..r... PRINCETON, N. J. No. Case, ^ No. Shelf,__}_t^ No. Book, f^Q The John IW. Krebs Donation. BV 665 .S5 Smyth, Thomaa, 1808-1873. The prelatical doctrine of apostolical succession THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION EXAMINED, PROTESTANT MINISTRY DEFENDED AGAINST THE ASSUMPTIONS OF POPERY AND HIGH-CHURCHISM, IN A SEHIES OF LECTURES. BY THOMAS SMYTH, PASTOR OF THE SECOND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, CHARLESTON, S. C. BOSTON: PUBLISHED BY CROCKER & BREWSTER. .NEW YORK ; DAYTON & SAXTON'. PHILADELPHIA : HOOKER & AGNEW, AND HENRY PERKINS. CHARLESTON, S. C. : S. HART, BEN. CI.VCIN.NATI : WEED & WILSO.V. 1841. CAN ANY REASONABLE RULE OF CONSTRUCTION MAKE THIS (l. E. THE EPISCOPAL SUCCES- SION) AMOUNT TO MORE THAN ANCIENT AND APOSTOLICAL PRACTICE? THAT THE APOSTLES ADOPTED ANY PARTICULAR FORM, AFFORDS A PRESUMPTION OF ITS BEING THE BEST, ALL CIRCUMSTANCES OF THAT TIME CONSIDERED; BUT TO MAKE IT UNALTERABLY BINDING, IT MUST BE SHOWN ENJOINED IN POSITIVE PRECEPT. [bISHOP WHITE IN ' THE CASE OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCHES,' I AM, — SAYS THE REVEREND THOMAS SCOTT, — AN EPISCOPALIAN, BUT NOT A PRELATIST. Entered according to Act of Congrfss, in the year one thousand eight hundred and (brty-one, by CROCKER AND BREWSTER, In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the District of Massachusetts. S. N. DICKINSON, PRINTER, Si Washington Street. THESE LECTURES ARE DEDICATED, BY THEIR AUTHOR, FIRST, TO ALL EVANGELICAL, OR LOW-CHURCH EPISCOPALIANS, AND TO ALL NON- EPISCOPAL, AND EVANGELICAL COMMUNIONS, WHOSE COMMON INTEREST AND DUTY IT IS TO OPPOSE THE EXCLUSIVE ASSUMPTIONS OF POPERY AND HIGH-CHURCHISM. SECONDLY, TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SECOND PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH, CHARLESTON, S. C. FOR WHOSE IMMEDIATE BENEFIT THEY WERE ORIGINALLY PREPARED ; BY WHOSE COUNSEL THEY WERE PUBLICLY DELIVERED ; AND BY WHOSE SUBSTANTIAL ASSISTANCE, THEY ARE NOW PUBLISHED TO THE WORLD : AND, THIRDLY. TO THE REV. SAMUEL MILLER, D. D. AND REV. ARCHIBALD ALEXANDER, D. D. THE LONG-TRIED AND FAITHFUL ADVOCATES AND FRIENDS PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH ; TO WHOSE LABORS ITS BISHOPS, ELDERS, AND CHURCH MEMBERS, ARE UNDER DEEP AND LASTING OBLIGATION. Fkom the unprecedented haste with which the Volume has been earned through the prefs , n.any n^istakes in names and references bo h ,„ the b^ y of the work and the Index, may have escaped the notice of the Author, who has done all he possibly could to avoid them. ADVERTISEMENT. The present Volume, while complete in itself, and therefore published under its distinctive title, formed only the First Part of a Course of Lec- tures ON Prelacy and Presbytery. The Second Part, which will constitute a second Volume, and which is in a state of preparation, will embrace discussions, more or less full, of the following topics : — I. The True Apostolical or Ministerial Succession claimed by Presby- terians — in which it will be shown that this claim has been always urg- ed, and the ignorance of some Prelatists on this point exposed. II. This claim of Presbyters justified by Scripture — in which the condition of the church during our Lord's Ministry will be considered, and some general topics debated. III. This claim of Presbyters sustained by Scripture, continued — in which the arguments from the Apostolic Church will be entered upon. IV. This claim of Presbyters sustained by Scripture, in which the argument from the Apostolic Chiu'ch will be continued. V. This claim of Presbyters sustained by Scripture, and objections answered, in which the argument will be concluded. VI. This claim of Presbyters sustained by the testimony of the Apos- tolic Fathers. VII. This claim of Presbyters sustained by the testimony of the Primi- tive Fathers. VIII. This claim of Presbyters sustained by the testimony of later Fathers. IX. This claim of Presbyters sustained by the testimony of later Fathers and Divines — of the most eminent Reformers — and of many of the most eminent of the English divines. X. The Antiquity of Presbyterianism, including an account of the Culdees. XI. The true Liberality, Catholicity and Security of Presbyterianism. XII. The Republicanism of Presbyterianism. BY THE SAME AUTHOR. AN ECCLESIASTICAL CATECHISM OF THE PRESBYTE- RIAN CHURCH, for the use of families, Bible Classes, and private families. Second edition — much improved. TRACTS ON PRESBYTERIANISM ; 1 vol. 12mo. SOLACE FOR BEREAVED PARENTS : Or, INFANTS DIE TO LIVE. With an historical account of the Doctrine of Infant Salva- tion, and Select Thoughts in Poetry and Prose. A FORM FOR THE SOLEMNIZATION OF MATRIMONY, ac- cording to the order of the Presbyterian Church. CONTENTS. LECTURE I. THE NECESSITY FOR THIS DISCUSSION — IN WIHCH THE aUESTION IS STATED — THE NECESSITY FOR ITS DISCUSSION ILLUSTRATED — AND THE PLAN OF THE ARGUMENT DEVELOPED. It is the object of this Lecture to explain the nature of those claims assumed by Prelatista ; and by which the right of other communions to a fellowship in the privileges of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolical church is denied, 2. — The bigotry of Prelatists towards all other denominations, and their demand for the investigation of their claims, 3. — Some of the reasons which have led to this discussion, 5 — : First, This discussion of these high and exclusive claims, we owe to their authors and abettors ; secondly, we are under obligation to institute this investigation, by a duo regard to our character and just claims, which are both — this doctrine being true — entirely overthrown, 9; — thirdly, such an examination is de- manded by the cause of truth and liberty, 13; — as a fourth reason, we are summoned to this enterpiise by the claims of charity and peace, 18; — fifthly, to this defensive warfare for the maintenance and preservation of our spiritual rights, we are imperatively summoned by the memory of our fathers, 20. — Note A. The bigotry of Prelatists further illustrated, by a reference to their opinions of the different christian denominations, 23. — Note B. On High-churchism, 29. — Note C. Dr. Rice on the necessity of this controversy, 29 j the call of charity, 30. — Note D. Our Scottish fathers, 30. LECTURE IL THE TRIBUNAL : BY WHICH THIS PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION MUST BE ADJUDICATED. This necessary to be decided, 34. — This tribunal is the written word of God, 34-35. — The question at issue fully stated, 37 and 44 > 1. Many churches make these same claims, and therefore we must try them all by the written word, 45; 2. If these church principles are essential, they must be found in scripture, 48-51. Note A. — The doctrine further illustra- ted from prelatic writers, 152. — Note B. Further authorities in support of our first position, 53-54. — Note C. Further authorities for demanding clear scripture evidence, 54. LECTURE in. THE SAME SUBJECT — CONTINUED. 3. We demand clear scripture proof, because these principles constitute new terms of communion with the church universal, which Christ alone is competent to prescribe, 5G-60 ; 4. This de- mand is in accordance with the doctrine and the spirit of Protestantism, 60-67 ; 5. This de- mand is further made, because it is a right admitted and acted upon, whenever needed, by our opponents themselves, 67-74. LECTURE rV. THE SAME SUBJECT — CONCLUDED. Recapitulation, 75-76; 6. Before allowing to fathers, councils, or the practice of the church, an authority, coordinate with, or interpretative of, the Bible, evidence of not less weight than that given for the Word of God, must be produced, 76-82 ; 7. We demand this unquestionable evidence, because of the unreasonableness of the whole scheme, in itself considered, 82-87. — The conclusion from the whole argument drawn, namely: that this clear evidence must be given — that Prelacy, however, as is admitted, is not thus revealed in the scriptures, 87-92, — Prelacy, therefore, is untrue, and to urge it as fundamental is wrong, 93-94. — Two inferences drawn : 1. Presbvtery, as contrasted with Prelacy, is characterized by a fearlessness of scrip- ture, 94-96 i 2. Also by its reverence for the Word of God, 96-98. — Note A. The authority of the fathers, 100-101. — Note B. Teatimony of fathers. — Note C. Prelacy not m gcrip- ture, 103. VI CONTENTS. f LECTURE V. THE TESTS BY WHICH THIS PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OP APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION MUST BE TRIED. This unbroken succeaaion to be proved, not one of ministers, but of prelates, 106. — Thia succession must bo shown to liave oriffinated with Christ, 107. — This order, supposing it to have been thus originated, must be shown to have been designed as perpetual and unalterable, 107-108. also, to have been instituted by all the apostles, under the guidance of inspiration, 10&-109. also, that it was made of fundamental importance, 109-110. — We must have equally satis- factory proof for the validity of every subsequent link, 110. — It must be shown that no link is wanting, 112. — Also, that the ordination of every prelate in this entire succession, was valid ; first, as to the form of ordination, 113-114; secondly, as to the subjects of ordination, 114-118 ; thirdly, as to the ministers of ordination, or the ordainers, 110-120. — The utter im- possibility of doing this shown, 121. — The absurdity of the whole scheme shown, and our safety argued, 122. — Note A. Episcopius and Hoadly on the succession, 124-126. — Note B. Another ground of uncertainty, 126. LECTURE VI. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION TESTED BY SCRIPTURE. The doctrine again stated, 127-129. — Disagreement of Prelatists, 131. — Our present object, 132 — What ha.s been proved by Mr. Taylor, 133-134. — Promises claimed, 134. — Universal consent for presbytery, 135-136. — Prelacy denounced by Christ, 137-138. — Opposed to scrip- ture declarations, 138, — warnings and prece|)ts, 139. — and to scripture prophecy, 140-141. — Also, in opposition to the ministerial commission, 142-144, — and to the promises, 144-148. Note A. Variations of Prelacy, or episcopal doctors versv^ jure divino Prelatists. — Note B. — Mr. Noel on the promises. — Note C. Presbyterian succession the only safe one. — Note D. Matbew Henry on the case of Eldad and Medad. LECTURE VII. THE SAME SUBJECT — CONTINUED. Recapitulation, 155. — This doctrine equally contrary to the facts of scripture, 156. — Of ordina- tion and its alleged essentiality, 156-157. — Bishop and presbyter identical, 158-161. — Contra- ry, also, to the decisions of scripture, 161-164 — Contrary, also, to scripture manifestations, 164-173. — The variations of prelacy, and the demonstration of presbytery, 173-179. LECTURE VIII. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION BROUGHT TO THE TEST OP HISTORY. Question again stated, 181-182. — Recapitulation, 182. — The issue staked upon the historical proof, 183. — No proof for the very beginning of this chain, 185. — Peter never at Rome, 185- i.rr-.JPoter never Bishop of Rome, 187. — Peter never appointed any successors, nor can any order of succession be determined, 167-194. LECTURE IX. THE SAME SUBJECT — CONCLUDED. The doctrine again stated, 195. — Recapitulation, 196-197. — Our confusion thickens as we ad- vance, 197-198 The succession evidently invalid, 198-199. — Character of the popes, 199- 200. — The Anglican succession defective in various respects, 200-202. — So, also, the Irish, 202. — Further illustrations of the English succession, 203. — The papal and, of course, the Anglican succession antichrislian, 204-208. — The Anglican succession invalid since the refor- mation, 208 ; — Derived from the crown, 209-210. — On Archbishop Parker's ordination, 210- 213. — Other flaws in the Anglican succession, 213. — On the Scottish succession, 214-216 This succession confessedly broken, by the undeniable separation of the English church from the Roman church, 216-218. — The American succession also doubiful, 218-221. — The suc- cession can only be of the strength of its weakest link, 221. — Objections answered, 221-223. — The succession, therefore, assuredly destroyed, 223-224. — Note A. The character of the popish successors, 225-227. LECTURE X. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OP APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION BROUGHT TO THE TEST OF J FACTS. Doctrine stated, by Bishop Seabury, 230; — and by Romanists, 231. — Recapitulation, 232. — Prelates not, in fact, successors of the apostles, 233. — Not to their name or title, 233-2.35. — Different meanings of the word apostle, 236-238. — Prelates not aportles in their call, 239 ; — nor in the insignia of their office, 239-242 ; — nor in their office itself, 242-246 ; nor in their laborious duties, 24G-250. — Oppose preaching, 248-250. — The parable of the apostles, 253- 254. — Note A. On the meaning of the term apostle, S55. — Note B, Prelatical opposition to preaching, 255-256. CONTENTS. Til LECTURE XI. THE PRHOATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLTCAL SUCCESSION ESSENTIALLY POPISH IN ITS TENDENCIES AND RESULTS. This char^ disavowed, 257-258. — Necessity for discussing this topic, 258. — Tliis popish ten- dency shown, first, by the analogy between this doctrine, as embraced and followed out by the Romish and the Anglican churches, 259-:2(i2 ; secondly, from the fact that this doctrine and the system of the Oxford divinity are essentially connected, 262-2t)7 ; thirdly, from the unde- niably popish character of this system, and to which it leads, 267-2C8. — This proved by abun- dant testioiony, 265-274. — Note A. The character of the Oxford divinity, 275-276. LECTURE XII. THE SAME SUBJECT — CONCLUDED. The tendency of what is called Oxford divinity to popery, proved by numerous facts and con- versions, both in England and this country, 279-285. — This system prevailing in the episcopal church in this country, 285-286. — Our conclusion inevitable, and our discussion justifiable, 287-288. — On the ground of this doctrine, consistency requires an apostacy to the church of Rome, 288-292. — The doctrines of prelacy and popery different, hut not distinct, 289-292. — The doctrine of prehitical succession leads therefore to popery, 293-294. — Note A. Roman Catholic Letter to the prclalists, proposing union, 295. — Note B. Peculiar attachment of preiatists to the Romish church, 296. — On the value of tradkion, 297. LECTURE XIII. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OP AP0STOLIC.\L SUCCESSION INTOLERANT IN ITS TENDEN- CIES AND RESULTS. This arises from the powers implied in this claim, 299-300. — This shown from a historical re- view of the prelatical character, and of this doctrine, 301-305. — The spirit of intolerance not abandoned when the Ohurcu of England separated from Rome, 305-307. — Nor is it now aban- doned, 307-309. — The laity to be excluded in America from all conventions, 309-312. — Pre- iatists, even now, advocate compulsion and implicit obedience to canonical authority, 312. — Justify absolute anathemas from the articles and canons, 313, 314. — Bishops to punish the disobedient, 314, — and to do so by an inquisition, 315. — They teach that civil magistrates have plenary power in ecclesiastical matters, 315-317. — Glory in intolerant laws, 317. — Re- quire implicit suhjoction, whether right or wrong, 317. — Exult in being reproached for this in- tolerance, 318. — This intolerance exemplified, 318,319. — Prelacy entirely opposed to civil and religious liberty, 320, 321. — Subjects her members to a foreign influence, 322. — This spirit cannot, at this time, be carried'out, 323. — That it would be, if it could, shown by the introduction of intolerant epithets, 323-326. — Necessity of opposing it, 327. — Why they brand us as schismatics, 327, 318. — They teach that no human legislature has any liberty to tolerate schismatics, 329. — Presbyterians not open to the same charge, 330,331. — Note A. Dr. Bangs on prelacy as an usurpation, 332. — Note B. This intolerance historically illus- trated, 332-334. — Note C. This intolerance illustrated in the conduct of Bishop Hobart,334, 335. — Note D. Extracts from Dr. Rice's Letter, (from the National Intelligencer,) on High- church principles opposed to the genius of our republican institutions, 335-342. — Note E. Tendencies of prelacy illustrated, 342-344. — Note F. The true character of Archbishop Laud, 345-346. LECTURE XIV. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION UNREASONABLE. The three prelatical castes, 347, 348. — Review of the intolerant principles of the system, 349, 350. — The province of reason, 351, 352. — This doctrine to be adjudged by reason, 352. — It substitutes the means for the end, 353. — Prelatic and scripture reasoning contrasted, 354, 355. — This theory sustained by false and sophistical reasoning, 355-357. — Preiatists differ from each other more than from us, 357, 358. — This absurdity episcopally described, 358- 360. — No prelatical distinctions known in heaven or hell, 361, 362. LECTURE XV. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION SUICIDAL. The Anglican and Romish succession stand or fall together, 365, 366. — The Romish church can on this theory recall as well as give the succession, 366. — The invalidity of both successions shown by examples, 366, 367. — Bishops limited by the power of the Pope, 367, 368. — This doctrine would make true the most opposite and evident errors, 369,370. — May be claimed by one church as well as another, 370. — Its claimants are mutually excommunicated, 370, 371. -^ The prelacy cannot defend herself without defending us, 371. — How can the Holy Spirit pass through an unholy succession, 371,372. — Destroys all chrisLian hope, 373. — Repudiated, and why, 374. Vlll CONTENTS. LECTURE XVr. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OP APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION CONTRARY TO THE MORE) AF- PKOVED AND CHARITABLE JUDGMENT OF THE ENGLISH AND AMERICAN CHURCHES. This (icclured to be a tUldehood, 377. — Proved by tlio London Christian Observer and Bishop Burnet, 378-280. — Also, from the articles, canons and practice of the English church. 381- 364-386. — And from its relbrmers and laws, 384, 385. — Also, from the testimony of Englinh divines, 387-391, — and bishops, 391-391), — and archbishops, 396-403, — and from Bishop White, 403-405. — Note A. .Additional testimonies, 406-410. — Note B. The seatiments of Bishop White, continued, 410-412. LECTURE XVIL THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION SCHISMATICAL IN ITS TENDEN- CIES AND RESULTS. Moaning of the term schism in the Bible, 413 ; — in the fathers, 414 ; — among prelatists, 414- 417. — The Anglican chnrch schismatic, 417, 418. — Tlie Romish church schismatic, 418- 420. — The different parties in the Anglican church also schismaticul, 420, 421. — The Oxford divines and their sect schismatical, 421-403. — The evangelical party also echismatical, 423. — The prelatical party also schisniatical, 425, &;c. — Chri.-tian unity, 425-431. — Scriptural and primitive meaning of schism, 431-434. — Ecclesiastical meaning of schism and its conse- quences, 435, 436. — The true doctrine of, 436-438. — Note A. The necessary tendency of prelacy to unity, both of spirit and of ecclesiastical association, 439-441. — Note B. The nature of schism, 442-444. LECTURE XVIIL THE SUBJECT CONTINUED, AND THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH VINDICATED FROM THE CHARGE OF SCHISM. Recapitulated view of unity and schism, 445, 446. — We are branded as schismatics, 447, 448. — We are not schismatics, because so called, 449; — nor because in a minority, 449, 450 ; — nor because ecclesiastically independent, 450 ; — nor on the ground of heresy, or of improper terms of communion, 451,452-454. — Presbyterian liberality and prelatic exclusivenesa con- trasted, 452-454. — We are not separated from the Catholic church, by separation from the prelacy, 454-457. — We were never rightfully subject to it, 458,459. — The ancient schis- matics identified with prelatists, 459-464. LECTURE XIX. THE PRELATIC DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAI, SUCCESSION SCHISMATICAL. — SUBJECT CON- CLUDED. What is implied in this charge explained, 465, 466. — This tendency exemplified, 467. — Proved from their definitions of schism 467-470. — The Puritans did not willingly separate, but were driven out, 470-472. — Their exclusive bigotry is schismatical, as prelatists show, 473, 474. — Their intrusion of their churches and doctrines within other bounds is by their teaching schism, 474-476; — and so is their separation from Rome, 477, 478. — The prelacy evidently schismatical, 478, — and divided, 479. — Why it is schismatical shown, 480-482. LECTURE XX. THE TRUE DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION ASSERTED. To find this, must be guided solely by the Word of God, 483. — Question again stated, 484- 486. — The several meanings of the word church, 486-488. — Divided into several denomina- tions, 488, 489. — I. What is essential to a true visible church, our belief, 489, 490 ; — and 1. What is thus essential to the being of a church generally, 491-496 ; — 2. What is essential to the being of a church as it regards its ministers, 497-.501 : — II. What is not essential to the being of a church, .502-509. -Note A. The nature of ordination, 510-512. — Note B. On Separation, 513, 514. LECTURE XXL THE SAME SUBJECT — CONCLUDED. Recapitulation, 515. — Uniformity in rites, ceremonies or policy not essential, 516-530. — Of other alleged marks, .530. — When and how the church is to be sought, 530-532 True doc- trine is the all-essential mark of a true church, 532-547, and Note A. CONCLUSION. Recapitulation and Huiumary of the arguments, and closing appeal, 551-558. INDEX. INTRODUCTION. Section I. The Object of this Discussion. The subject-matter of the following Volume is, the prelatical doctrine of apostolical succession, or the exclusive claim of high- churchmen and Romanists, to be the only true church of Jesus Christ ; his oni^y true and valid ministers ; and the only sources of efficacious ordinances and covenanted salvation. This doc- trine, and not episcopacy, is the subject of our animadversion. The principles involved in this assumption — and not the char- acter or standing of the protestant episcopal church — \ye con- demn. The tendencies of this doctrine, as exhibited in its past history, and in its necessary influence — these, and not the per- sons of its abettors, who may utterly repudiate and deny many of these consequences, we reprobate as anti-prolestant and danger- ous. Our warfare is against principles and not men — in defence of truth, against the aggression of this opposing system. High-churchism, therefore, in contradistinction to low-church- ism ; prelacy, considered as being the ultraism of episcopacy ; the exclusive, bigoted and intolerant assumptions of the hierarchy, in their wide separation from the peaceful and equal claims of the episcopal denomination ; this, we wish it to be distinctly under- stood, is the only object of our reprobation. Whether the arguments by which the episcopal form of church government is sustained, are valid, or of greater strength than those produced for presbytery, is another question, which we may have occasion to consider. This, however, is not our present inquiry. That in- quiry is simply and in substance, this : — Is the prelacy the only CHDRCH OF Christ, in this or in any other country, and the ONLY source of COVENANTED MERCY AND EFFICACIOUS GRACE ? AND ARE PRESBYTERIAN, AND ALL OTHER DENOMINATIONS, WHICH CLAIM TO BE CHURCHES OF CHRIST, HAVING MINISTERS AND ORDI- NANCES ACCORDING TO HIS APPOINTMENT, ARE THEY IMPOSTORS, WHO ONLY DECEIVE IGNORANT PEOPLE, TO THEIR GREAT, AND SERl- B INTRODUCTION. ous, IF NOT FATAL, INJURY ? This is the question to be answered, — plainly — candidly — either in the affirmative or in the nega- tive. Section II. Origin and Design of this Discussion. Nothing could have been more unexpected by the Author, than an engagement in this discussion. The whole subject was for- eign to his tastes and pursuits. In common with his brethren, he was accustomed to hold it in abeyance, as unworthy and unde- serving of any mature deliberation. It was better, he thought, to occupy his own mind, and the minds of his people, with the practical and saving truths of the gospel, and leave ecclesiastical polemics to ecclesiastical agitators. Circumstances, however, led him to discover his own ignorance of the grounds of our denomi- national views — his inability to grapple with the arguments of our opponents — and his incapacity to satisfy the minds of those who sought for ministerial guidance and direction. The manifesta- tion of alienation of feeling; of haughty reserve; of high-toned exclusiveness ; of reluctance to associate with him, or in any way to acknowledge him as a minister; and the open declaration of sentiments at war with all charity, and which threw him out of the pale of Christianity — at various times and by various persons ; — were still further inducements to examine into the foundation upon which our church professed to build her claims. This de- sire was strengthened, by observing, that by our total silence on these subjects, not only our members, but also our ministers, were generally unacquainted with them, in any thing beyond a mere general and superficial knowledge, and that many of the laity were perfectly ignorant of the first principles of our ecclesiastical polity. Hence he discovered, they were open to the artful and insidious efforts of proselyters, and were easily made a prey by the cunning craftiness whereby they lie in wait to deceive and to insnare the unwatchful. For many years, too, there has been a growing in- terest in these subjects, gradually extending itself through the community. This interest has been excited to tenfold strength, and universally diffused, by the origination and efforts of that asso- ciation known as the Oxford Divines, and by the circulation of the Oxford Tracts, and various other volumes of a similar charac- ter and tendency.* The introduction of these writings into this countiy ; the terms of praise and exultation with which they were noticed; their re-adoption by many individuals, religious newspa- pers and periodicals, as containing in the main their own cherished sentiments ; the republication of these tracts, and of many of the separate volumes; the adoption of many of them by the Protestant Episcopal Tract Society, among their issues ; and the zeal with * See a very salisfactorv account of the origin of this system, iu Note A., at the end of the Introduction. INTRODUCTION. XI which they were put into circulation, not only among episcopa- lians, but through the community generally, and within the author's own congregation ; — all seemed most loudly to demand investi- gation. This conclusion was rendered evidently proper by the additional fact, that these exclusive assumptions were made the topics of pulpit discussion, and, in some cases, to the disturbance of many minds. These, among other reasons, urged the author to an examination of the subject. On entering upon this examination, some three or four years since, it was the object of the writer to procure, and to read, the writings above alluded to, and whatever else was most important on the prelatic side of the question. This, as the work will show, he has, to some considerable extent, been enabled to do. In doing so, he was astounded at the confidence with Avhich our error and their truth, was proclaimed by our opponents ; at the triumphant air with which we were called upon to gainsay or resist; and at the unblushing effrontery with which we were excommunicated from the church of Christ, and consigned to uncovenanted mer- cies. These assumptions he found to be all built upon the doctrine of the apostolical succession, as the only charter of the church, and as the exclusive right of prelates. But Avhile it was easy enough to procure works, in abundance, in defence of this prelatical theory, the Author was amazed to find so little, even of an indirect kind, in exposure of this furi- damental principle, from which prelatists have deduced their entire scheme. While their views are before the public in every form, from the child's catechism to the full-sized volume ; and are teeming daily from the press, in every possible variety of shape ; and are held forth as essential to the very existence of the ministry, and the church; there is not, so far as the author has ever yet discovered, one disii?ict treatise, on our side of the question, and upon this branch of the argument, in print, in America; and but one, recently issued by a methodist cler- gyman, (and only seen when these Lectures were far ad- vanced,) in England.* The Author, therefore, found himself subjected to great expense and trouble, in procuring rare works on the general controversy, and in discovering their incidental, or partial, discussions of this topic. While there are many valuable Avorks, both English and American, on the general argument, this particular part of it appears to have been considered as unde- serving of a full investigation ; or as in itself unreasonable and absurd'. The Author was, therefore, led to think, that a distinct examination of this prelatic theory — which is now put forth with more confidence than ever, and made the foundation of the whole prelatical superstructure — would be equally advantageous to himself, and to his own people; and serviceable, also, to his brethren in the ministry, who might not have an opportunity of An ' Essay on Apostolical Succession/ &c., by Thomas Powell, Wesleyan min- ister. XII INTRODUCTION. examining works, which are now with great difficulty procured.* In order to secure this end, the Author has added (very many of them since the composition of the Lectures) authorities, and further iUustrations of the points in hand, from works in his own possession, or in the libraries referred to. By this means, at a cost of time and self-denial, of which he had no anticipation, he hoped to make the work valuable not only to general readers, who might pass by the Notes and illustrations, but especially to such as were disposed to examine the subject for themselves, and with a closer attention. The Author has spoken, in these lectures, as the defender of an assailed citadel, on whose walls he has been set as a watchman. He has used the language of defence, and written in the spirit — not of aggression, — but of justification. Still, however, he does not rest the merits of the discussion, or its necessity and import- ance, upon the correctness of this position. To his mind, the evi- dence of its truth and propriety, is clear and certain. Every just provocative to examine this subject has been given. The assault upon our principles has been beyond all precedent, open and avowed; and in an air of resolute determination to circumvent and destroy us. We have said, and we repeat it — that nothing else than the firm belief of this necessity could have induced us to enter upon this uninviting — toilsome — thankless task. If we were mistaken, be it so. We have no controversy to wage on this subject. We give our views, and speak as impelled by our convictions. Let this be as it may, the subject itself is none the less important, nor its investigation unnecessary. Cer- tain it is, that the claims involved in the prelatic doctrine of the apostolic succession — referring, as they do, to other denominations also, which are all characterized as sects, dissenters, and schis- matics — are now promulgated from the pulpit and the press, with a boldness never before exhibited. This doctrine, then, we should understand. Of these claims we should be fully apprized ; and the grounds upon which they are based, and upon which they are altogether rejected, should he well ascertained. And although, to many, these claims ap- pear to be absurd, and unworthy of consideration, yet they are now advanced as unquestionably of divine origin ; as sanctioned by express divine authority ; and as demanding implicit and uni- versal acquiescence. Section IIL Importance of the Subject. This Doctrine cuts off all other Denominations from Salvation. The supreme imf)ortance of this subject at once appears, when it is affirmed that this doctrine being true, then, among all de- * Having matured his preparations, the expediency of either delivering or of printinj^ these Lectures, was submitted to the determination of a number of the mem- bers of llie author's congregation. It was in accordance with tiieir unanimous desire, they were first delivered to audiences composed of different denominations j and it is by their cordial and substantial co-operation they are now published to the world. INTRODUCTION. XUl nominations of christians not prelatic, there is no true church, no valid ministry, no efficacious ordinances, no authorized ministra- tions of any kind whatsoever, not even in the solemnization of mat- rimony ; AND NO COVENANTED SALVATION. Now, as \ve Can imag- ine THE POSSIBILITY of uo Other salvation than such as flows through the channel opened by the covenant of grace, this conclusion is, to our minds, identically the same with the declaration that FOR US there is, WHILE OUT OF THE PRELATIC CHURCH, NO POS- SIBLE SALVATION. We are without God —without hope — beyond the means of grace — and the covenant of mercy. This is the practical bearing, and the plain, logical, and unavoidable, inference from this doctrine — A QUESTION OF INFINITE MOMENT TO EVERY MAN, WOMAN, AND CHILD, WHO IS NOT A PROFESSED MEMBER OF THE PRELACY. This doctrine being true, then are the millions of protestants of all denominations now alive, and the million millions that are dead, consigned to the blackness of darkness and despair.' This conclusion, the Romish church, with characteristic cruelty, openly affirms to be unalterably and infallibly the truth in the case. Extra ecclesiam salus non esse potest."^ This orthodox sentiment, as has been said,^ was beautifully ex- pressed by jiEneas Sylvius, afterwards Pope Pius II. of blessed memory, (Epist. lib. i. ep. 369,) viz: "That none who had dis- regarded the authority of the Roman pontiff, could at any time enter the kingdom of heaven ; and that those who had spurned the commands of the apostolical see, should not have any occa- sion for exultation. Hos enim catholica Veritas 7iisi resipuerint ante ohitum, ignis CBterni mancipio sine intermissione deputat." So that there is no redemption from eternal fire for those who do not repent before their death of their disregard of the pope's au- thority. Pope John XXII., in his Bull of 1317, says, on his infal- lible authority, that " God has confided the empire of the earth, as well as that of heaven, to the sovereign pontiff'." A labored defence of this exclusive characteristic of this anath- ematizing communion — whose public creed, to which every con- vert has most solemnl)'' to swear, is little more than a vow to curse and hold accursed all heretics, however good or dear — may be found in the recently published manual for the benefit of young ladies.* This conclusion, however, we must explicitly say, though in itself, as we think, inevitably consequent upon this doctrine, as is allowed by the Romish church, is not generally admitted by pre- latic writers. Many of them, as, for instance, Dr. How and Dr. 1) See this view of tlie subject fully presented in 'Three Lectures on the Sup- posed Apost. Succ. and Aulh. of a Christ. Priesthood,' by the Rev. Henry Aclon, Exeter, 1840, pp. 4, 5, and 72, 79, and which I have seen since this Preface was written. 2) See ' Cramp's Text-Book of Popery/ pp. 46, 47, and 395. 3) Charleston Observer. 4) See ' The Ursuline Manual/ N. York, 1840 ; the whole appendix, and espe- cially at p. 513. XIV INTRODUCTION. Bowden, indignantly repel the imputation as outrageously slan- derous.' Bishop Onderdonk, also, disavows this inference.^ We are not, therefore, to charge this opinion personally upon any in- dividuals, except upon their personal avowal of it. But our pres- ent business is not with persons, but opinions. We have nothing to do with Dr. Bowden, Dr. How, or Bishop Onderdonk, but only wiih this prelatical doctrine of succession — to which, as it happens, they have severally given their advocacy. Our inquiry, therefore, is, what is the nature, the tendency, and the necessary results, of this doctrine ?* Now to this inquiry we can give but one answer, and that is — that it is a sentence of excommunication and repro- bation passed, not by God, and guided, therefore, by infinite wis- dom and mercy, but by weak and passionate men, upon nine tenths of the protestant world, living and dead. This is our opin- ion of it. This is the only and the certain inference to which it leads. And yet these are the men who cannot name Calvin, or think of the doctrine of election, — which leaves the fate of every man, not in the hands of either priest or prelate, but of a just, wise and merciful God, — "without the strongest feelings of indig- nation," and " their blood running cold,"^ while they coolly con- sign millions to a fate beyond the reach of mere)'' ; — just as the king of France expressed his tender sympathy for the Admiral de Coligny, after having himself procured his assassination. ^ 1) The amount of the reserve imposed upon the full application of thoir princi- ples may be stated in the words of Dr. How, ( Vind. p. 44 :) " We are very far from saying that there is no possibility of salvation out of the visible cliurch. God forbid ! It is, indeed, in the visil>le church alone that God has deposited his covenant; such as fail to enter that church, therefore, cannot b« considered as in a covenanted state. Still they are in the hands of a merciful Being, who makes due allowance for the errors of his frail creatures; — pardoning and receiving all who sincerely desire and endeavor to know and to do his will." 2) ' Works on Episcopacy,' vol. ii. p. 181. 3) But then, tn use the language of Bishop Jlcllvaine, (pp. 173, 30G, 348, and see pp. 452, and 527;) '• Their doctrine is now public properly, doing its good or evil, inde- pendently of its authors ; just as a poison or a medicine works its health or death in those who take it, independently of the apothecary who compounded it. The public inust judge of the compound, as to its nature and conse(]uences, without being bound by the opinion of the apothecary. And so the public will and can make the true in- ference as to whether Oxford divinity is essentially as much a system of human merits as that of Rome, without being governed by the deductions of Oxford divines." " Many a man professes entire renunciation of doctrines, to which his system direct- ly tends ; and of practices of which his principles and frame of mind contain already the swelling germ and essence." " It will be remembered, that this external instrument (baptism,) is made absolutely necessary to salvation, by Oxford divines There is no regeneration, no justification, and therefore no entrance to Heaven without it ; before it is applied, faith is dead, and incapable of any instrumentality, except as it prepares for, or leads to baptism, or except as ' restitution' of stolen goods on the part of a thief, would be instrumental in justification." 4) " The absurdities of Calvinism, like those of popery, if left unopposed, would have produced universal infidelity." (Dr How's Vind. of tip. Ch. p. 12.) So also the episcopal church is represented as " atfording an asylum to those whom the absurdity of Calvinism would otherwise lead first to .socinianism and then to open infidelity." (Ibid, p. I'J.) " Now, it is a fundamental rule with respect to a dilemma," says Dr. Bowden, " that when it can be retorted, it is good for nothing." (Works on Episco. vol. i. p. 10!).) 5) See Dr. How's Vind. pp. 3G4, 372. But, after all, we must say, with Dr. How, when he will insist upon the uncharitableness of our presbylerian standards, in INTRODUCTION. XV The ground upon which this conclusion is denied by prelatists, is the unscriptural and baseless dogma of uncovenanted mere}'. " But how," asks Counsellor Bristed,' — himself an episcopalian, — "do our deep divines establish their position, that non-episcopa- lians have no covenant claim to salvation, seeing that they do not pretend to adduce one syllable from the scriptures in support of their theory ? If it appear from the Bible, that God has promised eternal life to those who believe in Christ, without putting in any clause of exception against non-episcopalians, then they have a claim upon covenant mercy. And if the Bible contains such a clogged promise, confining ealvation exclusively to the episcopal channel, by what authority do our theologues undertake to assert, that any non-episcopalian can escape damnation, since the scrip- tures say nothing about uncovenanted mercy 1 and they both assert, that communion with the episcopal priesthood is an indis- pensable condition of salvation." " One of the theologians iterates, and reiterates, his candid con- viction, that all in communion with the episcopal church are in covenant with God ; and that all others are aliens from the com- monwealth of Israel, strangers to the covenant of promise, and have no hope but in the Ziwcovenanted mercy of God. He then proceeds to charge the presbyterians with entertaining a similar opinion, with excluding from the christian covenant all, save pres- byterians ; and pronouncing all, who do not embrace the rigid peculiarities of Calvinism, to be in an unregenerate state, and left to uncovenanted mercy." "I believe it would not be easy to find any Calvinistic presby- terian so very ignorant of the Bible, as ever to speak about uncov- enanted mercy; so entirely unacquainted with the gospel plan of redemption, as to dream of any mercy, other than what is prom- ised by the covenant of grace in the Lord Jesus Christ." "The truth is, Calvinistic presbyterians profess to believe that, by the covenant of grace, salvation is promised to all who really repent of sin, and sincerely believe in Christ as the great propitia- tion for sin, to whatever church they may belong ; nay, although they bear no relation to any visible church." spite of a]l evidence, — "Here is a great display of candor, (charity- ;) but I am sorry to be obliged to add, it is nothing more than a display." (p. 373.) " The whole is a mere evasion, founded on the vague meaning of a phrase." (p. 382.) "And it will not be denied," says Dr. Mitchell, (Presb. Letters, p. 285,) " that if piety consist in confining the favor of God and the benefits of Christ's manifestation in the flesh, to themselves and their little parly, and in shutting the gates of heaven against all protestants who differed from them ; in inventing and embracing, with enthusiasm, a new doctrine, never heard of before their time; 1 mean, that their baptism, and no other baptism, conlers immortality on the souls of men, and (lest their adversaries should get oflT with annihilation, and thus escape the damnation of hell.) that God, by an act of omnipotence, confers immortality on all English, Irish and Scottish protest- ants, who are not non-jurors, that they may be damned to eternity ; — if, I say, piety consist in broaching, publishing and defending such doctrines as these, which are enough to make ' the ears of him that heareth iliem to tingle,' and his hair to stand on end ; then it will be universally allowed, that those learned and conscientious divines were the most pious men, that ever lived in England, or any where else." 1) ' Thoughts on the Anglican and Anglo-American Churches,' New York, 1822, p. 433. XVI INTRODUCTION. " Are such men," asks Mr. Bristed, after enumerating Luther and Calvin, and a number of others,' " of whom the world was not worthy, to be excluded from Christian fellowship ; to be shut out from the communion of the saints ; to be consigned over to the uncovenanted mercy of God ? Is not the covenant of grace made with all true believers ? with all those who, feeling them- selves to be sinners, fly unto God for mercy, through Christ; and to whom God gives the Holy Spirit, which first regenerates, and then progressively sanctifies them both in heart and in life ? with all those who find peace from the Son of God, and from the Spirit of God ; from the Lord Jesus Christ, forgiveness ; from the Holy Ghost, sanctification ; with all those, who, under the sanctifying influences of the Spirit, are assured, that although sin still remains lurking in the deeper folds, and buried in the inmost recesses of the heart, it shall not regain dominion, nor shall they come into condemnation ; but, being 'accepted in the beloved, shall give evi- dence of what manner of spirit is in them, by wishing what the Father wishes, and hating what the Father hates ? with all those who study the holy scriptures, with prayer for forgiveness through the Lord Jesus Christ, for assurance of pardon through the Holy Spirit, and for grace to obey the commandments of God ; seeing, that the gift of the Holy Ghost is promised to all those, who, despairing of themselves, rest for righteousness on the Son of God ? " " Is not salvation altogether individual ? Can one man be saved by another's faith, or damned by another's works? The declara- tion of Jehovah himself is, ' he that believeth, shall be saved ; he that believeth not, shall be damned.' " " Erasmus, when he became acquainted with the persecuted Puritans in England, exclaimed, ' May I live their life, and die their death ! ' " On this subject, Mr. Bristed," after quoting from two American divines, further says : " The same doctrine is repeated again and again, by another distinguished divine of the same school, in his 'Vindication' of the American Anglo-church ; and if these two theologians be right, that God has made 7io covenant with any people in the United States, except the two hundred and fifty thousand bishops, priests, deacons, and laics, so thinly scattered over their surface, wo betide the ten millions of all the other American denominations ! For the scheme of ziTzcovenanted mercy cannot help the poor presbyterians, congregationalists, baptists, methodists, or any other non-episcopalians, simply be- cause no such scheme is to be found in the Bible, which uni- formly represents God as, out of Christ, a consuming fire, and in Christ, as reconciling the world unto himself, not imputing to them their trespasses and sins." " In reference to this doctrine, one of the greatest divines of the 1) 'Thoughls.'&c. p. 415. 1) Ibid.pp. 419, 420, 421. INTRODUCTION. XVll present, or of any former age, observes : " "Warrant for this sweeping sentence of proscription, from the word of God, none has or can be produced. To unchurch with a dash of the pen, ail the non-episcopalian denominations under heaven, and cast their members indiscriminately into a condition worse than that of the very heathen, is, to say the least of it, a most dreadful ex- communication ; and, if not clearly enjoined by the authority of God, as criminal as it is dreadful. " That all those glorious churches, which have flourished in Geneva, Holland, France, Scotland, England, Ireland, since the Reformation; and all which have spread, and are spreading throughout this vast Continent; that those heroes of the truth, who, though they bowed not to the mitre, rescued millions from the man of sin, lighted up the lamp of genuine religion, and left it burning with a pure and steady flame, to the generation follow- ing ; that all those faithful ministers, and all those private chris- tians, who, though not of the hierarchy, adorned the doctrine of God, their Saviour, living in faith, dying in faith, scores, hundreds, thousands of them, going away to their Father's house, under the strong consolations of the Holy Ghost, with anticipated heaven in their hearts, and its hallelujahs on their lips ; that all, all were without the pale of the visible church, were destitute of cove- nanted grace, and left the world, without any chance for eternal life, but that unpledged, unpromised mercy, which their accusers charitably hope, may be extended to such as labor under invol- untary, or unavoidable error, and this merely because they re- nounced episcopacy; are positions of such deep-toned horror, as may well make our hair stand up like quills upon the fretful por- cupine, and freeze the warm blood at its fountain." Hear also, on this subject. Archbishop Whateley.» "To de- cide what persons can or cannot be members of the same religious community on earth, uniting in public worship and other observ- ances, is no more than it is possible, and allowable, and requi- site, for uninspired man to undertake ; and this is implied, and is all that is necessarily implied, in the ordinances and formularies of every church : but to decide who are or are not partakers of the benefits of the christian covenant, and to prescribe to one's fellow-mortals, as the terms of salvation, the implicit adoption of our own interpretations, is a most fearful presumption in men not producing miraculous proofs of an immediate divine mission." There being, therefore, no foundation for this figment — this covering of fig-leaves — the naked deformity of this cruel doctrine must stand forth to view. This consequence is equally certain, not only as deduced from this doctrine generally, but also as inferred from the prelatic theory of schism, which follows from it. Schism, say they, is a voluntary separation from the holy catholic church, which church 1) ' Essays on Dangers to the Christian Failh,'p. 238. C XVin INTRODUCTION. they are. Such a separation is, according to Austin and other fathers, and to Thomas Aquinas and other schoohnen, a damna- ble sin; and as efleciually excludes from the means of salvation, as did the shutting of the doors of the ark, close upon all without the only way of escape from the deluge. (See Pet. 20 — 21.) From this, therefore, it follows, as theRornanists plainly teach, and as the premises necessarily conclude, that all who are guilty of schism, as all non-episcopalians are, are certainly beyond the reach of any possible salvation. That this conclusion is the certain and necessary result of this doctrine, Avill further appear from the testimony of episcopalians themselves. " The doctrine of these high-churchmen, then,'" says Mr. Bristed, after quoting two divines, " is, that all non-episcopalians are in the broad road to perdition ; their watchword being ' epis- copacy or damnation,' as if multitudes do not obtain both these benefits ; and as if such a dogma were not of the very essence of popery ! " "They, indeed, only follow in the foot-tracks of another rever- end gentleman, who, some years since, when preaching an ordi- nation sermon at St. Paul's church, in the city of New York, de- clared that Jill ministers, not episcopally ordained, are impostors ; their commissions, forgeries; and their sacraments, blasphemy." That this is the nece.-sary conclusion from their principles, is urged, explicitly, by the London Christian Observer.^ "But the declaration," says this work, in allusion to the dicta of a Mr. Knollis, ' that those who are saved must be saved through Christ,' "does not touch the question. It was the very point of his argument, (let our readers re-peruse the extract,) that no dissenter can be in covenant with God, or have any title to the promises of salvation. A dissenter, he urged, ' is not a member of Christ's church ; and Christ has no where said that he will save out of his church;' assuredly, then, a dissenter, if saved, must be saved by unpromised, uncovenanted mercy. Again, ' Christ Tnay save' a dissenter ; 'but he does not positively say he will,' Is not this consigning all dissenters to uncovenanted mercy ? And we may add, that it is presumptuous not only in the way of bind- ing, but also of loosing; for if God has not given any promise, what right has Mr. Knollis to hold out any possibility, however feeble, that a dissenter may be saved ? He should say more or less. The error arises from an unscriptural and anti-Anglican notion of 'the church,' from which, and the blessed promises made to it, Mr. Knollis's argument excludes many who will not be found excluded at the last day. We believe that Christ's holy catholic church includes all who love our Lord Jesus Christ in sincerity ; though they do not all form one visible com- munion upon earth." The same interpretation was put upon the high-church doc- 1) ' Thoughts,' &c. vol. i. p. 420. 