 
 ral Conferences, do not our legislative assemblies, without con- 
 sulting with their constituents, elect the Senators of the 
 United States ? 
 
 If the General Conference enacts laws apart from the direct 
 voice of our members, does not Congress enact laws apart from 
 the direct vote of the people ? 
 
 If the General Conference elects the presiding oflBicer, the 
 bishop, does not the Senate of the United States elect the 
 presiding officer, the speaker ? 
 
 If a bishop, executing the wishes of those who elected him, 
 appoints our ministers to certain fields of labor, does not the 
 President of the United States, without asking the permission 
 of the people, appoint many of the leading officers of the re- 
 public ? 
 
 Have any of you, who are now listening to our argument on 
 the republicanism of the Methodist Episcopal Church, ever 
 voted for the President's Cabinet? Have any of you ever 
 voted for our hosts of foreign ministers? Have you ever 
 voted for a postmaster? In a word, are there not thousands 
 of officers officiating in high places without your immediate 
 sufirage ? 
 
 Here we beg leave to ask, persuaded that the evidence ad- 
 duced must fully satisfy the unbiased mind, have we not 
 demonstrated that the government of our Church is founded 
 on the principle of republicanism ? Yea, more, that it grants 
 privileges that are not granted by the republicanism of the 
 people of the Commonwealth in civil affairs. These privileges 
 being stated, we need not repeat them. 
 
 A republic, in Brandt's Dictionary of Science, Literature, 
 and Art, is thus denned. New York ed., 1854 : '^A republic 
 may be either an aristocracy or a democracy : the supreme 
 power, in the former being consigned to the nobles or a few 
 privileged individuals, as was formerly the case in Venice and 
 Genoa; while, in the latter, it is placed in the hands of rulers 
 chosen by and from the whole body of the people, or by their 
 representatives assembled in a congress or national assembly/' 
 
 This, however viewed, proves that the Methodist Episcopal 
 Church is republican in her organization. Hear again the 
 testimony : ^'A republic may be either an aristocracy or a 
 democracy.^' 
 
 Respected hearers, the more you will reflect on the facts 
 
20 
 
 DEFENCE OF THE QOVEllNMENT 
 
 and illustrations presented, the more you will be convinced 
 that the whole question stands undeniably sustained. If there 
 is a doubter under the sound of our voice, he must be looked 
 on as composed of doubting qualities. 
 
 Let us therefore ask, would it not seem like piling Ossa on 
 Pelion, were we to attempt to add any thing to what precedes 
 on the question under discussion ? Most assuredly. 
 
 Yet the officers of our Church are represented as being 
 
 clerical despots — subverters of the rights of the members." 
 Clerical despots ! We, who stand in the front of God's army, 
 contending with rain and snow, heat and cold, privations and 
 trials; visiting the poor man in his cabin, the Indian in his 
 wigwam — the salary of each being less than that of any other 
 minister of a difl'erent denomination, " clerical despots I" 
 The thought insults the common understanding of mankind. 
 
 We leave our homes, with an adieu to the scenes of child- 
 hood — to all we there love, fathers, mothers, brothers, sisters, 
 lingering on our lips, that we may preach the story of the 
 cross to God's poor; yet we are called clerical despots." 
 We plead ^^not guilty." Heaven would say ''not guilty." 
 
 The Church of our choice may have defects and faults in 
 her movements ; but with all her imperfections we love her 
 still ; and when the future historian will recount her trials, 
 the fields of her labors and mighty achievements — her startling 
 zeal and efi'orts to save a world smitten with a curse, she will 
 stand out before the eyes of ail like some bright star on the 
 brow of evening. 
 
PUBLICATIONS OF THE M. E. CHURCH. SOUTH. 
 
 HYMNS EOK SCHOOLS AND FAMILIES, specially designed for the 
 Children of the Church. Edited by Thos. 0. Summers. Net price 
 to Sunday-schools : boards, 10 cents ; roan, 21 cents. Retail, 30 
 cents ; roan gilt, 50 cents ; morocco, 75 cents. The line ones arc 
 gems. The book consists of 384 pages, and contains 600 Hymns. 
 
 "As its title indicates, it is a collection especially designed for the child- 
 ren of the Church, and it has been compiled Avith the ability, research, 
 and taste which characteri/.e .the labors of the accomplished editor in the 
 department of hymnology. We are not saying too much for it, when wo 
 affirm that it leaves nothing to be desiderated hereafter in this line."- 
 Soiithcrn (Jhr'iHtinn Advocate. 
 
 THE SUNDAY-SCHOOL TEACHER; or, the Catechetical Office. By 
 Thos. 0. Summers. 18mo, pp. 144. Price 30 cents. 
 
 This work discusses the most interesting questions connected with the 
 Catechetical System — the Teacher's Qualilications, Eifiieulties, and Encour- 
 agements. It exhibits the obligations of pastors and toachefs to the 
 children of the Church/*and shows how the}' may be discharged. 
 
 OLD MICHAEL AND YOUNG MAURICE; or. Country Scenes, in 
 England. ISmo, pp. 178. Price iiO cents. 
 
 A truthful, fascinating, and instructive volume. 
 
 TALKS, PLEASANT AND PROFITABLE. By Thos. 0. Summers. 
 18mo, pp. 146. Price 30 cents. 
 
 The topics of these dialogues are Orphans, May-l)ay, Birds, Tempe- 
 rance, Peter and the Tribute-money, Pietribution, Recognition of Friends 
 in Heaven. The style is adapted to the minds of intelligent youth. 
 The engravings are handsome. 
 
 THE WORLD OF WATERS. By Fanny Osborne. With Illustrations 
 Two vols. 18mo, pp. 186, 224. . Price 80 cents. 
 
 A couple of fascinating and instructive volumes. The tales and narra- 
 tives beguile, like sailors' yarns, the voyage over the world of waters. The 
 descriptions and anecdotes blei\d the charm of romance with the credi- 
 bility of truth. 
 
 SCRIPTURE VIEWS OF THE HEAVENLY WORLD. By J. Edmondson, 
 A.M. 18mo, pp. 249. Price 35 cents. 
 
 A neat edition of a book which takes rank with Baxter's Saints' Rest — 
 to which great work it is in some respects superior. 
 
 TRIAL OF THE WITNESSES OF THE RESURRECTION OF CHRIST. 
 By Bishop Sherlock. With an Introduction by Thos. 0. Summers. 
 18mo, pp. 137. Price 30 cents. ^ 
 
 This masterly work is got up in convenient form and beautiful style. 
 The Introduction contains a brief biography of the illustrious author.