2) Nov. 1840, pp. 703 and 704. INTRODUCTION. XIX trines, by the learned and able author of ' The Rights of the Christian Church,' who was himself a member of that church, and a professed defender of it, against the non-jurors. " But," says he,' *' are the highflyers, who confine the church of Christ to a smaller number, (than the papists,) and who are so far from communicating with other reformed churches, either at home or abroad, that they damn those who do so, as schismatics and hypocrites, more charitable ?" But as this is a point of such evident importance, I would in- vite attention to a few quotations from prelatical writers, in addi- tion to the many that may be found in different parts of the work itself. " The immediate purpose of the church is to convey from God to man, those heaven-descending influences of the Holy Ghost, whereby his salvation is to be vvrought. That preternatural op- eration, that subtle but powerful touch, whereby the will is reno- vated, requires a distinct vehicle, a mode of conveyance which both befits and witnesses a direct derivation from God. "2 Is not this prelatically-ordained ministry laid down as one of the essential marks of the church, and " the means through which the divine presence is graciously represented in the church ?"^ " I conscientiously believe the church of Christ (that is, in her three orders) to be an institution equally sacred as the divine lavvs themselves."'' Hear Bishop Ravenscroft, of North Carolina :^ " What presby- terian or other dissenter, will risk the purchase of property from a distant owner, by power of attorney, upon the mere assertion of the agent, that he is empowered to convey the title ? Know you of any, who would not require to see the power of attorney, that iiwas in due form ot law, and such as would bind the principal, before he paid the price, or even became bound for it? And know you not of thousands, who bargain for the rich inheritance of the gospel, for themselves and their families, without the slightest security, beyond the mere say-so of the agent ? Alas ! how very true are our Saviour's words, ' that the children of this world are, in their generation, wiser than the children of light.' Episcopalians present these doctrines to their hearers, in the full persuasion, that the church, the ministry, and the sacraments, are as distinctly and truly appointments of God, in order to the snlcation of sinners^ as the faith of the gospel ; and that only as th£se are united in the profession of religion, can the hope thereby given to man, be worthy of the name of assvra^ice.'" Savs Dr. How,6 " Of this church, (i. e. ' the true church,' as instituted by Christ and his apostles,) " of this church, all men 1) Lonrl. 1707, ed. 3cl, p. 364. 2) Gladstone's Church, in its Relations to the Stale. 3) The Old Paiiis, by the Rev. J. B. Pratl, 3d ed. Oxford, 1840, p. 41. 4) Ibid, pp. 10!) and 250. 5) Vind. and Def. in Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 549. 6) Vind. p. 73 5 and also p. 81. XX INTRODUCTION. are commanded to become members. In refusing' to become members of it, therefore, they violate the law of God, So far as their conduct is to be traced to unavoidable ignorance, or in- voluntary error, it will be excused ; so far as it is the result of pride, passion, negligence, or any other culpable cause, it will be ground of condemnation. God only can tell when error proceeds from a criminal, when from a pardonable, source : He only can tell, in each individual case, how far the heart is sincere, and how far allowance is to be made for the ignorance, the mistakes, and the prejudices, of his frail creatures," " Wilful oppo- sition to episcopacy is certainly rebellion against God, and must, therefore, exclude from his presence.'" " /n short, your op- ponents say that wilfxd rejection of episcopacy will exclude from the kingdom of heaven.^^ The Rev, Andrew Fowler, Rector in the Protestant Episcopal Church, in S, C, in his Catechism, defines the " church of Christ," as that in which " the sacraments are duly administered by persons rightly ordained,"' that is, by " the bishops who were commissioned by the apostles,"* And he concludes, ^ " that, as there is but one holy, catholic, or universal church, for which Christ died, we, who are called, have no hope of salvation, but as being faithful members of it." Not less explicit are the words of the ' Charleston Gospel Messenger,' in a recent article on " Schism,"* Speaking of the " very great misfortune " " of those who are dissenters," it is said, " whatsoever blessing God gives through his regularly or- dained ministry — whatever benefit is attached to their ministra- tion of the sacraments of baptism and the holy eucharist — what- ever advantage belongs to hearing the word preached by lawful, spiritual authority — all these the dissenter, (that is, every non-epis- copalian in Charleston and elsewhere,) loses, whether it be through his sin, OR HIS MISFORTUNE, Thus, in a remarkable man- ner, the sin of the parents cleaves to the children until the third and fourth generation," Again, " it may be thought very liberal to say that separation from the church is not sinful, (that, is, in Charleston, from St, Michael's, St, Philip's, or St. Paul's,) when scripture declares it to be so, but I deny that it is charitable." It is then shown to be charitable to unchurch them all, that they may " see their error, and join themselves to the apostolic church."^ "Firmly persuaded, with Hooker, that episcopacy is the primi- tive apostolical institution, I must consider obedience to it to be a matter of christian obligation."^ Bishop Hobart, in his ' Companion to the Altar,' puts these words 1) Charleston, 1840, p. 6, § ii. and p, 13, § ix. 2) Pages 10, 12, 13. 3) On p. 24. 4) For May, 1841, see p. 52. 5) P. 50, 51. The reader should know that this Magazine professes to be " rfi- dactic" in its character, and a " lover of peace." Wc mighl fill our volume with similar exemplifications of its pacific, liberal and didactic character. 6) Daubeny's Appendix to his Guide, quoted with approbation, in ' A Collection of the Essays on the subject of Episcopacy,' N. York, 1806, p. 152. INTRODUCTION. XXI into the mouth of a communicant : " Let it be, therefore, thy su- preme care, O my soul, to receive the blessed sacrament of the body and blood of the Saviour, only from the hands of those who derive their authority by regular transmission from Christ," Ag-ain he says, " where the gospel is proclaimed, communion with the church, by the participation of its ordinances at the hands of the duly authorized priesthood, is the indispensable con- dition of salvation,''^ except in cases of " ignorance, invincible prejudice, imperfect reasoning, and mistaken judgment.'" Dr. Hide, after laying down their premises of no ministry, and no worship, &c., goes on to say: "Here seems yet a very bad certainty of their religion ; and how can there be a better cer- tainty of their salvation ? unless (that we may gratify their sin- gularity more than our veracity) we will say, there may be a company of good christians out of the communion of saints, or a commonwealth of saints, out of Christ's catholic church.'"^ What are we to understand by the declaration of the Tracts, that " episcopal authority is the very bond which unites christians to each other, and to Christ" — or of the British Critic, that " the effect of separating from the bishop is a separating from Christ." In Nos. 51 and 52 of the Oxford Tracts we have these strong expressions : " Christ never appointed two ways to heaven ; nor did he build a church to save some, and make another institution to save other men. There is no other name given under heaven, among men, whereby we may be saved, but the name of Jesus, and that is no otherwise given under heaven than in the church. "^ From the ' New York Churchman,' which quotes from the Ox- ford Tractists, we learn : " 1. That the only way of salvation is the partaking of the body and blood of our sacrificed Redeemer. 2. That the mean expressly authorized by Him, for that purpose, is the holy sacrament of His supper. 3. That the security, by Him no less expressly authorized, for the continuance and due application of that sacrament, is the apostolical commission of the bishops, and under them the presbyters of the church." "That is, episcopacy or perdition."'* The Rev. William Jones, one of the fathers of the English church, quoted by the Oxford Tractators, in their Catenae, has two discourses on the same perverted and unmeaning words, (i. e. in their isolation,) which have, as if original, gained such noto- riety to Dr. Hook. In these he exposes " two great errors " — the first supposes that the church will save men without godliness f and the second, that godliness will save men without the church,'"^ which " is the error of those that leave the church to follow some private way of worship." " We must," he says, " be of the 1) Ibid, p. 149. 2) See quoted in Baxter's ' Five Disc, on Ch. Govt.' Lend. 1659, p. 343. 3) See quoted with more, in Bishop Meade's Sermon for Bishop Elliott, p. 95. 4) Tlie Presbyterian. 5) " Godliness is the sense and spirit of all the forms and services of the church." Ibid, p. 411. 6) Wks. vol. V. pp. 393, &c. 411, &c. XXll INTRODUCTION. church outwardly, in order to be of the church inwardly."' And as baptism can only be administered by them, so he teaches that " as the church could never find any where a new birth, indepen- dent of baptism, we never shall. "2 Of course, therefore, we are excluded from its possible enjoyment. Our condition and that of such as are within the church, is likened by him to the waters of the flood, and the ark of Noah ;'' the city of Sodom devoted to destruction, and Zoar, the city of refuge ; Egypt, the house of slavery, and Canaan, the land of liberty." And thus again:'* " What further danger is there in schism? The obvious danger of losing the benefit of God's ordinances for our salvation ; as a limb severed from the body loses the life of the body. Why so ? Because, if we have no true church, we have no true sacraments, to which the promises of life are an- nexed."* The facts in the case, then, are these. Prelatists do not under- take (for how indeed can they ?) to deny the eminent piety , as chris- tia7is, of many non-episcopalians — but they do positively deny that they can possibly receive or enjoy any mercy flowing through the evangelical covenant, while as to their future state and condi- tion, " they obstinately refuse to pronounce any judgment," one way or the other." Now, surely, here is a most extraordinary case. We have in the premises " eminently pious christians " — we have, as propositions, an utter rejection, as infamous, of the tenet that none but prelatists can be saved — and the equally pos- itive affirmation, that for all such individuals, covenanted mercy there is none — and as a conclusion, a dogged silence, which will give no response to the most earnest inquiry, — what will be the future condition of such rejectors of prelacy ? ' There is, on this theory, mercy for the heathen, vile, wicked and idolatrous, though they be^ — and for the Jews, though in "great and lamentable error"* — but all who "wilfully reject episcopacy," must be forever excluded from the kingdom of heaven,'" for their " certain rebellion against God." We can only 1) Ibid, p. 412. 2) P. 42.3. 3) Ibid, vol. xi. pp. 410, and 411. 4) See the first Collect in the office for public baptism. 5) Ibid, p. 428. See also similar quotations from tlie Bishop of Exeter's Second Triennial Char<;;e, 1836, p. 44; and from Precenlor Lowe's Sermon, in Mr. Acton's Lect. as above. Mr. Lowe says, of these prelatical successors, that Christ •' delegated these powers to them alone, dL.nd absolutely excluded all others from acting with effect as ambassadors and stewards of the mysteries of God." So the Bishop says, " He who wilfully and in despite of due warning', or through recklessness and worldly- mindedness, sets al naught its ordinances, and despises its ministers, has no right TO PROMISE TO HIMSELF ANY SHARE IN THE GRACE WHICH THEY ARE AP- POINTED TO CONVEY." 6) Daubeny's Guide, App p. 259. 7) Ibid, App. p. 275, and Lond. Chr. Obs. 1805, p. 162. 8) Dr. How's Vind. p. 106, el preced. 9) Ibid, p. 109. 10) Ibid, pp. 81, 73, &c. INTRODUCTION. XXlll say — happy are the heathen — happy are the Jews — but of all men, most miserable are non-episcopalians, — that is, nineteen twentieths of all the reformed churches ! Section IV. The imperative Duty of controverting this Doctrine. Inasmuch, therefore, as this doctrine so plainly and unequivo- cally involves — as has been shown by the confession and the teaching of prelatists themselves — the utter exclusion from all hope and mercy of all non-episcopalians, the duty of controverting it is very apparent. We concur fully with Dr. How, in the reasons he has so ably presented in his ' Preliminary Kemarks" in favor of the neces- sity and importance of controversy. Where important truths are denied, or unimportant truths are held forth as essential to the faith of every true christian, we are called upon to controvert. Scripture — the tenure upon which we hold the blessing of sound doctrine — the lessons taught us on every page of ecclesiastical history — the experience of the church in this country — the in- trinsic value, and the exposed and dangerous position, of truth — all call upon us to contend earnestly for the faith and liberty of the gospel. "No body of men," says this writer, " will grow with- out contending for their principles ; nor will any attachment be preserved for principles, which it is made an object to keep sys- tematically out of sight. Under such circumstances, the laity would soon become entirely ignorant of the peculiar doctrines of the church ; the clergy would, in time, become ignorant of them also." " They who so decidedly condemn all defence of the prin- ciples which discriminate our church from other christian societies, must be reduced to the dilemma of saying either that the peculiar principles of our church are unscriptural, or that the injunction of the apostle is not to be obeyed." " We are to display the meek- ness and affectionateness of the christian temper in our inter- course with our brethren of other denominations ; but we are not to sacrifice our principles to theirs : — nay, ive are not to he afraid to contend firmly against what we conceive to he error, even at the hazard of deeply offending those by whom it is emhraced. The apostles were surely animated by the true spirit of the gospel. They resisted error with a firmness which nothing could shake ; and propagated truth with an unwearied and inextinguishable zeal. It is a false charity that places all opinions and all commun- ions upon a level — a charity which religion, reason, and common sense, equally disclaim." Dr. How, indeed, is not ashamed to boast that "the church" — we suppose he means the prelatical church — "of Connecticut has grown up in the midst of perpetual discussion. She is liter- ally the child of controversy."" Again, " a large proportion of the 1) Vind of the Prot. Ep Ch, 2) Pages 15, 9A, 27. XXIV INTRODUCTION. clergymen of our church now settled in the diocess of New York are converts from other denominations.'" " Deprive our church in this diocess of the clergymen who have joined her from other denominations, and she would be left, indeed, in a very desolate condition.'"' How clearly, then, is it our duty, as presbyterians, to stand for- ward in defence of our character and claims. " Matters have come to a fine pass, indeed," says Dr. Rice, in his able review of Bishop Ravenscroft,'' " if, when a presbyterian maintains that he is a member of the church of Christ, he is to be represented as thereby making an attack on episcopacy ! It is often made a sub- ject of private talk, ' this presbyterian is not one of us ; he is an alien from the family, and has no right to any of its privileges, nor to any part of the inheritance.' The presbyterian, on hearing this, comes out openly, and says, ' We are brethren ; here is the proof of my birth, my baptism, my education under the care of a common father; let us, then, live in peace, and cherish brotherly love.' ' See,' cries the other, ' how this man is picking a quarrel with me, and even attacking me without provocation ! This was the only sort of attack ever made by the Reviewer, until Bishop R. preached and published his famous sermons."'* This necessity for discussion is also apparent from the prevailing ignorance upon the subject Dr. Rice, in introducing some consid- erations on this point, remarks : " In our southern country, sub- jects of this kind have been so little discussed, that the great body of the people have no ideas of their true bearing, or of the manner in which they affect their true interests."* Bishop Ravenscroft, adopting the sentiment, presents it as a reason why he " should stand justified for discarding that false tenderness to the feelings of others, which had been instrumental in keeping back these fun- damental doctrines from the edification of the pulpit."^ One design of the Hon. Judge Dudley, in establishing his Lec- ture at Harvard College about a century ago, — as Dr. Chauncy informs us, in his lecture on ' The Validity of Presbyterian Ordi- nation Asserted and Maintained " — was, " that our sons who are sent here, from all parts of the land, to be trained up for public service, might be under advantage to hear and know the reasons, upon which they may with all good conscience join in communion with these churches, and officiate as pastors in them, should they, when fitted for it, be called thereto." " It took rise in the honorable founder's mind, from the narrow principles of those 1) Vinci, p. 17. 2) Ibid, p. 19. 3) P. 20. 4) Evangelical and Literary Magazine, p. 634. 6) Evang. and Rel. Mag. vol. ix. p. 4o8- 6) '■ Wen should never be considered as guilty of attack upon their fellow-chris- tians, simply for bearing testimony against what they conceive to be pernicious error." (Dr. How's Vind. p. 145.) " If ^ou think our church corrupt, you have a right to say so. Without a privilege of this kind, free discussion would be impossible." (Ibid, p. 142.) 7) Boston, 1762, p. 63 in Atheuseum, b. li. p. 118. INTRODUCTION. XXV anathematizing' zealots, who would confine salvation to their own church, by confining the validity of gospel ordinances to the ad- ministration of them, by persons upon whom the hands of a bishop, in their sense of the word, have been imposed." " I therefore earnestly wish," says the Rev. William Jame- son, in his ' Sum of the Episcopal Controversy, '^ " that the pastors of the Kirk of Scotland would spend more time in explaining this controversy, especially in their catechetical discourses, and confirm from scripture the presbyterian principles, and confute their adversaries. This, I earnestly wish were done in a grave way and clear style, for it certainly would be of great use, espec- ially to the common people. It would also be of great use to give from the pulpit, now and then, calmly and plainly, a deduction of God's mercies unto this land by delivering us from spiritual Baby- lon, Rome ; and again, from the false doctrine and tyranny of her kinsmen, the prelates." " Some may say, the question is of no great moment — I afllrm the contrary, were it but on this account only, that all the bloodshed, rapine, confiscation, banishment, im- prisonment, fining and confining, that miserable Scotland has been harassed with above a hundred years, were occasioned by this controversy." But on this subject we refer our readers to our first Lecture, where it is fully considered. Should it be thought that our language is, in many cases, too strong, let it be borne in mind, that most frequently we have used the language of our opponents themselves; and that blame is, therefore, imputable to them and not to us, where it may be justly merited.^ Let it also be remembered, that in all cases, we speak only " of the tendency of the doctrine, and not the actual /eeZm^ of any particular persons,'" — and that the further we may be from questioning any individual's devotion and reverence, the more necessary is it that we should be on our guard against their erroneous principles ; since their acceptance by such persons is an alarming symptom, and a proof of their very probable diff'usion.'* Section V. What we Challenge and Assert. First — The production of any one scriptural record, of any one ordination, where only a single individual ofiiciated. Secondly — The production of one single case, where any indi- vidual was ordained a second or third time, and where there is thus afforded even a pretext for the three ordinations of prelacy. Thirdly — The production of any proof for the necessary em- ployment, in ordination, as essential to a valid ministry, of impo- 1) Glasgow, 1713, Preface. 2) Thus speaks Dr. Cook, (Wks. on Episcop. vol. ii. p. 200 .) "If there is any thing offensive to any one, in the book, it is a quotation ; and quolations a man is bound to state as they are staled bv the author from whom they are taken." 3) Keble on Primit. Trad. p.lOG. 4) Ibid; and also Saravia's Priesthood, p. 29. XXVI INTRODUCTION. sition of hands, — if the cases of Paul and Timothy are not allowed to be cases of ordination, and therefore proofs of presby- terian, in direct opposition to prelatic, ordinations. Fourthly — The exhibition of any authority whereby prelates usurp the title of bishop ; a title which was given by the Holy Ghost to presbyters, and which is given to no other ofKcers in the New Testament. Fifthly — we challenge those who assert the necessity of prelates, priests and deacons, as three distinct orders of the christian minis- try, and essential to the being of the church, to prove that these orders were originally given, and do belong to the catholic church, as such ; and not to particular churches ; so as that separation from them comes to be separation from the church catholic' Sixthly — Supposing that there were persons called bishops or apostles, from the very beginning ; or even diocesan bishops ; still we challenge some proof of a triple consecration, and of the pos- session of a right to ordination in the order of prelates exclusive of presbyters. Let some instance in the first two centuries be pro- duced, or let these prelatic assumptions be forever abandoned. Seventhly — Further, we ask prelatists to show, from any rec- ord of the church, for two hundred and tifty years, any trace whatever of a second ordination, which yet we might expect to be most frequently alluded to, on the supposition of the existence of three orders with their three separate ordinations.^ Eighthly — We challenge the production of a case in the earliest ages, where any ordinary minister held the oversight of more than one particular charge ; having, as his specific duty, the oversight of ministers and churches, and not the pasto- ral care of some particular congregation. What is Asserted. First — Mr. Noyes, in his ' Claims of Episcopacy Examined,'' gives it as the result of his examination, 1. That " it cannot be shown that the order of diocesan bishops existed during the first two centuries of the christian era. If, during that period, bishops are mentioned, it is in such a connexion as to show that they were only overseers of single churches, or moderators amongst presbyters equal to themselves in authority, having no connexion with more than one church, and no exclusive right to ordain chris- tian ministers. 2. It can be shown that diocesan episcopacy had human origin, and a gradual progress. It can be shown that it naturally arose from the circumstances of the early churches, 1) The Ta7*g;^!«a of ihe Nicene Synod, says Dr. Owen, (Works, vol. xix. p. 173,) intends no more than the old usage, nor is any thing of institution, nor so much as of apostolical tradition, pleaded therein. 2) See Dr. Rice in Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 617. " But to put the mat- ter beyond controversy, we will undertake to show, that there was no ordination per- formed in the church at all, from the days of the apostles, until at least two hundred and filty years after Christ, by any but presbyters." (pp. 618 and 629.) 3) Dudleian Lect. for 1838, in Christ. Examiner, for Nov. 1838, p. 212. INTRODTTCTION. XXVll from certain tendencies in human nature, on the part of ministers and people, and from the influence of Jewish and heathen insti- tutions." " From prime-presbyters arose city-bishops ; from city- bishops, diocesan ones ; from diocesan bishops, metropolitans ; from metropolitans, patriarchs ; and, finally, at the top of all, his holiness the pope, claiming the character of universal head of the church.'" Secondly — "The testimony of early writers," says the author of the ' Sketch of the History of Presbyterianism in England,'* " shows that presbyterian order, as then followed, was derived from scripture, and is a confirmation of its statements- The name ot bishop or overseer was given to all presbyters or elders till the year 106 ; and down to the beginning of the third century, bish- ops were at least parochial or congregational ; — that is, the pas- tor, administering the word and sacraments in each congregation, was styled bishop, which was the first stage in the change of the use of the word, applied originally to both classes of elders, — those who only rule, and those who both rule and teach. After- wards it was appropriated to one in each presbytery ; and thus prelacy was gradually introduced, by men, who, like ' Diotre- phes, loved to have the pre-eminence.' " Thirdly — For the laying on of the hands of the presbytery, we have most express scripture; whereas, on the other hand, for the laying on of the hands of the diocesan bishop, we have no express scripture.^ (1 Tim. iv. 14.) Fourthly — No instance is to be met with of an ordination by a person under the name of a bishop, in scripture ; neither have I been able to find an instance of ordination under the like name, and meaning by it a bishop, as distinct from a presbyter, in any writer, till we come to the times when it is owned a distinction obtained between these officers of the church.'* Fifthly — Nor is that mode of diction, bishops, presbyters, and deacons, to be met with, in any writer, before Clement of Alexan- dria, who did not flourish until the latter end of the second cen- tury, unless we except Ignatius, in whose corrupted and interpo- lated epistles this manner of speaking is common.^ Sixthly — There werer was any general council — never any number of accredited fathers ; never any modern church, since the time of our Lord and Saviour, who maintained that bishops were, hy divine right, an order superior to, and distinct from, and possessing powers and authority incompatible with, presbyters, as presbyters. He that affirms there was, let him prove it.® In conclusion, we have only to say, that we have not been led 1) Chauncy's Dudleian Lecture. See also his Views of Episcopacy ; Geiseler's Ecclesiastical History, § xxix. lii. liii.; Christian Examiner for Nov. 1834, p. 180, &.C. 2) Pp. 33, 39, and 40. 3) See Jameson's Sum of the Episcopal Controversy, p. 9. 4) Dr. Chauncy's Dudleian Lect. 17G2, p. 70. 6) Dr. Chauncy's Appeal to the Public Answered, Boston, 1768. 6) Powell on Ap. Succ. ed. 2d, p. 78. XXVIU INTRODUCTION. to this discussion through any desire of controversy, or any per- sonal or denominational animosity. Our object is not the exclusive aggrandizement of any one church, but the assertion of the equal rights of all who hold the truth in sincerity. We speak in the language of Christianity, and not of a sect or party. We defend protestantism against popery — apostolical, against ancient Chris- tianity— spiritual freedom, against the assaults of hierarchical despotism. That the principles we condemn are attributable, not to the episcopal church, but to a party in that church, we have affirmed, and until we are otherwise convinced, it is against the principles of that party, we are at war. Neither do we desire to be led into controversy. We have given our views candidly, and our authorities explicitly. Let the reader examine for himself, and weigh the evidence advanced, seriously and impartially. Meantime, should any one feel inclin- ed to notice this argument, we would remind him, in the language of the London Christian Observer, in a late review of the work of Bishop Mcllvaine,' "that no question is satisfied, unless it is presented in particular detail, and in its broad principles and gen- eral relations. No writer is fully answered, unless you not only disprove his stated arguments, but his very thoughts." Should any of the author's facts or references be found incor- rect, he would say that such incorrectness has arisen not from any intention to mislead. And if any such mistakes are pointed out, it will give him pleasure, should he have the opportunity, to cor- rect them. In the mean time, he is willing they should be withdrawn, and the argument adjudged by the strength of the remaining evidence. 1) March, 1841, p. 167. Charleston, S. C. July, 1S41. ADDITIONAL NOTE TO INTRODUCTION. NOTE A. ORIGIN OF THE OXFORD TRACTS AND THE OXFORD DIVINITY. The best account of the on'n^in of the present Oxford party, who, with such learn- ing and diligence, have re-puliiished and propagated these sentiments, is given by Mr. Beverly, in his recent work on the ' Heresy of Human Priesthood,' (Lond. 1839, ed. 2d, pp."72. 73, 74:) " To Dr. Pusey, the regius professor of Hebrew in the University of Oxford, is generally attributed the origination of that sect or part}', which is now called after his name ; but if honor were given to whom honor is due, the more appropriate name of the sect would be Hamites,* from Dr. Hook, the teacher to whom even Dr. Pusey has attributed his knowledge of those precious truths, which characterize the Oxford Tracts. " Dr. Pusey returned from the continent, in the year 1828, and then published an apologetic inquiry into the charge brought against the theologians of Germany, by Mr. Rose, the christian advocate, of Cambridge. Mr. Rose, the late principal of King's College, London, was certainly deeply imbued with those opinions, wliich are now known by the name of Puseyism, as early as the year 1324; for, at that time, I conversed with him on these questions, at Cambridge ; and such were the sentiments which 1 used to hear him express, that they led me to suppose he was aiming at the revival of the Laudean school, which seemed, in those days, to exist only in history. Puseyism had not yet been mentioned ; and tiie Laudean views, now in a fair way to influence the whole body of the clergy, were not openly entertained by any writer in the church, as far as i am acquainted with clerical proceedings. " Dr. Pusey's opinions are supposed to have been not unfavorable to rationalism, when he took up the pen in defence of the German theology ; and on that ground, most probably, the Ediiibursh Rmew defended Pcise}', most warmly, versus Rose. An entire change, however, must subsequently have taki'n place in the sentiments of this gentleman, who, together with his coadjutor, Mr. Newman, t and all (he leading traciators of Oxford, came to consider Mr. Rose a sort of patriarch in their cause. " In the year 1830, the Rev. J. H. Newman, and the Rev. R. H. Froude, fellows of Oriel College, Oxford, disagreed with the p ovost of their college and soirie of the tuors. on the subject of their exercising another prerogative, besides the usual offices of tuition and literary superintendence ; and upon the provost's refusing to allow iheir claims, resigned the offices they held as college tutors. What Mr. Newman's opinions may have been, at that time, I know not ; but in the year 1828, Mr. Froude. the now all-but-canonized saint of the party, thus wrote of Mr. Newman, in a letter to a friend : ' Sept. 7, 1828 ; I heaid from N. the other day, with the testimonials He is a fellow that I like more and more, the more 1 think of him ; only I would give a few odd pence if he wprv: uol a heretic ; ' a heretic, in Mr. Froude's phraseology, means a proiestant, and N. is an abbreviation for Newman ; at that time, therefore, 'the Vicar of Saint Mary the Virgin ' was not indoctrinated in the theology of the Oxford Tracts ; indeed his opinions were bordering on low-church views. " About midsummer of 18.33, the party began publishing THE OXFORD TRACTS, having first organized themselves in a regular association, as is apparent * From hamust a hook. t Mr. X.*wman ti.os l.*lely pu1)lished a volume of Sermons, willi tlie followinsr dpilication : *' To the I^ev. HtiErti James Rose, Principal of Kinj's College, London, and domestic chaplain to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who, when hearts were tailing, bade U3 stir up Ihe gift th.at was in U8, and betake ourselves to our true mother, this volume is inscribed by his obliged and faithful friend, the author." XXX NOTES TO INTRODUCTION. by a sentence in Mr. Froude's ' Remains :' ' Sept. 16, 1833 has sent me j'our resolutions for our association, which I Ihinii excellent ;' and it is to the opera- lions of this association, that we must now for a few moments turn our attention. " The system of the party seems to be this; to take advantage of the obviously incomplete and unfinished state of the Church of England ; and knowing well that it is a mixed system, which, in the act of emerging from popery, was suddenly arrested by the death ol Edward VI., to collect carel'ully all that it has of its ancient popish form, and to reject, as far as may be, without absolute infraction of ecclesiastical law, every thing that savors of its protestant regeneration. The Church of England is indeed an image of iron and clay, a fal)ric of ill-assorted and incongruous materials ; but such as it is, Elizabeth, who came to the throne as a heroine of the protestant cause, after the Marian persecution, would not allow any change to take place in this her brother's unfinished plan ; and indeed it seems certain, that she wished rather to recede to some more papal form of religion, till she was stimulated by the unceasing intrigues and treasons of the papists, to appear, to the world at least, a protectress of the protestant religion. The discrepancies and contradictions of sentiment in the authorized standards of the Anglican faith, have been frequently exposed ; the prayer- book, the homilies, the articles and the canons, are a quarry from which a Laudean, a Puritan, a Calvinist, and an Arminian, may each hew out his own religion, and plausi- bly argue that his is the orthodox selection: but besides this, the very omissions of the established church, the many questions which it has left open and undecided, allow a Laudean to argue, that if the established church, which was onc:^ avowedly popish, has not, in emerging from popery, denounced or rejected such or such '' usages,' it is fair to suppose that she does not oppose their retention ; and. therefore, it is right and proper to revive any 'ancient usage' not ahsolu'ely prohibited. Amongst these omissions, for sake of example, I mention ' prayers for the dead,' which, it is now de- cided in the courts of law, the Church of England does not forbid ; and if she does not forbid, then the next step is to revive the custom ) and so of divers other ' usages.' " '' In the reign of Charles I., Archbishop Laud, with rapid strides, took the Church of England into Puseyism, or popery faintly concealed ; the executioner's axe stopped his project, which revived again, however, in the reign of Queen Anne, but was foiled with a great overthrow by the revolution of 1688. It was the evident policy of the Brunswick dynasty, to discourasfe the high-church parly, and to promote clergymen, with oppo-iile views, to the bench ; hence, the two first Georffes steadily repressed the old Lnudean school. Puseyism was consequently to be found chiefly, if not altogether, amongst the non-juring clergy, the Jacobites, and all the other pious maleconteiits of that sera. Bishop Ken,* and Hicks, and Collier, and others of that grade, kept up the consecrated flame of Puseyism and ' privy conspiracy,' till the flame seemed to die out altogether wiih the death of the non-jurors. During the reign of George III., and his successor, the clergy seemed perfectly contented with their secular emolu- ments, and were little disposed to trouble themselves wiih an}- questions of an exciting nature: Reiio^ious feelins;, for sixty years at least, was not 171 action; and therefore, they were neither Puritans nor Papists, neither evangelical nor Puseyistie, but simply consumers of tithes, or, if need be, persecutors of methodism, when methodism arose to disturb their golden slumbers. At last, however, the old Laudean fever has revived, and has spread its contagion through a'! ranks of the clergy; a swarm of unknown an'l inferior priests may now justify the adoption of Puseyistie opinions, by reference to the prelates of Oxford and Lincoln, and, it is believed, to the Archbishop of Can- terbury also. " But now to the Oxford Tracts. The managers of the association ' seem to have laid down three principles in the course ihny are pursuing. 1. To restore every thing practiseil or believed in the papal communion, not expressly forbidden and plainly priihibited by some decision o<' the established church : this they call, ' inquiring alter ancient usages of the holy catholic church,' ' cherishing a transmissive religion.' and ' listening to the venerable voice of the fathers, councils,' &c. 2. To enjoin silence on all the protestant tenets of the church, such as the atonement, justification by faith. 3. To make a liberal use of phrases expressive of their abhorrence of poperv ; which, however, has not succeeded in deceiving the Roman catholics, who perfectly under- stand this politic language of their best friends and most useful allies." The true character of the leader of this heresy may be learned from the following notice, which we copy from the London Record : " Some surprise has been expressed by the Times newspaper, that Dr. Pusey was • Ki>n, Kfttlewell, Hicks, Collier, arc now lavorite saints of the Oxford school. It iB rumored, that, by some soleraa process, ihcy have canoniwd Bishop Ken, more Romano, so that now he is Saint Ken. The extent to which the non-juring altachtnenLs of the Oxford party arc carri-^d, is strikingly displayed by Dr. Pusey's sermon on the 5th of November. The reverend ifenUeman aeema anxious to revive, if possihle, the Jacobioite agitation ; so great is his love for the Stewart.B and the non-juror£. NOTES TO INTRODUCTION. XXXI not present at the meeting held at the late IMr. Rose's house, in the summer of 1833, at wlii h, according- to Mr. Arthur Perceval, the Oxford Tract 'conspiracy' was hatched. We believe the explanation is to be found in the coolness which then subsisted between Mr. Rose and Dr. Pusey, arisinj^ out of their controversy about German Neology. Mr. Rose had exposed the awful state of the German universities and churciies. Dr. Pusey had defended them, and questioned Mr. Rose's facts and conclusions. Dr. Pusey, also, then avowed his low notions of the value of the Bible, by declaring, that it was too much to contend for the divine authority of the historical books. Thus it appears, that a denial of the inspiration of scripture was one of Dr. Pusey's first steps towards that heresy of which he has become a leader. Denying that ' all scripture is given by inspiration of God,' and consequently being led to under- value the authority of the whole of the book of God, he was naturally led to look for some other court of ultimate appeal in matters of religion. Having rejected the Bible, he resorted to antiquity and tradition. It was but very lalcl}', as we are informed, that Mr. Dodsworlh preached, that to give the Bible to a poor man without having Jirst given him the Prayer-Book, was little better than an insult." Note. — As proof that this doctrine excludes others from salvation, the Author would add the following, which he has just met with. Bishop Jebb teaches, that " the Sacred Scriptures, taken by themselves, are not THE WHOLE OF REVEALED RELIGION," and that " AN HIERARCHICAL CHURCH, DAYS OF COMMEMORATIVE OBSERVANCE. &c. are all ESSENTIAL COMPO- NENTS of the great body of the christian revelation." See Life, vol. ii. p. 340, Eng. ed. He also deprecates on behalf of a large portion of his church the universal dissemination of the Scriptures, and is sustained in doing so by Mr. 31iller — (see Miller's Bampton Lectures, Third ed. 1838, p. 10, 14, &c.) — who speaks of the " quicksands ! of dissent." p. 21. The Author would, in conclusion, commend to his readers the perusal of two small and very interesting volumes, recently issued by the Board of Publication of the Presbyterian church, ' The History of the Covenanters,' where the3' will find a prac- tical commentary taken from the facts of history, upon the spirit and bearing of this prelatic theory. LECTURE I. THE NECESSITY FOR AN EXAMINATION INTO THE PEELATICAL DOC- TRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION. When the prophet Jeremiah was commissioned, by Jehovah, to stand in the gate of the Lord's house, and there call upon all who entered in to worship the Lord, to amend their ways and their doings, he was especially enjoined, to admonish them not to trust in lying words.' And what were those " lying words," in which they were not to trust ? The people had been led, by their false teachers, to believe, that because the temple, W'ith all its services, its ritual, its forms and ceremonies, and its gorgeous rites, were theirs ; and because these had been originally ordained by the express appointment of God ; they were, therefore, so unalterably the favorites of heaven, as to be assured of God's presence and favor, however perverse and dis- obedient they might be. Thus were they deluded with the cry, "The temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, are these;" not remembering that He, who ordain- ed the temple, was a holy God — that the temple itself was a holy place — that the end, for which it, and all its services, were instituted, was to promote the holiness of its worshippers ; and that, therefore, the further removed they were from holiness of heart and life, the greater was that condemnation in which they were involved by these distinguishing privileges. And yet, as the same principles of human nature still remain, these ancient Israelites have found imitators in every age and country. So that there are, and ever have been, those who cling the more tenaciously to the form of godliness, by how 1) Jer. vii. 1 — 4. 1 2 TENDENCY TO TRUST IN FORMS. [lECT. I. much the more they are strangers to its power; and who are there- fore " haughty, because of the holy mountains,'" just because they have no other holiness in which to trust. Forms and cere- monies man loveth, and can, by his natural powers, appreciate and enjoy. These, too, nourish and sustain the righteousness of the self-approving heart; while "the righteousness of God, which is by faith in Christ Jesus," as it excludes all boasting, has ever been a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence. Hence do we find multitudes, even now, not only within the pale of the Romish church, but also within the limits of the prelacy 5*^ and even elsewhere, who look round upon their fellow christians, as aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise — as lying beyond the precincts of the holy city, in the open field of uncovenanted mercy, in all the shame of their natural pollution, unwashed and unsanctified — and as thus debarred from all rightful partici- pation in the blessings of God's sanctuary. Confident in their own claim to the peculiar favor and promises of heaven, they are found boasting, that they can call Abraham their father, and that theirs are the oracles of God, with the urim and thummim of sacred ordinances. On these do they build their assured reliance, and while they say to us, who by their decision are " afar off," — stand by, for we are holier than ye, — in all the sancti- moniousness of these ancient pharisees, do they exclaim, with endless repetition, "the temple of the Lord — the temple of the Lord — the temple of the Lord are we." ^ Do we allege these things without foundation, or on insuffi- cient grounds ? " We trow not." There is a time to speak, and a time to be silent. There is a tin)e, when to be silent is treachery ; and to speak, fidelity. Such a time to speak is come, when charity is violated, and the law of brotherly kindness set at naught ; when character is blackened and rightful claims are denied ; when truth itself is en- slaved to the exclusive interests of a party ; and when not only we, but all who may look to us for guidance and direction, are blotted from the book of life, expunged from the roll of christian churches, and positively declared to be " as the heathen." The doctrine now inculcated, and to which we object, is sum- marily this : That there is an order of ministers in the christian church distinct from, and superior to presbyters ; and who are exclusively entitled to be called bishops. That these, are 1) Zeph. iii. 11. of this tendency to trust in names and 2) See Note A. privileges in Archbishop Whatelej's 3) See a very valuable illustration Origin of Romish Errors, ch. 6. § 3. LECT. I.] THE BIGOTRY OF PRELATISTS. 3 by divine right, and not merely by human appointment; — that they possess prerogatives, by pre-eminence, their own — that they, alone, are empowered to ordain, — that their ordination is essential to the validity of a true gospel ministry — that they pos- sess, and can alone bestow, the gifts of the Holy Spirit — and that, without them, all preaching, and all or dinances, administer- ed by such as were ordained in other denominations, are " vain," and " without the promise of Christ," and of course delusive, not only as it regards us who minister, but those also to whom we minister in holy things. Presbyterian ministers are therefore branded as " pretended ministers"' — as guilty of " presumption and daring imposture, ^'"^ as no "ministry," and their churches "no churches"^ but "withered branches"* — as "unauthorized sects. "^ We are " protestant sectaries "^ — " sectarians "^ — " the meetingers"^ — "schismatics"^ — "guilty of a most griev- ous sin" and of" wicked errors" — "self-appointed teachers"" " dissenting mountebanks " — and " those beings who pretend — to be ministers of the gospel and really are ministers of hell."' " It is utterly unlawful to attend our ministry," and to hear us " is rebellion against God."^^ " Our Baptism is a mockery, which may sprinkle with water on earth, but cannot admit souls to the kingdom of heaven.""* We are declared to be as totally different from the true church and the true ministry, " as a mouse is from a bat,"'^ or as " one kind of flesh is from another"'^ — " they are in the church, we are out of it."'^ We are therefore (and if all this is true, we are justly) " ex- communicated," as being guilty of " a sin against our brethren, against ourselves, against God — a sin which, if not repented of, is eternally destructive to the soul,"'^ since "all our acts of se- parate worship " are to be ranked among the works of dark- ness." Our church " sessions are meddling, inquisitorial courts."'^ 1) High-churchism, No. 3, § 31, 11) High-churchism, No. 3, § 52. as published by the Author. See 12) The Rev. T. S. Escott in plea Note A. for Presbytery, Glasg. 1840. p. v. 2) Ibid. § 52. 13) British Critic,Oct. 1839, p. 337. 3) Ibid. § 41. 14) Ibid. p. 338. 4) Ibid. § 4G. 15) Ibid. p. 341. 5) Ibid. § 48. 16) Palmer on the Church, vol.1. 6) Ibid. § 52. p. 54 and 59 and 70, and vol. 2, p. 7) Ibid. § 54. 323. English Ed. 8) Ibid. § 4.5. 17) Ibid. p. 70, 71. 9) Ibid. § 31. 18) Soames' Elorabethian Relig. 10) Ibid. § 47. Hist. p. 587, 592, et passim. PREVALENCE OF HIGH-CHURCHISM. [lect. I. " Our whole system involves errors in fundamental doctrines,"' while presbytery and episcopacy are declared to be two oppo- sites.'^ " Whereas," says Bishop Beveridge, " in the private meetings, where their teachers have no apostolical or episcopal imposition of hands, they have no ground to succeed the apostles, nor by consequence any right to the spirit which our Lord hath ; with- out which, although they preach their hearts out, I do not see what spiritual advantage can accrue to their hearers by it.'" This is no more than a fractional illustration of that language and sentiment which are now prevalent in reference to Presby- terianism. It may be thought, however, that this is the language of only some few, illiberal, bigoted and extravagant writers. But this is not the case. This system is not only found in the writings of many old and standard divines of the Church of England,* of whom forty-three are quoted in No. 74 of the Oxford Tracts ; it is not only re- ceiving extensive currency, by the able and zealous advocacy of certain eminent divines of Oxford ; it has not only been avowed by some of the English prelates, and by two thousand of the English clergy ; but it is now extending itself widely through the 1) Oxford Tr., vol. ], Am. Ed. 2) Dr. Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, p. 100. Am. Ed. 3) Sermon on Christ's presence with his ministers ; in Works, vol. 2. 4) See the list of them in the Ox- ford Tracts, vol. 3, Tract 74. 5) Very erroneous conceptions prevail of the extent to which these high-church principles, as developed by their recent advocates, have been diffused. These doctrines, says an English episcopal press, " are every where creeping into houses and into churches too." '• Fuseyism," which is scarcely a modification of popery, is increasing most fearfully ; its votaries boast that TWO THOUSAND clergymen of the es- tablished church have publicly or pri- vately announced themselves converts to its erroneous doctrines." Plea for Presb. p. 522. A Roman catholic priest, in Great Britain, in a public meeting recently stated, that out of fifteen thousand clergymen of the Episcopal church, eleven thousand have embraced these sentiments. The proportion is by no means so large in this country, and the statements respecting the church of England may be exaggerated. As to the extent of the influence of these views, see also Professor Pow- ell, of Oxford, in his recent work, *' Tradition Unveiled, or An Exposure of the Pretensions andTendency of Au- thoritative Teaching in the Church." Lond. 1839, p. 1,2. " It is clear," he says (p. 4) of these opinions of church authority, and others dependent on it, that they " have been extensively adopted and are strenuously upheld, and are daily gaining ground among a considerable and influential portion of the members as well as ministers of the established church." Dr. Pusey boasts of " the almost electric rapidity with which these principles are confessedly passing from one breast to another, from one end of England to another." Letter, page 230, 231, Edn 2.— and also of "the sympathy which they found in the sister and daughter churches of Scot- land and America." The testimony of R. M. Beverly Esq., who was him- self educated at one of the universi- ties, is of weight. In his " Heresy of Human Priesthood," he says, "At last, however, the old Landean fever has revived, and has spread its contagion through all ranks of the clergy ; a swarm of unknown and inferior priests LECT. I.] THE DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATION. 5 protestant episcopal churches in this country ; has been avowed by some American prelates; by some leading journals — by some of their periodicals — and by some of their ministers, in this very city.' Acting on these principles, the episcopal church, by her Canons, prohibits her ministers from allowing a minister of any other denomination to preach in any of her pulpits — while they, who fully adopt these principles of high-churchisra, most carefully avoid any possible occasion — as for instance co-operat- ing in the advancement of any work of common charity or bene- volence— by which they might "even seem " to acknowledge our claim to the character of christian ministers. The most zealous efforts are also made to put into the widest possible cir- culation, those works, pamphlets and tracts in which these views are most boldly and pertinaciously advanced. By these, and other means, the minds of many in our communion have been already excited to inquiry on these great questions — while the minds of all must, sooner or later, be turned anxiously to the settlement of the fundamental principles which they involve. From these causes, in different parts of this country, as well as in England and Ireland, ministers of our own, and other protes- tant denominations, have felt called upon to appear in vindica- tion of their claim to membership in the holy, catholic, and apostolic church of Christ. Urged by a strong conviction of duty, we have also deter- mined to examine those assumptions, whereby we are to be despoiled of all right and title to the character of a church of Christ — the possession of christian ordinances — and a christian ministry. The reasons — or some of them — why this course appears plainly and imperatively demanded of us, we will at this time present. This open discussion of these high and exclusive claims, we owe to their authors and abettors. However desirable and proper it is for christians to live in may now justify the adoption ofFu- gress of those sentiments to the sup- seyistic opinions, by reference to the port of which those tracts were main- prelates of Oxford and Lincoln, and ly devoted. it is believed, to the Archbishop of 1) For proof of this see the Charles- Canterbury also." Ed. 2d. pub. in ton Gospel Messenger for July, 1840, 1839, pp. li. 74. See also p. 81. pp. 103, 118, et passim, and also the See further the Review of Tracts for quotations which shall be subsequently the Times, Number Ninety, in Edinb. introduced. See also British Critic, Rev., April 1841, p. 14G. Oct. 1837, 343, pp. 285, 305, 308, The recent restriction put upon the 309, and 324, 326, 327. publication of what are termed " The See also Presb. Defd. p. 27, and p. Oxford Tracts," will in no degree 130. retard, but rather advance the pro- 6 INVESTIGATION DEMANDED BY OPPONENTS. [lECT. I. peace and brotherhood — yet, when that peace is broken by the incessant shouts of war, and this brotherhood is scornfully rejected as "impious opposition to the divine will'" — it is time to proclaim — " amicus Socrates, amicus Plato, sed magis an)ica Veritas."* And however we might feel justified in bearing patiently personal contumely or wrong — yet, when it is the character and claims of the church that are in question, we are surely required, by an imperious call of duty, " to vindicate the perverted truth and abused ordinances of our blessed Master.'" In accepting, therefore, the call to this discussion, we make no assault upon the christian character and standing of those churches denominated episcopal. The question is not, " is episcopacy right, or is it wrong — of scriptural or of human origin ? " That episcopacy does not destroy the being of a true church of Christ is cheerfully granted ; for we ourselves claim the possession of primitive and apostolical episcopacy. Our ministers are styled tpiscopoi (E7rzo"/C7ro<) or bishops, — and our polity is the scriptural episcopacy. 1) Palmer, on the Church, vol. ii. page 323. 2) "Plato is my friend, so is Soc- rates ; but truth is a friend I prize above both." 3) This challenge is given by Mr. Kebie, in his work on primitive tra- dition, in the very fulness of confident victory. He complains bitterly of that " light, extemporal way in which many reject it," and calls upon its rejectors in the language applied of old to an impatient controversialist, " strike, but hear me." " Do your best in argument, if you can any how re- fute the claim of the succession ; but do not dismiss it unexamined, in any kind of hasty feeling. Do not set it aside," &c. Edition, 4th, p. 95, 96. These doctrines are most fully avowed by the Rev. Mr. Odenheimer, of Philadelphia, in his Origin and Compilation of the Prayer Book. Phil. Id4 1, see passim. He even ven- tures so far as to denominate all non- episcopalians as dissenters, (e. g. pp. 33, 46 ) and the Episcopalian as the only legitimate branch of the church catholic in America. See p 106, 113. The notorious sermon of Dr. Hook, " Hear the Church," has been also republished by the Bishop of New Jersey, "whose untiring efforts for the dissemination of Catholic trutli and practice, claim the gratitude and love of American churchmen !" See do. do. p. 53 ; Note. So also in the Preface to No. 74, of the Oxford Tracts. " Persnns who object to our preaching distinctly and unhesitatingly the doctrine of the apostolic succession, must be asked to explain, why we may not do what our fathers in the church have done before us, or whether they too, as well as we, are mistaken, or injudi- cious theorists, or papists, in so doing? This question is here plainly put to them ; and at the same time the at- tention of inquirers wlio have not made up their minds on the subject, is invited to the answer, if any is Ibrth- coming, from the parties addressed." Oxf Tr. No 74, vol 3, p. 129. This doctrine will be found contain- ed in the most elementary catechisms of our opponents. See, for instance, the catechism prepared by Bishop England (Roman catholic) " for young children, servants, &c." p. 27, 28, and his larger catechism, p. 23. See also the church primer of the protestant episcopal church, passim and p 12 — and Hobarts Catechism, (number three) at p. 46, &c. and the short catechism at the end of Bay- ard's Anniversary Sermon to the Prot. Ep. Sund. Sch. Un., from Cat. No. iii. LECT, I.] THIS DISCUSSION NOT ABOTTT EPISCOPACY. 7 That this discussion does not turn upon the mere question of episcopacy, and that therefore, in pursuing it, we are not to be regarded as either opposing or denouncing episcopacy, as such — this, I say, is granted even by our opponents. " We are," say they, " of THE CHURCH, not of the episcopal church — our bishops are not merely an order in her organization, but THE PRINCIPLE OF HER CONTINUANCE ; and to Call ourselvcs Episcopalians, is to imply, that we differ from the mass of dis- senters mainly in church government and form ; whereas the difference is, that we are here, and they are there : we in the CHURCH, AND THEY OUT OF IT."' " It may sccm harsh," they add " to speak thus of episcopacy and episcopalian, yet we hope it will not shock any one, if we say, that we wish the words — as denoting an opinion and its maintainers — never had been invented. They have done great mischief to our own cause. "^ " Apostolic order," and not " the episcopate, or the liturgy " form the corona, or crown, which adorns their kingly head. " Our all," say they, " as we cannot but know, depends upon that holy succession."^ The argument, there- fore, now entered upon, is not about episcopacy, which is thus repudiated as containing (as indeed it does) nothing pecu- liar to themselves,* nor is it about liturgical services,^ which do not constitute their distinctive characteristic — but it is about the all-important and essential question — which is, confessedly, fundamental to all well-grounded hopes of eternal life — where is, and where is not, the church of Christ, and the way of sal- vation ? This church, and this way of salvation, are limited by these prelatists, or high-churchmen, to those only, who either are members of, or who fraternize with, the anglican church. All others are guilty, they say, of "renouncing the church of Christ — a renouncing of her ministers, and through them of Christ himself." They " cannot, therefore," it is said, " expect to be considered as christians, but, according to the command of Christ, as heathens and publicans."® 1) " The American Church." See 5) " He," Archbishop Usher, as is in British Critic, Oct. 1839, p 341 . declared by Dr. Bernard, " was for 2) See ditto, p. 341 . See, also, the minister's improving of their gifts p 340, and p. 337, 338. and abilities in prayer before sermon 3) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 376. Am. and after, according to his own prac- Edit. and p. 5o5. tice." The Judgment of the late 4) But we may give up " ^own5, Archbishop of Armagh, &c. Lond. robes, surplicfis, christmns festivals, 1657, p. 149, 150. and even a liturgy and still be as dis- G) See Letters to a Dissenting tinctly as we are now an episcopal Minister, by L. S. E. recommended by church. These are not essentials to an the Bishop of London in " Schism," Episcopal organization." Dr. Clark's p. 351. Letters on the Ch. Phil. 1839, p. 29. 8 SYSTEM DENOMINATED HIGH-CHURCHISM. [lect. I. To characterize this system, we use the terms prelacy, or high-churchisin — terms which they themselves adopt, which are currently applied in a good sense, and which cannot there- fore be offensive.' In rejecting their claim to supremacy, and to a fallible infal- libility, we are accused of abetting heresy and socinianism,^ and thus branded with names of the greatest possible opprobrium. Seeing, therefore, that prelatists are thus bold and uncom- promising in hurling their dread anathemas against us — while "to seek controversy is hateful," "to shrink from it" in such circumstances, " were indeed pusillanimous." The exam- ination of this subject is a debt we owe to them, that wherein they are wrong, as we believe them to be far wrong, we may correct their errors, as God shall give us opportunity — and that whereas they are straining every nerve to diffuse their erro- neous principles, we may, if possible, counteract their injurious influence, and arrest their desolating progress. 1) The currency of this distinction between high and low church as early even as the I7th century, will strikingly appear from a treatise en- titled " The Distinction of High- churchand Low-church distinctly con- sidered and fairly stated," published in London in the year 1705, and "hum- bly offered to the consideration of the ensuing parliament and convocation." p. 56. The work was written by a high churchman who endeavors, by defin- ing his terms so as to suit his own purposes, to prove that low churchmen were notciiurchmen at all. On page 7 he says, " I know no odious or spe- cious characters that have made more noise, nor passed through the world with so much license and authority as the distinction of high-church and low-church with the fair spoken plea of moderation." On page 24 he speaks of the term High Church " as generally used and applied ;" — on p. 25, of" the odious character of a high churchman;" — on page 35 he speaks of the " qui uninodicuni as an intem- perate and undue affection, as some- thing in the extreme, as the terra high slily indicates." He shews on p. 34, that " it is not open and professed enemies that do us the mischief, but they that walk in the house of God as friends, and are doing the work of the dissenters in the shop of the church. " Hunc tu Romane caveto," thus showing how tenderly these parties at that day regarded one anoth- er in the bonds of their professed union and fraternity. On the use of the term high-church, See Charleston Gospel Messenger, Feb. 1840, p. 368; Dr. Hook in Lond. Christ. Observer, 1839, p. 657, and defined in do. p. 658 ; Dr Hook's call to Union, (Am. Ed.) p. 84, 86, 88, 90, 131 , 44, 45, 57, 59, 65 ; Palmer on the Church, vol. l,p. 259; Soames' Rel. Hist, of the Elizab'n Age, p. 150, 366, 462, 583 ; Burnet's Hist, of the Ref- ormation, vol. 1, p. xvi, xvii. and xviii ; see also a full account of the difference between the high and low churchmen in Burnet's Pastoral Care, preface. For further remarks see Note B, also Archbishop Seeker in his letter to Mr. VValpole in Crit. Comment, on p. 26 ; Bishop Fleetwood in Lond. Chr. Obs. 1841, p. 12; see also the tract of the Protestant's Episcopal Tract Society ; " The High chtirchman vindicated," N. Y. 1837. Warburton's Works, vol, 7, p. 83. " The Church of England and in America Com- pared." N. Y. 1841, p. 6. 2) See Oxf Tr. vol. ), p. 383; also, p. 320 : also, N. York Review, Jan. 1840 p. 320, 321. LECT. I.] THIS EXAMINATION DUE TO OURSELVES. 9 Our apology, therefore, were any due, for attempting such an arduous undertaking, must rest upon the infinite importance of the subject, our extreme soUcitude to impress what appears to us right sentiments respecting it, together with the considera- tion that the confidence which ill becomes the innovators " up- on christian truth and charity, however able and learned, may be pardoned in the defenders, however weak, of a system, which" rests upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.' But in the second place, we would remark, that we are under obligations to institute this investigation, by a due regard to our own character and our just claims. The church of the living God, we believe to be the pillar and ground of the truth — the repository of " the oracles of God" — the source of heavenly wisdom — the fountain of life — the centre of divine influences — the birthplace of souls — the celestial ladder — the kingdom of our Lord Jesus Christ — the house and family of God, out of which there is no or- dinary possibility of salvation.^ We also further believe, that unto this cathoUc, visible church, Christ hath given the ministry, oracles, and ordinances of God, 1 .) In order to appreciate the call made upon us to defend our assailed bulwarks, let us imagine ourselves to be Episcopalians, and that declarations similar to those now fulminated against Presbyterians, were addressed to Epis copaiians by Presbyterians. Let the Rev. John A. Clark, Rector of St Andrew's church, Philadelphia, and who is himself a most wortiiy and es- teemed minister in the episcopal church, let him desciibe what would, in such circumstances, be our neces- sary conclusions. " How would it strike us," askslliis writer," ifaiiotiier denommation were to assert, to jjreach from the ])ulpit, and publisli through religious papers, that the episcopal church was no church at all — a mere unauthorized human institution — that it had no valid or authorized ministry — that its preachers were nothing more than laymen — that it had no sacraments — that baptism and the holy supper, being administered by unauthorized hands, were of no efficacy, and that if any belonging to this body were saved, it would not be because they had been brought within the covenant promises, but because God in his sovereignty " will have mercy on whom he will have mercy." Were a large and influential denomi- nation of christians to assume this stand, and proclaim these views, would not our prejudices be aroused ? Would you not then say with some reason, " Shall we sit still, and see ourselves swept off the face of Chris- tendom by the restless spirits of the age .' " Letters on the Church, Phila. Ib39, p. 23. The same writer gives the follow- ing illustration of the zeal with which episcopacy is advanced. " I have heard a minister occupy his au- dience with this topic exclusively up- on a communion Sunday, without a word about the spiritual qualifica- tions we ought to possess in coming to the Lord's supper, with no reference to Christ, or the emblems that repre- sented his dying love, save the re- mark, that this ordinance would be valid only when administered by prop- erly authorized hands. I have even heard this made the topic of discourse at a funeral." Do. do. p. 24. 2. See Conf of Faith, chap. XIV. 10 THE SUBJECT OF VITAL IMPORTANCE. [lECT. I. for the gathering and perfecting of the saints in this hfe, to the end of the world, and doth by his own presence and spirit, ac- cording to his promise, make them effectual thereto.' And still further, we believe, that as " all saints are united to sus Christ, their Head, by his spirit and faith," and they have " ALL fellowship with him ;" so are " all saints bound to maintain an holy fellowship and communion in the worship of God, to their mutual edification,'" by a public profession of their com- mon faith, and their consequentunion with the church of Christ. He who wilfully fails thus to confess Christ before men, and to show forth his death, in the appointed ordinance of the Lord's supper, — him will Christ deny before his Father and his angels. Hence, it is manifest, that the question, whether we are or are not, as a presbyterian church, a living branch of the good olive tree, a truly scriptural and apostolic church of Jesus Christ — is not a question of small or trifling import, but of the most grave and serious moment. Are our claims to such a character invalid ? Are our marks, wherein we show the im- press of a divine commission, a forgery? Are our ministers intruders, deceivers, hypocrites, unsent, uncalled, and unauthori- zed? Are our ordinances mere human ceremonies, unaccom- panied by any virtue or grace from on high ? Then surely it is all important that we should make a timely discovery of the rottenness of that foundation on which we have builded our house, before the floods rise and the winds beat upon it, and we are overwhelmed in the dreadful ruin. Are prelatists in exclusive possession of the keys of the kingdom of heaven ? so that whomsoever they admit on earth, shall be welcomed in heaven ; and whomsoever they exclude on earth, shall be refused admission there ? Then, who will deny that the voluntary neglect of principles which would, in this case, become divine, and separation from a church so constitut- ed, or union with any other — is schism, and a sin of no ordinary magnitude? We owe it, then, to ourselves, in view of our best interests — even our everlasting welfare — to examine well into the grounds of our confidence ; that, if deceived by others, or if deceiving our own selves, wc may, while there is opportunity, fly from the impending danger. We owe it to our children, and to all over whom our example may have any influence, to ascertain 1. See Conf. of Faith, Chap. XXV. §3. 2. See Conf. of Faith, Chap. XXV. LECT. I.] THE DISCUSSION IN SELF-DEFENCE. 11 the perfect soundness of that vessel wherein they are to venture the perilous vo}'age of eternity. On the other hand, are we right in our views, and are prela- tists mistaken, when they represent our denominational character as " resistance to the love, power and wisdom of God, and the punishment — the wrath of God ? '' ' — then are we as truly called upon to justify our character and claims, in order that the " schismatical distance and alienation between religious denomina- tions,'' originated by these exclusive pretensions to divine right, may attach in all its certain criminality to its true authors. Since it is publicly taught, that "but for the episcopal church in this country, there would be nothing but the extremes of infi- delity or fanaticism"^ — since in every way, in every place, and by every means — 'prelatists are endeavoring to undermine, by misrepresentation, the doctrines and order of presbyterianism — since the cry is now raised against our church in particular, *' raze it — raze it to the foundation'" — shall we not stand on the defensive; and, as far as the "panoply of God," " the ar- mor of righteousness," and the weapons which are " spiritual and not carnal," shall enable us, repel the fiery assault, and pre- serve the endangered walls of our Zion — that " city set on a hill, whose builder and maker is God ? " This we do in self-defence — in the spirit of repellency, and not of attack — of bold and uncompromising adherence to what we confidently believe to be the truth and order of God. We have no wish to depreciate the character of episcopacy, as the form of a sister denomination of christians, and a branch of the true vine — the church. We question not their rights, as church- men. We impugn not their claims as christians. We reject not their evidences of heaven-taught piety, though they repudiate the truth and genuineness of ours. We scruple not to enter their temples, or to unite in their worship ; though they think it scorn to participate with us in our worship of God. In short, for ourselves, we deprecate exclusiveness ; to them we deny nothing but monopoly ; and for both we supplicate peace, purity, and charity from God, who is " the Author of peace," and from Christ, who is " the Prince of peace." " To the law and to the testimony" is our appeal against the unjust judgment of those, who "say that, since prelacy (epis- copacy, in original) is an ordinance of God, to abandon it is sin,"* — who thus presume to declare essential, what God has not 1) See quoted in Schism, p. 352. to the Bp. of Oxford, p. 143, Note, 2) See Powell on Ap. Sue. p. 170. and 104, Note. Oxf Tr., vol. i, 3) Seethe Report of Edinb. Celc- Tract 4. bration, p. 63, 64. Dr. Pusey'a Letter 4) Dr Pusey's Letter, p. 101, 104 12 WE APPEAL TO THE [lECT. I. made necessary — who thus command with absolute authority what inspired apostles never ventured to require — who thus rush in where angels would fear to tread ; and assuming the pre- rogatives of Him, who alone is Judge, consign to '' uncovenanted mercies" or to "eternal wrath," those who boldly "stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ has made them free." Receiving our commission from those heavenly oracles — resting our credentials on their divine requirements — submitting our souls to every ordinance of heaven — obeying all divine prescriptions — and rejoicing in the manifestations of God's favor- able mercy towards us — we glory in the hope, that, however men may reject, " God hath received us." We are satisfied with a commission given in the courts above — a validity to our claims, sealed with the witnessing of the Spirit of the Most High God, even though it should not be countersigned by popes or prelates. We can thus fearlessly ask, " Who shall curse whom God has not cursed ? " — drying up the fountain of our baptism ; tainting the manna of our eucharlst ; making our ministers speechless ; and breaking the sceptre of divine authority held by those who are over us in the Lord ? Who shall excommu- nicate those, who have held to that creed, to that succession, to those ordinances, to those orders, and only those, which Christ bequeathed to them, in that last divine testament which reveals the whole will and council of God ?^ Who shall interpose between our souls and salvation — close upon us the gates of mercy — and cut off from all, beside themselves, those streams of salvation, which make glad the city of our God. You, my brethren, we would have well instructed in the whole counsel of God, so that ye may be able to give a reason of the hope that is in you to every man that asketh it. Why should you stand in jeopardy through doubt or ignorance ? Be ye not children in understanding, but be men ; so that ye may be blown about by no winds of doctrine, or sleight of men, whereby in cunning craftiness they would beguile your souls. Be ye therefore fully established in your own minds ; know- ing whereof ye affirm, and having the profession of your faith grounded in principles well established. And thus, in that hasten- ing time, when the endangered rights of christian men must be abandoned or maintained, ye may be " able to withstand in the evil day," as were the Presbyterians of Scotland in one of her seasons of peril and distress.^ 1) Adopted in part from Newman 2) See Burnet'g Hist, of hisOwn on Romanism, p. 414. Times, vol. i. p. 160. Similar, also, LECT. I.] TESTIMONY OF GOD. 13 We proceed to show, that such an examination into " the first principles " whereon this prelatical usurpation rests, is de- manded hy a regard to the cause of truth and hberty. The truth is a sacred deposit, which we are to " buy " at any- cost, and " to sell " at no price whatever. It is a treasure com- mitted to us, for which we are " to contend earnestly," and to which we are to " hold fast, without wavering." The truth is the centre — the source — the foundation — the citadel, of our liberties. It is " the truth, which makes us free indeed ;" delivering us from the bondage of " will worship," and " man worship," of formality and superstition, and every " cor- ruption," whereby " the word of God is made of none effect through the traditions of men." Now, in this liberty wherewith Christ has made us free, we are " to stand fast." All aggres- sions upon it we are to resist. " To those false brethren," and their doctrines, " unawares brought in, who come privily to spy out the liberty we have in Christ Jesus, that they may bring us into bondage — we are to give place by subjection," to their un- scriptural demands, " no," says the apostle, " not for an hour, that the truth of the Gospel may continue with us." (Gal. ii. 4, 5.) Well might it be declared of us, that we " are not worthy" of this heavenly birthright, could any thing " bewitch us to be again brought in bondage of the beggarly elements " of carnal policy and earthly wisdom. We might receive admonition, were any such spirit ours, from the ancient synod of Nice, in which it was decreed, that " ancient customs should be retained," and "the privileges of churches be preserved." Or from the ancient council of Ephesus, which decreed, that "every church should preserve the rights which it possessed from the beginning, lest the pride of worldly domination should come in under the guise of the sacred ministry : and lest we should imperceptibly lose the liberty which our Lord Jesus Christ purchased for us was the familiarity of our New-Eng- gospel direction." Boston, 1767, p. 53. land fatliers with the principles of So, also, could Dr. Livingston, in their ecclesiastical polity. his letter to the same prelate, declare Dr. Chauncy, in his letter to the " that the non-episcopalians in this Bishop of Landaff, could claim for the country had conscientiously abandon- clergy and people of that day, that ed a religion which taught submis- *' they KNOW the errand of their fore- sion to that prelatial oppression where- fathers into this country, and have by those venerable persons were ex- been well indoctrinated in the prin- pelled their native soil," and " super- ciPLES of CHRISTIAN LiBERTV. We stitious attachment to rites and cere- prefer our own mode of worship and monies of human invention," " and discipline to that of the English 'tis devoutly to be wished their pos- Church; and we do it upon princi- terity may be never so infatuated pie, as really believing that it comes as to resume it." New York, 1768, nearer to the purity and simplicity of p. 12. 14 ALL THE REFORMED CHURCHES INVOLVED. [lECT. I. with his own blood."' Or from Cyprian, who teaches us, " we must let no man corrupt the truth through faithless concessions." While, therefore, we take heed, that we build our doctrines and order on the alone foundation land in Zion, let us not be ashamed to own, avow, and proclaim them ; but rather let us "glory in them," and "magnify," and make them honorable. In opposing the exclusive claims of prelacy, and in asserting those of presbytery to an equal share in the inheritance of our common Head — we are pleading not our own cause merely, but the cause, also, of all other protestant denominations f for they are equally placed under the ban of this dread anathema,' and as far as the essential principles of ecclesiastical polity are concerned, must stand or fall with presbyterianism. We are thus encouraged to stand fast in this our liberty, whether we examine well our foundations, and look round upon our impreg- nable bulwarks ; or whether we consider the number and char- acter of our allied forces. " This is the doctrine and prac- tice," says Mr. Percival, speaking of presbyterianism, " on this point, to wit, ordination by presbyters, now received by the Lutherans in Denmark and Germany ; by the Calvinists in France, Switzerland, Germany and Holland ; by the Presbyte- rians in England, Scotland, Ireland and North America ; and by the Wesleyan Methodists.* These all claim," says he, " to have received their orders from some episcopally ordained pres- byter." The Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel, a minister of the English church, in a tract on Unity published by him, in which he speaks of an individual who had lately become a presbyterian, says : " His conclusions were supported by several of the re- formed churches. The Lutheran, Swiss, French, Dutch, and Scotch churches, the church of the Vandois, and a large and pious section of the American church, were all on his side. While in favor of episcopacy," he adds, "besides the church of Rome, ' the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, drunken Avith the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus ;' and the eastern churches, which are nearly as corrupt, he found only the Church of England, and THREE OR FOUR small scctions of the church of Christ else- where, who had retained diocesan episcopacy."^ 1) See in Palmer, vol. ii. p. 272, 5) Among the countries embrac- 273. '\ng presbyterianism, in one or other 2) See Oxf. Tr. vol i. p. 400. of its forms, the London Christian 3) See Palmer, vol. i. p. 230, Observer for February, 1841, p. 73,74, where all beside episcopalians are an- enumerates Scotland, Germany, Swit- athematized ; and Schism, p. 290. zerland, Prussia, Holland, the Luther- 4) On Ap. Succ. p. 9. an church in Germany, and France. LECT. I.] OUR SUBMISSION REQUIRED. 15 Such, therefore, being the facts of the case, when the church-standing cf ahiiost the entire protestant world, and the christian character of the purest churches under heaven, are assailed and utterly denied ; may we not say, in the language of one of these assailants, that the presbyterian church "has fairly been put on her defence, and been called upon to allege grounds on which she receives and maintains her doctrines. Under such circumstances, no man can be blamed who desires, after the apostle's instruction, to give an answer to them that ask a reason of the hope that is in him, with meekness and fear."* " And if there is, as I think, every reason from Scrip- ture and tradition, for believing that it" — i. e. this prelatic doc- trine of apostolic succession — " did " not " form part of that faith, (which was once delivered to the saints,) then who shall blame us for obeying the Spirit's injunction by the mouth of the apostle, that we should earnestly contend against it," " and for that faith ? "^ And this the more especially, as " there is a consequence springing from these premises," to continue the words of Mr. Percival, " if established ; in respect, namely, of the paramount and exclusive claim upon the obedience of all christians within the British (or prelatic) dioceses, which be- longs to the bishops of those dioceses ; and which well deserves the consideration of all who refuse that obedience, whether they are members of non-episcopal communities, or profess to have an episcopacy of their own."^ It is thus made further apparent, that we are challenged to the consideration of this subject, — as indeed we are distinctly, in the last words of this same writer's work, which is now issued by the Protestant Episcopal Tract Society of this coun- "That the presbyterian reformed Not to mention the once famous churches are more numerous and po- churches of Hungary, Bohemia, Po- tent than the episcopal reformed land, Transylvania, and France, who churches, will appear from this short now by popish cruelty are in a man- list of those countries that were re- ner reduced. formed from popery to presbyterian- The whole mass of the reformation ism. is at this day presbyterian, except I. The kingdoms of Denmark and England, Ireland, some of our planta- Noiway. tions, and the bishopric of Lubeck, II. The King of Prussia'a domin- in Germany." ions. See " Rebaptization Condemned, by III. There's the branching of Swe- the author of Plain Dealing, or Sep- den's extensive dominions. aration without Schism." Lond. 1716, IV. Several provinces of the em- p. 25. Pire. 1) Percival on Ap. Succ. p. 10. V. The United Provinces. 2) Percival on Ap. Succ. p. 142. VI. The Republic of Geneva. 3) Do. do. p. 142. VII. The Protestant Swiss Can- tons. 16 niGH-CHURCHISM AND POPERY SIMILAR. [lECT. 1. try — whicli is in extensive circulation — and a copy of which, willi some similar publications, was very recently sent to one of the families in my own congregation. We are therefore called upon, in all plainness and boldness, to show cause why we altogether repudiate the asserted authority of any prelatic church whatever. If the fact of the re-publication of these Oxford writings in this country, and their " beguiling many unwary and unstable souls,'" was deemed by Bishop Mcllvaine a sufficient reason for his defence of those doctrines controverted by them, much more is this — together with the repeated boast that numerous converts had been made from among our clergy — an amply suffi- cient warrant for our vindication of the liberty of Christ against the unjustifiable pretensions embodied in this widely-diffused doctrine of apostolical succession.^ The authority of the church, which prelatists make an arti- cle of fundamental importance,^ — in other words, the authority of prelates, — this we believe to be one of the main pillars of the gorgeous structure of popery ; the broad base, upon which has been erected that huge colossal fabric of superstition and spiritual despotism, around which such floods of human tears and blood have been made to flow. " Antichrist," say the Waldenses, in a treatise written A. D. 1200, " covers his ini- quity by the length or succession of time — by the spiritual authority of the apostles — by the writings of the ancients, and by councils." Nor does this system symbolize less with popery in " enforc- ing as necessary points of faith" what are not contained in the creed^ — nay, in resting these exorbitant claims not on the Bible, but upon " oral tradition,"^ and the perverted dogmas of the ancient church. On such grounds as these do prelatists pro- claim that the name of catholic is appropriated to their churches, to the utter exclusion of all the various denomina- tions of christians separated from them." On these grounds do they throw off all fellowship with protestants, and openly avow their friendship for Rome. " We are unwilling to speak harshly of the Romanists," say these divines. " Whatever be our private differences with the Roman Catholics, we may join with them in condemning Socinians, Baptists, Independents, and the 1) Lond. Chr. Obs. 5) Oxf. Tr., vol. iv. p. 1, Eng. cd., 2) See Note C. and Tr. No. 80, p. 62, &c., and Anc't 3) See Brit. Critic, Oct., 1839, p. Christianity, vol. i, p. 405. 337, 338. G) Palmer on the Church, vol. i, 4) See Newman on Romanism, p. 237, 238. p. 288. )34 LECT. I.] AEKOGANCE OF PRELACY. 17 like. But God forbid that we should ally ourselves with the offspring of heresy and schism, in our contest with any of the branches of the holy church which maintain the foundation, whatever may be their incidental corruptions.'" Again we hear them say, " If no western church now-a-days is quite what its mother, the church of Rome, used to be, the catholic church in England, Scotland, and America, (that is, says the Tract, the protestant episcopal churches of those countries,) surely comes nearest to her, nay, so near, that they who have well scanned the mother's lineaments, can be at no loss to trace her features in her child," &;c.^ Thus do they cast out the reformed churches as repro bate, as having committed " grievous sin'" — as " inexcusable — and as having forsaken Christ.^ Thus do they boldly ad- vance sentiments which, on their own principles, must be pro- nounced illiberal — uncatholic — and dyed in the gall of party spirit.^ And, while they are torn with intestine divisions, and pitted against each other, in the most resolute and determined antagonism ; and split up into countless and sectarian clans ; — they assail the rights of all other churches, and proclaim war against all Christendom beside.'' For to use the language of their great Coryphaeus, " in the English church may be found differences as great as those which separate it from Greece or Rome — Calvinism and arminianism, latitudinarianism and orthodoxy, all these, sometimes simply such, and sometimes compounded together into numberless varieties of school, * * * each denouncing all the rest as perilous, if not fatal errors."* Now this arrogant claim to the prerogatives, and this assump- tion of the exclusive character, of the true church, Mr. Palmer (in his great work on the church) charges on the papists as " impudent pertinacity." But is this assumption less " impu- dent pertinacity," when made by prelatists, as it is by this writer himself, on their behalf, against us? Is it less " a mon- strous fabrication," " founded on false premises," and " sustained by ignorance and bigotry," when uttered by the voice of prelacy, than when it comes forth in some Romish bull ? Most assur- edly not. These church principles must terminate in the same results 1) Oxf. Tr., No. 25. p. 6, 8, 9. 5) See Newman on Rom., p. 2) Tract No. 153 of the Am. Prot. 418. Also the Bp. of Norwich in Episcopal Tract See, on The Ancient Schism, p. 508. Things of the Catholic Church, p. 6. 6) See Oxf. Tr., vol. i. p. 427, 3) Palmer on the Church, vol. ii. 428 and 429. p. 368. 7) Newman as above. 4) Do. vol. ii. p. 366. 8) See vol. i. p. 238. 3 18 CHARITy AND PEACE OVERTHROWN. [lECT. I. in England and America, which have ever followed them in Italy and Spain, in Asia and in Africa. And if we will not sacrifice every thing that is pure in the truth — precious in the promises — spiritual in the ordinances — ennobling in the pre- cepts— and free, elevating, and refining in the spirit — of the gospel ; we must stand fast in the liberty of apostolic Chris- tianity against all the innovations and the self-originated policy of ancient and modern church principles.' Their views, these writers inform us, and those understood by the term evangelical, are as wide apart as socinianism and popery .'^ Further, we remark, that we are summoned to this enterprise by the claims of charity and peace. ^ To oppose prelacy is not, we again repeat, to oppose episco- pacy ; neither is it to impugn the character, standing, or piety of evangelical episcopal churches. In entering our protest against the anathematizing, excommunicating spirit of high- church principles, we consider prelatists as they present them- selves, in their self-chosen garb, " stripped of those better parts of their system" — those common principles of Christianity, "which are our inheritance as well as theirs;" and so contem- plating them, in that aspect by which they are distinguished, as prelatists, it is surely for the interests of peace and charity, that their unscriptural and unchristian dogmas should be exposed. A defensive war, when made necessary by the aggression of others, can never be wrong in principle, however it may be tarnished by the spirit in which it is conducted. On the contrary, it is only by such a war, vigorously and successfully prosecuted, that peace can ever be restored, and prosperity enjoyed. There is, in such circumstances, no alternative between war and liberty; or submission and enslavement. The question before us is, con- formity to prelacy, or the justification of our claims to that in- heritance in which we glory. To this image we must bow down and worship ; or boldly avouch the Lord to be our God, and Jesus Christ, our Redeemer. While prelacy goes forth in her present crusade against the immunities and privileges of all other denominations, there is, and there can be, neither peace nor charity. By demanding uniformity, prelacy destroys and prevents unity. By branding as aliens from the christian com- monwealth, all who worship God in a manner different from her — prelacy opposes what she miscalls schism, by what the Bible pronounces to be truly schism ; for illiberality, bigotry, intole- 1) See Anc't Christ'y, passim. 3) See note D. 2) Hook's Call to Union, p. 41. LECT. T.] PRELACY SCHISMATICAL. 19 ranee ; what are these but the very essence of schism ? The rebuke given by Campbell to the fanaticism of Dadwell, who makes the very existence of Christianity to depend on prelacy, is surely not too strong. " Arrogant and vain man ! what are you, who so boldly and avowedly presume to foist into God's covenant, articles of your own devising, neither expressed nor implied in his words ? Do YOU venture, a worm of the earth ? Can you think yourself warranted to stint what God hath not stinted, and, following the dictates of your own contracted spirit, enviously to limit the bounty of the Universal Parent, that you may confine to a party what Christ hath freely published for the benefit of all ? Is your eye evil because he is good ? Shall I then believe that God, like deceitful man, speaketh equivocally, and with mental re- servations ? Shall I take his declaration in the extent wherein he hath expressly given it ; or as you, for your own purpose, have new vamped, and corrected it? 'Let God be true, and every man a liar.' You would pervert the plainest declarations of the oracles of truth, and, instead of representing Christ as the au- thor of a divine and spiritual religion, as the great benefactor of human kind, exhibit him as the head of a faction — your party. "^ "Who, then, is the true sectarian ? but he who thus denounces all, as sectaries, who are not of his sect ? Who is the fanatic ? if not he, who sees fanaticism every where, but in his own party spirit? Who is the enthusiast? but the man who makes a God of externals and non-essentials — while he finds enthusiasm in those only, who are in earnest respecting the grand objects of religion ? Where is the schismatic ? if not among those who term every thing schism, which does not accord with their own opinions ?'" How, then, can there prevail peace and charity, while it is still a question whether God or man is to be the Lord of con- science— and the principle is still undetermined, whether man can impose as a fundamental doctrine of Christianity, what Christ has not instituted or revealed as such ? How can christians walk together in unity of heart, or of profession, while differing on these first elements of all church principles ? There must be controversy, so long as these primal and mo- mentous questions are matters of dispute. They affect the very being, and much more, the well-being, of the church. They involve, in their decision, the whole doctrine of charity. Their determination makes peace a duty, which must be ful- 1) Lect. on Eccl. Hist. vol. i. p. 90, 91. a) See Schism, p. 341. 20 THE MEMORY OF OUR FATHERS. [LECT. 1. filled, " as far as lieth in us," — or separation and withdrawment, and avowed opposition, as imperative on all who would faith- fully contend for Christ's kingly prerogative and crown. Never, while these church principles of prelatical usurpation are cur- rent, can the prayer of Christ be visibly fulfilled, when all his churches and people shall be seen and known to be one, being of one mind and of one heart, and preserving amid their differ- ences of views, the unity of the Spirit in the bonds of peace. Such claims were rejected by the English reformers — by all the reformed churches — and by the greatest divines of all ages. They are in violent opposition to the spirit and princi- ples of the gospel. "Let us," then, as said the Bishop of Norwich, in his late charge to his clergy, " let us abide by the faith of our protestant ancestors, whose object it was to pro- claim that there was a deeper and more scriptural unity, than the unity of ecclesiastical organization, or of ecclesiastical de- tail,— I mean the unity of christian principle, the unity of the Spirit.'" Then would the church of God have rest and be edified ; displaying on the banners of the various divisions of her one sacramental host, the glorious motto of her own glorious Au- gustine, " In things essential, unity — in things not essential, lib- erty— and in all things, charity.'"^ Till that happy period arrive, which may God in his mercy hasten, forget not the admonition of the apostle — and stand fast in that liberty wherewith Christ has made you free. Finally, brethren, we would remark, that to this defensive war- fare for the maintenance and preservation of our spiritual rights, we are imperatively summoned by the memory of our fathers* *' It is no new thing, brethren, that has happened unto us," as wrote the imprisoned martyr Ridley to his brother Bradford ; " for this was always the clamor of the wicked bishops and priests, against God's true prophets ; the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord."^ There has thus, as it plainly appears, ever been a spiritual aristocracy, which would make a monopoly of salvation, con- fining it to Its own orders, succession and gifts, as the only and exclusive fountain whence it might be obtained. Now, to that form of government, in which this spirit inheres, WE may be said to possess a hereditary antipathy. The history of presbyterianism, whether we look to its ancient defenders, 1) Charge of 1838, p. 22, &c. libertas, in omnibus caritas. 2 In necessariis unitas, in dubiis 3) Letters of the Martyrs, p. 48. LECT. I.] THE MEBIORY OF OUR FATHERS. 21 the Culdees, or the Waldenses ; — or to the churches of the reformation, which, with the single exception of the Enghsh, re-adopted these primitive and apostolical principles; — or to its more modern defenders in Ireland and in Scotland, yea, and in this country prior to the revolution ; — presents a series of strug- gles, of unexampled severity and suffering, to preserve the church, on the one hand, from the grasp of Erastianism, and on the other, from the domineering rule of spiritual tyranny. To surrender the church to the one, or to the other, and to give it up a prey either to the civil, or to the ecclesiastical powers, was regarded by them as nothing short of treason to their Head and King. Acknowledging no man, as master on earth, and recognizing no temporal head or fountain of supremacy, — they placed the crown upon the brow of Him who is alone worthy to wear it. "For Christ's crown and covenants," — for his word and wor- ship,— for his ordinances in their entireness and in their purity ; — these were the stirring watchwords by which they were rallied around the standard of the truth ; — by which they were bound together in one heart and in one mind — and by which they were sustained in the loss of property, of liberty, and of life itself. The headship of Christ, and the liberty and spiritual indepen- dence of the church of Christ, these were the high principles, for the maintenance of which they endured a great fight of afflictions ; counted not their lives dear unto them ; and poured out their blood like water. And having, at a cost so priceless — even ages of endurance, ignominy, oppression, penury and danger — secured to us the enjoyment of this great inheritance — are we not called upon, against all who would attempt to bring us into bondage, to con- tend earnestly for that liberty wherewith Christ has made us free and wherein we stand and rejoice. "And because the world, as I perceive, brethren," again to use the words of Ridley, " ceaseth not to play his pageant, and to conspire against Christ our Sa- viour with all possible force," eloquence, learning and power, " exalting high things against this knowledge of God and this liberty of Christ, let us join hands together in Christ; and if we cannot overthrow, yet, to our power, and as much as in us lieth, let us shake those high things, not with carnal, but with spiritual weapons."' And now to conclude. — We find ourselves, providentially, by birth, education, or from conviction, in the bosom of the pres- 1 Letters of Martyrs, p. 33. 22 THE ANTICIPATED RESULTS. [lECT. 1. byterian communion — a body identified with civil and religious freedom. Many of us hope that we have been here spiritually born — that from this alma mater we have drawn spiritual nourish- ment, and on her lap been nurtured in piety. With her, too, are associated all our hopes for the everlasting happiness of the loved and the gone. Under the shadow of her sanctuaries lie the buried forms of our venerated sires, and our beloved offspring, whose resurrection to glory and honor must stand or fall with the standing or falling of presbyterianism. It is no slight or trivial interest, therefore, which demands our contemplation. And what we say to you is, Abide where you are, neither be ye moved or shaken, until our opponents have shown cause why wesiiould escape for our lives, as from a tottering building whose founda- tion is on the sand. Till then, we would desire to help you to a more perfect understanding of the sure foundation upon which our church is built, as on a rock, against which the gates of hell shall not prevail ; and to show you its immovable strength by an exhibition of the utter weakness of the forces with which her overthrow is attempted. By so doing, we expect to brighten hope, and to gild the pages of memory ; — to inspirit the heart of the onward pilgrim — and to hallow the memories of the depart- ed spirits of the sainted dead. You will be emboldened, we trust, to venture more largely for a church so adorned with all the graces of heaven ; and so capable of enriching you with all spiritual blessings in Christ Jesus. You will bless God for having led you into her sacred temple, and to tread her heavenly courts. You will hold more assured communion with the church of the first-born — the spirits of just men made perfect, as know- ing, that among that bright and shining throng, there are many who here mingled their voices in our earthly worship. And you will more tranquilly approach the hour when, leaving all you love below, you will know that you are not therefore hurrying to the doom of the schismatic, or to the purgatorial limbo which may be provided by God's uncovenanted mercy, but are hasten- ing to join the ransomed throng of the church triumphant, in that temple not made with hands, whose Builder and Maker is God.^ 1) See Note E. ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE FIRST. NOTE A. As it may still be thought by many, that we have very laboriously collected a few extravagant expressions, it may be well to bring together in a note some additional illustrations of the spirit and language of high-churchism. Of such specimens we have a large collection at hand. Let us first rtake a few ex- tracts, showing the sentiments of prelatists regarding the churches of the Dutch Reformed, Presbyterians, and Independents, conjointly. " Either ciiurch organization is far more than a form, or it does not call for a great deal of lamentation. There are no forms under the gospel. Apos- tolical order is an ethical principle, or it is not worth much. These worthy Independents were deficient in an inward element of truth, in a something mental, moral, spiritual, mystical — or they had no great loss, considering they were in unavoidable ignorance. They were not altogether right, up to a cer- tain point, and only wanted finishing. They were not dressed, all but hat and shoes. Mr. Ceswall seems to consider that the episcopal form is the lost thing in the idea of a church — and therefore a presbyterian or independent body may be considered an imperfect sort of episcopacy. Imperfect ! Is a mouse an imperfect kind of bat .' Is it a bat, all but the wings ? Could we sew wings on it, and make it a bat .'' Did all the swellings of an ambitious heart develope the frog into the bull? Could it 'perfect its defective organi- zation.'' So it is with independency or presbyterianism, viewed in them- selves ; as forms, they are as distinct from the church as one kind of flesh from another." See the British Critic for October, 1839, page 337. " Now, taking the thirty-nine articles as the exactestform of apostolic truth, still we must] consider that the quakers and Dutch reformed deviate from them as far as the Roman catholics." See do. p. 339. " It may seem harsh thus to speak of ' episcopacy,' and ' episcopalians,' yet we hope it will not shock any one if we say, that we wish the words, as denoting an opinion and its maintainer, never had been invented. They have done great mischief to their own cause. We are ' of the church,' not ' of the episcopal church ; ' our own bishops are not merely an order in her oiganiza- tion, but the principle of her contintmnce ; and to call ourselves episcopalians is to imply that we differ from the mass of the dissenters mainly in churcfi gov- ernment and form, in a matter of doctrine merely, not of fact; whereas the dif- ference is, that we are here and they there; we in the church, and they out of it." See do. p. 341. Let us now present their views of The Independent, or Congregational Churches. In special reference to these, it may be sufficient to quote, besides what is applicable to dissenters generally, as intended to bear particularly on them, the following quotation from a letter addressed to the Rev. William H. Cooper, 24 NOTES TO LECTURE I. of Dublin, Ireland, by the Rev. T. D. Gregg, dated Dublin, 28th November, 1839, and printed in the newspapers generally.* He addresses him in ridicule, " my lord," because he claimed to be a chris- tian bishop. " If, like the excellent primitive Methodists, you acted as a lay -helper of the church, renounced all titles but that of * Mr. W. H. Cooper, preacher of the gospel,' 'expounder of gospel truths,' or 'evangelist,' it would be quite a different matter. Even though you were irregular, 1 should consider that tlien there was no place for ridicule — nay, I should respect your liumble zeal. But to announce yourself as 'reverend,' to talk of your 'ordination,' ' of your administering of sacraments,' and rf your ' not denying the right hand of fellowship to your dear episcopal brethren ' — this, believe me, is ridiculous. 1 assure you, my lord, you have no more right to perform pastoral functions — no more riglitful pastoral authority — no more faculty to administer sacraments, than one of your own ' clergy ' — the Rev. Miss Blank, an excellent relation of mine ; or than my other excellent friend, who was lately one of your sect, but who having, through my arguments, abandoned dissent, is now an attached member of the holy catholic and apostolic church — the one fold of the one shejjherd, Jesus Christ — Mr. John Hanley." In reference to speaking severely of the Romish church, he says : " J am consistent — I should not be esteemed offensive. It is at once insult and injury that you, supported by the Rev. Miss Dobbs, and the Rev. Mrs. Snobbs, your ' clergy,' take the liberty of using such language as you have used. " Forgive me if 1 have spoken harshly — I have heard some say that you and I are embarked in the same cause. I can scarcely think so ; I know the mind of the Roman catholics, and I know this, that if there be one offence in the way greater than another, it is the offence that arises from proteslant sec tarianism, while it is with the very arguments of independence that popery is at present assailing the church. You say that Christ has made your commu- nities churches ; I deny it. You are they who 'separate themselves,' (Jude 19.) and what Christ makes you is ' sensual ' — ' not having the spirit.' He then concludes thus : " With respect for you as a man, love as a chris- tian, but with thorough contempt for your Fungus Episcopate — I remain, my lord, very seriously, yours in Christ, "T. D, Gregg. " Dullin, 28thA''ovember, 1839." Let us now hear their opinion, more especially of Presbyterians. In a Treatise on the Church, by Edward Barrick, of Trinity College, Dublin, published in Belfast, in 1813, and for years past offered for sale in Londonderry, it is said : " We must recollect, that these pretended ministers who officiate in the meetnigs of Preshyterians, &c., have not been ordained by the bishops. And consequently, as I have already demonstrated, these men have not been sent by God ; and therefore, it must be utterly nnlaicful to attend their viinistry. For how can we hear without a preacher, and how can they preach unless they be sent.^ The Lord forbids us to hear them, because ' he hath not sent them, and therefore they shall not profit this people.' To hear, then, in sucli a case, is rebellion against God and utterly unlaicful, and is coun- tenancing them, and hardening their •presumption and daring imposture." ^. 146. He quotes the following sentence, with approbation, from Dr. S. Butt's Discourse on Churcli Government: "That episcopacy is of divine right; that to separate from the orthodox bishops is schismatical ; that schism is a damnable sin." p. 327. In another passage he says : " The case being thus, the nonentity of these unhappy peoples' church appears upon a double account ; first, as wanting a ?ninistry, and second, as wanting the due preaching of the pure Word, and • duoted from the Belfast Christian Patriot, of December 6, 1839. NOTES TO LECTDRE I. 25 riirht administration of the sacraments. So that the difference between us and this people, as already considered, is a ministry mid no ministry, a church and no church."* In the Oxford Tracts, vol. i. p. 2G4, No. 3f!, under the head of " Account of Religious Sects," &c., the second division includes, " Those who receive and teach a part, but not the whole of the trutli, erring in respect to one or more FUNDAMENTAL DOCTRINES. Under this head are included most of what are called ' Protestant dissenters.' The chief of these are — 1. Presbyterians, so called, from maintaining the validity of ordination by Presbyters or elders only ; in other words, by the second order of the clergy, dispensing with and superseding the first." " We need not deny to the church the abstract right, (however we may question the propriety.) of alter- ing its own constitution. It is not merely because episcopacy is a better or more scriptural form than preshyterianism, (true as this may be in itself,) that Episcopalians are right and Presbyterians are wrong, but because the presby- terian ministers have assumed a power which was never intrusted to them. They have presumed to exercise the power of ordination, and to perpetuate a succession of ministers without having received a commission to do so." Oxf. 'J'r. Vol. i. No. 13. It will only further be necessary to quote the recent and very explicit views drawn up for the guidance of theological students, of Mr. Palmer, in his Trea- tise on the Church, vol. i. p. 574 — 577, in which, with the most cool and con- summate arrogance of bigotry, there is the most daring assertion of what the true facts of the case will by no means warrant. " I am now to speak of the presbyteiian societies in Scotland, and examine their claim to be considered a part of the christian church. " These proceedings being annulled on the restoration of Charles II., the Church of Scotland continued till 1690, to be subject to its bishops, like all other churches, though many adherents of the covenant formed conventicles, and separated themselves from the church. In 1690 this party of dissenters obtained the support of the civil power, (in consequence of the refusal of the bishops to acknowledge King William II.) and under their influence tlie Scot- tish parliament consummated a most woful schism, abolishing episcopacy, and establishing the presbyterian separatists as the church of Scotland. Thus the bishops and clergy were deprived of their estates and all their legal rights, and their place and authority was usurped by others, while a portion of the nation fell from their obedience, and united themselves to the new establish- ment, which afterwards obtained many converts by the same persecution which it directed against the church. " Hence it would be a great mistake to suppose that the question between the Presbyterians and the church was merely a dispute on church govern- ment— it was concerning the most vital principles of the church's unity and authority. The Presbyterians were innovators who separated themselves from the church, because they judged episcopacy anti-christian, and thus con- demned the church universal, in all past ages. Their opinion was erroneous ; but had it merely extended to a preference of the presbyterian form, it might have been in some degree tolerated — it would not have cut them off from the church of Christ. But it was the exaggeration of their opinion, their separa- tion for the sake of their opinion, their actual rejection of the authority and communion of the existing successors of the apostles in Scotland, and there- fore of the universal church in all ages, that marks them out as schismatical ; and all the temporal enactments and powers of the whole world could not cure this fault, nor render them a portion of the church of Christ. If a party of schismatics should separate themselves from the church of England, and should, by a fortunate combination of events, be able to effect the temporal overthrow of the church, and their own establishment by the civil powers, this would surely not deprive the church of her claim to the adherence of christians, nor cover the sins of those who assailed and de- spoiled her. " This appears really to have been the case of the Scottish church and the * See Presbvterianism Defended, Glasgow, 1839, pngea 197, 198. 4 26 NOTES TO LECTURE I. Presbyterians ; and tlierefore, while we must ever deplore the condition of Scotland, and must earnestly desire that the people may be re-united in reli- gious harmony, it is impossible for us to close our eyes on the origin of the presbyterian establishment in that country. " With regard to all the other sects in Scotland, which have seceded from the presbyterian communities, such as Glassite, Sandcmanians, Seceders, Burgh- ers, Anti-Burghers, Constitutional Associate Presbytery, Relief Kirk, Scot- tish Baj)tists, Bereans, Independents, &c. ; the same observations apply to them all. Their predecessors, the Presbyterians, voluntarily separated themselves from the catholic church of Christ, and they, in departing from the presbyterian communion, have not yet returned to that of the true church. Consequently, they form no part of the true chuucu of Christ." Similar are the sentiments expressed towards Baptists. The Baptists, under the general head of dissenters, have already been dealt with according to the tender mercies of these high-church expounders of the will of God. It will not be necessary therefore to enlarge. Mr. Palmer, on the Church, vol. i. p. 266, in replying to the objection that the Church of England is in error on the subject of baptism, says : " A diffi- culty of this kind, raised by a mere handful of professing christians, in oppo- sition to the judgment and practice of the church, and of all sects, in all ages, from the beginning, is not worthy of attention. We may refuse all contro- versy on the subject, for, as St. Augustine says, ' Si quid horum tota per orbem frequentat ecclesia — quin ita faciendum sit, disputare, insolentissimse insanife est.' In fact, there cannot be a more certain mark of heresy and apostacy from Christ, than such a condemnation of what the church in all ages has received and approved. If infant baptism renders our churches apos- tate, all churches must have been so for many ages, and therefore the church of Christ must have entirely perished, contrary to the promises of holy scrip- ture." In the Oxford Tracts, vol. i. p. 265, Baptists are ranked among those who err in respect to " fundamental doctrines," and are further declared to have " departed from the truth, not only as concerns the doctrine of the laying on of hands, but also as concerns the doctrine of baptism, and other of the fundamental doctrines, according to St. Paul." Nor are they at all more lenient toward the Methodists. This large body of Christians have lately received very rough handling in the British Magazine, and other high-church courts of ecclesiastical law. In the Oxford Tracts, vol. i. p. 265, they are also dignified with a place among those who " err in one or more fundamentals," and are thus described : " Methodists are subdivided into an immense variety of sects — the chief are, Wesleyans, Whitefieldians, or Lady Huntington's Ranters, or Primitive Methodists, Briantes, or Bible Christians, Protestant Methodists, Tent Metho- dists, lnde])endent Methodists, and Killiamites. " These do not receive or teach the truth respecting the doctrine of ' laying on of hands,' which St. Paul classes among the fundamental doctrines of Christianity, and by which the christian ministry receives its commission and autiiority to administer the word and sacraments For they, one and all, reject the first, fi. e. the apostolical, or as we now call it, episcopal,) order of clergy, who exercised the rite according to the New Testament, and without whom there is no warrant from scri])ture for believing that the clergy can be appointed or tiie sacraments be duly administered." Mr. Palmer, on the church, vol. i. p. 247, says : " The Methodists do NOT pretend to BE A CHURCH AT ALL J but Call themselves a society or association, wliich they would represent to be united to the Church of Eng- land, and subsidiary to itn ministrations." NOTES TO LECTURE I. 27 So also at page 237, honorable mention is made of Methodists. " In fine, we use the name of catholic as appropriate to our churches, while we give other titles to the various denominations which have separated from us; as Independents, Quakers, Swedenborgians, Baptists, Romanists or Papists, Huntingdonians, Methodists, Socinians, Unitarians, «fec. None of these com- munities dispute with us the possession of this name except the Romanists ; and their impudent pertinacity, in the assumption of it, induces sometimes the ignorant or the indifferent to countenance their claim in some degree." So, also, as it regards the Lutherans and Reformed Churches. Of these it is declared by Palmer on the Church, vol. i. p. 157, " The socie- ties were not properly churches. " That the lutheran and calvinistic were not properly churches of Christ, I argue thus," &c. See do. p. 383. " Several theologians, it is objected, even of the British churches, have acknowledged the lutheran and reformed to be churches of Christ. " Answer. I admit that this opinion has been held by some writers ; but they seem to have been influenced by the notion, that it was necessary for the justification of both the protestant and British churches. However, scarcely any theologian affirmed these foreign communities were perfect in all respects, according to the institution of Christ ; and most of those who give them the title of churches, do so in a general sense, not meaning that they are churches in the strict sense of the term." See do. p. 397. " Of these communities, whether collectively or individually considered, 1 affirm, that they are no part of the church of Christ. This ques- tion has been recently so well treated by many able writers, that very little need be said on the subject." See do. p. 399. And as regards the Dissenters Generally. In regard to all other denominations who, living in the same country with Episcopalians, are on that account arrogantly styled dissenters, though they have no relation whatever to the episcopal cliurch, other than as churches of Christ, mucii is said. This term, as we shall show, is one applied even in America. " They are human societies. The will of man makes them, regulates them, unmakes them. They are, in a word, purely voluntary associations, and therefore cannot be any part of that church which is formed by the divine command, and by means instituted by God, and from which man cannot sep- arate without most grievous sin." See do. p. 407. " It is clear, then, that the principle of division is a principle of dissent, and therefore their community cannot form any portion of the church of Christ." See do. p. 407. " And as every officer of a voluntary association or club, derives his com- mission entirely from those who create him, so the dissenting minister is com- missioned to preach the gospel, not by God, but by man. He is the minister of man only, and therefore the dissenting communities being destitute of a true ministry, which is essential to the church, are not churches of Christ. I shall add nothing in a case so easy and clear." See do. p. 414. " Therefore, their separation from the Church of England was founded, not only in schism, but in heresy, and this being the case, they could not have been any part of the church of Christ, nor were they capable of forming christian churches." p. 403. See also page 402. " They and their generations are as the heathen ; and though wo may have reason to believe that many of their descendants are not obstinate in their errors, still it seems to me that we are not warranted in affir.m- ING ABSOLUTELY THAT THEY CAN BE SAVED." See do. p. 110. ■ The present feeling of liberality towards Presbyterians and others, is thus 28 NOTES TO LECTURE I. rebuked in the Oxford Tracts, vol. i. p. 599 : " Do not hover about our ancient home, the home of Cyprian and Athanasius, without the heart to take u)) our abode in it, yet afraid to quit tiie sigiit of it; boasting of our episcopacy, yet unwilling to condemn separation ; claiming a descent from the apostles, yet doubting of the gifts attending it, and trying to extend the limits of the church for tiie admission of Wesleyans and Presbyterians, while we profess to be exclusively primitive. Alas, is not this to witness against ourselves, like coward sinners who hope to save the world, without giving up God's service !" " Wlien 1 say that dissent is a sin, I by no means thereby imply, that for that reason every dissenter is at once and necessarily a sinner. To say that a particular thing is a sin, is very different frem saying that every one who does it is a sinner." See do. p. 355. " 1 must observe, then," says Mr. Dodsworth on Romanism and Dissent, p. 14, •' that liiere is often a kind of levity indulged in, when speaking on the subject of dissent, which conveys the idea that it is a very light and trivial matter. If a man ventures to speak of it as an evil, he is met by a smile at his supposed bigotry or simplicity. Now, if dissent is indeed, as I think has been shown, a breach of unity in the cliurch — if it bo that which we are taught to pray against in the same sentence with ' false doctrine and heresy,' witli ' hardness of heart, and contempt of God'.s word and commandments,' — then it is a sin ; and then to make light of it, is to subject ourselves to a re- proof which we should not willingly incur — for ' fools make a mock of sin.' And then we should feel bound in charity to others who have been drawn away from us, in meekness and gentleness to warn tliem of their danger, be- cause we must not ' suffer sin upon a brother.' " " So we do not exhort you to abstain from going to those assemblies because we attach any inherent virtue to our own ceremonies above theirs ; but be- cause, by so doing, you lend your countenance to that which the Scriptures ■pronounce to be sinful." See do. p. 15. " I need scarcely add, therefore, that in order to obey the injunction in the text, you must refrain from ever sanctioning by your presence the assemblies of those whose standing is one of rebellion against the Lord and his church. If schism is sin, then to be present where it is practised cannot be without culpability." See do. p. 1(5. " But we must judge of dissent, not in reference to individual teachers, but as a system ; and we may easily see, both from fact and reason, that its ten- dency is to infidelitij." See do. p. 11 . Further, in the Oxford Tracts, vol. i. pp. 355, 356, it is said : " For when a man thinks the church unscriptural, he has good reason for leaving it, and is (what 1 have called above) a conscientious dissenter ; though at the same time 1 am bound to say, I think his conscience a very erroneous one, which leads him to consider the church as unscriptural ; and while I allow him to be con- scicntious, in one sense of the word, yet I also think him to be heretical — ^just as those who, (as our Lord foretold.) thought when they persecuted the Apostles 'they did God service,' were wrong, not in that they obeyed their conscience, but because they had not a more enlightened conscience. ' The light that is in' a merely conscientious dissenter, is what Christ has called 'darkness.' " " Christ has appointed the church as the only way unto eternal life. We read at tiie first that the Lord added daily to the church such as should be saved ; and what was then done daily hath been done since continually. Christ never appointed two ways to heaven; nor did he build a church to save some, and make another institution for other men's salvation. ' Tliere is no other name given under heaven whereby we must be saved, but the name of Jesus,' and that is no otherwise given under heaven than in the church." See do. p. 3G1. These extracts, in addition to many more which shall be introduced in the course of the work, and which we could most easily multiply, may suffice to lead all our readers to appreciate the urgency of that demand which calls upon us to examine these arrogant pretensions. NOTES TO LECTURE I. 29 NOTE B. The meaning of this term, high churcii, is given by Dr. Rioe. " Some- body," says lie,* " lias putforth a long story about Bishop Horsley's notions on this subject. But all this is as far from the subject, as it is discussed in this country, as we are from being high churchmen ourselves. There are men in England, who maintain that the clergy are entirely dependent on the State, and derive all their clerical authority from the laws of the land — while others hold that, apart from the civil power, and all acts of the government in relation to the church, the ministers of religion have power and authority derived from the appointment of Christ. The latter of these, in Bishop Horsley's sense of the term, are high, and the former, lotc churchmen. But this has no connexion whatever with any controversy in this country. The church here derives nothing from the State ; in all her branches she is entirely separate and independent. In Bishop H.'s sense, we are all high churchmen. But when we use the term, as expressive of the principles to which we never can be reconciled, we mean a man, who holds that all spiritual power is vested in him ; that he is a substitute for Christ's person on earth ; that he belongs to an order, whose official prerogative it is to come between God and man ; to declare authoritatively the divine will to his fellow men, and to bind the source of all mercy and grace to the performance of his own covenant engage- ments, and thus give to man the assurance of salvation. And who adds to all these monstrous claims, the assumption, that all who differ from him in these particulars, and separate from his communion, are out of the pale of the church, and destitute of all warrant to hope for heaven. These are the princi- ples against which we are pledged to wage war as long as Vk'e live. But at the same time, we delight to call every humble, pious episcopalian, brother, and to cherish towards him feelings of fraternal kindness." We might make a further reference to a treatise written expressly in de- fence of moderate, or low church men, entitled, "A Vindication of the Princi- ples and Practices of the iVIoderate Divines and Laity of the Church of Eng- land," by the Rev. Edward Pierce, Rectorin Northampton. Lond., Ifi82,p. 410, p. 80. The author shows that they were distinguished from the high church by all their practices and opinions, which he fully justifies. At p. 52, he urges moderateism towards dissenters, " because we agree not only in funda- mentals of religion and government, but in the necessary adjuncts of worship," «&c. See in Philad. Lib. No. 937, Miscellanies, vol. xvii. See this distinction used also by. Prof Powell, in his Traditions Unveiled, p. 5, in reference to that party in the church, " the well-known and old established section of the church commonly designated as the high-church party." NOTE C. In his Review of Bishop Ravenscroft's Vindication and Defence, Dr. Rice remarks : '• It was indeed the opinion of some,t that we had undertaken a work of gratuitous labor and trouble ; that the extravagant pretensions of Bishop R. might be left to sink at once into the oblivion to which, it was believed, they are destined. We thought differently. It has for some time appeared obvious to us, that there is growing up a spirit in tiiis country, which seeks for marks of distinction between itself and the mass of the people. As infidelity is out of fashion, and unitarianism is not popular to the south, there is a great demand, among people of a certain sort, (to use a plirase cur- rent among all good cavaliers ever since the " merry days of King Charles,") for a " religion fit for a gentleman." There is, also, among many of our republicans, a passion for ceremony, for pomp and show in religious worship. Others, moreover, too indolent, too much devoted to the world to secure scrip- * Evang. and Lit. Magazine, vol. ix p. 635. t Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 368 and p. 436. 30 NOTES TO LECTURE I. tural evidences of their being in a state of salvation, are willing enough to look to their priests for assurance. Higii-church notions, then, do not sink under tlie influence of public opinion. It is necessary to make efforts to pull them down. The interests of tiie church and of tlie country require it. Under this conviction, we acted according to our sense of duty, and endeav- ored to sliow that tiie claims of this bishop could not be sustained either by reason or scripture." " But we will say, that when high-church principles were first broached among us, we thought that it was perfectly a work of supererogation to undertake to oppose them ; that in this counlrij their very extravagance, their opposition to the genius of all our political institutions, their obvious tendencies, would at once put them down. But they are grow- ing. Their influence is felt even by evangelical men. Young preachers, who turned out warm hearted and liberal, are gradually screwed up to notions and feelings high enough to please a diocesan bishop. We see these things and lament them. It is our duty to expose the error, and give the warning. And as God may give us grace to be faithful, none within the sphere of our labors shall go unwarned." NOTE D. That we are thus required by the call of charity to examine and discuss this subject, is taught us by one of its most recent advocates. " The only ques- tion," says Mr. Percival, " then is, whether the episcopal (i. e. prelatical) scheme is ^rwe; if so, charity REquiKEs that we should teach it, and forbids our keeping it back." " The exclusiveness of that whicli professes to be an article of this one faith, aflbrds a ■prima facie probability* of its being a genu- ine article of that one faith." "Believing," he adds, "the doctrine of the apostolical succession to be catholic and scriptural, 1 will never so far betray the cause of truth as to surrender it to the sole use of the erroneous papists."! " They who believe this doctrine to be true, are only acting faithfully to God and to his people, when they calmly vindicate and bear witness to the truth. "t And, once more, in the very spirit of fabulous invention, this writer adds to the assertion, that all the churches during the apostles' time were epis- copalian; "that, until the presbyterian scheme was invented in the sixteenth century, it had always been understood to be our Lord's intention that the church should continue episcopalian (i. e. prelatic) until his return." § " Now when," as one of tlieir ownselves has said, " when a religious sys- tem condemns us by name, and pronounces sentence concerning our eternal state in so decided a tone, and that simply because we dis.sent irom some of its tenets, we not only think we have a right to defend ourselves and our religion, but consider it our bounden duty to examine the grounds on which a system of such pretension rests, and honestly, though quietly, to avow our reasons for rejecting it." || NOTE E. The Rev. Dr. Muir, in his Sermon in Commemoration of the General As- .sembly of 1G38, (Glasgow, 1838, p. 18—20,) thus eloquently alludes to the fathers of the church of Scotland : "That for exciting our gratitude, as on such a day as this, we may well cherish the remembrance of the men who were instrumental in procuring, and then transmitting the privileges of our protestantism. Tlie zeal of David, the man after God's own heart, was truly exemplified in their piety, and wisdom, and sufferings, and constancy. Their strength of character and decision was great Their devotion to the cause of Christ was greater. Persecuted in their adherence to that cause, they still • On Ap. Succ. p. 38. f P. 40. J P. 52. $ P. 61. II The Old Paths, by the Rov. Aloiander McCauI, D. D., of Trinity College, Dublin. Lon- don, 1837, p. 3, No. 1. NOTES TO LECTURE I. 31 endured. Thwarted in their measures, at once religious and patriotic, they planned anew. Withstood in their most reasonable demands, they held fast by tlieir claims, and persevered. " And while, on reviewing the glorious deliverance achieved from anti- christ, from tiie monstrous evils of the mercenary and superstitious priesthood of Rome, of an interdicted reason, and a banished Bible, — while, on reviewing that struggle with ' the man of sin,' which broke the chain of the papacy in Scotland, we trace the might of the contest and the victory to the Lord of Hosts, and give him the honor and the praise, yet ought we not to remember ' the noble army of the martyrs ^ ' — with grateful sentiments ought we not to think and speak of ' the cloud of witnesses ' that endured, and labored, and died, in the cause of truth; and to hold up their memories, embalmed in sacred gratitude , before ourselves and our children ? There was Hamilton , distinguished by learning as well as high birth, devoted from his youth to God, and whose zeal for the pure faith, which he drank at the feet of Luther and Melancthon, was not quenched on earth but with his blood. There was Wishart, skilled al- most equally in divine and human sciences, whose sermons penetrated the most hardened, and melted them into tears, — who braved the pestilence to carry the message of divine grace to his ignorant and perishing countrymen, — whose devout wrestlings for sinners had somewhat of angelic fervors in them, and whose martyr's crown shone amid the flame of persecution as gloriously as that of any of the early christians themselves. IPhere was Knox, the apos- tolic messenger of the reformation, peculiarly fitted, by the spirit of wisdom and power, for his extraordinary work; and whose devotedness to the cause of Christ, and eloquence, and compassion for the souls of men, and warmth of aflection, were not less memorable tlian the boldness of character which earned for him the well-known encomium at his grave : " There lies a man who never feared the face of man." Names these are, not ofien rehearsed from the pulpit ; and, doubtless, liaving scripture names, examples of piety and zeal so numerous, how seldom need we go from the Bible record to seek the pattern and incentive to righteousness ! But, on this day, and valuing the privileges of our church, and desirous to see them perpetuated and extended, shall we not recall the memory of the great men who planted and watered the tree of our privileges with tlieir very blood ? and shall we not consider that those now named, were followed by a multitude of other religious patriots, in having whom any country miglit deem itself honored ? And surely we can- not read of such men as the Melvilles, and Bruce, and Welch, and Henderscm, and Gillespie, and Rutherford, and more of the like sainted character, with- out blessing God for his goodness, in having raised up those who were so fully qualified, both for establishing and adorning our Zion. They who thus wrought at the second reformation (as it is called) were indued, even as they needed, with qualities both of mind and heart, similar to what had been requisite at the first. The work of the first had been marred and shaken by the renewed attempts of popery to gain, under the disguise of improving and beautifying the services of the church, a lodgment once more in Scotland. Who shall doubt this who have traced the painful steps of our history, from the opening of the seventeenth century, onwards to its thirty-eighth year .'' " In Scotland, these persecutions were peculiarly severe* and aggravated. From the opening of the tragedy with the scarcely legalized murder of the Marquis of Argyle, to the closing of it in the death of the zealous Renwick, an innumerable host sealed with their blood, their testimony to the truth of presbyterian reformation principles. Their sufferings and privations were of the severest kind, and of every possible form which the cruelty of man could invent. Neither were the martyrs confined to the man of robust constitution and masculine mind ; but delicate and helpless females were found fear- facing their blood-thirsty persecutors, preferring to die with their children in lessly their arms, rather than sacrifice their religious liberty. ' God and our country ' was the watchword, — the governing sentiment which filled the hearts of these patriotic sufferers. But, though driven from their homes, and forced to seek a hiding-place in the lone glen or rocky cavern, the presence of * Sketch of Hist, and Princ. of the Picsb. Ch. in England. London, 1810, p. 17 and p. 26. 32 NOTES TO LECTURE I. the covenant sustained and cheered their souls ; and it was then they found the vision of Moses in Mount Horeb, afFectingly applicable to their circum- stances, and adopted the burning bush in the wilderness, as a fit emblem of the state of the church — enveloped in the flames of a fiery persecution, yet not consumed, for the Lord was in the midst of her. " Ye3 — tliough the sceptic's tongue derido Those martyrs who for conscience died ; Tlioiigh modish history slight tlieir fame, And sneering courtiers hoot the name Of men, who dared alone be free Amidst a nation's slavery : Yet Ion;; for tliem the poet's lyre Sliail wake its notes of heavenly fire. " Their names shall nerve the patriot's hand, Upraised to save a sinking land; And piety shall learn to burn With holier transports o'er their urn." LECTURE II. THE TRIBUNAL, BY WHICH THIS PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOL- ICAL SUCCESSION MUST BE ADJUDICATED. While the nature of man is so constituted, as to dispose him to submit to that authority which is true and valid, it also compels him to resist that which is unlawful. Thus, when our Saviour had entered upon his public ministry, and had mani- fested his design to interfere with the established usages and opinions of the Jews, they came unto him, as he was teaching in the temple, and said, " by what authority doest thou these things? — who gave thee this authority?" (Math. 21, 23.) The propriety and reasonableness of such an inquiry, (while, in view of the captious manner in which it was, at this time, pro- posed, Christ gave only an indirect and parabolic answer,) — our Saviour has fully allowed, by the frequent appeals which he, at other times, makes to the evidences of his divine mission. When, therefore, any body of men assume to themselves the exclusive possession of the gifts and calling of God ; — declare themselves to be the one and only true church of Christ, out of which there is no covenanted salvation ; and pronounce a sentence of excommunication, and of withering anathema, upon all other denominations, who call themselves christian ; — un- churching their churches ; deposing their ministers ; confound- ing their orders ; protesting, as forgeries, their commissions ; despoiling of all virtue their most solemn ordinances ; and thus casting them out of the temple, as intruders; — we seri- ously put to them the question, which was arrogantly addressed to Christ, and ask, " by what authority doest thou these things, and who gave thee this authority ? " And, since these claims are either founded on assured divine sanctions, and are, 5 34 WHAT IS THE RULE OF JUDGMENT. [lECT. II. therefore, to be most humbly and imphcitly allowed ; or are based upon the prescriptions of uninspireu and fallible men, and are, in this case, mere assumptions, involving the deepest crim- inahty ; it will not do for their abettors, to draw tliemselves up in lordly dignity, and with the declaration that the ground of such authority is too notorious to be denied,' violate the spirit while adopting the language of our Saviour, when he said, " neither tell T you by what authority 1 do these things." To this question, therefore, which we propound in all sin- cerity and honesty of purpose, and with an unfeigned de- sire to know and obey the truth as it is in Jesus, that in all things by His grace given unto us, we may please God, and walk obediently in his statutes and ordinances, — we must de- mand a reply. And as we are not willing to abandon that posi- tion which we have taken, and as we believe, by the guidance of holy Scripture, — we cannot bow down to these masters, or serve them, until they have duly authenticated the divine war- rant of their supremacy. The first point, therefore, to be decided, and which is of vital importance to the determination of the whole scheme of church policy, is the rule by which the claims of prelacy, or of popery, or of presbytery, are to be measured. — What is the tribunal to which their claims are to be brought for adjudication ? Who is the judge, by whom our appeal is to be finally issued ? For until these preliminaries are decided, "we will but be led," as Alexander Henderson told King Charles, " into a labyrinth, and want a thread to wind us out again. "^ Now this inquiry is, we humbly think, most plainly decided for us in a celebrated passage in the book of Isaiah. The Jews were prone to seek counsel and direction in their perplex- ities from diviners, wizards, and enchantments. The prophet is, therefore, instructed to rebuke them for this heaven-daring course, which was as foolish as it was impious. "Should not a people," he asks, " seek unto their God ? — to the law and to the testimony ? " " The law of God is the standard of duty ; his sure testimony the fountain of truth ; his promise the firm ground of hope." All principles, practices and characters, are to be tried by this criterion. All doctrines, counsels, or claims, by whatever advisers or priestly instructers they are offered, must be brought to this unerring touchstone. All asserted privileges, and pretended endowments, must be submitted to the arbitrament of the law and the testimony ; so that, if not found 1) See Oxford Tr. No. vii. p. 2, 2) See Life of Alexander Hcn- and Dr. Hook's Two Sermons, p. 7. dorson, p. 655. LECT. II.] NO SUBMISSION TO THE FATHERS. 9S warranted and authorized by the word of God, then is there not even the shadow of a foundation upon which they can be made to rest. They are manifestly without authority. " Here," says the learned, and more pious, episcopal commentator, Mr. Scott, " here, in this passage, we have a solemn, decisive, and scriptural appeal, applicable in all ages and cases." This appeal we now make, and the answer to our inquiry — " who gave thee this authority ? " — we require shall be adduced from the law and the testimony, and not from antiquity, per- petual succession, universal consent of the fathers, or the univer- sal practice of the primitive church. To these inferior sources of evidence we will freely allow weight and value, as historians of facts or of opinions, so far at least as they are borne out by the positive and authoritative warrant of the divine word; but when considered in themselves, and as measured by their own intrinsic importance, we at once reject them as of no authorita- tive value whatever. Apart from scripture, and from a reason- able support in scripture, we give place, by subjection, no, not for an hour, were it even to the whole church, in all its priests, prelates and councils, from the year of A. D. 100, when the last inspired apostle had died, to the present hour. We utterly repudiate all antiquarian servility, and spiritual prostration to the ghostly rule of church guides and church principles. Our first beginning in this discussion must be, the principle of the supreme authority of scripture, as arbiter and judge. And this first principle we regard as most reasonable, in a con- troversy between two parties, both of whom professedly re- ceive the Bible as the only, or at least as an infallible, rule of faith and practice. Both parties mutually acknowledge the divine origin and authority of the Bible, while one party most peremptorily rejects any other rule, except as " unauthoritative tradition."^ We cannot, therefore, allow prelatists to found their argument for their exclusive claims upon the acknowledged ex- istence of prelacy in an advanced age of the church ; and thence to argue backward to the apostolic age; for we yield no sub- mission whatever to the opinions of the church, as such, and this too, at a time, when she had corrupted the plain doctrines and ordinances of God, and had almost suffocated Christianity by a superincumbent load of vain and foolish ceremonies. We pro- test against the judgment of the Nicene, or even of the earlier church, because they had both, in many and grievous respects, made the word of God of none effect, by their traditions receiv- 1) See Hawkins Dissert, oa Unauthoritative Tradition, Oxford, 1819. 36 WE DEMAND DIVINE ATTTHORITY. [lECT. II. ed from the fathers. We make our appeal from ancient, to apostolic Christianity ; and, from all will-worship of men, to the pure word and worship of God. "The church," when the ar- gument suits aprelatic purpose, " is not built upon individuals — nor knows individuals.'" Neither does it rest, do we affirm, upon ''catholic teaching, expressing and representing that more ancient religion which of old time found voice, and attained con- sistency in Athanasius, Basil, Augustine, Chrysostom and other primitive doctors."^ Our church, and the true catholic church, rests upon the foundation of apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone. This rule of scripture, then, being a first principle among those concerned in this discussion, while the authority of the fathers is a question of most serious dispute ;^ and since the authority of the church depends, at best, only upon human testimony,* we cast our anchor in the haven of divine truth, fearless of whatever storms, from the turbulent ocean of ecclesiastical antiquity, may burst upon us.^ Let those who will, venture on it, and make shipwreck of their faith. Now, since Christ has positively declared that in his church there should be — as we understand him to affirm — no such dis- tinctions and no such arrogant claims to superiority, as are pre- sented by prelatists, (Mark iv. 42,) — since the Bible was adapt- ed to the necessities of the present, as much as of the ancient church ; since it expressly forewarns us against false teachers and false doctrines which should prevail even " in the temple of God ;" and since, on the other hand, the system of prelacy is declared by its advocates to be one of " the fundamental " and " great doc- trines of religion,"® so that to " regard it as no doctrine but only al- terable discipline, is not to keep the substance of the faith en- tire,"'' and to oppose it is to "violate not a small, but a great duty of the christian religion,"* and to become " schismatics, if not here- tics ;"® — seeing that these things are so, we demand before God and the world, that they, who thus sit in judgment upon us, and peril by their decision, our everlasting Interests — shall produce divine authority for the rendition of such a judgment. On them, 1) Newman on Romanism, p. 288. the ocean of councils, the decretals, 2) Ibid, p. 289. and the papal constitutions." Mend- 3) See Chillingworth, vol. iii. p. ham's Councils of Trent, p. 63. 237, 238. 6) See the Charleston Gospel Mes- 4) See Palmer on the Ch., vol. ii. p. senger, July 1840, p. 103. 86. 7) Ibid, p. IIS. 5) This description of ecclesiastical 8) Ibid, antiquity is given by the fathers of the 9) Palmer, on the Church, vol. ii. Council of Trent, in their fifth ses- p. 392. sion, where they speak of" entering LECT. II.] THE QUESTION AT ISSTTE STATED. 37 and not on us, rests the whole burden of proof. We hold firmly to the Bible — to the law and the testimony. And by that sacred institute they must disprove our claim, and bring us in guilty before God. Till then — we charge them with "sitting in the temple of God as God, and defying those whom the Lord has not defied." Addressing them in the adapted language of Dryden, we may say, Despair at our foundations, then to strike, Till you can prove your faith, apostolic ; A limpid stream drawn from the native source, Succession lawful, in a lineal course. " For " such hiffh claims " traditions must not fight. But you must prove that prelacy is right.''^ Before proceeding to the discussion of this point, it will, hoAV- ever, be important to present a full view of the doctrine in ques- tion. We will, therefore, endeavor to state what is the faith on this subject of the presbyterian church — wherein that church harmonizes with the.prelatical — wherein they differ from each other — and what is precisely that doctrine against which we contend. The presbyterian church teaches, that besides the catho- lic or universal church, which is invisible, and consists of the whole number of the elect, there is " the visible church, which is also catholic or universal under the gospel, (that is, not confined to one nation, as before, under the law,) and consists of all those, throughout the world, that profess the true religion, together with their children, and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God ; out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation."'^ As " holy signs and seals of the covenant of grace, immediately instituted by God, to represent Christ and his benefits, and to confirm our interest in him ; as also to put a visible difference between those that belong unto the church and the rest of the world ; and solemnly to engage them to the service of God in Christ, according to his word," which "with a precept autho- rizing their use, contain a promise of benefit to worthy receivers ;"^ " there be only two sacraments ordained by Christ our Lord in the gospel, that is to say, baptism and the Lord's supper, neither of which may be dispensed by any but by a minister of the word lawfully ordained."* 1) See the " Hind and Panther," in 3) Conf of Faith, chap, xxvii. § 1 Poetical Works, vol. 2. p. 01 and 67. and 3. 2) Conf. of Faith, chap. xxv. § 2. 4) Ibid, § 4. 38 THE DOCTRINE OF PRESBYTERIANISM. [lECT. II. She further teaches, that "the ordinary and perpetual officers in the church are — bishops or pastors ; and the representatives of the people usually styled ruling elders and deacons."' Further still, it is declared that " it is absolutely necessary that the government of the church be exercised under some certain and definite form. And we hold it to be expedient and agreeable to scripture and the practice of the primitive christians, that the church be governed by congregational, presbyterial and sy nod- ical assemblies. In full consistency with this belief, we em- brace in the spirit of charity, those christians who differ with us in opinion or in practice on these subjects."^ In accordance with these catholic sentiments, we are taught that "the purest churches under heaven are subject both to mix- ture and error, and some have so degenerated as to become no churches, but synagogues of satan. Nevertheless, there shall always be a church on earth to worship God according to his will." Now with this doctrine, substantially, all denomina- tions of christians not prelatical, agree ; and wherein they differ on these points, which regard the polity of the church, they never- theless agree in believing that their difference is not — as far as relates to this question — a matter so absolutely essential or funda- mental as to endanger the substance of the faith, or the salvation of souls. These things our church maintains. She holds them forth in her standards for the instruction of her own members ; and requires full compliance therewith from her own officers, as being " in her judgment agreeable to scripture and the practice of the primitive churches." But she leaves all other denominations free to act, as they may think most accordant to the will of Christ — by whom and through whom and with whom, as their common lord and master, she desires to hold " the unity of the Spirit, in the bond of peace, with all that in every place call on the name of the Lord Jesus, both theirs and ours." Far different from this, however, are the claims of prelacy, as laid down in the doctrine of apostolical succession. In order that you may understand fully and clearly what is implied in this doctrine, we will exhibit, at some length, those points in which we agree. It is then, we remark, mutually allowed, that the Lord Jesus Christ has established a church on earth, which is his kingdom — house — or family. That into this church the Lord, as his ordi- nary method, gathers such as shall be saved by the ministration of his word and spirit. That all are under obligation to be- 1) Form of Gov't, chap. iii. 2) Form of Gov't, chap. viii. § 1. LECT. II.] THE DOCTRINE OF PRELACY. 39 lieve on him, and to confess him before men, by a union, where this is possible, with his visible church. That, for the edifica- tion of this body and the perfecting of the saints, Christ has or- dained two sacraments, of baptism and the Lord's supper, in connexion with the preaching of the gospel. That these are to be administered by those whom he has called into this ministry. We are also agreed in believing that this church is holy, catholic, and apostolic — visible and perpetual — one and unchangeable — and that she is the nursery of heaven. Thus far our views are concurrent and harmonious, and we may say that we have one God and Father — one Lord and Sa- viour— one Spirit and Sanctifier, — one faiih, one baptism, and one sacramental communion. The claims of prelacy to which we object are, in addition to all that has been now stated — separable from it — and super- added to it. According to this system, the church of Christ is identified with the prelacy ; to which, as such, is given by our Lord Jesus Christ, an exclusive supremacy and divine right, in perpetual possession. The holy, catholic, and apostolic church is, therefore, limited by the very necessity of the case — the terms of its original institution — to those churches which are prelatical in their form. To these are committed all the authority, in any way delegated by Christ to his church on earth. To this church alone is given, as an hereditary trust, " the grace of the episcopal order'" — that " sacred gift" whereby alone *' any real vocation can be conferred to the min- istry" — or any efficacy imparted to the administration of the word and sacraments. Now "this supreme authority" — we are further taught — having been given by Christ to his apos- tles, was, by them, committed to an order of men called " the episcopate," prelates, or bishops, who are alone empowered, to use the words of Epiphanius, " to beget fathers of the church by ordination," while presbyters, in virtue of the imposition of the bishop's hands, having thereby received " the inward grace of the divine commission with which the church has power to animate" their previously lifeless spirits'^ — are enabled "to beget sons by baptism," and to minister at the altar. " Episco- pacy," (prelacy,) in short, as defined by Bishop Onderdonk, " declares that the christian ministry was established in three orders, called ever since the apostolic age, bishops, presby- 1) See all these expressions in apart has not before received the Holy Palmer, vol. ii. part 6. Ghost for the office and work of a 2) "The church declares her priest in the church of God." Bp full persuasion that the person set Onderdonk. 40 THE DOCTRINE OF PRELACY. [lECT. H. ters or elders, and deacons ; of which the hif^hest only has the right to ordain and confirm — that of general supervision in a diocese — that of the chief administration of spiritual disci- pline — besides enjoying all the rights of the other grades," and "having the power of supreme discipline over the clergy."' All this " the church declares to have been established by DIVINE inspiration/"^ and to be by divine right.^ This original grant, thus bestowed on the episcopate by the apostles, has been, we are also assured, transmitted by the church, and is to be traced through " an unbroken line" of pre- lates, in personal succession, from its first communication, until this hour ; and the authenticity of any claim to this sacred and apostolic gift must be attested by the manifestation of this unin- terrupted and unquestionable lineal descent.^ Every link in the chain by which the existing prelacy is united to the apostolate is, we are assured, in preservation — while any such succession is positively denied to any other church or denomination what- ever. " The real ground of our authority," say these divines, " is our apostolical descent."^ " The Spirit, the sacred gift, has been handed down to our present Bishops."® " An uninter- rupted series of valid ordinations has carried down the apostol- ical succession in our churches to the present day."'^ " We must necessarily consider none ordained who have not been thus ordained,'"** "appealing to that warrant which makes us ex- clusively God's ambassadors."^ " Now every one of us believes this."i» From this view of the doctrine of apostolical succession, which is a fundamental article of the Romish church, and " which has been inherited and embodied by the Church of England, and other episcopal communions,'"^ the points of our difference may be as clearly developed as are the points of our agree- ment. In opposition to this theory, (for we deny that it has any foundation in the word of God, or in reason,) we maintain, there- 1) See Wks. on Episcopacy, p. from St. Peter or St. Paul." Dr. 419 and 436. Hook's Two Sermons, p. 7, 8. 2) See do. Charge, 1831, p. IG, 5) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 6. immediately applied to the deaconate. 6) Do. do. 3) " From its establishment to the 7) Dr. Hook do. do., and see Note present day, there have been three A to Lecture 1. distinct orders in the priesthood." 8) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 11. Pratt's Old Paths, p. 53. 9) Do. p. 23 and 131. 4) See Palmer, vol. ii, p. 453. 10) Do. do. p. 10, and see Note A. "There is not a bishop, priest or 11) So speaks Mr. Isaac Ta3'lor, deacon among us, who cannot, if he an episcopalian, in his Spiritual Des- please, trace his own spiritual descent potism, p. 145. Eng. Ed. LECT. II.] WHAT PRESBYTERY REJECTS. 41 fore, that bishops are not, by divine right, an order superior to presbyters ; or possessed of any one of their asserted preroga- tives, in any higher degree than what is common to presbyters; or than has been voluntarily delegated to them by presbyters. We maintain that the ordinations of presbyters alone, are quite as valid as those by prelates and presbyters conjointly ; and more regular than those performed by a single prelate ; and that the ininistry in the different reformed churches is equally valid and efficacious, to say the very least — whether examined as to its authority, or as to its results — with that of the prelatical communion. You thus perceive that, in utterly repudiating and rejecting this sacerdotal authority — which is claimed by the privileged order of prelates, as their exclusive inheritance — as an arro- gant usurpation, in part, of the rights of the other clergy ; and in part, also, of a power and dominion never given by Christ to any officers whatever in his church ; and as being thus an en- croachment upon the authority of our only King and Law- giver, and upon the liberties of his people — we do not, in any degree, attach to ourselves the criminality of that heartless bigotry, which, because of such differences alone, would excom- municate from the kingdom of Christ, and consign to uncove- nanted mercy, millions of professing christians. We do not, therefore, reject ordination as a proper and necessary service. We set apart, by the public and solemn imposition of hands, such as give credible evidence that they have been already called of God to the work of the ministry. But we utterly deny that there is any mysterious efficacy in the hands of prelates, whereby that " vis insita," which comes living along the line of their prelatical succession, can be im- parted to their less privileged brethren. The source of all spir- itual power and sacred gifts, we trace beyond any terrestrial springs, to the pure fountain of heavenly influence. We believe, therefore, that there have been many lord bishops who were not the Lord's bishops, and many man-made minis- ters who were not called, or sent, or commissioned, by God, or acknov/ledged by him at all. " They are not all Israel that are of Israel." The question before us, then, is not whether a christian min- istry is necessary to the christian church — or whether ordination is necessary to the regular induction of that ministry, within any particular denomination. Neither is it the question, whether epis- copal ordination is valid — since all true presbytkrs are BISHOPS, and bishops can be nothing more, even if true and valid, 6 42 WHAT PRESBYTERY REJECTS. [lECT. II. than presbyters. We do not question whether one of these bish- ops or presbyters might be made a constant moderator of the presbytery, and thus become, officially, chief bishop or pastor, possessing delegated and exclusive powers.' The expediency of such a course we must strongly deny ; but its legality we would not be hasty in rejecting.^ Irenajus, we know, was thus moder- ator of the council in Gaul, for twenty-four years, while such a practice was customary, also, in the later Waldensian synods, and is still followed in the French presbyteries.^ We regard prelatical bishops as having originated in this very custom of the early church. But while we might thus allow to them this extrinsic and accidental authority, though not as by divine, but only by ecclesiastical right, we altogether deny that they possess any intrinsic or essential authority, with which presbyter bishops are not endowed. The original apostolic authority of both is, we contend, equal, supreme, and the same. Neither would we dispute whether the concurrence of this chief bishop, or perpetual moderator, — where the custom of the church allows such a dangerous office to exist — just as in those churches, in which, (as in our own,) the office of moder- ator is temporary — is essential to a regular and valid ordina- tion in that church. For this moderator is, by the very tenure of his office, the organ of the presbytery or council, and in- trusted with its delegated authority — and in a proper sense, the minister of ordination ; as being the mouth, the head, and the acting officer of the ordaining body. But that an exclusive, inherent, episcopal grace, is transmitted in an order of prelates, whose very office it is, by divine right, to govern and ordain other ministers ; and this, too, so that no other ordination but theirs is allowable or proper ; this is what we deny, and for which we demand sufficient proof.* For this pre-eminence, we require the same positive and indubious testimony, which these very prelates demand of Romanists, when they assert the divine pre-eminence of Peter and of Rome.^ If even the admission that Peter was personally, on some accounts, fore- most among the apostles, would not authorize the conclusion 1) On appointing moderators for of Dr. Samuel Johnson, of King's life, see Hill's View of the Constitu- College, New York, (New York, tionof the Church of Scotland, Edinb. 1805, p. 25,) the question is thus sta- 1803, p. 169, part 2, lect. 2. ted : " No act of ordination and gov- 2) On this danger, see Altare Da- ernment, for several ages, was ever mascenum, &.c., Davidis Calderwood, allowed to be lawful, without a bishop Lugduni, 1708, 4to p. 221. at the head of the presbytery." What 3) Blair's Waldenses, vol.i. p. 36. does this make for diocesan prelacy ? 4) The artfulness of prelatists, in 5) See Palmer, vol. ii. part vii. laying down their premises, is truly chap. 1, et passim. See also Newman iistonishing. Thus, in Chandler's Life on Romanism. LECT. II.] WHAT PRESBYTERY REJECTS. 43 that he had dominion over them ; neither would the supposition, that prelates are, by virtue of their office, foremost among presbyters, give them any supremacy over them/ And what- ever we might be willing to grant as a privilege, we most reso- lutely deny, when it is required upon the ground of principle and of right. When these honorary officers would, therefore, boast themselves, over those who are the very founders of their office ; and assert a despotic and hereditary rule — then do we appeal to the word of God, and put in a demand for judgment, against this doctrine, as being, to use Mr. Newman's words, no less " gratuitous in proof than as it is in itself untrue.'" Neither, again, do we deny that there ever has been, and ever will be, a succession of ministers ; as there ever has been, and ever will be, a true and perpetuated church, whose minis- ters they are. To this church we belong, and to this succes- sion we lay claim. ^ But what we affirm to be a figment, and without any sufficient proof is, that Christ appointed three dis- tinct orders in this ministry — bishops, priests, and deacons — that of these three essentially distinct orders, there ever has been, and ever will be, an uninterrupted succession, and that to these the gifts of the Holy Spirit have been limited, and through them alone are enjoyed. Irenasus says, " et ubi spiritus Dei, illuc ec- clesia et omnis gratia ;" that is, where the spirit of God is, there is the church, and all grace.^ The presence of God's spirit, therefore, is the sure index to this *' legitimate ecclesiastical perpetuity." We learn from him, says Faber, " both where we are not to seek the true catholic church, and where we are to seek it."'' Now has this Spirit, we ask, been confined to pre- 1) See Palmer, vol. ii. p488, 492, the foundation of Christianity, and of and Oxford Tr. vol. i. p. 92. primary doctrines ; and this transmis- 2) Newman on Romanism, p. sion attested by a succession of authen- 336. tic writings. Does the certainty of 3) " We rejoice in the fact of the our knowledge of the common "law succession, such as it was, and of the depend on our being able to produce tradition of a regula fidcl as the com- a perfect list of lords chief justice .? mon law of Christianity; and here "2. If the catalogues were indubita- we find an evidence of the origin and bly complete, nothing would follow divine authority of our religion and to the detriment of our views, or to of its principal doctrines. We regard the advantage of the style of episco- the succession and tradition, 72oi indeed pacy against which scripture and an- as autltority, yet as a valuable auxilia- tiquity compel us to protest. We ry or collateral elucidation of our ONLY look at those pleasant lists with a standard of faith and practice, the smile of doubt ; but we see in their holy scripture. But let me remark, — early links nothing but the idea of a "1. Our argument does not turn line of lowly pastors of congregational upon tlie p£rA'o?!rt/ succession, a thing, churches." — Dr. Pye Smith's First notwithstanding the boasting of Dr. Letter to Dr. Lee, p. 26. Cave, Mr. Bingham, &c., impossible 4) Adv. Haer. Lib. iii. c. 40. to be satisfactorily made out. It [i. e. 5) See on the Anc't. Vdlenses, the genuine christian idea of succes- &c. p. 27. sion,] lies in the transmission oT facts, 44 WHAT IS INVOLVED IN THIS QUESTION. [lECT. II. lates and refused to all other, the reformed protestant churches ? God forbid. But if we possess the "omnis gratia," the "all grace " — we may well be satisfied, even if we are denied by prelates the title of " ecclesia," or church. This subject, therefore, involves in it plainly these three questions : First, who are the divinely appointed ministers of the chris- tian church — presbyters or bishops, and these alone, as one order — or bishops, presbyters and deacons, as three essentially distinct orders, having essentially different oflSces and powers? Secondly, by what authority are these men called into the ministry ? By the authority of God, or of man ? And thirdly, is this divine authority of the ministry com- mitted to the church as a sacred deposit, to be transmitted in unbroken succession ; and to depend for its virtue upon this un- broken succession, from the apostles to the end of the world? Or is it so immediately derived from Christ, through the agency of his Spirit, and so dependent upon his divine gift, that whether ecclesiastical order is interrupted or not, this authority can be communicated and preserved to the church? If it is tlie doctrine of the Bible, that presbyter-bishops have only in part the divine authority which is there given in per- petuity to the ministry ; that prelates alone have the power of ordination and of government — that to these prelates is committed the Holy Ghost — and that this heavenly gift cometh upon the church, not immediately from God, but mediately through these prelates, by a line of uninterrupted succession, so that without and beyond them, these sacred gifts cannot be enjoyed — then does it follow, that nearly the whole of protest- ant Christendom lies beyond the pale of the church ; and that while saying " peace, peace to themselves," they are still in the shadow of death, without God, and without hope. But if, on the other hand, ordination is the scriptural and legitimate work of presbyter-bishops — if all that authority, power and grace, which render any ministry effectual to salvation, is derived im- mediately from Christ, and is not communicable by any man or body of men on earth — and if the only succession which is at all essential to the true being, or to the well being, of any church, is a succession in the pure doctrine of the word of God, and in the due administration of God's two, and only appointed, sacra- ments— then does it follow that this system of prelacy is not only baseless in itself; but, what is far worse, that it is posi- tively unchristian. For this system, therefore, as now portrayed, and which we pronounce a schism from the whole reformation — we demand LECT. II.] THIS DEMAND URGED BY ALL CHURCHES. 45 express and indubitable sanction from the word of God, We fall back upon this written testimony, as the only inspired law — the only code of Heaven's institutes — the only rule by which we are to be judged, either of men, or as it hath pleased Him, by God himself.' On no lower authority than this, is it possible to sustain such unbounded assumptions ; and to no other power will we yield subjection, while this magna charta of our spiritual liberties is in preservation. The grounds upon which we rest the justice of this de- mand, that, being christians, we shall be tried at the bar of Christ, and if worthy of death, receive it at his hands, rather than fall into the hands of men, are in part, these : I. In the first place, these same exclusive claims were asserted by the ancient heretics, as is taught us by Tertullian,' who says they were on this account to " be detected by the diversity of their doctrine." The Arian churches which once prevailed to such an extent, and through so many countries ; the Nestorian, Eutychian, Jacobite, and other churches, which were all in their turn condemned as heretical ; had undisputed claims to this apostolical succession. The Greek, Armenian, Syrian, Abys- sinian, and other oriental bodies, all assert their rightful pos- session of this hereditary title to the charter of the true church. The mere production, therefore, of a catalogue of bishops, in all apparent regularity, from the apostles down to the present time, is nothing to the purpose. The Greek church, the Ethi- opic, and others, are equally willing to spread out their endless genealogies. Bellarmine says, " the church of Constantinople has one from the emperor Constantine in an uninterrupted series, and Nicephorus likewise deduces the names of all the bishops, even from the time when the apostle Andrew flourished." And yet, notwithstanding all this, Bellarmine and his Romish coad- jutors deny to the Greeks any true and valid apostolical succes- sion. They require in order to the substantiation of such a claim, not only an uninterrupted lineal succession of prelates, but also, that no single heretic shall be found among them all.^ Such, also, are the boasted pretensions of the Romish church, which ex- communicates and anathematizes the English, as schismatical 1) John viii. 50, and xii. 48. true church, and had been living; when 2) And so Cyril Hieros. Catech. 18 Luther appeared, and had before him in Gary's Testimonies, p. 249. See theNestorians andEutychians,the Ar- Oxford Tracts, vol. l,p. 37, § 8, and menians, Egyptians and Ethiopians in Oxford Tracts, vol. 1, p. 55G, 557. the east, the numerous churches of 3) Bishop Williams urges this very Greece, &c., which pretend to a du- argument against the Romanists. ration as good and sufficient as thai of Notes of the Ch. Examd. p. 100, 101. Rome, and the last of which is ack- " Suppose that a person that has ira- knowledged by the Bishop of Bitonto, bibed this principle is in quest of the in the council of Trent, to be ' the 46 NO CERTAINTY BEYOND THE BIBLE. [lECT. II. in its character, invalid in its ministry, and inefficacious in its sacraments.' Now, since there are different and rival claimants to this same high prerogative and supremacy,^ we require a judge who may arbitrate their respective pretensions, before we abandon " a good hope" and a " well-grounded assurance," and submit our souls, we cannot tell whether to heretics, Romanists, or to An- glican prelates. Such a judge is the more necessary, inas- much as, when our ship is once loosened from the firm moor- ings of scripture, we know not whither we are to be driven, but must allow ourselves to be swept by every wind of doctrine, w'ithout any cheering light from sun, moon, or stars. There is evidently no security, no rest, for the sole of one's foot, except in the form of sound words f and of this much we are assured, that the true church of Christ " knows no master but Christ, as he enjoined ;"^ since " Christ has taught his church, by his scriptures, in what he will be glorified ; and it is not for us to tolerate other ways, however they may challenge our admiration, for their ingenuity ; or our kindness, by the seeming sincerity of their inventors."^ Neither do we believe lliere is any " via media," or middle path, between this exclusive supremacy of Bible doctrine, order, and polity, and the full-grown enormities of the papal hierarchy. For, if the church has committed to it, under divine guidance and promise, an inherent power of gradual developement and progressive alteration, — then, why this power should be limited to the age of the Nicene church, or why it should be even termi- mother of the Latin, and to which the pose; which hatli had an uninterrupted Latin owes what it hath ;' how sliall succession of bishops, from the apos- he be able to determine where he shall ties, and is of greater antiquity than fix?" So also Bishop Fowler. Ibid. the church of Rome, and which hath pp. 124, 123, 130 See also Dr. Thorpe produced more fathers than that in Ibid, pp. 135. 136, 138, 140. church." See note B. " To pass by the christians under the ]) See Palmer, on the Ch. vol. 2, Patriarch of Mozale, of whom Postel- part C. chap. ii. lus saith, "Though they are but few 2) " It is not true," says Bishop On- in comparison of what they have been, derdonk, in his charge on the rule of yet they are many more than us Lat- faith, (p. 7, Tract form,) "that tradition ins." To say nothing neither of the is the same among churches ofdiffer- Armenian christians, falsely called ent countries. For example ; tlie Nestorians, (whose Catholic, as they Greek, Armenian, Syriac and Coptic call their patriarch, " Otho Frisangen- churches do not agree with the church sis," reports to have under his obe- of Rome in regard to the traditions dience above a thousand bishops, from before us — that the latter is the mis- the report of his legates sent to Rome,) tress of all churches." both which vast bodies of christians 3) Oxford Tr. vol. 2, p. 425, and acknowledge no subjection to the see also pp. 423, 424. of Rome : I say, to pass these by, we 4) Ibid, 427. need not instance any besides the 5) Ibid, 423. Greek church, for the aforesaid pur- LECT. II.] PRELACY LEADS TO POPERY. 47 natedat the period of the Tridentine council — we cannot possi- bly divine. If the church was authorized to re-construct, alter, amend, or beautify the glorious fabric of the christian temple, as left by Christ and his apostles, then do these church principles equally sanction the continued adaptation of this building, in its internal arrangements, and in its outer appearance, to the al- tered spirit and temper of the times. ^ The theory of the papacy, assumes the continuance, with the church, of a divine prerog- ative and supremacy of legislative control, which the theory of the prelacy regards as having ceased somewhere — the precise time she has not yet determined — between the third and the eighth centuries, according to the opposing views of her contra- dictory theologians.^ But it can be, and has been shown, that the ripened system of popery, as it now exists, is nothing more than the maturity of those principles and practices, which were in full blow, as early even as the fourth age. And there is, therefore, most plainly no alternative, nor resting place, between the undisputed sovereignty of scripture, and the infallibility of the Romish church. The single question is between the Bible and the church. "The popery which is even now gathering over our heavens from all quarters, is nothing but the digested superstition which the good Augustine (and the other divines of the Nicene age) set forward in their day. "^ To sustain the enormous structure of a hierarchical and pre- latic church, any other foundation is altogether insufficient, and hence if this is " a building of God, and not made with hands," it must be shown to rest upon that rock, against which the gates of hell shall not be able to prevail. It has been made obvious that the fact of uninterrupted suc- cession— much more, the mere claim to such succession — can prove nothing as to the identification of the true church. Time was, when such a claim constituted no distinction whatever, and that confessedly, between the orthodox and the heterodox, the true and the untrue churches of Christ. And even now do we find various bodies, with very varying forms, ordinances, rites, ceremonies and doctrines, who regard each other as heretical and schismatical, and many of whose views, we, in common with three-fourths of protestant Christendom, must esteem erroneous 1) See Dr. Miller's letter to Dr. separated by mutual excommunica- Pusey, Lond. 1840, p. 11 and 13, tions. Palrner, on the Ch., vol. 2, p. &c. ' 189. Miller's Letter to Dr. Pusey, p. 2) Mr. Palmer and Dr. Pusey 12, 28. would seem to extend this period as 3) See Ancient Christ'y, vol.1, p. late as to the year 1054, when the 445, et passim, eastern and western churches were 48 PRELACY IF TRUE MUST BE [lECT. II. — all asseverating that they inherit this pure, unadulterated, un- interrupted, indefectible, or infallible succession. As plain, there- fore, as any thing can be, this mark can never guide us to the true church, since it may just as readily guide us to the false. And therefore must it be made evident from holy writ, that Christ has left his promise and all his bequeathed inheritance of divine blessings, with the prelacy of England ; or with any prelacy whatever ; or that Christ — a fact we have never yet discovered — has instituted any such thing as a prelacy at all. For as Hooker remarks, " our conviction can only be of that strength which the evidence will warrant, and one scripture proof must outweigh even ten thousand general councils.'" " We allege, as a second reason for our demand of a full and explicit scriptural authority for these high-church principles, that were they — supposing them to be correct — of essential importance, they would have been plainly revealed in scripture, and be susceptible of plain scripture establishment. Whether there is such an institution as the church of Christ at all, can be known surely only from the scriptures — now written and completed — but during the lives of our Lord and his apostles, delivered orally, and from time to time. This fact cannot be made certain to us by any uninspired men, for the church is an institution of God, for the accomplishment of his wise and gra- cious ends, and can be made known only by Him ; either through a written revelation, or in some other mode. The church being thus divine in her origin, must receive her charter from heaven, and this must be contained in that revelation, which is now preserved in a written form, for our guidance. But it is equally plain that this charter alone, can declare what is the nat- ure— what the constitution — what the faith, order, worship, laws and powers of this heavenly society. Being not a natural body, not originated or moulded by man's wisdom or sagacity, but being altogether a mystical body, and removed from hu- man comprehension or discovery, the entire platform, genius, and design of the church, must evidently depend upon her insti- tution, her sacred charter, her heavenly commission, and that code of laws framed for her by her supreme and ever-living Head.^ 1) See Wks., vol. 1 , p. 181, 182, 183, declare the nature and constitution of and Chillingworth's Wks. vol. 1, p. it, what its faith and worship, and 316. laws and privileges, are." Bp. Sher 2) "Whether there can be any such lock, in notes of the Church Examd. thing as a church, or not, we can only and Refuted, pp. 'J and G. know by the scriptures." "Forcer- Again, "the church is not a natu- tainly the church lias no charter but ral but a mystical body, and therefore what is in the scripture." " For the its nature depends upon its institu- chaiter which founds the church, must tion." Do. p. 23. "And therefore if LECT. II.] FOUND IN THE BIBLE. 49 It is, then, incontrovertibly plain, either that there is no such thing as a church, or that every thing essential to the being of that church, which it is imperatively binding upon all her members to observe and follow, must be contained in that divine institution from which she derived her origin. Now pre- lacy asserts the absolute necessity, to the very being and con- tinuance of the church, of a succession of prelates as one of three orders in the ministry ; and therefore is it most manifest that such a doctrine, and such an order and orders, must all be made clear from this heavenly institute. Otherwise, though the whole world were against us, as it was against Alhanasius, we abide by the charter, and in the name of its divine author, the omnipotent and all-wise God our Saviour, we hold in abey- ance all the synods, convocations, and oecumenical councils which may attempt to wrest from us this title-deed, signed and sealed in the courts above.' If such a prelatical succession is essential to the true church, so that there cannot be a true, and pure, and safe church, with- out it ; then would our Lord have necessarily " designated, in express terms, that could not be mistaken," the nature, order, and character of such succession, and by such specifications on his part, would have rendered any miraculous proofs need- less for our full satisfaction. It is only by such a definitive specification of this doctrine, or by the continued presence of a miraculous agency bearing attestation to it, that christians in all future ages could have been assured of the truth of this funda- mental article. Certainty on this point was most certainly to have been expected, since the very object of this doctrine is to exclude all rival or differing forms of polity, from having any there be any, they must be instituted end of their authority." Archbishop notes." Do. p. 24. " Whatever in- Whateley holds this language, (Dan- stitution makes proper and necessary gers to the Chr. Faith, Lond., 1839, p. it makes essential." " And it is car- ]71) : " If it were possible that all the tain there can be no other rule or christians now in existence — suppose standard of the church, but its institu- 250 millions — could assemble, either tion as to faith and worship and go- in one person or by deputations of their vernment." respective clergy, in one place, to " As no covenant can originally be confer together ; and that the votes, made for God, but by God himself; whether personal or by proxy, of 230 it hence follows that God only can or 240 millions of these were to be at make or constitute a church." Dan- variance (as in many points they bury's Guide to the Ch. vol. l,p. 44. probably would be) with the decision 1) Thus speak the authors of the and practices of our own church, we Notes of the Church Examined and should be no more bound to acquiesce Refuted. See p. 9, 6, 23, 24, &c. On in and adopt the decision of that ma- p. 47, Bishop Sherlock says: " Should jority, even in matters which we do synods, and convocations, and cecume- not regard as essential to the christian nical councils, determine that for an faith, than we should be, to pass a law article of faith, which is not plain and for this realm, because it was approved intelligible in scripture, they were by the majority of the /mman race." ridiculous indeed, and that were an 7 50 SILENCE OF SCRIPTURE. [LECT. II. participation in the benefits of Christ's kingdom, and all exer- cise of private judgment in otherwise interpreting the word of God.' That error cannot be fundamental, even " our enemies them- selves being judges," which consists in the rejection of a doc- trine that is only probably revealed by Christ, " while there is a probability that he did not reveal it." " In this case," we are instructed, " error is tolerable. "^ Now, in order to estab- lish against us, the charge of wilful denial of a certain truth, — which conduct is, we are told, " heretical, anti-christian, and destructive of salvation,"^ — the certainty of the revelation of that truth must, of course, be made apparent. When we consider, how these church principles are conso- nant to the pride, pomp, and circumstance, which are so dear to the natural heart4 — how perfectly they are in unison with the strongest feelings and prejudices of the Jewish people — and how often the apostles manifested the outbreaking of this self-same spirit — we may well feel assured, that had not these apostles been restrained from doing so, by a divine influence, they would have fully developed, and frequently asserted them.s This argument becomes conclusive, when, in contrast with the course pursued by the apostles, we consider the bombastic and fulsome exaggeration with which many of the fathers, and later churchmen, expend all their force of energy and of eloquence, in the establishment of these — to them, all-important verities. But further: "no bishop — no church," is a current maxim in the system of prelacy. Now, it is on all hands allowed, that the writers of the New Testament employed the word bishop interchangeably, and as synonymous, with the word 1) See Whateley's Dangers to Chr. "But," to apply this bishop's Faith, Essay iii. § 4. " Now," says words, " has this enormous structure Dr Howe, (Vind. of the Protestant a foundation of proportionate strength ? Episcopal Church, p. 361,) " nothing No, it has not — none in scripture — will serve as a basis for a divine insti- none in common sense and sound tution but an express ?oarmn« of scrip- reasoning." (See p. 38, in the Tract ture ; now, it is quite sufficient if the form.) institution be capable of being fairly 2) See Palmer, vol. i. p. 131. proved from scripture." 3) Do. do. Bishop Onderdonk, in his charge on 4) " But a visible priesthood, with the rule of faith, remarks : "that in power and parade, officiating within proportion to the magnitude of the the perimeter of holy rails, at altars of structure should be the strength of gold or marble, and mimicing medi- the foundation," which is, says his ation with divers well-contrived cer- Roman catholic reviewer, "true in emonies and shows of intercession, is logic as well as in architecture." See gross food for the natural man, and the Catholic Miscellany, March 6, such as his coarse palate does exceed- 1841. He further adds, " that without ingly relish." (Beverley's Heresy of a clear and explicit scriptural basis. Human Priesthood, p. 7.) the whole structure of infallibility can 5) See Hinds on Inspiration, p. only rest on the foundation of human 79 and 85. fallibility." LECT. II.] MUST BE PROVED FROM SCRIPTURE. 51 presbyter. But since the apostles gave very full and explicit directions to the churches they addressed, on all points deemed important ; and were led to do so by the teaching of the Holy Ghost ; — it would have been the more necessary to guard their readers against the inference which must be otherwise drawn, as to the identity of these officers. Prelacy being true, and being of essential importance, we cannot imagine how the apostles should have said what they have spoken, and should have left unsaid what they might have so easily declared. Christ commanded us to call no man master on earth, and before submitting, therefore, to this yoke of bondage, we must be certified of the authority by which it is imposed. Christ represented his kingdom as divided into different provinces, un- der the dominion of as many separate governors as he then had chosen ministers, and we ask where he has reduced it to one consolidated and absolute monarchy.^ Christ is held forth to us, every where, as the only head of his church ; and as carry- ing on all its operations by his own immediate and divine presi- dency ; and we ask where he has consigned this sceptre, and intrusted this rule, to prelates — these self-styled successors of the apostles.^ Christ commanded his ministers to go forth as heralds, not as legislators — as servants, not as masters — as teachers of what he commanded, and not as enforcers of what he commanded not. The Jewish Rabbis are condemned, for making the law of God, — which, like prelates, they professed fully to receive — of none effect by those traditions, with which they overlaid and obscured them. Now we must be certified that these prelatical church principles are not, likewise, tradi- tions of the elders, and therefore to be condemned. That which is essential to salvation, is held forth in scripture so plainly that the wayfaring man, though a fool, need not err. Such truths are as a city set on a hill, toward which we can hardly miss our way, if sincerely desirous to reach it. They are proclaimed so openly, so unreservedly, and so clearly, that whosoever belie veth may be saved. But these writers would persuade us that the main difference between the Jewish and christian dispensations, lies in the difficulty of discovering the precise requirements of the christian ritual ; and that in- stead of being a law of liberty, it is a law of severity, of con- straint, of formality, and of external rites. But is this indeed so ? " To the law and the testimony."^ 1) See Mark 29, 30. Christ being the sole legislator and 2) See the Dudleian Lecture, by supreme head and ruler of the chris- the Rev. John Tucker, A. M., Bos- tian church." ton, 1778. "The validity of presby- 3) See note C. terian ordination argued from Jesus ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE SECOND. NOTE A. That we do not overcharge the picture, will appear from the statement of the question as given by its three ablest American advocates. Dr. Bowden declares that he has proved " that diocesan (his own italics) episcopacy is of divine origin."* " I had proved," says he,t " that bishops in the third century were diocesan ; that they were raised from the presbyter- ate to the episcopate by a new ordination ; that they possessed the supreme power of the keys ; that they were the sole ordainers : that they alone con- firmed ; that all orders in the church were subordinate to them, and that bishops of this kind were instituted by Christ. "t The doctrine is thus laid down by Dr. Howe : t " Well, the supposition is, that Christ established distinct grades of ministers, and conferred upon the highest grade the exclusive power of ordaining. When a minister of the highest grade, then, ordains, Christ ordains; when a minister of the second grade ordains, it is not Christ that ordains, but man. Thus episcopal ordina- tion confers the sacerdotal office ; presbyterial ordination does not. If, there- fore, the former ordination be laid aside, and the latter be substituted in its place, the sacerdotal office must cease to exist; and as there can be no church without a ministry, the church must cease to exist also. " Man can no more make a minister of Christ than he can make a Bible. The sacerdotal power can come only fiom the great Head of the church ; and it can come from him only in the way of his appointment." Dr. Cooke thus presents the question :§ '-We have express warrant for saying, that there was an order of drrgtj superior to presbyters ; that their supe- riority rests on the appointment of Christ, and that with this superior order alone ivere deposited all the treasures of ministerial order and succession. More- over, that we have the positive testimony of those to whom this superior order committed the church, as their successors, that they, when the church was settled, dropped the name of apostles, messengers, and, now that they were confined to the oversight of the church in one city and the district of country surrounding it, assumed to themselves the more appropriate name of over- seers or bishops^and continued to exercise the powers of the superior order,"|| viz. the apostolic order. Bishop Meade, in his sermon at the consecration of Bishop Elliott, with a particular reference to Arclibishop Laud, gives the following outline of the high-church doctrines on this subject: "1st. That before Jesus Christ left the world, he breathed the holy spirit into the apostles, giving them the power of transmitting this precious gill to others by prayer and tlie imposition of hands ; that the apostles did so trans- mit it to others ; and they again to others ; and that in this way it has been pre- served in the world to the present day. * Letters, 2d series. Letter ii. p. 18. t Do. Letter iii. p. -25. See also p. 2fi, 36- See also Works on Episcop. vol. ii. p. 68 and 73. i Vind. of the Prot. Episc. Oh. p. 35-1. 0, where he shows that ciprocally repels the gospki,, and a " the frightful impiety of denying the religion ofasceticism, superstition, and possibility of salvation to dissidents" sacramental efficiency. Nf.ver have must follow from these principles. the two systems been combined, al- That it is not against faith to reject though often they have been tightly even points fundamental, unless suffi- bound together by stringent creeds, in ciently proposed as revealed by God is the same church-bundle. The epistle a position taken by Romanists, as in to the Galatians turns entirely upon Chillingworth, vol. i. pp. 33(J, 333 this irreconcilable contrariety between 2) See On the Ch. vol. ii. p. 71. God's religion and man's religion. 3) See Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 70,74. Whoever, therefore, adheres to the 4) " The laws of attraction and latter, finds himself, as if by an irre- repulsion are universal and invinci- sistible and invisible hand, drawn 60 THIS PROOF DEMANDED BY THE [LECT. III. since He makes essential, only such points as are really neces- sary to salvation. This system, so far as it stands distinguished from evangelical episcopalianism, is in unquestionable opposition to the entire catena of the apostolic, and inspired authors — the true fathers, founders, and authorities of the christian church. For such a system, therefore, which is made to stride the entrance to the kingdom of heaven, like the cherubim with the flaming sword in the garden of Eden, to be a consuming fire to all presbyterian and other sectaries, who may venture to approach — for this system we must demand, before submitting to it, the most plain, palpable, and certain scripture evidence.^ IV. A fourth ground upon which we stake the merits of this demand, for the most clear and unequivocal scripture authority, in support of these exclusive pretensions is, that it is in accord- ance with the doctrine, and the spirit of Protestantism. The doctrine of protestantism cannot be more satisfactorily stated, than — in the language of an episcopal writer, Mr. Isaac Taylor, already quoted, and whose language we use rather than our own, because he is an episcopalian, — "That no article of worship, discipline, government, or opinion, which, however well attested as belonging even to the apostolic churches of the first century, is nowhere alluded to, or enjoined, in the inspired scriptures, can be binding upon the church in after- times ; for we adhere to the belief, and on this very ground renounce Romanism, that, whatever our Lord intended to be of permanent observance in his church, he has caused to be includ- ed in the canonical writings ; and secondly, that points so attested as ancient, and yet very slightly or ambiguously alluded to by the inspired writers, are not to be regarded as of prime necessity, or insisted upon as conditions of communion. " Again, at the present moment, the christian community, and especially the clergy of the episcopal church, are called upon to make their choice between apostolic Christianity, and an- cient CHRISTIANITY ; and this weighty alternative must soon merge all other distinctions, leaving only the two parties — the adherents of the inspired, and those of the uninspired documents of our religion."* "What we mean by protestantism," says away from the former : a dread fatal- river toward a cataract." Anct.Christ'y. ity pursues him, from step to step, of vol. i. p. 503 his course; he himself struggles 1) See Rutherford's Due Right against what he feels to be an omi- of Presbyteries, Lond., 1G44, 4to, pp. nous tendency ; — lie wistfully returns 224, 223, ch. iv. § r>. twenty times to a point nearer to the 2) Anct. Christ'y. vol. i. p. 510 foot of the cross, and as often is borne and 110. away, as on the bosom of a smooth LECT. 111.] DOCTRINE OF PROTESTANTISM. 61 Mr. Taylor, in his preface to the Life of Luther, " can be nothing less than a renouncing the religion of man's contrivance, and a returning to the religion which God has revealed ; and to effect this return, we must recede, not toward the sixth century, not toward the fifth, nor toward the fourth, nor the third, nor the second : not to the times of Polycarp or Ignatius : not even to the age of the apostle John ; but we must go where alone revealed religion is to be found — namely, to God's Book."^ No mere human power, whether civil or ecclesiastical, has any right or authority whatever, to make essential to salvation, either the form of church government, or the manner of admin- istering its discipline and rites; so far forth, as they are not so propounded in the Word of God. This is that liberty where- with Christ has made us free — in which we stand — and for which we mu^t contend earnestly, and if needs be, even unto blood. From those carnal ordinances, in which were prescribed the mi- nutest detail of religious services and ecclesiastical offices, we have been delivered ; and what should bewitch us, having been once freed from bondage, to be again enslaved to these weak and beggarly elements ? Were the apostle alive, he might address the abettors of such a system, as he did the Galatians: " Ye ob- serve days and months and time and years, I am afraid of you." Let us here use the language of that eminent episcopalian, Dean Stillingfleet, in the preface to his Irenicura : " Will Christ ever thank men at the great day for keeping such out from commu- nion with his church, to whom he will vouchsafe not only crowns of glory, but it may be aureolce too, if there be such things there ? The grand commission the apostles were sent out with, was only to teach uhat Christ had commanded them. Not the least intimation of any power given them, to impose or require any thing beyond what himself had spoken to them, or they were directed to, by the immediate guidance of the Spirit of God. 1) See the fundamental principles church of Rome was this, that christian of the reformers well laid down in Dr. people were not tied up unto blind obe- Owen's answer to Dr. Stillingfleet, in dience unto church guides, but were AVks., vol. 20, p. 2d2, &c. First. not only at liberty, but also obliged " The first was, that the scripture, tlie to judge for themselves, as unto all Word of God, is a perfect rule of faith things that they were to believe and and religious worship ; so as thatnoth- practise in religion and the worship of ing ought to be admitted which is re- God." pugnant unto it in its general rule of Tliirdly. Another principle of the especial prohibitions, nothing is im- reformation is, "That there was not posed that is not prescribed therein, any catholic, visible, or^anical, go- but that every one is at liberty to re- verning church, traduced by succes- fuse and reject any thing of that kind." sion into that of Rome, whence all Secondly. " The second principle of church-power and order was to be de- the reformation whereon the reform- rived." ers justified their separation from the 62 POCTKINB Of PEOTESTANTISM. [HCT, HI. It is not whether the things required be lawful or no ? which I now inquire after, (of those things in the treatise itself) but whether they do consult for the churches peace and unity, who suspend it upon such things? how far either the example of our Saviour, or liis apostles, doth warrant such rigorous impositions? There were great diversities of practice and varieties of observ- ance among christians, in the apostolic times, but the Holy Ghost never thought those things fit to be made matter of laws, to which all parties should conform. All that the apostles re- quired as to these, was mutual forbearance and condescension to- wards each other in them. The apostles valued not indifferences at all, and those things it is evident they accounted such, which, whether men did them or not, was not of concernment to sal- vation. Without all controversies, the main inlet of all the distractions, confusions, and divisions of the christian world, hath been by adding other conditions of church communion than Christ hath done." These fundamental principles of protestantism, that the church can never make any thing to be wrong, but can only declare or hold forth, that which is made wrong by the Word of God,^ — and that it has no authority to make necessary as articles of faith that which the Bible has not made certainly necessary, — these principles are held forth, as if engraven on their fore front, by all the reformed churches in Christendom.'^ Luther, in his preface to the Bohemic confession, says, " Let us remember that all the rites and observances of all churches never have been, or could be, uniform and alike; for the circumstan- ces and varieties of men do not permit it. Only let the doctrine of faith and morals be preserved, for this ought to be the same." Melancthon says, " As we agree respecting the chief articles of christian doctrine, let us embrace each other with mutual 1) See Palmer vol. ii. p. 262, and nelle, que tons les serviteurs de Dieu the Church Indep. of Civil Gov't, p. doivent sainctement entretinir avee 62, by an Episcopalian. les Protestants qui ont quelque diver- 2) The reformers and later divines site, soil d 'expression, soil de methode, rejected the claim of uninterrupted soit mesme de sentiment, rassembli's succession as a mark of the true en un pour la consolation et confima- church. See De Moor Comment, tion des ames pieuses, et pour I'in- vol. 6, p 54 ; Turretini Opera, tom. III. struction de la posterite, a Amsterdam, p. 121, de Notes EcclesifE ; and tom. 1655," 4to. The clergy of England iv. De Secessione, p. 210. For a full receive even her creeds, as Bp. Bull and elaborate collection of the testi- testifies, " upon this ground, primarily, monies of the reformers, the reader — because slie finds that the articles is referred to Blondel's " Actes Au- thereof may be proved by most evident thentiques des Eglises Reformees de testimonies of Scripture." Vind. Ch. France, Germanie, Grande Bretaigne, Eng. § xxviii. p. 106. See also Voe- Pologne, Hongrie, Pais Bas, &c. tius Desperata Causa Papatus, Amst Touchant la paii et charite frater- 1635. LECT. III.] SPIRIT OF THE REFORMERS. 63 love. Nor ought dissimilitude and variety of rites and ceremo- nies to disunite our affections." Calvin did not regard the peculiarities of the Lutheran church, as any just cause of disunion between it and the Reformed. He desired that the most catholic union should subsist among all the churches of the reformation, exclaiming, " I should not hesitate to cross ten seas, if by this means holy communion might prevail among the members of Christ." In his exhor- tation to the Lutheran churches, he says, "keep your smaller differences, let us have no discord on that account ; but let us march in one solid column, under the banners of the Captain of our Salvation, and with undivided counsels pour the legions of the cross upon the territories of darkness, and of death." Knox ministered to a church at Frankfort, in which a form of modified liturgical service was employed. "We do not," says the Helvetic confession, "by a wicked schism separate and break fellowship with the holy churches of Christ in Germany, France, England, or other nations of the christian world." " For it is of little moment," says the Polish agreement at the synod of Sendomir in 1570, "what rites and ceremonies are employed, provided the fundamental doctrine of our faith and salvation be preserved entire and incorrupt." " In 1614, at the general synod held at Tonneins, a plan of union was proposed, which was to allow each of the churches to retain its independence, and its own order." The sixth article of the Church of England, declares that " whatsoever is not read in scripture, nor may be proved there- by, is NOT to be required of any man, that it should be believed AS AN ARTICLE of THE FAITH ! " Again, in article 20th, after the interpolated passage, (as we must regard it,) it is said, " It is not lawful for the church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's word written . . . and as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so, besides the same ought it not to en- force any thing to be believed for necessity of salvation." Again, in the canon of 1571, it is enjoined that "preachers shall be careful not to preach aught to be religiously held and believed by the people, except what is agreeable to the doctrine of the Old and New Testament, and collected from that new DOCTRINE, by the catholic fathers and ancient bishops." Bishop Burnet, in his commentary on the thirty-nine articles, very strongly contrasts this characteristic of the Church of 1) See these quoted on Schism, p. 483, &c. 64 SPIRIT OF THE REFOEMERS. [lECT. III. England, with " the tyranny of the church of Rome ; which has imposed the beHef of every one of her doctrines on the consciences of her votaries, under the highest pains of anathe- mas, and as articles of faith.'" This he regards as " intolerable, because it pretends to make that a necessary condition of sal- vation, which God had not commanded." That this was the doctrine of the English reformers, cannot be doubted. Thus Hooper tells us, that Christ left his will "unlo the world in writing, by the hands of his holy apostles, unto which writing only he has bound and obligated his church, and not to the writings of men."^ " It is mine opinion unto all the world," he adds, " that the scripture solely, and the apos- tles' church, is to be followed, and no man's authority, be he Augustine, Tertullian, or even cherubim or seraphim."^ '' The church of God, therefore, must be bound to no other authority than unto the voice of the gospel and unto the ministry thereof, as Isaiah saith, ' seal the law among my disciples.' " Indeed, the very first article in the confession which this bishop and martyr drew up, as monitory articles for his clergy, in A. D. 1551, is " that none do teach any manner of thing, to be neces- sary for the salvation of men, other than what is contained in the books of God's holy word."'* That such also were the sentiments of the earliest puritans, is made manifest from the very first paragraph in the " Sacred Discipline," drawn up by Cartwright, the opponent of Arch- bishop Whitgift. " The discipline of Christ's church, that is necessary for all times, is delivered by Christ and set down in the holy scriptures ; therefore, the true and lawful discipline must be fetched from thence and from thence alone, and that which resteth upon any other foundation ought to be esteemed unlawful and counterfeit."^ " We say," says Cartwright, " the word is above the church, 1) See Introd. p. 8. changed into the body and blood of 2) See in the Brit. Reformers, our Saviour, Jesus Clirist, the form vol. vii. p. 30. and shape only not being changed. 3) Ibid, p. 23 and p. 27, and again Which thing, if it were most true, (as at p. 200 and 220. they shall never be able to prove it by 4) " The cause why I die," said any authority of the scripture or doc- John Frith, vpho was offered up a tors,) yet shall they not so bring to sacrifice on the altar of British tyr- pass, that that doctrine, were it never rany, by the bloody hands of Henry so true, should be holden for a neces- Vllf., "is this: (Price's Hist, of sary article of faith. For there are Nonconf vol. i. p. 48.) for that I can- many things, both in the scriptures not agree with the divines and other and other places, which we are not head prelates, that it should be neces- bound of necessity to believe as an sarily determined to be an article of article of faith." faith, and that we should believe, 5) In Neal's Puritans, vol. v. Ap- under pain of damnation, the sub- pendix, p. xi stance of the bread and wine to be LECT. III.] THE SPIRIT OF EARLIER REFORMERS. 65 [Eph. ii. 20,] then, surely, it is above the English church, and above all these books before rehearsed." " The puritans con- tended for a rigid adherence to the letter of apostolic insti- tutions and practice, while Whitgift maintained that a discre- tionary power was vested in the rulers of the church, to modify and regulate its ceremonies. The one appealed to the Word of God, the other to the writings of the fathers. The one required conformity to the example of the apostles ; the other obedience to the mandate of the prince." — " Neither is the controversy betwixt them and us," say the writers of the Admonition, " as they would bear the world in hand, as for a cap, a tippet, or a surplice; but for greater matters, concerning a true ministry and regiment of the church according to the w^ord, which things once established, the other melt away of themselves."^ This fundamental principle of the sole and exclusive suprem- acy of scripture, as the arbiter and judge in all controversies, and the only fountain of authority and source of necessary doctrine ; was the foundation upon which truly enlightened christians, in all ages, even the darkest, rested their confidence in bearing testimony against the growing corruptions of the church. Thus, for instance, that eminent man, Claude, metro- politan of Turin, in the ninth century, in his commentary on the epistle to the Galatians, " with an evident reference," says Faber, who quotes the original words, " to the state of religion in his own time, declares, that what constitutes heresy, is a de- parture from that interpretation of scripture which the sense of the Holy Spirit demands." He remarks, at the same time, " that real heretics, of this description, are to be found within, as well as without the pale of the church."^ " It is in vain, therefore," that I may employ against prelates what they address to Roman catholics, " to adduce passages from the fathers, where they speak of the catholic church as one communion, from which all heretics and schismatics are cut off." " These," says Mr. Palmer, " do not touch the question whether the catholic church itself may ever be divided in point of external communion." There is no '' promise," he adds, " of its perpetual and perfect external union," and yet '• this is what Romanists ought to produce before they affirm the impossibility of any division in the church, or the certainty that the catholic church can only exist in some one communion." 1) Second Admon. in Price Hist. 2) See Faber's Albigenses, p. 313. Nonconf. i. 250, and pp. 236, 237, and 3) Palmer on the Church, vol. i. 230. pp. 78, 77, 76. 9 66 THE FATHERS MUCH ABUSED. [LECT. III. Now claiming, as we do, but not in exclusion of others, to be one communion of the catholic church ; before we are cut off from this privilege, some promise or declaration of Christ, by which we are excommunicated, and by which the church of Christ is confined to the one communion of the prelacy, must assuredly be produced. The assumption that they are the church, which prelatists so frequently make, we interpret as arrogance. Their retreat to the authority of the fathers, we regard as an avowal of the fact, that they have no sufficient evidence from scripture. These very pretensions, thus built upon the fathers, the best of those very fathers, as we have evidence to show, would most sternly rebuke.* And to such an outcry against this tyranny over Christ's free-born subjects, would be added the loud and unmingled reprobation pronounced upon it by the fathers of the English church, and the noble army of modern reformers. Their history informs us, that they perilled life, endured the loss of favor and of fortune, and suffered even unto death, that they might establish and perpetuate the sole supremacy of scripture, and the inalienable right of appealing from the deci- sion of man to the judgment of God, as the only test of the purity and the perfection of our faith ; the only infallible rule 1) Upon the authority which is tion. In proving them to have grossly claimed for the early christian wri- perverted the gospel, and to be among ters, Mr. Isaac Taylor remarks : the worst guides which the church " It would be doing an injury to the can follow, we are driven to the ne- reputation of the illustrious men cessity of producing evidence which whose writings are in question, if we no motive less imperative would have were to speak as if they had claimed, led us to bring forward. The same in their own behalf, any such power happens in every analogous instance ; to interpret scripture despotically ; or to thrust a man into a position not to legislate for the church in all fol- due to him, is to expose him to the lowing ages. They do no such thing. peril of being treated ignominiously. Whatever may have been their faults, " Let it then be clearly understood this impiety is not of the number. It that, in vigorously contending, as we is altogether the product of the wicked shall, for the paramount and unshared despotism of a late age. None do the authority of the inspired writings, and fathers so grievous a wrong as do in demonstrating that the strongest those modern champions of church and most peremptory reasons of fact principles who are attributing to them as well as ■principle, forbid the attempt an authority which they themselves to conjoin the records of the ancient religiously disclaim. Who are the church with them ; we are at war, not enemies of the fathers .'' the men who with the men whose writings are in now are thrusting them, by violence, question, but with those ill-advised and against their solemn protest, into champions of church power, in modern Christ's throne. times, who have put these writings in "The harsh treatment to which the room of God's word. Itisthemod- these good but greatly erring men must ern mystery of wickedness, not so unavoidably be exposed, in the rude much the ancient error, which we are struggle which is yet before us, for laboring to overthrow. "Anct.Christ'y. rescuing apostolic Christianity, cannot vol. ii. Eng. edit, but do an injury to their just reputa- LECT. Ill,] THIS PROOF REQUIRED BY OUR OPPONENTS. 67 of faith and practice. " The Bible and the Bible alone, is the rehgion of protestants." " The religion of the protestants is the Bible. The Bible, I say, the Bible only, is the religion of protestants. Whatever else they may believe besides it, and the plain, irrefragable, indubitable consequences of it, well may they hold it as a matter of opinion ; but as a matter of faith and religion, neither can they with coherence to their own ground believe it themselves, nor require the belief of it from others, without the most high and schismatical presumption.'" V. We therefore make this appeal, fifthly, on the ground, that the right and privilege to demand it is not only recognized by the fathers of the reformation, and by all the reformed churches, but is, as has been already in part shown, a right admitted and acted upon whenever needed, by our opponents themselves. However far high-church prelates may be disposed to carry their sacerdotal claims of exclusive prerogative and authority, against those whom they denominate dissenters ; yet are they obliged, in coming into collision with the Romish church, to fall back for protection, into this fortress of scriptural supremacy. Nor do they even decline to make such a retreat, when hard pressed by the force of some one of those protestant arguments, which may be termed — to use a military phrase — invincibles. If, therefore, we require the most clear, irrefragable, and indu- bious scripture proof, for this divine right of prelates, and for this passive obedience of all but the favored few ; they will them- selves teach us how to frame our apology. Thus, in arguing against the great protestant doctrine of private judgment, (which we had supposed was now a received, and not a dispu- ted truth among protestants,) Mr. Newman asks : " Can any one text be produced, or any comparison of texts, to establish the very point in hand, that scripture is the sole, necessary in- strument of the Holy Ghost in guiding the individual christian into saving truth. '"^ Now, surely, to say the very least, it is as important to establish, by such positive scripture evidence, the divine right of prelacy, as the coordinate authority of tradition. Take a second illustration, from another Coryphaeus among modern high-church writers. Mr. Palmer, in arguing against popular election, as sufficient to constitute any man a minister, says : "But the grand, and unanswerable proof of its unscriptu- rality," is the fact, confessed by the most ardent advocates for such election, that " no case occurs in the inspired history, where it is mentioned that a church elected its pastor. This 1) Cliillingworth's Wks. vol. i. 2) On Romanism, p. 199. ch. 7, § 56. 68 ALL ESSENTIAL TRUTHS IN SCRIPTURE. [LECT. III. fact," says he, " is undeniable, and it is conclusive." Now, in the same way we argue, if there is any passage in scripture, by which prelates are empowered with all the prerogatives now claimed, — and this, loo, as a hereditary right, to be carried down by personal descent, to perpetuity — let it be shown ; or other- wise we must aflirm that this very silence of scripture is a con- clusive and unanswerable proof against them ; " for it is not to be supposed," says this same writer, " that scripture would omit all notice of the very cssejitials of the christian ministry."' " How is it possible," asks Bishop Taylor, " that the scrip- tures should not contain all things necessary to salvation, when, of all the words of Christ, in which, certainly, all necessary things to salvation must needs be contained, — there is not any one saying preserved but in scripture alone."' " An opinion," says Mr. Newman, '' which, in addition to the indirect evidence resulting from the foregoing remarks, seems to be sanctioned by the concluding words of St. John.'" But still further, when we demand, that the evidence thus to be produced from scripture, shall not be constructive, and in- ferential merely ; we are sustained in this position, by Bp. On- derdonk himself, who in his tract on this subject affirms, that " against the taking for granted any mere hypothesis, all sound reasoning protests."* He further says, " the right of these elders (or presbyters) to govern and ordain, cannot be claimed, as re- sulting from construction or implication," since "nothing of im- plication can be valid here."^ Now, if this is true of the claims instituted by presbyters ; it must be equally true as applied to the assumptions of prelates, since their exclusive supremacy cannot be deduced from construction or implication. If prelacy, therefore, as Mr. Palmer teaches, is to be ranked under the head of rites and ceremonies,* then it cannot be made a fundamental doctrine ; nor of the substance of the faith. 1) Palmer, on the Church, vol. i. principle contended for — and urg-es p. 171. the very demand we press. In his 2) Dissuasive, part 2. B. 1, § 2. Vindicalion of the Church of England, 3) On Romanism, p. 365 ; see Bishop Bull alleges it as one of the aJso pp. oGG, 367. errors and corruptions of the church 4) Episcopacy tested by Scripture, of Rome, that she maintains " that all in Works on Episcopacy, p. 424. things necessary to be known and be- 5) Ibid. p. 432. We cannot refer lieved unto salvation, are neither in to a stronger exhibition of our position express terms or by necessanj conse- in all its fullness and in every par- quence, delivered and contained in ticular, than to Bishop Onderdonk's the holy scriptures ; and that there charge on the Rule of Faith, forming is need of the tradition of the church, Tract No. 67, of tlie Protestant Epis- as a supply in this case." Oxf. ed., copal Tract Society. See especially p. 10. pp. 38, 30, where he argues against 6) See Palmer on Ch., vol. 2, p. infallibility — lays down the very 71. LECT. III.] ALL ESSENTIAL TRUTHS IN SCRIPTURE. 69 If, on the other hand, it is a necessary article of faith and of fun- damental importance ; then it cannot be so regarded without ex- plicit scripture warrant.' On the contrary, to make that a nec- essary doctrine, which scripture does not make necessary ; is, we are told, " sinful and detestable in the sight of God ;" for says Mr. Palmer, " the church of Christ would be apostate, if it taught positively what was false in faith, or contrary to the gospel of Christ."^ Those who reject such articles when made necessary, were those articles, in their proper degree of rela- tive importance even scripturally true, "are neither heretics nor schismatics in the sight of God, and are therefore in a state of salvation."^ ^ayj we are still further taught, that many things may be " theologically and absolutely true," and yet " not prop- erly articles of faith, necessary to salvation, because they involve questions of fact and of human reasoning which are not self-evident, and on which men may be divided without doubt- ing the doctrine of revelation itself."^ " The pure word of God " in short, " means the doctrine CERTAINLY REVEALED by Jesus Christ, neither mutilated nor corrupted;"' and if any body of men, be they prelates of the English or of the Roman school, " should be guilty of such rejection or contradiction, and obstinately persist in them, it would," says Mr. Palmer, " be apostate and cease, ipso facto, to be a church of Christ."^ In arguing against the Romish doctrine of the unity of the church, as implyins; union under one spiritual jurisdiction or government of any kind, Dr. Barrow also says, " It is reasonable that whosoever claimeth such authority, should, for assuring his title, show patents of his commission, manifestly expressing it ; how otherwise can he justly demand obedience, or any with satisfaction yield thereto ?"'' " It was just that the institution of so great authority should be fortified with an undoubted charter, that its right might be apparent, and the duty of subjection might be certain." " If any such authority had been granted by God, in all like- lihood it would have been clearly mentioned in scripture; it being a matter of high importance among the establishments of Chris- tianity, conducing to great effects, and grounding much duty."^ 1) See in proof Newman on Rom. 3) Ibid, vol. 1, p. 109, and see p.86. pp. 2-25 and 260. Palmer, vol. 2, p. 4) Palmer, vol. 2, p. 262. 74, Obj. iv., and vol 1, p. 92, and 5) Ibid, vol. 1, p. 45. vol. 2, p. 32:!, 3G2; Keble on Tradi- 6j Ibid, vol. 1, p. 64. That the tion, p. 30 and p. 74 and 77, 4th ed. church has authority only in things Sententia Johann. Davenantii Epis- indifferent, see also Jones (of Nayland) copum Sarisburiensem Cantab. 1640, Works, vol 4. p. 429, and vol. 2, p. pp. 9, 22, 30, 3.5, in the Old South Ch. 346. Lib. Also his Ashortatio, &c., cap. 7) Works, vol. 1, fol. edit. p. 771, ii. p. 49. In ibid, p. 45. 2d and 5th. 2) Palmer, vol. 2, p. 110, 111. 8) See ibid, p. 551. 70 THE JUDGMENT OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. [lECT. III. We arc thus particular in illustra:ting the fact, that in arguing with Romanists, or upon any other important subject than the powers of the ministry, churchmen avouch to be true and valid, the doctrine we have laid down; because in reference to this subject of prelacy as being jure divino — such a demand for a distinct, certain, and clear revelation in the word of God, has been generally denied. The appeal to scripture, as the only standard by which the merits of this question can be tested, has been set aside for the decisions of councils, and of fathers. And as this is a point of great practical importance — and goes far to invalidate the theory in question, we will here present unanswer- able evidence for its truth, reserving some further testimony, for the concluding argument under this branch of our subject. Archbishop Whitgift explicitly avows it as his opinion, that the question was not whether "the platform of discipline " drawn up by the puritans " were fitly used in the apostles' time — but may now well be used in sundry reformed churches. This," says he, " is not denied.'" He maintained, that " though the holy scriptures were a perfect rule of faith, they were not designed as a standard of church government and discipline ; but that this was changeable and might be accommodated to the civil govern- ment we live under ; that the apostolic government was adapted to the church in its infancy, and under persecution, but was to be enlarged and altered as the church grew to maturity and had the civil magistrate on its side."^ "The diversity of our times from the apostles, requires a diverse kind of government and of ordain- ing of ministers."^ That this was the early judgment of the English church, Dr. Willet affirms.'' " The third opinion is between both ; that al- though this distinction of bishops and priests, as it is now received, cannot be directly proved out of scripture, yet it is very necessary for the policy of the church, to av^oid schisms, and to preserve it in unity. Of this judgment Bishop Jewel against Harding showeth both Chrysostom, Ambrose, and Hierome to have been.^ And among the rest, Hierome thus writeth, " Apostolum perspicue docere &c." that the apostle teacheth evidently that bishops and priests were the same ; yet he holdeth this distinction to be necessary for the government of the church. " Quod unus post electus est, qui coeteris prae- \) See quoted in Neal's Puritans, Saravia's Priesthood, Oxf. 1840, p. 5. vol. 1, p. 240. Mr. Keble denomi- 2j Ibid, p. 237, and p. 405. nates VVhitnriil " the church's de- 3) Whitgift Def. of the answer to fender," see Primitive Tradition p. 102. the Admon. He is also called "the Cliurcli of 4) Syn. Pap. p. 273. fol. England's watchful patron." Pref to o) Defens. Apolog. j). 24^. LECT, TTI.] THE JUDGMENT OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. 71 poncretur in schismatis factum est remedium. That one after- wards was chosen, to be set over the rest, it was done to be a remedy against schism/ To this opinion of S. Hierome, sub- scribeth Bishop Jewel in the place before quoted, and another most reverend prelate of our church in these words," hc.^ 1) Ep. Ad Evag. 2) We will here add some other authorities. Dr. Willet, in his great work against " Papistrie," says, (Syn. Pap., p. 2G(5,) " As for the names and offices of sub-deacons, readers, exor- cists, acolythi, door-keepers, we have no such warrant out of the scripture, to make them orders of the church : and therefore we condemn them. All necessary orders for the edifying and building of the church the scrip- ture hath prescribed. (Eph. iv. 11.) There are all offices set down needful for the doctrine, instruction and edi- fying of the church. (Fulk. Eph. iv. § 4.) Wherefore away with these popish orders invented by men. But as for other offices and services, which shall be thought meet for the atiairs and business of the church, they may be retained and kept, but not as new orders of the ministry." Hooker" aknowledges that these controverted points, belong to the outward things of the church and not to its being. (Eccl. Pol. B. 3, § 1, vol. 1, p. 194.) That there were dif- ferent forms in the apostle's days. (Ibid, vol. l,pp.3C, 37.) And that the evidence of scripture on the subject of episcopacy is doubtful. (Ibid, vol; 1, pp. 30, 33.) And while it is asserted in the book of Common Prayer, that these orders are clear to all who dil- igently read holy scripture, Hooker shews that this whole subject is entire- ly beyond the reach of ordinary men. (Ibid, vol.1, pp. 2G, 27.) He makes it out that no form of church government is taught in scripture. (Eccl. Pol. B, 3, § 2, vol 1, pp. 207, 212, and B. 3, §11.) That various forms may be equally consonant to it. (Eccl. Pol. B. 3, § 2, vol. 1, p, 208. And that this is not among the things essential at all. (Ibid. B. 3, § 2, vol. 1, pp. 208, 210, 211, 212.) * " Perhaps there is no work," says Bish- op White, in allusion to the Ecclesiastical Po- lity "which from the circumstances conneclf!il with it, has so goorl pretensions to bo consid- ered as evidence of the opinions of the leading churchmen of the period." Lect. on the Ca- techism, Philad. 1813, p. 42C. Bishop Warburton thus speaks of Hooker: (Controv. Tracts, p. 4G7, as quoted in Meth. Quart. Rev., 1841, p. 78 :) " The great Hooker was not only against, but laid down principles that have entirely subverted all pretences to a divine unalterable right in any form of church government whatever. Yet strange to say, his work was so unavoidable a confutation of puritani- cal principles, which, by the way, claimed their presbytery as of divine right, that the churchmen took ad- vantage of the success of their cham- pion, and now began to claim a divine right for episcopacy on the strength of that very book that sulverted all pre- tences to every species of divine right whatsoever." Thus says Dr. Hammond :* (Pow. of Keys, in Pref Oxford Tracts, vol. 3, p. 1441:) " Who were the apostles' successors in that power, which con- cerned the governing their churches which they planted ? and first, I an- swer, that it being a matter of fact, or story, later than the scripture can universally reach to, it cannot be fully satisfied or answered from thence ; but will, in the full latitude, through the universal church in these times, be made clear from the recent evidences that we have, viz., from the consent of the Greek and Latin fathers, who generally resolve that bishops are those successors." Bishop Heber also teaches, that Jer- emy Taylor erred in this respect, and that the claims of prelacy are not to be based on the arguments from scripture, (see Taylor's Work's, Heber's ed. and Life, vol. 1 , pp. 18j , 183, and 186.) but on "apostolical tradition" which is, says he, " the strong, and if I may be allowed the expression, the impreg- nable ground of the episcopal scheme." "It happens, however, "he further says, (Serm. in Engl. No. 12, p. 250, Am. Ed.) " to be in our power to show, if not an explicit direction of Christ for the form of our church government and * " Hammond's name alono, were there no other, binds us to the Englisli church," &.c. Oxf. Tr., vol. 3, p. 3. 72 THE JUDGMENT OF THE ENGLISH CRUTtCH. [lECT. III. Rusliworth informs us, that in his days, (he wrote in the year 16l8,)''prelacy was ahnost universally held, by the prelates them- selves, to be a human ordinance, which may therefore be altered or abolished, in cases of necessity, without wronging any man's conscience.'" Thus, in the famous debate with the parliament divines, in 1648, King Charles allowed, that bishops, as " succes- sors of the apostles in all things not extraordinary, such as teach- ing, and governing, — are not mentioned, as a distinct order, in the New Testament;" while, on the other hand, these divines were of opinion, " that human testimony on both sides ought to be discharged, and the point in debate be determined only by scripture — and since your majesty," say they, " cannot produce any record from scripture, warranting the division of the office of teaching and governing into two hands, we must look upon it as an invention of men, to get power into their hands. "^ "His majesty in reply," relies, as he says, "on the numerous testimo- nies of ancient and modern writers, for the scripture original of bishops ;" while he modestly insists, at the same time, that " testimonies from those fathers, even of an equal number, to the contrary, are of no value whatever."^ the manner of appointing our spiritual guides, yet a precedent so clear, and a pattern so definite, as can leave little doubt of the intentions of our di- vine master, or of the manner in which those intentions were fulfilled by his immediate and inspired disciples." Bishop Tomline (see Elem. of Theol. vol. ii. pp. 376, 401, and 427., declares, that " as it has not pleased our Almighty Father to prescribe any particular form of civil government tor the security of temporal comforts to his rational creatures, so neither has he prescribed any particular form of ecclesiastical polity as absolutely neces- sary to the attainment of eternal hap- piness, &c. The gospel only lays down general principles, and leaves the application of them to men as free agents. Faith and good works are the only things indispensably required for salvation." And again : "JVetf/ter Christ nor his apostles prescribed any particular form, of ordaining ministers, to be observed in succeeding ages ; but they left this, with other things of a similar nature, to be regulated by the church." See also Paley's Works, vol. G, p. 91. 1) SoquotedinNeal,vol.2,p.49C. 2) Neal's Puritans vol. I, pp. 423. 430. 3) Neal's Puritans, p.431, and Life of Alexander Henderson. Dr. Pusey would not allow us any greater favor in our investigation of the fathers even could we feel at liberty to receive their testimony as authoritative. In his pre- face to the Library of the Fathers, and in treating upon their proper use, he says, — (Li. of Fath. vol. l,p.xvii.xviii.) " The end then of this study is not dis- covery of new truth, for new truth there is none in the gospel; not any criticism of their own church, this were irreverent and ungrateful ; not to see with their own eyes, for they will come to see with their own eyes, but not by making this their object; not to compare ancient and modern sys- tems and adopt the one or the other, or amalgamate both, taking of each what seems to them truth ; this were to sub- ject the truth of God, and the authority which he has placed over them, to their own private judgment; it is not criti- cism of any sort, no abstract result of any sort, nor even knowledge in itself, but to understand and appreciate better and realize more thoroughly the estate to which God has called them, as mem- bers of that branch of the church cath- olic, into which they were baptized, and in which, perhaps, they have been or look to be, made his ministers." LECT. III.] PRELACY MUST BE, YET IS NOT, FOUND IN 6CKIPTURE. 73 In like manner, we find in a recent article on the " Use of the Fathers," in a standard high-church periodical, a re-assertion of this principle. " We wish," says the reviewer, " this humble effort might first of all direct the eyes of churchmen to see where the hidden power of the Church of England lies, that her defenders may not go forth to the contest, with armor that they have not proved, nor rob themselves of those essential graces, which are to them, not the works of comeliness, but the se- cret of their strength."^ That episcopacy cannot be substantiated from scripture alone, is also the general doctrine of the Oxford divines in their celebra- ted works.^ " We do not find the origin of episcopacy exactly recorded," says Mr. Palmer,^ "but it is probable,"* he adds. "Everyone must allow," say the tractators themselves, that there is next to nothing on the surface of scripture about these (i. e. these church doctrines,) and very little even under the surface, of a satisfactory character."' " If we were to take the several articles of what is called church doctrine," says the author of Ancient Christianity, him- self an episcopalian, "in the order and under the perspective in which we find them, where only we do find them at all, — namely, in the extant remains of the early church, — for if we give up these records, we have no other sufficient warrant for paying them any regard "* "The claims of episcopacy (prelacy) to be of divine institu- tion, and therefore obligatory on the church, must rest, how- ever," as we have proved by the admissions of some of these writers themselves, and as Bishop Onderdonk expressly avows, " fundamentally on the one question — has it the authority of scripture ? If it has not, it is not necessarily binding. No argument is worth taking into the account that has not a palpable bearing on the clear and naked topic — the scriptural evidence of episcopacy," i. e. prelacy. And so, in entering upon his treatise on the different degrees of the christian priesthood, Hadrian Saravia says,^ " I seek not to " This indeed is the greatest practi- concurrent voice of antiquity as the cal end of the study of the fathers — not sure guide to all fundamental truth." to prove any thing, not to satisfy our- 2) See Oxford Tr. vol. 4. Tr. 81, selves of any thing, but to bring more p. 1. vividly home to our own thoughts and 3) Vol. 2, p, 382. consciousness the rich treasures of 4) Ibid, p. 383. doctrine and decoration, which our 5) See also other quotations from church has from their days brought them in Ancient Christianity, vol. i., down for us." p. 211. 1) See British Critic, Jan. 1838, p. 6) Ibid, pp. 242, 243. 47. The writer then speaks of" the 7) See p. 19, Oxf edit. 1840. 10 74 OUE ONLY DEMAND, AND CHOICE. [LECT. III. be believed beyond what is expressly declared in the word of of God, or may be proved from it by the clear deduction of reason.'" This, then, is the only demand which we prefer. Chris- tianity, whatever it implies, is our choice. The scriptures, whatever they make necessary, are our rule, — the truth, as it is herein revealed; — the whole truth, as by these oracles it is proclaimed ; — and nothing beside, beyond, or in superaddi- tion to that truth. Episcopacy proved by scripture — to this we are ready humbly and implicitly to bow; — while any thing but this, we as resolutely disclaim. The system of the apostles — as distinct, and distinguishable, from the church principles of an after-age ; — Christianity as opposed to pharasaic religionism ; — the gospel as contrasted with hierarchical traditions ; — the de- crees of God, in their wide separation from the impositions and burdensome canons of innumerable councils : this is the foundation, without any intervening stratum of human authority, upon which we build. All pharisaism, Judaism, Nicenism, and Romanism, kindred and identified as they are, in all essential principles, we disavow. All such " ecclesiastical pretensions," which lead their authors to the avowal, that " we know nothing from revelation of any grace, any christian ministry, any sacra- ments, or any salvation, beyond the church,"" (i. e. of the prel- acy) — we must regard as " adding the guilt of outrageous im- piety to the sin of schism."^ 1) " No fact can be established p. 38, in Evang. Mag. vol. 9, p. 562. by reasoning solely; whatever, then, See also p. 31, and pp. 40, 41, 42, to hath been reasoned by the ingenuity 57. and research of men contending for 2) Palmer, vol. ii, p. 431, and parity, is of no moment until the fact 436. be previously established by proper 3) Ancient Christianity, vol. i. p. evidence." Bish. Ravenscroft's Vind. 488. LECTURE IV. THE TRIBDNAL, BY WHICH THIS PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOL- ICAL SUCCESSION MUST BE ADJUDICATED. THE SUBJECT CONCLUDED. We now resume the discussion of the prelatical doctrine of apostohcal succession. This doctrine is thus defined by Bishop Beveridge :^ " In the first place, I observe, how much we are all bound to acknowledge the goodness, to praise, magnify, and adore the name of the most high God, in that we were born and bred, and still live in a church, wherein the apostolical line hath, through all ages, been preserved entire, there having been a constant succession of such bishops in it, as were truly and prop- ly successors to the apostles, by virtue of that apostolical impo- sition of hands, which, being begun by the apostles, hath been continued from one to another, ever since their time, down to ours. By which means, the same spirit which was breathed by our Lord into his apostles is, together with their office, trans- mitted to their lawful successors, the pastors and governors of our church at this time ; and acts, moves, and assists at the administration of the several parts of the apostolical office in our days, as much as ever. From whence it follows, that the means of grace which we now enjoy are in themselves as powerful and effectual as they were in the apostles' days," hc.^ If this doctrine is essential, and the powers assumed by it are necessary to the origination and perpetuation of a true church on 1) Serm. on Christ's Presence when you were consecrated to be an with his Min. in Wks. vol. ii. apostle." Keble on Trad'n. p. 10, in 2) " That fountain of supernatu- ref. to Timothy, ral grace which was opened for you 76 SUPERNATURAL EVIDENCE REQUIRED. [lECT. IV. earth, then must it be susceptible of proof from holy writ, as clear and undeniable as any other article of fundamental importance. That such clear and positive evidence must be given by the abettors of this system, we have shown, first, from the fact that various and opposing claimants set forth the same pretensions, and there must be some tribunal by which their claims may be determined. Secondly, if this doctrine is a fundamental one, then it must be found clearly laid down in the Word of God. Thirdly, as the doctrine is made to constitute a term of communion with the Catholic church, since Christ alone, as the head of the church, is competent to institute such terms, therefore must it be shown that Christ instituted this. Fourthly, we urged this demand for positive scripture proof, on the ground that such a claim is in perfect accordance with the doctrine and the spirit of protestantism. And, fifthly, we made this appeal, on the ground that the same requisition is urged whenever needed, by our opponents themselves. VI. A sixth ground upon which we require this unques- tionable scripture authentication of this doctrine is, that before allowing to the fathers — the decisions of councils — and the prac- tice of the church, an authority co-ordinate with, or authorita- tively interpretative of, the Bible ; that authority must be sub- stantiated by evidence of no less weight than that which is given for the Word of God. If a secondary authority is to be admitted, by which the pri- mary is to be directed how to speak, when to speak, and for whom to speak ; and by which its plainest declarations are to be pronounced obscurest; and its obscurest hints proclaimed as the plainest and most binding edicts ; and by which no meaning can be put upon any of its most evident relations, but what is sanc- tioned and allowed by this interpreter ; then is it at once mani- fest, that what is thus nominally the secondary authority, is in reality the primary, the supreme, and the only authority ; and that what is denominated the primary source of authority, is of no authority whatsoever. The scriptures, in this view of them, instead of being the source of authority, are subsidiary to no other purpose than the introduction, the exaltation, and the glorification of the church — that is, the prelates of the church; for, from the church, as thus considered, the unofficered laity are entirely excluded. They have neither voice, authority, or interference in the whole matter. Their duties and their privi- leges are summed up in the one word, obedience. Now, if the universal consent and agreement of fathers, councils and churches, (if, indeed, such a pure fiction were even conceivable, much less ascertainable,) — if this is to be the rule LECT. IV.] THE PRELATIC CHURCH INDEFECTIBLE. 77 by which we are to ascertain the true meaning and intent of God's word ; the true acts of the apostles ; the real polity of the apostolic churches; the unquestionable prerogatives of the hier- archy ; and the assured duty of implicit subjection to their sacer- dotal sway; — then, most plainly, is the Bible set aside, as to any practical value it is of; so that it might as well be actually kept secreted, or altogether withheld. For, no possible informa- tion can be acquired from it, except through the interpretations of the church; and the adoption of any different interpretation incurs the fearful risk of schism, heresy, and apostacy from " the obe- dience of the faith." Romanists only claim for their church, an authority equally infallible, and co-ordinate or concurrent, with that of the Bible ; — but prelatists demand for the church, an authority " inde- fectible" in itself;' by which alone, any meaning shall be attached to this revelation of God — and without which, any such explanation of it, is a breaking loose from the anchorage of sound catholicity, and a venturing forth upon the shoreless ocean of interminable error. The Bible is thus a revelation made for the special benefit of the clergy of the prelacy ; and not a revelation made to man. It is a gift to the church, and not to the world. It is a code of laws, of which they, the clergy, are to be the sole judges, interpreters, and executors ; and in which the laity have no interest, other than is made known to them by the clergy. Now, if this is so, we may surely, without arrogance, demand, " by what authority " these prerogatives are sustained ; and "what signs, and wonders, and mighty works," carry to our minds the evident impress of divine sanction? Suppose these claims — involving, as it is avowed they do, fundamental doc- trines, which are essential to salvation — to be established; as they are not, and cannot be ; but suppose them to be established by patristical authority, and that, therefore, as is also affirmed, they must be apostolic. That doctrine, or article of faith, whch is apostolic, is inspired ; for, it is only what the apostles gave to the churches, under the guidance of inspiration, that is divine, and of binding force upon the conscience. These doc- trines, therefore, are doctrines of inspiration, or else they are not of binding authority. If heaven's mercy is limited by the boundaries of the existing prelacy, then this fact can be made known to us only by revelation ; for it cannot surely be ascer- tained by uninspired men. We conclude, therefore, that since 1) " He (i. e. Christ) as our Media- tlie Prot. Episcop. Tr. Soc. p. 9. See tor, is God, and so he has made his also Newman's Lecture on Roman- CHURCH INDEFECTIBLE." Tr. 158, of ism, p. 232, &c. 78 8UPERNATT7RAL PROOF REQUIRED. LECT. IV.] inspiration implies supernatural assistance, and nothing short of miracles or prophecy can constitute its supernatural proof — this evidence must be given before receiving as apostolic, the church polity and doctrines framed by councils, fathers, and the gradual, and altered practice of the early church.* If "the church," as is asserted, "has a supernatural gift, for the purpose of transmitting the faith ;" so that it is made true, " be- cause she teaches it ;"^ then what we ask her to give us, is supernatural proof for these supernatural claims. The propriety of this demand is admitted by the Roman (pre- latical) church, " who are fond of arguing that the perform- ance of miracles is a sign of the true church."* Such miracles are pretended to, not only by the Roman, but by the oriental church.^ This claim, Mr. Palmer also does not reject as un- reasonable,^— but allows that there is every " probability, nay certainty, that such signs have been wrought since the time of the apostles."® Now the line of demarcation between documents which are authoritative, and such as are unauthoritative, how- ever otherwise valuable and instructive, is that drawn between those which are " attested by miracles, and all without excep- tion not so attested.'" Making appeals of the same kind, therefore, to the one, as to the other, — to man and to God — is giving the glory of Jehovah to another — canonizing the writings of fallible men — and thus making the word of God of none effect, through vain ti'aditions.^ And to have recourse to such self-constituted prophets, is to provoke God to give us up to believe a lie. If this principle was so acknowledged in the Nicene age, as that, in support of the church principles and practices then estah- 1) See Hinds (of Queen's Col- (judgment ?) was continually recog- lege, Oxford) on Inspiration. nized in tlie church of England during Mr. Newman, in his argument for the whole reformation, and always the " indefectibility (infallibility) of afterioards." Again, in vol. ii. p. xv. the church," says, " we must have he shows their agreement with the recourse to such sources as will ena- synod of Trent, so that when it taught ble us to agree, and such, I would " the christian truth and discipline contend, is ecclesiastical antiquity ;" are contained in unwritten traditions, " and the evidence of its being apos- also," he says, " we admit it." tolic is in kind the same as that on 4) Palmer on the Ch. vol. i. p. •which we believe the apostles lived, 141 , 142 ; also Dr. Rosbury in Notes labored, and suffered." See on Ro- of the Ch. Ex. and Ref. p. 279. manism, p. 232 and p. 233. 5) Ibid, p. 143. 2) Newman on Romanism, p. 0) Ibid, p. 145. 233. 7) Hinds on Inspiration, p. 185. 3) Palmer, vol. i. p. 499, says : " It See from p. 174. is evident, then, that the authority of 7) Ibid, p. 1S4. catholic tradition, and of the univer- 8) See Ancient Christianity, vol. sal church, as opposed to the unlim- i. p. 347, «&.c. et passim. ited freedom of private inventions, LECT. IV,] SUPERNATURAL EVIDENCE REQUIRED. 79 lished — although these were in glaring contrariety to the word of God — such miraculous evidence was freely boasted ;' — and if such gifts are proclaimed also by the existing hierarchy of the Romish church ; then on what principle can it be denied by those other inheritors of apostolic powers and gifts, who assert their identity with the church of the Nicene age ? " For, moreover," says Archbishop Whateley, " we must not (if we would profit by the examples of Christ and his apostles) refer the people, as a decisive authority, on the essential and immutable points of Christian faith and duty, to the declarations or decrees of any class or body of fallible men ; of any who have not sensibly miraculous proofs of inspiration to appeal to. Whether it be to a council or to a church, that reference is made ; whether to ancient or to later christian writers ; whether to a great or to a small number of men, however learned, wise, and good, — in all cases the broad line of distinction between inspired and uninspired, must never be lost sight of; and (if we would profit by what Christ and his apostles have taught us) we must neither make, nor admit, claims to inspiration, unless supported (as theirs were) by miraculous proofs."^ But even were this requisition set aside as extravagant, — though to those whose eternal destiny is to be decided by it as by the Lord, it must appear no more than what is reasonable — we are still called upon to heave off from us the imposed yoke of patristical authority,^ by the very fact that, once beyond the region of inspiration, we find "no end, in wandering mazes lost." There is, confessedly, no certainty as to the practice of the universal church, after the time of the apostles. This is al- lowed by Eusebius, the primitive historian of all that can be known, and affirmed by Joseph Scaliger and other learned in- 1) See Anc't Christianity, vol .i. tem of tradition and churnh authority, p. 347, &c. et passim. is to obliterate the boundary line of 2) Whateley's Dan. to the Christ. distinctive evidence betvs^een the New Faith, p. 130, and see the whole of Testament and the fathers and coun- the subsequent discussion. cils ; between the apostles and their That this system, requiring im- successors to the present day. In plicit faith in its teaching, as much this view, both are placed on the as in the scriptures themselves, must same footing ; both must be equally therefore produce the same miracu- inspired and divine ; or (we have the lous evidence, is also most ably argued alternative) both equally uninspired by Professor Powell, in his Tradition and human." Unveiled, pp. 29, 34, 36, 39, 40. Nay, 3) See Life of Henderson, p. 638. this evidence is actually claimed, for 4) On the obscurity of ecclesias- it is said " the lives and deaths of the tical history, at the very period when great framers of the articles attested a most needed,!, e. the first ages, see supernatural assistance." Sewell on Scaliger, Silenus, Potavius, and Stil- Subscription, in Ibid, p. 31. lingfleet, in Ayton's Constit. of the " Thus," says Mr. Powell, on p. 38, Ch. p. 480. Hegesippus in Euseb. " the manifest consequence of the sys- 1. 3, c. 29- so FATHERS NO AUTHOHITY. [LECT. IV. quirers. It is just as easy to quote these early writers on the one side of this question as on the other — against, as for the prelacy.' There is among them an endless diversity and confu- sion. And we believe this latter " confusion of tongues " has been as wisely ordered as was that of Babel. The descend- ants of Noah (as is supposed) proposed to themselves to make such a provision as should render them, in any future deluge, independent of divine assistance. Exactly similar is the attempt now making to raise such a pile of human authori- ties, as may enable its architects to dispense with the Word of God, as completely as they of old proposed to dispense with any future ark. The attempt is equally presumptuous, and its result will equally frustrate the expectations of its authors.^ 1 ) " It has happened , that from the beginning of the second century, in which Ignatius wrote, until towards the end of it, the works of all the christian authors are lost, except a few fragments found in other authors of later dates, and except the apolo- gies and decalogues of Justin Martyr, who has said nothing which makes for the one side or the other of the present question." Bishop White's Lect. on the Catech. Philadelphia, 1813, p. 453. Between these two periods, who can prove that prelacy was not introduced .' That the testimony of fathers is of no possible value towards a final and authoritative determination of this question, is conclusively shown by the evidently contrary interpretations put upon them by opposing parties, and by the evident purpose of high-church never to permit the fathers to speak a word in contrariety to their views. " From all these circumstances," says Dr. Bowden, (Letters, second series. Works on Episc. vol. ii. p. 49,) " it necessarily follows, that you have either mistaken the meaning of Je- rome, or that he contradicts himself. If the former, you derive no aid from him, he is altogether on our side. If the latter, he is not worth a straw TO either party." " But," says Dr. Bowden, (Works on Episc. vol. ii. p. 76,) "suppose the scriptures to be doubtful on this point, what will the weight of the fathers be then.' I answer, absolutely decisive; their testimony removes the doubt at once, for they, and they only, are the persons to whom we can appeal." Of what use, then, can an appeal to the fatiiers be, if, as Dr. Bowden affirms, " I have maintained and do now maintain, that the scriptures alone are sufficient to prove the apos- tolic institution of episcopacy." " For," says Dr. Rice, (Evang. Mag. vol. X. p. 358,) " on the supposi- tion that we can search the records of the primitive church, how far do these terms reach .'' They include the first four general councils ; that is, they reach 450 years. But in going through the records of this period, we find something to favor Congregationalism ; more to support presbyterianism ; and in about 400 years, strong evidences for episcopacy, with now and then a little in favor of the papists. And in modern times, we do not see any thing exactly, in all respects, like the primitive church. What are we then to do .' The primitive church itself presents us diffisrent aspects, and really we are unable to decide. Tak- ing the first three centuries for our standard, we should, on the whole, be presbyterians. But, taking the next century and a half, we should in all probability be episcopalians. We must go to scripture, and find the 7iotes of a true church there. And then, according to the rule, we must look to the church to expound the scripture. Drive this argument as we may, it will run round in a cir- cle." 2) Sec Essays on Romanism, by an Episcopalian, very highly spoken of and quoted in London Christian Observer, 1840, p. 48. LECT. IV,] THE FATHERS MISREPRESENTED. 81 But there are other grounds on which we would protest against that most unfair use which is made by Romanists and prelatists, of these ancient records. They are perverted to their own purposes.^ They are subjected to just the same treatment which the scriptures are wont to receive at their hands. For as these oracles of God are made to receive their meaning and interpretation, from the rites, forms, usages, and opinions of the Nicene and later ages, so that the canonical meaning of scripture can only be ascertained through the com- ments and explanations of the church ; just in the same man- ner these ancient records of the Nicene and proximate ages are to be understood, and their terms explained, by the meaning attached to these terms, and by the principles adopted, in the church now. It is utterly forgotten, that "names, rites, and formularies may remain unchanged, when their spirit and meaning have been essentially altered ; and that much of what the Romanists (or prelatists) confidently appeal to in the early ages of Christianity, carried quite a different import to a cotem- porary from that which it suggests under the dominancy and in the nomenclature of the hierarchy."^ And, finally on this part of our subject, we remark, that it would be easy, with no other assistance than what is rendered by these writers themselves, to array the fathers in manifest support of this sole supremacy of scripture. "The holy and divinely inspired scriptures, are sufficient of themselves to the discovery of truth," says Athanasius. "It is an instinct of the devil to think any thing divine with- out the authority of the scriptures," says Theophilus of Alex- andria. " That which the holy scripture hath not said, — by what means should we receive and account it among these things that be true ?" says Cyril of Alexandria. Basil declares, " It is a manifest falling from the faith, and 1) To use the words of a mem- great numbers of forged and spurious ber of the English church : (Dr. authors, whose testimonies are still Payne in Notes of the Ch. pp 163 produced by these writers, for those and 1G4 :) " Besides the correcting, or doctrines and opinions which are des- rather corrupting of so many fathers, titute of true antiquity, a collection of which were genuine monuments of which is given us by our King James, antiquity, the counterfeiting of so in his Bastardy of the False Fathers ; many false ones, and obtruding of so and all those critics who have written many spurious authors upon the censures upon the fathers' works can- world, is a plain evidence of the want not but own it." of true antiquity." " Thus the de- 2) We quote from the London cretal epistles were counterfeited to Chr. Ob. 1840, p. 48, an evangelical prop up the pope's spiritual power, episcopal periodical. and Constantino's donation to estab- 3) See also Note A. lish his temporal." " But there are 11 82 THE FATHERS MISREPRESENTED. [LECT. IV. an argument of arrogancy, either to reject any point of those things that are written, or to bring in any of those things that are not written." "Forasmuch," says Gregory Nyssene, "as this is upholden with no testimony of scripture, we will reject it as false." " Nothing at all ought to be delivered concerning the divine and holy mysteries of faith without the holy scriptures," sailh Cyril of Jerusalem. "If it be not written," saith Tertullian, " let them fear that woe which is allotted to such as add or take away." " As we deny not," says Jerome, " these things that are written, so we refuse those things that are not written." " Whatsoever ye hear," says Augustine, " (from the holy scriptures,) let that savour well unto you ; whatsoever is with- out them refuse." " It would be superfluous," says Mr. Palmer, from different portions of whose learned work these authorities are chiefly taken, " to cite additional testimonies to the same truth, from Clemens Alexandrinus, Hippolytus, Cyprian, Optatus, Hilary, Vincentius Lirinensis, Anastasius, Prosper, Theodoret, Antony, Benedict, Theophylact, which have been collected by our writers."' On the authority therefore of the fathers — that is, by all the weight and influence attached to tradition by prelaiists them- selves ; we are required to receive or to reject this doctrine, as it shall, or shall not make good its title, from the clear and cer- tain testimony of God's Holy Word. The apostolic writings are certainly not more obscure on this point than those of the early fathers ; for the meaning of the one, is as much controverted, and their as authority variously claimed, as is the case with the Bible. And the whole obscurity on this subject, which is charged upon scripture, arises from the fact that the assumed practice of the early church, as prelatical and not presbyterian, is made to justify the most forced construction of certain pas- sages of God's Holy Word. But let that word speak out in its plain unvarnished phrase, and this obscurity will in a great meas- ure vanish.^ VII. A seventh ground on which we rest this claim to an unquestionable scripture authentication of these exclusive pow- ers, is the unreasonableness of the whole scheme, in itself con- sidered. 1) Lee on the Church, vol. ii. p. 556, 560, and 563. Faber's Albigen- 13, and p. 74. See also Newman on ses, pp. 264,491,492; see also Note B. Romanism, Lect. xiii. and also at pp. 2) See Henderson's Rev. and 274, 281. Also Oxf. Tr. vol. i. pp. Consid., Edinb. 1706, 4to. p. 53. LECT. IV,] THIS DOCTRINE UNREASONABLE. 83 We are very far from saying of any doctrine, that, because mysterious, and removed from the region of common sense, it is therefore of necessity false — as a scheme pretending to divine authority. But what we do affirm, is, that being not only above, and beyond reason, and therefore beyond man's power of origination ; but being also, as we hold, at the same time, unreasonable and very contrary to reason, such claims cannot receive the shadow of respect, as of divine authority, until their divine sanction is made irresistibly clear. Indeed it is not pretended, that these prelatical claims are founded in reason, or are to be adjudicated upon at all by rea- son. Their abettors disclaim utterly any such foundation or standard. Thus let us hear the Rev. William Dodsworth, in his recent Discourses on Romanism and Dissent: " If human reason," says he, " may safely reject every doctrine which is above its powers, then we at once admit that this doctrine must be rejected ; for the conveyance of a blessing through the medium of some men, which is not, and cannot be conveyed through others, equal or superior to them in all respects of natural endowment, is a mystery of which human reason is not cognizant : all argument founded upon it, therefore, must go for absolutely nothing. Again, we admit that the blessing is the object of faith and not of sight, and hence the true foundation of our belief is not touched by any inference which is drawn from visible effects. Hence, then, the Church of England has no sympathy with those injudicious, and I may say unbelieving opponents of Ro- manism, who throw contempt on the doctrine of apostolical succession, deny the efficacy of the sacraments apostolically administered, and who oppose the pretensions of the Romish ministers on the ground that no visible effects follow from the exercise of those sacred functions, in behalf of which they advance such preposterous and impious claims. Here, again, we shall find that the Church of England is equally distant from Romish corruption and from sectarian latitudinarianism.^" So again in his discourse on the efficacy of baptism, he says : " Such baptism the church ever regards as efficacious to the cleansing away of sin, to justification, to the implanting of a new life, to the illumination of the spirit, to adoption into God's family, to heirship of the kingdom of heaven.'" So also in No. 80 of the Tracts for the Times, the Oxford trac- tators thus deliver themselves : 1) See Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 26. 3) See Dodsworth on Romanism 2) See Dodsworth on Romanism and Dissent, p. 19. and Dissent, p. 6. 84 THIS DOCTRINE UNREASONABLE. [lECT. IV. " The question therefore need never be, whether an ordinance such as that of episcopacy, can be proved to be of divine command, for it has been observed, that our Lord never said that he was the Christ. But he was not on that account the less so, nor was it the less necessary that he should be received as such. All the external evidence required would be, whether there are indica- tions of a divine preference given to it, for if this can be proved, it is sufficient for a dutiful spirit. In such considerations, all that can be said is, " he that can receive it, let him receive it," and that "the poor in spirit" occupy "the kingdom.'" Thus also Mr. Keble speaks, — " The succession itself is — a mystery, and of course left as all mysteries are, in some respects dimly revealed, i. e. in the world's language, vague and indistinct."^ Now, inasmuch as for the full establishment of these claims, we are to be deprived of all use of our own understanding in the investigation of them ; and of all exercise of the right of private judgment upon the reasonableness of them ; — it is surely incum- bent upon their abettors to put their divine origin beyond any reasonable doubt, cavil or objection. For, to use the language of their own approved commentator, Bishop Burnet — " We, having naturally a faculty of judging for ourselves, and using it in all other things, this freedom, being the greatest of all our other rights, must be still asserted, unless it can be made to appear that God has in some things put a bar upon it by his supreme authority. "That authority must be very express, if we are required to submit to it in a point of such vast importance to us. We do also see that men are apt to be mistaken, and are apt likewise willingly to mistake, and to mislead others ; and that particularly in matters of religion the world has been so much imposed upon and abused, that we cannot be bound to submit to any sort of persons implicitly, without very good and clear grounds that do assure us of their infallibility : otherwise we have just reason to suspect that in matters of religion, chiefly in points in which human interests are concerned, men may either througii ignorance and weakness, or corruption, and on design, abuse and mislead us. So that the authorities or proofs of this infallibility must be very express ; since we are sure no man, nor body of men, can have it among them, but by a privilege from God ; and a privilege of so extraordinary a nature must be given, if at all, in very plain and with very evident characters ; since without these 1) Tracts for the Times, No. 80, 2) Keble on Tradition, p. 9G. vol. 4, p. 67. LECT. IV.] THIS DOCTRINE UNREASONABLE. 85 human nature cannot, and ought not be so tame as to receive it. We must not draw it from an inference because we think we need it, and camot be safe without it, that therefore it must be so, because, if it were not so, great disorders would arise from the want of it.'" " It is also certain, that if God has lodged such an infallibility on earth, it ougiit not to be in such hands as do naturally heighten our prejudices against it. It will go against the grain to believe it, though all outward appearances looked ever so fair for it ; but it will be an inconceivable method of Providence, if God should lodge so wonderful an authority in hands that look so very unlike it, that of all others we should the least expect to find it whh them. " If they have been guilty of notorious impostures, to support their own authority, if they have committed great violences to extend it, and have been for some ages together engaged in as many false, unjust, and cruel practices, as are perhaps to be met with in any history; these are such prejudices, that at least they must be overcome by very clear and unquestionable proofs: and finally, if God has settled such a power in his church, we must be distinctly directed to those in whose hands it is put, so that we may fall into no mistake in so important a matter."^ This doctrine of the supernatural efiicacy of sacerdotal minis- trations, and the exclusive possession of this sacred gift by prela- tical bishops, is either reasonable, or it is above reason, or it is unreasonable. If it is reasonable, then, according to an estab- lished maxim of modern science, we must neither know, believe, nor assert it, without having warrantable and conclusive evidence, wherewith to establish and make it good. Positive opinion must rest upon indisputable proof. Where such a measure of proof is wanting, that, which if supported by it, would constitute an opinion, can without it, be regarded as no more than a doubt, a conjecture, or a question. To speak confidently, therefore, in reference to this matter, which is at least only set forth as the more probable of two alternatives, is to " dogmatize with all the pride of a most intolerable assurance." 1) Burnet on the 39 Art. p. 234. ious as the claim, because they alone, 2) Ibid, p. 235. "With such had the custody of it." Ibid, proofs, (i.e. more than ordinary J they " Much less could they adduce the must surely be prepared ; for without tradition which alone could establish them, a doctrine so questionable must the claim, — the written apostolic, uni- fall by its own improbability," so says versal tradition," "which is not the the Hon. and Rev. B. W. Noel, in Ro- consent of two fathers or of ten, but manistsand Prot. p. .5. of the universal church in all times " They bring proof from unwritten and places." Ibid, tradition. But the proof is as suspic- 86 THIS DOCTRINE UNREASONABLE. [lECT. IV. Is this succession, like its supposed communications, super- natural, and thus beyond the grasp of human reason, and secret- ed from human observation or discovery, both as to its means and its ends ? — then do we demand for it an institution as clear and undeniable as that given for other revealed ordinances. Or, on the other hand, is this doctrine unreasonable, so as to be not only without scripture warrant, but also to be contrary to reason ? — then is it at once, and without ceremony, to be cast out of the church, as evil. Now that this doctrine is unreasonable, would appear from this consideration. The sacraments are, on this theory, the appointed means of grace. The sacraments are efficacious only when validly administered. They are only thus administered by such as have received the sacred gift, and the mysterious power to conduct these " mysteries " by the im- position of prelatical hands. But it cannot be denied, that be- yond the line of this demarcation, the heavenly influences of God's saving and sanctifying grace do nevertheless descend and manifest themselves, in the christianization of thousands of souls. Here, then, is the evidence of undeniable and undenied facts, against a hypothetic system. There are, and ever have been, beyond the pale of the hierarchy, thousands who have given all the evidence, which the cases could possibly require, that they are made partakers of the grace of God which worketh salva- tion. It is, then, most unreasonable to say, that while God thus actually bestows his grace on thousands of thousands who do not receive it through this prelatic channel. He nevertheless cannot and will not, and is under promise and obligation that he will not, communicate these saving influences, except through this very channel of the " episcopal grace,'' and by the hands of prelatical functionaries. Considered, therefore, as being unreasonable, we reject this exorbitant demand upon our credulity. Considered as above reason, we repudiate it, because it is not and cannot be estab- lished by scripture. And considered as reasonable, we deny it, for the want of any thing like sufficient evidence. The canon of modern science, which makes such undoubted evidence essential to the establishment of any opinion, is just as true of the word of God, as it is of the works of God ; and in ascertaining what is, or is not, a doctrine of God's word ; as what is, or is not, a law in God's works. And it would be just as reasonable to conclude, that the early philosophers, with the same works of Nature before them, could more accurately dis- cover their laws and operations, than those of modern times ; as that the earlier christians, though uninspired, and with no other Bible before them than what we possess, could discover LECT. IV.] PRELACY KEJECTEl) BY SCRIPTURE. 87 therein a system of such matured and consohdated polity, based upon principles of such plain and avowed prelacy — which is altogether undiscernable to the closest scrutiny of modern inves- tigation. The admitted silence, therefore, of the Word of God, as to these church principles ; — the fact, that from Matthew to Revelation, we hear not a word about apostolical succession, and sacerdotal pre-eminence, and episcopal grace, and supernat- ural communications, by the laying on of prelatical hands ; and of the sin of dissent from this prescribed episcopate, as heresy, and schism, and destructive of salvation ; — this fact alone, is to our minds, conclusive evidence against them. It is not neces- sary, that the scriptures should be explicit in denunciation of them, in order to their condemnation. It is enough, that they are not to be found in scripture — that they are not, therefore, among the institutes of Christ, as recorded in this book of the law. This, we say, is enough to stamp upon them the mark of reprobation.^ This alone, is amply sufficient to prove that they are not of " the substance of that faith " " which was once de- livered unto the saints ; " that, however ancient, they are not apostolical, — and that they who uphold them, "teach for doc- trines, the commandments of men. '"^ Even then, were this system not in direct antagonism, as it is, to the parabolical institutions and to the prophetic exhibi- tions of our Lord ;^ — were it not equally at variance with the book of Acts, the j^rs^ and only inspired record of the primitive and apostolic church, as it most manifestly is ;* — even did it 1) See this shown at length, in See also Bishop Williams on Notes Ancient Christianity, vol. i. of the Ch. p. Ill, p. 117. 2) See this well argued in Camp- " Knowing of themselves, that if bell's Lect. on Eccl. Hist., lect. iv. p. appeal be made to the sacred bench of 58, &c. ed. 3d. prophets and apostles, they cannot Hear Bishop Fowler : (Notes of the stand, they carry the suit of religion Church, p. iii.) " We could very wil- craftily into the court of the fathers." lingly appeal to our adversaries them- (Bishop Hall.) selves, were they unconcerned, wheth- Thus also Jeremy Taylor : " IVhat- er a plainer proof can be given of a soever was the regimen of the church baffled cause in a controversy relating in the apostles' times, that must be to any point of revealed religion, than perpetual, (not so as to have all that for the asserters of it to decline main- which was personal, and temporary, taining it by those books, which alone but so as to have no other,) for that, can acquaint us with divine revela- and that only is of divine institution, tions. But it is notorious, that the which Christ committed to the apos- Romanists are highly chargeable upon ties, and if the church be not now this account, in their endeavors to governed as then, we can show no persuade the world that theirs is the divine authority for our government, only true church." which we must contend to do, and do As another illustration of the fact, it too, or be called usurpers." Epis. that in argument with the Romanists, Asserted, Wks. vol. vii. the siZence of scripture has been plead- 3) Il)id, vol. i. ed as a full, sufficient confutation, 4) See this shown at length in see Dr. Clagett in Notes of the Ch. Ancient Christianity, vol. i. Ex. p. 171, and 172, 173, 174. S8 NO PRELACY IN THE BIBLE. [LECT. IV. not come under the anathema thundered against that predicted apostacy from the purity and simplicity of the gospel, which is foretold in the apostolic epistles ;* — even were it not found in inseparable association with, or eagerly thirsting after, practices and principles, which reduce the difference between the prelacy and the papacy to a distinction in particulars, W'here there is no difference in essentials;'' — were none of these things true, yet still this very silence of scripture, and the undoubted origination of the whole nomenclature by which it is described, with the ec- clesiastics of an after-age, seals its condemnation. " For, surely," says Mr. Palmer, '-' it is in the highest degree improbable, that doctrines equally necessary, should be left with totally unequal evidence — that some articles should be delivered by scripture, as well as tradition, and others by tradition only.'" Or, to use the words of Mr. Newman, " Surely, w^e have more reason for thinking that these doctrines are false, than that their saying that they are apostolical, is true."* What we allege, then, is, that while it is admitted, even by prelates themselves, that in scripture, there is abundant testi- mony to the divine appointment of the ministerial order of pres- byters— there is not, on the contrary, in the whole Word of God, a single text which can be made to prove, with any fair- ness, the existence, in the apostolic churches, of an order of ministers who were not pastors of churches, but pastors of pas- tors — bishops of bishops — governors both of bishops and their flocks, — and sole repositories of "that divine grace or commis- sion, which may reasonably be considered a sacrament in the church."* There is not, we repeat, a single passage in the Word of God from which this doctrine can be, with any fairness, or certainty, deduced.® This system, which, from the fundamen- tal and necessary character attached to it, and the prominence with w'hich it is held forth, we might expect to find glaring upon us from every page of the sacred volume, is not sustained by a single trace — not even the most attenuated shadow — of explicit and divine appointment. As well might we seek the living among the dead, as to seek for diocesan prelacy in the scrip- tures of truth.'' 1) See Ancient Christianity, vol. may read all that the evangelists have i. p. 3. recorded of the sayings of Jesus, and 2) Ibid, passim. all that the humble, though inspired 3) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 8, 9, and 86, a]>ostles did and wrote, till he won- and vol. i. p. 131, 171. ders from what part of the christian 4) On Romanism, p. 324. revelation, these bold and lofty claims 5) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 441. can possibly be drawn. He peruses 6) See Presb. Def. p. 40, 41. and re-peruses the testimony, but in 7) A man, it has been truly said, vain ! — he finds no authority for this LECT. IV.] PROOF FROBI THE BIBLE MUST BE GIVEN. 89 That we may urge this point with some authority, and not as of ourselves merely, let us again employ the words of Bp. Burnet, as contained in his " Exposition of the Thirty-nine Articles." "The silence of scripture on this point," we use his reasoning against the claims of the Roman pontiff, " seems to be a full proof that no such thing was intended by God ; otherwise, we have all reason to believe that it would have been clearly expressed." "Here the greatest of all privileges is pretended to be lodged in a succession of bishops without any one passage of scripture importing it." "We cannot suppose that God has granted any privileges, much less infallibility, (these claim indefectibihty,) which is the greatest of all, to a body of men of whom or of whose constitution he has said nothing to us." " To enjoin it as necessary," therefore, " to obtain the pardon of sin, and to make it an indispensable condition, and indeed the most indis- pensable of all, — is beyond the power of the church ; for since Christ is the mediator of this new covenant, he alone must fix the necessary conditions of it."' The abettors of prelacy aver, that while these doctrines are more fully developed in antiquity, yet are they drawn from the wells of sacred scripture, and derive their authority from thence. Let them then be proved by this sure word of prophecy, and all controversy is at an end. If found in God's word, we ask not, nor do we stand in need of antiquity, to avouch for the truth of God. And if not warranted by this standard, then must we re- ject them as of divine right, or essential to the faith, though ten thousand fathers, with ten thousand dubious pretended miracles, should attest their divine original ; — unless, indeed, scripture predicts the coming of such brighter testimony to a doctrine which the sacred writers had overlooked, or of purpose had left unrecorded. hierarchical Christianity — this official never lordly, priestly, exclusive, de- and ceremonial sanctity — this sacra- manding : — but affectionate, tender, mental and hereditary grace — this conciliatory, beseeching, indulgent to divine right to supreme rule in the prejudice and weakness — non-com- church — this essential distinction of pliant and unyielding only in regard order, and function, and power, be- to sin : indeed, opposed throughout tween bishops and presbyters ; who, to the spirit which has ever been gen- in the New Testament, are one and erated by the fond dream of * apos- the same. He compares scripture tolic succession,' and all its attendant with scripture ; — he studies the spirit visions ; whether in the Romish or of the gospel — he finds it meek, Protestant church." See Schism, lowly, gentle, self-denying, self-diffi- 1) See on the xxxix. Art. p. 258, dent — not wont to take its stand on 259, and see also on Art. xx. p. 2C)0, and mere authority even in an apostle — again on Art. xxi, p. 275, and on Art. never solicitous for outward uniform- xxii, p. 290, and on Art. xxv. p. 349, ity — ever rising superior to externals, 453, 355, and 365. Page's ed. and cleaving to spiritual realities — 12 90 PRELACY A GREAT SECRET. [lECT. IV. Having thus, we trust, satisfactorily proved, that the silence of scripture is conclusive evidence against any doctrines claiming to be fundamental or essential to the faith; — in order to demon- strate the falsity of these prelalical claims — it will be only nec- essary, further, to prove that their establishment is not sought for in scripture alone. Now that this is the truth in the case has been already, in part, shown. But it may be well to adduce still further, and most satisfiictory testimony. Mr. Palmer allows that " we do not find the origin of epis- copacy exactly recorded.''^ In tract No. 86, the Oxford tractators say of these doctrines, " they appear to be great secrets, notwithstanding whatever may be said of them, only revealed to the faithful."^ "If the epis- copal and priestly succession have in them something divine, as channels which convey, as it were, such his presence, to us — we must expect to find in them something that hideth itself — surrounded with difficulties to the carnal mind, withdrawing it- self," &c.^ " These would lead us to expect that they should be left in so delicate a manner, that he who will not afford them such affectionate attention, will lose all those high privileges."^ " The question, therefore, never need be whether an ordinance, such as that of episcopacy, can be proved to he of divine com- mand."^ The Oxford writers, in Tract No. 8, further acknowledge, 1) Palmer, vol. ii, p. 282. He, Mr. feet right to make any regulation in Palmer, says " there are manifest tra- discipline not contrary to the word of ces of this institution in scripture," God." (ibid, p. 391 ) " Besides this, (vol. li. p. 369.) He says, "Titus the universal church having approved viay have made a distinction among and continued this discipline from the presbyters in Crete, or was the fourth century, at latest, till probably himself the chief pastor of the reformation, it cannot be sinful or those churches." (Ibid, pp. 392 and contrary to the word of God." (Ibid, 393.) " The consecration of bishops p. 391.) When dioceses arose, which was derived from divine and apostoli- are essential to modern diocesan epis- cal tradition, (in opposition to the dec- copacy, is, he grants, uncertain. (Ibid, laration of Hilary tliat bishops and p. 401.) And yet " general supervision presbyters were the same) is infinitely in a diocese," is one of the rights be- OToreTiT-oiaWc." (Ibid,p. 395.) " Itisad- longing only to the highest of the mitted," says this learned author,"that three orders," according to Bishop bishops and presbyters were the same Onderdonk. (See Episcop. Tested by at first, and that the church was gov- Script, p. 419.) The authority for their ERNED by a council of presbyters under existence, however, as late as the third the apostles," (ibid, p. 394,) " and the century, is" rather doubtful." (Palm- full amount of their jurisdiction (as er, p. 401.) Presbyters "were grad- in Jerome's time,) was not essential ually divested of the cure of souls," to the episcopal order," (ibid, p. 394,) and" these alterations were introduced for says he, " if bishops were gradu- gradually," »&c. (Ibid, p. 402.) ally intrusted with more exclusive 2) In vol. 4, p. 49. power by the church than they pos- 3) Ibid, p. 65. sessed at first, this was by the act of 4) Ibid, p. C5. the church herself, which had a per- 5) Ibid, p. 67. LECT. IV.] PRELACY AVOWEDLY NOT IN SCRIPTURE. 91 "there is no part of the ecclesiastical system which is not/a/«^- ly traced in scripture, and no part which is much more than faintly traced.'^ In tract No. 85, " it is granted by the writer that the divine right of episcopacy, the apostolical succession, the power of the church, he, are wanting in direct or satisfactory proof, and are to be established, if at all, only by the aid of very attenuated, and nicely managed inferential arguments." " Every one MUST allow," says the writer, " that there is next to nothing on the SURFACE, of SCRIPTURE ABOUT THEM, and VERY LITTLE EVEN UNDER the SURFACE, of a SATISFACTORY CHARACTER ; a few striking texts at most, scattered up and down the inspired volume, or one or two particular passages of one particular epis- tle, or a number of texts which may mean, but need not mean, what they are said by churchmen to mean, which say something looking like what is needed, but with very little point and strength, inadequately and unsatisfactorily."^ " Some doctrines, such, for instance, as the spiritual gifts in ordination, which are assumed to be great and real where these ordinances are duly and worthily received, " the church has retained by oral tradition, and maintained by her uniform spirit of deference to the early church, whose hallowed lamp she car- ries on, and whose handmaid she is."^ Mr. Newman says of " the sects around the church," that " they gain their opinions from a distinct source, their private examination of the scriptures, by which they conjecture the doctrine of Christ, with its traditionary delivery through its appointed stewards."^ The famous Henry Dodwell also admits the same thing.* " They (the sacred penmen) no where, with decided clearness, distinguish the extraordinary officers, (i. e. the apostles,) WHO WERE NOT TO OUTLIVE THAT AGE, fi'om the Ordinary min- isters who were not to cease till the second coming of Christ. They no where explain professedly the offices or ministries them- 1) See this and more, quoted in successors of the apostles in general. Ancient Christianity, vol. i. p. 241. On these subjects, the scripture is si- 2) Tract 81, p. 1, vol. 4. lent. Not one of the sacred writers 3) And that we do not misjudge has thought of describing in detail the these writers will appear from the plan of church government, which the following testimony from the Dublin apostles established to be observed af- Review of May, 1840, pages 345, 346, ter their death. For that we must a Roman catholic publication. (See have recourse, as the Oxford teachers the Method. Quart. Rev. for Jan. admit, to tradition." 1841.) " Avowedly there is no direct 3) On Romanism, p. 322. mention of the bishop of Rome in the 4) De Nupero Schismate, sect, scripture, no specification of the spirit- 14, in Powell on Ap. Succ. pp. 32 nal authority given to St. Peter; no, and 33. nor even of the authority given to the 92 PRELACY AVOWEDLY NOT IN SCRIPTUHE. [lECT. IV. selves, as to their nature and extent ; which surely they would have done, if any particular form had been prescribed for per- petual duration." Admissions equally important are made by Bishop Onder- donk, and that too even in his Tract on Episcopacy tested by Scripture. There he teaches that " all that we read in the New Testament concerning bishops, (including, of course, the words overseers and oversight,) is to be regarded as pertaining to that middle grade of presbyters. "i *' It was after the apos- tolic age, that the name bishop was taken from the second order, and appropriated to the first — as we learn from The- odoret"^ — a WRITER of the fifth century! — and this is the scripture by which episcopacy is tested !^ It is thus manifest, by the showing of prelatists themselves, that prelacy cannot — to say the very least — be so certainly revealed in the word of God, as to be a necessary doctrine — for such doctrines, says Palmer,'' " are known to be so by the clear words of scripture." These only are matters of faith. 1) See p. 420. 2) Ibid, p. 480. 3) fie further says, " the original meaning of bishop was only a presby- ter." " Was the laying on of hands on Timothy an ordination ? It can- not at least be proved ; and comparing scripture with scripture, are we not justified in regarding it," &c. " The ordination of Timothy may be alluded to by St. Paul in tlie second epistle, the gift of God," &c. " If not then, or in this view, both these passages are unconnected with the controversy be- fore us." (Ibid, p. 427.) He then gives several meanings attachable to this decisive passage in 1 Tim. iv. 18, (ibid, pp. 427, 428,) the amount of which is to show that the application of the passacre is very doubtful. " Tlie mere expression, presbytery, therefore, (p. 421),) does not ej:plain itself a.nd cannot of itself be adduced in favor of pari- ty," nor of imparity. (Ibid, p. 429, at bottom.) It " cannot explain itself in favor of our opponents. It can only be referred to a body of clergymen ; and these clergymen may have been in part or entirely apostles, who were supe- rior to presbyters." (p. 430.) " It is evident, therefore, if this passage refer to an ordination." (Ibid.) " On the whole, can it be denied, that a cautious and candid interpretation of the two passages said to relate to the ordination of Timothy," &c. (Ibid.) " And considering the above distinc- tion of by and with, (see p. 430) our theory is obviously the better of the two." (431.) Now as the author (p. 436) makes positive proof necessary tor the presby- terian claim, a fortiori do we demand it for prelacy, and " a hint," there- fore, is not to be made " imperative." The demonstrative plainness with which this author claims to have dis- covered his " theory " in the New Testament, reminds us of the Irish- man's telescope, with which he could see far out of sight. Bishop Onderdonk seems to have himself discovered, that it would hardly do to venture the claims of prelacy on scripture alone, since in his answer to Mr. Barnes, he says, (p. 92,) " And the ' press,' at the time it issued the tract, issued also with it, in the ' Works on Episco- pacy,' those of Dr. Bowden and Dr. Cooke, which embrace the argument at large. Tliere is no reason, there- fore, for thinking that, however a single writer may use selected argu- ments in a single publication, eitJier he or otlier episcopalians will (or should) narrow the ground they have usually occupied. The fathers are consulted on this subject, because the fabric of tiie ministry, which they describe, forms an historical basis for INTERPRETING SCRIPTURE ! " 4) vol. ii. p. 104. LECT. IV.] PRELACY OVERTHROWN BY SCRIPTURE. 93 " Other doctrines, which are deduced from passages of scripture, ivhich admit of a different interpretation, are matters of opin- ion, and they may be received or not received, without heresy, because there is no certainty il'x^i they were revealed by Christ." " In this, and in all similar cases, those who are in error are free from heresy, when they judge (on prohahle grounds) their opin- ion supported by a greater scriptural and ecclesiastical author- ity, than that of their opponents.'" " These, however misled, are not schismatics in the sight of God, and are, therefore, in a state of salvation."^ From all that has been said, we conclude that prelacy, when tested by scripture, cannot — our enemies themselves being judges — be so established, and as of such necessary importance, as to endanger either the church standing, or the personal sal- vation of those who reject it as unscriptural and unreasonable. And this conclusion, though plentifully obviated by other state- ments, is admitted by Bishop Onderdonk himself. " An appar- ently formidable yet extraneous difficulty, often raised, is," says he, this, " that episcopal claims unchurch all non-episcopal denominations. By the present writer this consequence is not allowed."' When we come to the proof of our position, that presbyters are the true successors of the apostles, it will be time enough to authenticate our right positively ; and to show, not only that presbyterianism " has divine sanctions, and must stand with epis- copacy,'"'' but that it is the truly apostolic and christian polity, and that prelacy must stand, — as we freely grant it may, — as one, though but one, and that an altered and deteriorated, form of presbyterian episcopacy, — the truly primitive and apostolical polity.' 1) See Palmer vol. ii. p. 108. the epistles, but they afterwards re- 2) Ibid, p. 109. ceived it, and ordained ceremonies." fi) Wks. on E|)isc., p. 414 ; see, ' His opponent urging, (ibid, p. 04,) however, the stnrtling peroration of that the church could have no author- his Tract, on p. 437, and liis remarks ity to act in opposition to the express in his charge, (pp. 9, 15, 16,) for 1831. directions of scripture, which enjoined 4) See Ibid, p. 1. an exact conformity to the divine laws 5) The gray friar who undertook respecting worship: "If so," said to argue with Knox at the convention Azbugkill, "you will leave us no of learned men, held at the univer- church." " Yes," rejoined Knoi, sity of St. Andrews, (McCrie's life of sarcastically, " in David 1 read of the Knox, vol. 1, p. C3,) " raslily en- church of malignants, Odi ccdesiavi gaged to prove the divine institution mallgnantium; this church you may of ceremonies; and, being pushed by have without the word, and fighting his antagonist from the gospel and against it. Of this church if you will acts to the epistles, and from one epis- be, I cannot hinder you ; but as for tie to another, he was driven at last to me, I will be of no other church but affirm, that the apostles had notreceiv- that which has Jesus Christ for pastor, ed the Holy Ghost when they wrote hears his voice, and will not hear the voice of a stranger." 94 PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED. [LECT. IV. But before concluding, we are led to observe two striking characteristics of our church in contrast with that of the prelacy. " The great characteristic " of that church, to use the lan- guage of one of the most recent tracts of the Episcopal Tract Society, "is a reverence for antiquity."' "We are to look," says Mr. Keble, " before all things, to the integrity of the good deposite," "the treasure of apostolical doctrines and church rules," ascertained by "apostolical tradition ;" "a tradition so high- ly honored by the Almighty founder and guide of the church, as to be made the standard and rule of his own divine scriptures," so that " the scriptures themselves do homage to the tradition of the apostles." " Our clergy," he says again, "can be called upon to walk by the rule of primitive antiquity, rather than by their more private judgment." It is therefore truly affirmed in the tract, already quoted, and which has been largely circulated by episcopalians in this country, that, " if no western church now-a-days is quite what its mother (the church of Rome) used to be, (alluding to what had been lost by the evil change of the reformation,) the catholic church in England, Scotland and Amer- ica, — that is, the protestant episcopal churches of those coun- tries— surely comes nearest to her; nay, so near, that they, who have well scanned the mother's lineaments, can be at no loss to trace her features in her child. "^ Such, then, is the self- drawn portraiture of the prelacy. What a contrast is presented, when we turn our gaze upon the presbyterian branch of the true, catholic, and apostolic church. Stripped of all the vestments of ancestral pride j dis- daining to conceal, under the trappings of official dignity, her poverty and emptiness ; assuming no forms of earthly splendor ; and hiding not herself amid the dim, discolored light of darken- ing ages ; she stands forth upon the pedestal of truth, in all the simplicity of her unadorned beauty, clothed only in those garments of righteousness which were aforetime prepared for her, by the ministry of her divine Master, and his inspired apostles. Nei- ther fearing, nor courting observation, she is satisfied with the inward assurance, that with her, resides the treasure of sacred doctrine, the truth as it is in Jesus ; that in her society there will be heard no other converse than that of Christ and his apostles; — that from her voice, there will go forth no other doctrines, than such as are of God; — and that all, therefore, who put themselves under her guidance, shall find her ways pleasantness, and all her paths, peace. 1) No. 153. Ancient Things of 2) Primitive Tradition, pp. 44, 28. the Catholic Church, p, 7. 3) Tract, 153, p. 6. LECT. IV.] PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED. 95 The great characteristic of our church is, therefore, her fear- lessness of scripture. No merely human system dare trust itself to scripture, and to nothing but scripture. It is, it must be, afraid of it. Its coward heart trembles at the approach to such a fiery ordeal; and is already filled with a certain fearful looking-for of judgment and of condemnation. Therefore, does the papacy throw discredit, doubt, and foul reproach, upon the sacred scriptures, as a sure and infallible rule of faith ; and upon the sacred right and duty of private judgment, as necessary in their investigation : and therefore does her child, the prelacy, imitate her kind mother, whose lineaments she so plainly bears, to mark her as her own. While she grudgingly holds forth the sacred volume with one arm; she stretches forth the interposing authority of the church, as its only authorized interpreter, in the other ; and thus silences the inquiring mind, with the enforced necessity of cautious re- serve, and reverential self-denial, in taking up opinions of its own. It is, therefore, to the holy and beautiful liturgy ; — to the incom- parable articles ; — and to all other, her appointed means for communicating divine knowledge to the soul — she points the weary and heavy-laden traveller to Zion.^ Not such, however, is the character of that church — composed of spiritual freemen — and to which we, by the great grace of God, are honored in belonging. She speaks " as unto wise 1) " And yet," says the Rev. John poor and perishing sinner. — " The sa- A. Clark (Letters on the Church, Phil. craments, again, are a still higher way 1839, p. 35,) it is undoubtedly true that in which the church helps us against in the face of all this, and in the time — by bringing heaven forward face of the most positive declara- upon earth, by fetching eternity out tions of God's words to the contrary, into time, by bringing great gifts from there are some within our borders who far, and by them, in the midst of time, point out no other method of salvation substantially anticipating eternity." to dying sinners than the practice of a Tr. 160 of Prot. Episc. Tr. Soc. p. 10. certain round of moral duties." " The sacraments by which it (the ..„,.,.,, , , ■ ,. 1- • r incarnation) is conveyed to us and " Ihat hi"h-cnurcli nave a right divine irom . >> rn -iro r i< t> , jgve = " GIVEN to US. Ir. 158 of the Prot. By signs and wonders they pretend to prove. Episcop. Tr. Soc. p. 9. If this is not They (i.e. Dodwellj can a mortal soul immor- pure nonsense, it is rank popery, and to talmake; , , „ our minds impiously profane. Again, They can by prayers our constitution shake." . ., . , ■, i ,. t/ i . ^ ' in ibid. p. 14, " You have the pres- See High-church Miracles, printed ence of God within you. Sacraments, in 1710, in Scott's Coll. of Tracts, vol. providences, ordinances, discipline, 12, p. 320. ascetic habits, sometimes slowly, some- Strange it is, that while these men times swiftly, all have been drawing make the sacraments the great end your natural infirmities more and more and glory ofthe church, there is not one within the power of this supernatural word about sacraments, as Mr. Leslie kingdom." And on p. 15, " self-strug- admits,in the apostles' creed. See Short ling is against the Spirit and the sacra- Method with Roman Catholics : Edin. inents. Therefore deny that self, and 1835, p. 21. And yet the church and the empire of Christ will stretch forth the sacraments constitute the alpha from the river even unto the green sea, and the omega of high-church divin- from baptism until eternity begins." ity, and their only consolation for the Truly this is another gospel ! 90 PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED. [lECT. IV. men." She addresses the understanding and the heart. She commends herself and her doctrines unto men, and not merely as unto babes and children in Christ. She speaks forth the truth, and the whole truth ; and giving into their hands the heavenly oracles, she calls upon her members to judge her words, and to search the scriptures, whether these things are so. She looks scripture in the face, and holds with it direct, immediate, and constant communion. She does not build her faith upon shreds and patches; upon forced constructions, and hypercritical analogies ; or upon illogical inferences ; " picking and choosing" what suits with her established wishes. She renounces, and calls upon all her followers to abandon, this " popery of the heart," and to seek the solution of every doubt, and direction in every perplexity, in that sure word of prophecy, to which she gives earnest heed, as unto a light shining in a dark place. But to proceed : Hadrian Saravia, in his Treatise on the Priest- hood, published in the year 1591, says, in one place,' "There IS NO QUESTION but that the apostles held the first rank ; evan- gelists the second ; prophets the third ; pastors and presbyters the fourth; teachers the last:" thus making five orders, be- sides deacons. These are " the different degrees of authority, appointed in the beginning by our Lord, and continued by the apostles." And yet does this writer take upon him to reverse this decision. " Although," says he, " St. Paul mentions proph- ets in the second place, I remove them into the third — follow- ing, not so much the order of dignity, as the time of institution of the offices of the New Testament : "* as if he knew the time of their institution. What can exceed — 'in such bold and irreverent assumption of a power to interpret scripture, to the liking of their own priestly notions — the declaration of this same wTiter, " the happy au- thor of many learned tracts" "concerning episcopacy;" — " that since the apostolical traditions concerning the government of the church, and its externals, were drawn first by our Saviour himself, and afterwards by his apostles, from the Old Testament ; with such modifications as difference of time and place required ; no fault can be found with the fathers, if they should appear to have taken certain regulations from the same source ! "^ What is this, 1 ask, but to reduce our blessed and divine Saviour to a level, as an instituter of sacred laws, and as an interpreter of scripture, with the apostles and the fathers ; 1) Oxf. ed. 1840, p. 57. 3) Saravia on Priesthood, Pref. 2) Ibid, p. 77. LECT. IV.] PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED, 97 and to exalt the fathers and apostles, to the same pre-eminence in authority and wisdom, with the Son of God liimself. Nor is there less presumptuous arrogance in the declaration of this same "happy author," — made after he had himself oth- erwise interpreted and applied these very passages — that the orders of patriarchs, archbishops and metropolitans, " are deno- ted by the titles of apostles and evangelists ; — in the epistle to the Romans, by the words, ' he that ruleth,' (Rom. xii. 8,) and in the epistle to the Corinthians, by the term, ' govern- ments.'" (1 Cor. xii. 28.)' We are thus led by these examples, to the notice of another striking feature of prelacy, as contrasted with presbyterianism, and that is, the spirit of lightness and irreverence with which it treats the word of God, and makes it subservient to its own purposes." This it does by teaching, first, that a discretionary power is given to prelates, to decree rights and ceremonies which shall be enforced, as necessary terms of communion with the church of Christ. Secondly, by teaching that prelates are the authoritative interpreters of scripture, so that it must mean what they are pleased to say it does mean. Thirdly, by teach- ing that primitive tradition is parallel to the scriptures — and of an equally divine original — and binding necessity.^ And we have just seen how, acting upon these principles, the defenders 1) Ibid, p. 240. Dr. Campbell, of Armagh, in his 2) "Therefore," says the Rev. Vindication of the Principles and Mr. Boyd, in favor of the prelatic Character of the Presbyterians of theory, " for our nonconformity with Ireland, (London, 1787, 3d ed. p. 6,) the conduct of our Master, (which we alludes to " the famous debate be- deny was intended in this case to be tween Hoadley and Sherlock, in a binding pattern,) we plead His which we find Parker, bishop of Ox- nonconformity to the rule and ancient ford, asserting the king was superior usage of Israel." That is, because to Christ." Christ thought proper to abrogate a Pope Innocent, of course guided by Jewish rite, both in its matter and his infallibility, clearly discovered the manner of observance, — therelbre, divine origin of his office in the first Episcopalians are at liberty to tamper chapter of Genesis. " For the firma- with his holy institutions." (Presb. inent of heaven, (i. e.) of the univer- Def. p. 266.) sal church, God made two great lights, 3) What can be more absolutely (i. e.) he ordained two dignities or dsetructive to all inherent, original, powers, which are the pontifical au- and independent authority, in the writ- thority, and the regal power ; but that ten word of God, than the authority which rules the day, (i. e. spiritual claimed by prelatists for tradition and matters,) is the greater, but that which the church. Thus Dr. Bowden de- governs carnal things, is the lesser." livers their views : (Works on Epis- Thus also, by the tops of the moun- cop. vol. i. p. 116:) "As episcopacy tains, in tlie seventy-second Psalm, appears from a cloud of witnesses to nothing can be more rightly designed be the government of the church, at than the prelates and priests of tJie the close of the apostolic age, it can church, as we are taught by Mr. Scla- never be admitted, that any thing in ter, a Romanist. (See in Notes of the New Testament militates against he Church, p. 318.) this fact." 13 98 PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED. [LECT. IV. of prelacy can even boast that there is little or nothing about it in the Bible, nothing certainly of a clear or satisfactory nature ; and how even an apostle can be set right, when, in prelatic judgment, he mistakes as to the relative dignity or order of these hierarchical rulers. Not such, however, is the spirit of presbyterianism. It claims indeed the right of private judgment, in ascertaining what is the true word of God, and what that word truly says — but there it stops. It bows reason, private judgment, and all discre- tionary opinions, whether private or public, individual or synod- ical, to the supremacy of this divine and infallible standard. It assumes no power of binding any conscience, in any matter in which God has left it free. It boasts of no reserved treasury of primitive traditions, from whose dark recesses it may draw forth auxiliary troops, whenever it would assault some battery of opposing truth. It pleads no commission to interpose be- tween God and his people ; and to say unto them, thus only shalt thou understand — whatever else you may believe it means — the proclamation of Heaven's will. It reverently receives from God's hands his own divine and precious gift. It enthrones it in the sanctuary. It affixes it to every sacred desk. It admits of no appeal beyond it, or from it. This is with it, the alpha and the omega of all authority ; the hearer of all questions ; — the judge of all controversies ; — the settler of all disputes, and the fountain of all antiquity. What- ever is in this, it receives. Whatever is beyond it, it rejects. It turns away from all the wisdom, and eloquence, and power of man, to listen to the still small voice of divine mercy, as it comes forth from this urim and thummim of the holy oracles. And to doubt — cavil at — wantonly tamper with — alter — amend, or add to, the words and ordinances of this book, it regards as a spirit, whose tendency is towards rationalism and infidelity, and that too of the worst and most fatal kind. While, therefore, we have, and should have, no disposition to think less charitably as to our fellow-christians of other denom- inations, who may, as conscientiously as we, obey, as they think, the divine will ; we may well think more honorably than we have done, of the claims of our own Zion. We may bless God, who has preserved our churches from the reception of doctrines which expose their adherents to such inevitable temptation to tamper with, or irreverently supersede, the teaching of God's holy word. Believing, as we do, that the church is " that true tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and not man ;" and that all her arrangements and essential forms, have been designed by this unerring Architect, we are reverently held back from the PRELACY AND PRESBYTERY CONTRASTED. 99 LECT. IV.] indulgence of our own sense of architectural beauty, and the fitness of proportion, by the warning voice — " see that thou make all things according to the pattern showed thee in the mount.'" 1) " In an inquiry, what is sin," says Matthew Henry, (A Brief Inquiry into the Nature of Schism, London, 1717, p. 5,) " let those books be opened which must be opened at the great day. If sinners must be judged by those books shortly, let sin be judged by them now, and let not any man or company of men in the world assume a power to declare that to be sin, which the sovereign Rector of the world hath not declared to be so, lest in so doing, they be found steppino- into the throne of God, who is a jeal- ous God, and will not give this branch of his glory to another." ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE FOURTH. NOTE A. On this subject, Bishop Hurd* in exposing the folly of the reformers, in allowing an appeal to the primitive fathers as interpreters of scripture, re- marks: " When the state of the question was thus changed, it was easy to see what would be the issue of so much indiscretion. The dispute was not only carried on in a dark and remote scene, into which the people could not follow their learned champions, but was rendered infinitely tedious, and indeed inter- minable ; for those early writings, now to be considered, as of the highest authority, were voluminous in themselves, and what was worse, were com- posed in so loose, so declamatory, and often in so hyperbolical a strain, that no certain sense could be affixed to their doctrines, and any thing or every thing miglit with some plausibility be proved from them. " The inconvenience was sensibly felt by the protestant world ; and after a prodigious waste of industry and erudition, a learned foreigner at length showed the inutility and the folly of pursuing the contest any further. In a well-considered discourse on the Use of the Fathers, he clearly evinced that their authority was much less than was generally supposed, in all points of religious controversy, and that their judgment was especially incompetent in those points which were agitated by the two parties. He evinced this conclu- sion by a variety of unanswerable arguments, and chiefly by showing that the matters in debate were for the most part such as had never entered into the heads of those old writers, being indeed of much later growth, and having first sprung up in the barbarous ages ; they could not, therefore, decide on questions which they had no occasion to consider, and had in fact never con- sidered, however their careless or figurative expression might be made to look that way, by the dexterous management of the controversialists. This dis- covery had great eifect; it opened tlie eyes of the more candid and intelligent inquirers; and our incomparable Chillingvvorth, with some others, took the advantage of it, to set the controversy with the church of Rome once more on its proper foot, and to establish for ever the old principle, that the Bible, and that only, (interpreted by our best reason,) is the religion of protestants." The inconsistency of the reformers, in appealing to the fathers, is also exposed by Herbert Croft, bishop of Hereford, in his Naked Truth, or the True State of the Primitive Church :t " The evangelical doctors, so called because they chiefly urged evangelium, the gospel, for the defence of their doctrine, were most of them bred up from their infancy in the popish church, and therein taught, even to adore all councils and fathers, and (education being of great force to command and awe both the wills and judgments of men) made them very shy rnd timorous to reject that authority which they had long reverenced ; in modesty, therefore, some of the evangelical doctors were con- tent to admit the aulhorily of fathers for three or four of the first centuries ; some admitted five or six, whereby they were reduced sometimes to great straits in their disputations ; lor though neither all nor half the popish errors * Introduction to the Pludj- of Propli. Sorm. xii. ed. 1839. London, p. 24!. t Published in 1675, and to' be found in Hcott's Uoll. of Tracts, vol. vii. pp. 279 and 2e0, NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 101 can be found in the councils and fathers of these centuries, yet some of tiiem were crept very early into the church. Thus superstition of the cross and ciirvsni were in use in the second century ; the millenary error got footing about that time ; the necessity of infants receiving the blessed sacrament of the Lord's supper came in soon after. About the fourth century, there were some touches in oratory sermons, by way of theoretical ejaculations, like pray- ing to saints, but long after came to be formally used as now in churches ; and so superstitions came in, some at one time and some at another. The papists themselves do not receive all these errors, but reject some, as that of the millenaries and the necessity of infants receiving the Lord's supper. Now I ask, first, the papists, by what rule they retain some of these things and reject others ? Secondly, I ask the evangelical by what rule they submit to the authority of some centuries and refuse others ? Both will answer me, because they believe some to be erroneous, some to be orthodox. Whereby it is evi- dent, that neither submit to the fathers' authority as commanding their judg- ments, but receive their opinions as agreeing with their judgments." " And will you," says Bishop Croft,* "be bound up to all the decrees of councils, without scripture or any reason for them .'' If once we leave scrip- ture, and hearken to the doctrine of men, ever so holy, ever so learned, ever so primitive, we shall soon be wheedled into the papist's religion, and many otlier errors which the papists themselves now reject, as I have declared at large before." " By the way," says the ever-memorable Hales, in his Tract on Schism, " by this you may plainly see the danger of our appeal to antiquity for resolu- tion in controversial points of faith, (he was speaking of the dispute about Easter,) and how small relief we are to expect from thence ; for if the discre- tion of the chiefest guides and directors of the church did, in a point so triv- ial, so inconsiderable, so mainly fail them, as not to see the truth in a subject wherein it is the greatest marvel how they could avoid the sight of it, can we, without imputation of extreme grossness and folly, think so poor-spirited per- sons competent judges of the questions now on foot betwixt the churches ? " That in this controversy we must not be tempted to give any heed to prim- itive teachers, further than as sanctioned by the word of God, see also London Christian Observer, 1837, p. J45. De Moor, in his Commentary on Marckii IMedulla, volume vi. p. 54, thus succinctly gives the reasons then deemed suffi- cient for rejecting this authority of the fathers : "Patres omnes fuere fallibiles, nffivis eterroribus pluribuslaborarunt, saspe dissident, dubia non raro est genu- initas scriptorum quae sub nomine eorum venditantur, monumenta ipsorum plurima perierunt, controversias recentiores ignorarunt, de argumentis variis ante ortam de illis controversiam securius locuti sunt." Vide supra Cap. ii. § 46, 47, et Turretine in loc. cit. § 32—33. Derhard Confess. Cathol. lib. i. part ii. cap. xiii. Tom. i. p, 549 — 730. " The writing of the fathers," says the Rev. Mr. Pratt, t " may contain many opinions which have no reference to apostolical doctrine or fellowship ; but such opinions are held to have no more weight than the opinions of individ- uals; they are not the voice of the church, declaring the everlasting truths of the gospel ; or, it may be, that the writings of some of the fathers contain opinions calculated rather to abrogate than to establish the doctrines of our Lord and his apostles, and to encourage new and strange practices ratlier than to guard the primitive ordinances and institutions of the gospel. In such cases, the episcopalian rejects the authority of the fathers, and looks on their opinions as vain or heretical. Independent of the scriptures of the Old and New Testament, the writintrs of the fathers can have neither weight nor authority in matters of faith." That the Church of England herself has not perfect confidence in the fathers, see Calamy's Def of Nonconf vol. i. p. 134. London, 1703. See a good disquisition on this subject, in the " History of Popery," by the authors of the Universal History. London, 1735, 4to, vol. i. Packet, xxxi. p. 128,&<;. No human authority can ever settle this question. " You shelter yourself," * Nake'l Truth, in ScoH'g Coll. of Tr. vol. vii. p. 3IJ. t The Old Paths, p. ICO. ]02 NOTES TO LECTURE IV. ■ays Dr. Bowden to Dr. Miller,* " under Bishop Taylor, who, from the quota- tions you give, seems to think that they have been corrupted. If Taylor really thought so, he is certainly very inconsistent, for he quotes them as freely as any man, in his Trad on Episcopacy, d^wd without uttering the least expression of disapprobation. If, then, you can quote him as condemning them in his Liberty of Prophesying, I can quote him as approving them in his Tract on Episcopacif, and thus his testimony either way becomes perfectly nugatory." The testimony of Jerome is treated in exactly the same manner at p. 49 of ibid. So also of Bishop Forbes and others, he says, (p. 73,) " Let this be exactly as you say, to what does it amount.'' Just this much: ^/tcy thought so. But I might oppose to them full as eminent episcopal divines. And what would the conclusion be.'' Precisely nothing." "There are so many passages in their (the reformers, Luther, Calvin, and some others) writings, which stand in direct opposition to one another, that I am totally at a loss what to think. t Hence it is, that they sometimes appear to be perfect equality men ; at other times, to assert as strongly as possible inequality. But this is easily explained. They did not hold an inequality of order, but an inequality of degree. This opinion, the offspring of the ' dregs of popery,' preserves them from self-contradiction, and in no other way can it be done." " Neither your testimonies nor mine, have the weight of a feather in the scale of evidence ; for, on both sides, they are nothing but opinion, and our opinion can never determine a matter of fact." NOTE B. The following additional testimonies are given in a German review of Mr. Manning's work on the Rule of Faith. t " A mind which is sound," says Irenaus, " and trustworthy, and God-fear- ing, and truth-loving, will, with a ready devotion, occupy itself in such things as God has put in our power, and subjected to our knowledge. These are the things that strike our very eyes, and are set down in so many words in scrip- ture, plainly and icitltout any ambiguity." — (Lib. ii. c. 46, ed. Ferard.) Justin Martyr, in his dialogue with Trypho, proves the greatest mysteries of our faith, by scripture testimonies, which, as he says, are so plain as to need no explanation. Clement of Alexandria — " The supreme demonstration produces a scientific faith from the citation and opening up of scriptures." — (Strom, ii. p. 38L) The canon of interpretation according to him is, " The harmony and concord of the law and the prophets with the New Testament." — (Strom, vi.) Origcn thinks that even " the difficult scriptures are only to be explained by a comparison with other scriptures." — (Philocal. c. ii. p. 22.) Athanasius assures Jovian that " The true faith is manifest to all, being known and read in the sacred scriptures." — (Ep. ad. Jov. t. i. p. 246 ) Chrysostom tells us that " all things are plain and straight in scripture ; yea, all necessary things manifest. (In 2 Ep. and Thessal.) And again, " The apos- tles, taking quite a different method from the philosophers, made their doctrine clear and plain to all, that such, by merely reading their writings, might under- stand their meaning." — (Hom. 3, in Lazar.) And S. Cyril of Jerusalem, in a passage quoted by Dr. Manning himself, tells the catechumens not to receive the creed itself, unless he could prove it to them by scripture. Is the scripture then to be explained by the creed, and yet the creed proved by scripture .-' As collated by Dr. Barrow, Augustine and Lactantius, thus clearly affirm our position :§ " I do believe," says Augustine, " that also on this side there would be most clear authority of the divine oracles, if a man could not be * Letters, Socond Series, vol. ii. Works on Episcopacy, p. 56. t Works on Episcopacy, vol. ii. pp. 173, and 178, and 179. t Lend. Clir. Obs. 1841. p. 173. \ See Wkg. vol. i. p. 562. Fol. and p. 769. NOTES TO LECTURE IV. 103 ignorant of it, without damage of his salvation ; " and Lactantius tiius, " Those things can liave no foundation, or firmness, whicii arc not sustained by any oracle of God's word." Again, " I will not that the holy churcli be demon- strated from human reasonings, but the divine oracles." See the quotation from Eleutherius, bishop of Tyana, A. D., 431, " against those who declare that we ought neitlier to searcli into, nor speak from scrip- ture, being content with the faith the}' possess," in Clarke's Succ. of Sacr. Lit. vol. ii. p. 1!37. See similar sentiments from Theodoret, Cyril and Basil, in Usher's Answ. to tlie Jesuit, p. 35. See also Cyprian, Epist. 63 and (i4. TerluUian, lib. de Veland. Virg. cap. 1. And lib. de Amma, cap. 28. NOTE C. We will here add some additional testimonies and remarks. Mr. Keble, in his Primitive Tradition, says, " he does not see how without its aid," (" the chain of primitive tradition ") "the vey outward face of God's church and kingdom among* us could now be retained," and he enumerates as among " the points of catholic consent known by tradition," and which " constitute the ties and knots of the whole system," " the apostolical suc- cession."! So on p. 76 he expects from this tradition " the proving the existing church syste?n divine in many points where they ignorantly supposed it human." t Nevertheless, this same writer has this declaration: '• it is among tlie privi- leges reserved for serious inquiring piety, to discern an express will of God, as well in these ecclesiastical laws, as in others more immediately." § The following is the confession of bisliop Croft in his Naked Truth or the True State of the Primitive Church :|| " And I hope my readers will see what weak proof's are brought for this distinction and superiority of order — no scripture, no primitive general council, no general consent of primitive doctors and fathers, no, not one primitive father of note speaking particularly and home to our purpose ; only a touch of Epiphanius and St. Austin upon Aerius, the Arian heretic, but not declared, no, not by tliem, an heretic in this particular of episcopicy." Professor Powell, of Oxford, in his Tradition Unveiled, says of the high- church party, that " the traditionists readily allow (which iiivsl iip])enr to a strict inquiier; that ail such appeal to wrillen evidence alone is iitfeily insuffi- cient to establish the point. No su''h institution, comph-tt' ;ind distinct, is to be found in the New Testament, positively delivered, or strictly deducible ; no code of its constitution laid down like the Levitical in the Old. Tradition, however, supplies the deficiency." - This silence of scripture is admitted by bishop Skinner, who offers some solution of the fact. See his Vindication, p. 134, and Dr. Mitchell's Letters, p. 59, &c. The same thing is admitted by Dr. Cooke. " How," he asks, IT " can the scripture assert beforehand that a thing is done? (that they succeed, in the present tense ) 'What Episcopalians, therefore, would be simple enough to expect to find a passage in scripture, asserting that the bls/iops do svccred the apostles in their apostolic office .' " However this be, it might reasonably have been expected that the scriptures would have made it pbiin that it was the pur- pose of God that prelates alone should succeed the apostles. That the claims of prelacy rest, after all, upon patristic tradition, is evident from the whole tenor of Dr. Bowden's Letters. See Wks. on Episcop, vol. i. pp. 106, 115, 116. It is here, therefore, to be ob.served, that even were this doctrine embodied in the present standards of the English church," * " she did not take her direc- tion from the scriptures only, but also from the councils and examples of the four or five first centuries, to which she labored to conform her reformation. * 4th edn. p. :JS. I| See p. 19. See also pp. !S, B.?, 59. t See also p. 78. H Wks. on Episc. 'Vol. ii. p. 211. i See do. pp. 39, 40. * * Dr. Owen, vol. 17, p. 235. $ Scott's Coll. of Tr. vol. vii. p. 306. 104 NOTES TO LECTURE IV. Let the question now be, whether tliere be no corruptions in this Church of England, supposing such a natural state to bo instituted. Wliat 1 beseech you, shall bind my conscience to acquiesce in what is [)leaded from tlie four or five first centuries, consisting of men that could and did err, more than that did hers, which was pleaded from the nine or ten centuries followinj." Now if this doctrine of succession is by tradition, tlien it cannot — as prelat- ists make it — be of the substance of doctrine, or among things necessary to salvation ; for this kind of tradition is tiiat which the church rejects, which Taylor repudiates, and in whose disparagement Mr. Keble himself inconsis- tently joins. " In practical matters," it is said, " tradition may be received, but in doctrinal (with the exception of the creed) it cannot." — (Kcble, on Prim. Trad. p. 71.) Again, "all necessary credcnda, all truths essential to salva- tion, are contained in scripture itself." — (Keble, p. 74.) It follows, therefore, that either this whole doctrine is not fundamental, or necessary, and therefore prelacy is self-condemned ; or if it is fundamental, it cannot be proved, or verified by tradition, but must be contained i)i scripture. But this, it is granted it is not, in any certain and palpable form ; and there- fore, to affirm, as do these writers, that its rejection unchurches and unchris- tianizes other communions, is as grossly absurd in reason, as it is heretical in doctrine, and uncharitable in spirit. LECTURE V. THE TESTS BY WHICH THIS PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OP APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION MUST BE TRIED. That we may once more illustrate the nature of the doctrine of apostolical succession, we ask a candid examination of the following passages, which are all extracted from " The Church- man," published in New York, under the sanction of Bishop Onderdonk : the first is from Dodwell, an English writer quoted in the Oxford tracts — the second from Dr. Hook, an English divine of the Oxford tract stamp — the third from an Address on Unity by Dr. Onderdonk, Bishop of New York — the fourth from a correspondent. 1. "None but the bishops can unite us to the Father and the Son. Whence it will follow, that whosoever is disunited from the visible communion of the church on earth, and partic- ularly from the visible communion of the bishops, must conse- quently be disunited from the whole visible catholic church on earth ; and not only so, but from the invisible communion of the holy angels and saints in heaven, and what is yet more, from Christ and God himself. It is one of the most dreadful aggravations of the condition of the damned, that they are banished from the presence of the Lord and the glory of his power. The same is their condition, also, who are disunited from Christ by being disunited from his visible representative.^' 2. "Unless Christ be spiritually present with the ministers of religion in their services, those services will be vain ; but the only ministrations to which he has promised his presence, are those of bishops, who are successors to the first commissioned apostles, and to the other clergy acting under their sanction and by their authority." 3. " None but the bishops can unite us to the Father, in the 14 106 THE NATURE OF THEIR CLAIMS. [lECT. V. way of Christ's appointment, and these bishops must be such as receive their mission from the first commissioned apostles. Wherever such bishops are found dispensing the faith and sacra- ment of Christ, there is a true church ; unsound it may be, hke the church of Rome, but still a true or real church, — as a sick or diseased man, though unsound, is still a real or true man." 4. " By being duly admitted members of the church of Christ, men are placed in a covenant relation to God, in which he gives them, on certain conditions, a title to the benefits of Christ's mediation. The means and pledges of this title's be- ing made effectual, are the sacraments, services, and ordinances of this church." Now, as prelatists have " suspended the validity of their own ministry and ordinances, and the whole Christianity of all their people," and their claim to be regarded as a church of Christ at all, upon this doctrine of an unbroken line of valid and successive prelatical ordinations, from the existing incum- bents up to the apostles themselves, into whom, as into a foun- tain of episcopal grace, they all empty themselves — we will proceed to expose the utter groundlessness and absurdity of this vaunted prerogative. Res est ridicula et nimis jocosa.^ Having disposed of this subject, we shall then proceed to show what is the true doctrine of apostolic succession ; and that presbyterianism, both as it regards its doctrines and its or- der, is accordant to the apostolic platform. This exclusive claim to be the church, and the only true church, and the only conveyancer of heavenly grace, we may consider as a fact to be proved, and as a right to be established. Now, in making good these pretensions, there are certain ac- knowledged principles or canons which have been ratified by prelatical adoption, and by which they may be tested. The succession which is thus claimed by prelates, is not a succession of christians, nor of ministers, but of prelates ; for episcopal ordination does not, we are told, confer any right or power whatever to transmit the sacred gift and grace, except in the one order of prelates. It is, therefore, a personal and ex- clusive succession of prelates which is to be made manifest. It must then be shown not only that the church has ever exist- ed — not only that officiating ministers have ever been found in that church — not only that there have ever been an order of men calling themselves prelates — but it must be shown, that there has been an unbroken succession of true prelates — from ]) Catullus. LECT. V.J WHAT PRELATISTS MUST PROVE. 107 the apostles' days down to the present time. For, if there is nny reasonable doubt, as to any one link in this lengthened chain, then is their proud boast made vain. But, should prelatists even succeed in carrying their chain, in its unbroken continuity, up to the apostles, and thus bridge over the dark chaos of intervening time — they will be required to fasten it surely and strongly to the rock of ages. They must point out and make manifest where and how, it has entered, as an anchor sure and stedfast, and is infixed in the good founda- tion of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner-stone. It will not do for prelatists to deal with this doctrine of apos- tolical succession, as the Romanists do with that of infallibility. This they assume, as the basis of their system, and as in itself necessary, as the ground and security of the entire building. But, as Mr. Newman in reasoning with the Romanists remarks, this " cannot be taken for granted as a first principle in the controversy, for if so, nothing remains to be proved, and the controversy is at an end." In like manner do we say, in argu- ing with prelatists : That principle, on which the excommuni- cation of all the protestant churches in the world is to be based, must be shown to rest upon no dubious interpretation — upon no questionable meanings, — no interpolated opinions of uninspired and unauthoritative men — no figment of the universal consent of the early church, founded upon the doubtful re- mains of comparatively a few, self-contradictory fathers. But, as Mr. Newman says of the Romish doctrine referred^to, that Romanists are obliged to maintain it by their very preten- sions to be considered the one, true, catholic, and apostolic church,' — so also do we affirm of prelatists, that they also are obliged to maintain this unauthenticated and equally prepos- terous dogma, by their very pretensions to be considered the one, true, catholic, and apostolic, church. The absurdity, how- ever, with which such a course is chargeable, is in both cases, equally apparent ; and the reasonableness of our rejection of both, until proved by a divine warrant, and fully established in all their parts, equally obvious. Nor is this all. For, even c6uld we suppose that it had been discovered in the apostolic writings, that such an order of ministers as prelates had been ordained in the churches estab- lished by the apostles, — as, for instance, Timothy and Titus; -it would be still further necessary to prove, that this order was instituted by the apostles as a perpetual and unalterable 1) See Lectures on Romanism, p. G3, &c. 108 WHAT PRELATISTS MUST PROVE. [lECT. V. order of the church. Reason would demand, that " we should hesitate awhile, before we regard the institutors of a new RELIGION, in appointing its ministers, or even their method of proceeding in naming their successors, as absolutely conclu- sive in favor of the same method in after times ; inasmuch as no other plan may be supposable as proper or practicable at the commencement of a new order of things ; and yet, some other plan be both possible and more eligible, when this same econo- my has run on through a tract of time."^ Apostolic prece- dent is only binding where it is of the nature of an apos- tolic precept, where it is given in the exercise of apostolic inspiration, and with the forethought of apostolic prescience. The apostles themselves distinguish between what is essential as a necessary principle, and what is expedient for the present necessity ; between what, in certain circumstances, may be a duty, while, in other circumstances, it may be a matter of per- fect liberty and indifference,'^ That this rule is necessary, ap- pears from the admission made by these divines, that "ordina- tion, episcopacy, &;c. come under the category of rites and discipline," and yet, that " rites are found in scripture, which every one admits to be changeable."^ But, what is still more to the point, in order to establish the designed perpetuity of such an institution, it must be shown, as Mr. Palmer testifies, that it was " enacted by the authority," not of " some of the apostles " merely ; but " by all the apos- tles, under the express direction of the Holy Ghost."* "It may be affirmed," to apply the conclusion of this writer, " that unless there is evidence that this system was instituted for a per- manent object, or was to be transmitted to others, it cannot by any means be proved a matter of faith ; and therefore, even if we were to concede, that " this system was, in fact, followed 1) Spiritual Despotism, p. 149. that he was directed to do so, for in- 2) See Calvin's Instit. B. iv. ch. spired men did many things, merely X. § XX. and ch. xix. § xxx. " We do on the ground of human expediency." not," says Dr. Howe, (Vind. p. 354,) " What if baptism was administered " rest the obligation of episcopacy on to heathen converts ? It was not the ground of its existence in the done, so far as we know, by divine primitive church, but on the ground appointment." See also Dr. Milch- tliat the apostles, acting under the ell's Letters to Bishop Skinner, p. G9. commission, and in conformity to the 3) See illustrated by examples, will of Clirist, established itasthereg- Palmer, vol. ii. p. 70. " It universally u\a.T a.nd permanent method of confer- acknowledged," says Dr. Bowden, ring tlie sacerdotal power." This prin- " that several apostolic usages are not ciple is also admitted by Dr. Bowden, binding, because the apostles, in such in arguing on the subject of the syna- cases, did not act on the ground of gogues. (Works on Episcop.vol.il. divine authority." (Letters, 2d series, p. H-'J.) "Ezra's being an inspired jii. p. 21.) man, is no proof that he established 4) See illustrated by examples, them ; but if he did, it is no proof Palmer, vol. ii. p. 7L LECT. v.] WHAT PRELATI3TS MUST TROVE. 109 by the apostles, as is pretended," " its divine right would not be established."^ For, unless it can be thus " proved from scripture, it is no article of faith, notwithstanding the rash assertions of some modern theologians to the contrary."^ But again, that we may advance to another point. Were we required by proof, plain and sufficient, to admit that the system of diocesan prelacy was instituted by apostolic authority, as a permanent ordinance in the church ; a further requisition must be met, before its exclusive title to the prerogatives of the church of Christ can be admitted. Many of the most important and learned writers, — and among them not a few who have adhered most conscientiously to the prelatic form of church government, — have been of the opinion, that, on scripture evidence alone, an assent could never be demanded for this, or any existing and completed form of church polity ; but that, with the approba- tion or permission of the apostles, the particular nature and order of the ecclesiastical constitution of any particular church, was made to accord with the national sentiments and civil usages of christians, in the different countries and provinces where Christianity was established. Many variations and anoma- lies in the distribution of offices, the order of proceedure, and the mode of government, were, it is by these parties believed, act- ually found in the apostolic churches ; and that it was only in the course of centuries, the churches became so fused and melted, as to form but one homogeneous mass. In the affirmation, that prelacy, as now modelled, was matured in the first age of the church, it is believed by such writers, that "common sense is insulted and historic evidence outraged, by affirming it to have been a fact."^ But, in order to authenticate the divine right of prelacy to the monopoly of grace, it is obviously necessary, that it should be made manifest by the clear declarations of the lawgiver, that such was his predetermined purpose and decree. This, then, is a fourth condition in the argument for the exclusive assump- tions of prelacy. It would not suffice, for this end, to show from undoubted scripture authority, that prelatic orders are valid and allowable, but that they are necessary, and, therefore, binding. It must be '• proved " that these prelatic dogmas are " articles of faith," and that they are so taught in the Bible.^ And this proof must be perfectly sufficient, for it is enough to destroy the claim of any such rites or discipline to be considered as 1) Palmer, vol. ii. J). 49G, in argu- 3) See Spiritual Despotism, pp. ing against the supremacy of Peter. 160, 103, 16G, and pp. 118 and ll'J. See also pp. 4'J4 and 493. 4) Palmer, ii. p. 4G5. 2) Ibid, p. 505 on do. 1 10 WHAT PRELATISTS MUST PROVE. [lECT. V. articles of faith, that their definite and exclusive appointment as the only allowable forms of christian polity, is doubtful/ Facts obscurely revealed, and practices inferenlially deduced from incidental allusions, can never be made authoritative and bind- ing on the conscience. " It is not in any such form, that law has ever been promulgated. No legislator has so tortured the ingenuity of any people." And since Christianity is distin- guished from Judaism by being a system of principles, instead of forms ; a code of doctrines, rather than a ritual ; a digest of essential elements, and not a huge collection of minute circum- stantials ; — we require nothing more to disprove the asserted obligatory character of any imposition which is forced upon us, than that " the primitive practice in such a matter is clearly not clear." The only council which assembled under the guidance of inspired men, has emblazoned, in the forefront of Christianity, its distinctive character, when they left on record this decree — "it seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things."^ " Never- theless, and with this very proclamation before our eyes, we may make the apostles despots, if we will thrust them into the iron chair of tyranny, and extort law from their lips, where in fact they have uttered no decree.'" We acknowledge, there- fore, no right of legislation where Christ has left us at liberty, nor will we be bound by the commandments or traditions of any men, however loudly they may trumpet their own praises, and herald their empty denunciations. These four canons being observed, in discovering to us the undoubted commencement of this chain of the apostolical suc- cession of prelatical bishops ; we shall be canonically equipped for an entrance upon the investigation of its more lengthened continuance. Here also, however, there are certain rules by which, in this all-important inquiry, we must be most cautiously guided. For, as we have already shown, prelates themselves, both Romanists and protestants, have staked their present claims to the character of THE church of Christ, upon the fact, as they state it, that "the succession of prelates (bishops) from the apostles has preserved and transmitted from one generation to another, the IDENTITY of the church.'" This is "shown," say they "to be the unanswerable argument for the truth of Christianity "* — " was maintained as the great pillar of the church by the men on whom 1) Seo Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 458, 4) British Critic, 1S39, No. 52, 4G7, 472, 473, 474. p. 2r.7. 2) Acts, XV. 28. 5) Leslie's Short and Eas^y Metii- 3 Spiritual Despotism, p. 12J. od, vol. iii. p. 2. See also p. 103 LECT. v.] THE VIRTUES OF THIS SUCCESSION. Ill the Anglican theology rests and is founded,'" — and is " the only- ground" on which is based that claim of respect and attention, which they make^ and upon which they can boldly meet Roman- ism and dissent/" The whole fabric of Christianity is, we are assured, virtually connected with it.' So that, where it is lost, *' the overthrow of the church, and the gospel of Christ, has fol- lowed also."^ Its rejection is the source of all errors and heresies,6 while it is made the fountain of all those other opinions and practices, to which we object in the system of high-church pre- lacy ; and by which we believe it to be, so far forth, identified first with the Nicene, and afterwards with the Romish church, in the corruptions and errors which characterized their apostacy from the simplicity and purity of the gospel. Hear what is said on this point : " This," that is, the apostolical succession, " is the ru- dimental truth on which all the churches rest. They have gone forward from one truth to another; from the apostolical commis- sion to the succession ; from the succession to the office ; in the office they have discerned the perpetual priesthood, the perpet- ual sacrifice ; in the sacrifice the glory of the christian church, its power as a fount of grace, and its blessedness as a gate to heaven." "There is no conceivable point of opinion, or practice, or ritual, or usage, in the church system, ever so minute — no detail of faith or conduct ever so extreme, but what might be a legitimate and necessary result of that one idea, or formula."^ 1) See Catena Patrum, on the her well-being." Letter, p. 183, Apost. Success, in Oxf. Tr. No. 74 ; Eng. ed. where are named Hooker, Andrews, The supreme importance to be at- Hall, Bramhall, Mede, Sanderson, tached to this investigation into the Hammond, Jeremy Taylor, Heyhn, tests by which the validity of this Pearson, Bull, Stillingfleet, Ken, Bev- succession must be approved, is mani- eridge. Wake, Potter, Nelson, Law, fest. " If the succession," says Dr. Johnson, Dodwell, Collier, Leslie, Chandler, (Appeal in Behalf of the Wilson, Bingham, Samuel Johnson, Ch. of Eng. in America, N. Y. 17G7, Home, Jones of Nay land, Horsley, p. 4,) " be once broken, and the power Heber, Jebb, Van Mildert, and Mant. of ordination, once lost," as it is 2) Oxf. Tr. No. 1, vol. i. on their theory by invalidity, " not all 3) Ibid, Tract 74. the men on earth, not all the angels 4) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 49 in heaven, without an immediate com- 5) Mr. Manning's Append. p.ll3. mission from Christ, can restore it." 6) See Oxf Tr. vol. i.p. 383. "Admit," says Dr. Howe, (Vindication 7) See a very elaborate article on of the Prot. Episcopal Church, p. 347.) "the American Church," in whose "for the sake of testing a principle, that praise this is spoken, in the British the succession should be interrupted, Critic, Oct. 1839, pp. 308, 300, where how would the priestly office be reference is given to, and quotations conferred ? There would be no per- made from American bishops. See son on earth, according to the siipposi- also Palmer, vol. ii. p. 529, 5i30. Thus tion, possessed of the ordaining power. Dr. Pusey speaks of " rites, practices It follows, that the sacerdotal office and observances, (such as fasting, would perish, unless God should be ember days,) which she (the church pleased again miraculously to inter- by virtue of this authority) has ever pose." "There is a perfect analogy observed, and which are essential to in this particular between the Bible 112 WHAT PRELATISTS MUST PROVE. [lect. V. Such, ihen, being the issues dependent upon the determina- tion of this question, it is all-important that it should be most ac- curately weighed. It must first, therefore, be shown, that no link is wanting in this chain of personal succession, from the first successor of the apostles down to the present time. In demanding the most perfect proof of the purity and perfection of every link, in the several chains, that bind each church to the apostles, and by which they are invested with that " plenitude of sacerdotal power which constitutes episcopacy'" — we only ask what they and the priesthood. An uninterrupted succession of true copies is necessary to the former ; an uninterrupted suc- cession of true ordainers is necessary to the latter. If either succession be really interrupted, the interruption must be fatal, until God shall be pleased to interpose." (Ibid. See also Percival on the Apost. Succ. pp.51, 53, Am. ed.) Bishop Ravenscrofl thus lays down the law : " As the ministerial charac- ter is a divine right to transact the affairs of Christ's kingdom, ordina- tion must consequently be the only evidence (miracles excepted) of divine right — the substitute to us for mirac- ulous attestation to the ministerial communion." (Vind. and Def. in Evang. and Lit. Magazine, vol. ix. p. 539.) The wily Romanist, the author of the " Nullity," a paper answered by Burnet, thus argues : " They are no bishops, (bond. Chr. Obs. 1838, p. 825, and Ed. obs. p. 626,) because their form of ordination is essentially in- valid and null, seeing it cannot be valid, (no more than that of priest- hood,) unless it be in fit words, which signifies the order given ; as Mr. Mason says, in his VindicifE Ecclesite Anglicanffi, lib. i. c. IG, n. G, in these terms : Not any words can serve for this institution, but such as are fit to express the power of the order given. And the reason is evident, because ordination, being a sacrament, (as the same author says, lib. i. n 8, and Doctor Bramhall, p. 96, of the consecration of protestant bishops.) that is, a visible sign of invisible grace given by it, there must be some visible sign or words in the form of it, to signify the power given, and to determine the matter (which is the imposition of hand.s, of itself a dumb sign, and common to priests and dea- cons, confirming, curing, &c.) to the grace of episcopal order." " We sin- cerely believe," they add, "that upon the non-spiritual principles assumed by the objector, the orders of the Church of England would be invalid." But there are many questions we, in our turn, might put both to Angli- can and Roman prelatists. As for instance, " Was Ignatius, (Dr. Mitch- ell's Pres. Letters, p. 219,) the bishop of Antioch, ordained by the laying on of hands .'' Dr. Wake seems to doubt of it much. We have seen that Gregory Thaumaturgus was not or- dained to the charge of the seventeen by imposition of hands, no more than by two or three bishops, and conse- quently never was ordained. Fru- mentius was the apostle of the In- dians ; and it was not till after he had been employed in converting them, that Athanasius ordained him. The king of the Iberians was employed, with success, in the conversion of hi3 subjects, before he was so much as baptized, and his history does not say, that he ever was ordained. Olaus Fringesson, king of Norway, first converted his own subjects, and then fitted out ships, and went on board, with a sufficient number of learned men and disciplined troops, and in his apostolic circumnaviga- tion, converted a great number of his pagan allies and dependents, without ever thinking of being ordained." We find, by a very recent possession of " Dr. Mitchell's Presbyterian Let- ters, addressed to Bishop Skinner," (London, 1809,) that this very argu- ment is pursued at great length. See part ii. of that work, p. 194— 2G2. \) British Critic, 1839, No. 52, p. 257. Plenitudo sacerdotii, is a de- signation used for episcopacy in ancient writers. LECT. v.] THE FORM OF ORDINATION NECESSARY. 113 vauntingly declare to be in preservation and in actual posses- sion.' A single breach, in any part, of any one course, of this mys- terious chain — by which a nervous spiritual energy is commu- nicated to the entire body — will at once destroy its vitality, and reduce its ministers to laymen, and its ordinances to mere nullities. A second test, which is also self-imposed, and which will be necessary for the further trial of the genuineness of each link in this golden chain, is this : it must be made manifest, in regard to all the individuals in this long line of personal succession, that their ordination as prelates was valid ; first, as to its form ; secondly, as to the subject of it ; and thirdly, as to its ministers.* This validity must be ascertained, first, as to the form of their ordination. For, " any episcopal ordination"^ will by no means be a sufficient guaranty, when, by a mistake, the souls which Christ redeemed may, through hesitation " or mistake, perish."* Numerous have been the cases in which individuals have been forthwith and unconditionally re-ordained, when any doubt has affected the "ministration of the sacrament," — to use prelatic language — in its own original form ; and this, "whether the doubt affected the whole sacrament, or related only to a circumstance of the sacrament already administered." "For sacraments are of such great moment ; especially those which are conferred but once, that when there is any probable doubt that they have not been validly received or delivered, they ought certainly to be conferred again."* This custom continues even now, as may be seen from many striking illustrations of it, as given by them- selves.^ The "divine grace or commission is believed," we are informed, " to be only given perfectly, to those lawfully ordained."'' Now Bingham teaches us, that " no bishop was to be elected or ordained without their (metropolitans') consent and approbation ; otherwise, the canons pronounce both the elec- tion and the ordination null,"^ No bishop was to be ordained, until the canons of the church were read in his hearing. All the ancient rituals, and pontificals, and canons, " require the imposition of hands to be given by the consecrating bishops, while the prayer of consecration is repeated. " It might be 1) See Oxf. Tr. vol. i. pp. 377, 3) Ibid, p. 434. 378. and see references in Lecture i. 4) Morinus de Ordin, in Palmer, " This authority is traceable in our ii. p. 434. church to the apostles, and through 5) See Palmer, ibid, p. 435. the apostles to Christ." Dr. Boy- 6) Palmer, ii. p. 441. ton's Sermon, p. 14. 7) Bingham, B. ii. ch. xvi. § 12. 2) Palmer on the Ch. vol. ii. 436. 8) Ibid", B. iv. ch. vi. § 1. 15 114 THE PROPEK SUBJECTS OF OKDINAtlON. [leCT. V. argued," says Mr. Palmer, " that this is necessary, in order to determine the other to the grace of the episcopal order.'" It must also be determined beyond doubt, what form is necessary to a valid ordination ; for, if the essence of " this sacrament " consists in the matter and form now assigned by the Romish church,* then it follows that, " since all the rituals of the Latin church — for the first ten centuries — had no such form, .... the church had, in the course of so many ages, no true orders."^ These, and all other considerations, of whatever nature they may be, touching the form in which a valid ordination may be conferred, — must be shown to be all fulfilled in reference to each individual prelate, in the endless chain of apostolical suc- cession. But, secondly, this validity must be further manifested, as it regards the subjects of such ordinations. And first, we demand that above, and in precedence to, all other requirements on this head, those laid down in the apostolic canons be fully and an- swerably met. The qualifications of a bishop are unequivocally expressed by the apostle Paul, as in other places, so very fully in 1 Tim. iii. 1 — 7, and Titus, iv. 5 — 9. Personal piety ; holiness of character ; a thorough and correct knowledge of the truths of the gospel ; and ability to communicate that knowledge to oth- ers — these, among other specifications, are made essential to him who would fitly enter upon the high and holy office of a christian bishop. These qualifications are what God himself has made necessary, and which cannot, therefore, be dispensed with by man. They are not such as are desirable merely, but such as are required — not such as are variable, but what are permanently necessary. Without these, no ecclesiastical authority under heaven, could induct a man into the character, however it might into the office, of a minister of the New Testa- ment.'' Such an individual might be officially, externally, and nominally, a bishop, but he would not be a teacher sent of God, or called by him. It were blasphemous presumption to chal- lenge the power of gifting such an one, by the mere imposition of a prelate's hands, and the utterance of a prelate's prayer, (and yet this, we are told, is the essence of ordination, though it is no where so taught in the word of God,) with the plenitude of sacerdotal power and episcopal grace. A bench composed of such bishops, were a most graceless episcopate — having power to sit as God in his temple — to subvert his counsels, and to set 1) Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 467, 468. 3) Ibid, do. 2) See Bishop Burnet on Art. 4) See Palmer, vol. ii. p. 446, 25th, pp. 373 and 374. and p. 510. LECT. v.] THK QUALIFICATIONS OF BISHOPS. 115 at naught his plainest requirements. They who knowingly ordain such characters ; and they who are, in such unfitness, knowingly ordained — are traitors to God, to his church, and to his sacred cause. In their declaration of the functions of bishops and priests, the English reformers declare, in full conformity with these views, that *' this office, he. is subject, determined and re- strained unto those certain limits and ends, for the which the same was appointed by God's ordinance," he. Again : " by which words, (of the apostle, in the passage quoted above,) it appeareth evidently, not only that St. Paul accounted and num- bered this said power and office of the pastors and doctors, among the proper and special gifts of the Holy Ghost ; but it also appeareth that the same was a limited power and office, ordained especially, and only, for the causes and purposes be- fore rehearsed.'" If, then, it should be found historically true, that such graceless and unqualified subjects have been thrust into the office, or rather, into the benefice and emoluments of the office of bishop — then are we assured, that God never sent them, and that, however called bishops, they were yet no bishops — and consequently, w^ere absolutely unfit either to re- ceive, or to impart, or to transmit, this spiritual or heavenly gift.' But when we pass from the consideration of the qualifica- tions of the proper subjects of episcopal ordination, as they are laid down in the canon of inspiration, to these same qualifica- tions, as laid down in the canons of councils, and in the common law of ecclesiastical bodies ; we shall find that the tests of such validity are multiplied and not decreased, and that the impossi- bility of authenticating the genuineness of every link, in this interminable chain, is as far removed from practicability as in- finite is from finite. Bishops, as we thus learn, were not to be ordained under thirty years of age,^ and yet we know they were often ordained even in infancy.* They only were proper subjects for ordina- 1) See also Art. xxvi. See this the office of the episcopate, then is in Burnet's Hist, of Reform. Coll. the word altogether misapplied, being of Records, B. iii. Art. v. withdrawn from its spiritual and in- 2) We do not say that God can- ternal reference, and applied to tha not, or that he has not blessed the which is only external. And if, on ministration of unworthy prelates and the other hand, it is intended to refe teachers, but only that such indieidu- to an internal spiritual efficacy, this ah are tkemsclres unworthy, and as plainly is neither possessed nor corn- ministers, invalid in the sitrhtof God, municable by such unholy prelates, and that they are incapable, by any 3) Bingham, vol. i. pp. 103, 104. personal merit or influence, of com- 4) Ibid, p. 106, and Calvin, B. iv. municating any spiritual grace. If ch. v. § I. by the episcopal grace, we understand 116 THE QUALIFICATIONS OF BISHOPS. [lect. V lion, who had gone through the inferior orders ;i and yet nothing was more common than for individuals to be thrust into the episcopate at once.^ The book of the gospels was to be laid upon the head of bishops at their ordination,3 and yet have there been times, when such a book could not be obtained. No one was to be ordained a bishop while under sentence of deposition.* Inquiry was to be made into the faith and morals of such as were ordained ;^ ordination was not to be given to strangers,8 — nor to persons who had done public penance? — nor to energumens or demoniacs® — nor to murderers, or adulterers, nor to any that had lapsed in time of persecutiong — nor to usurers or seditious persons'" — nor to such as had dismembered their own body, (as Origen did,)" — nor to such as were baptized with clinic 1) " When Constantine, (Presb. Letters, pp. 233, 234,) the antipope, was compelled to yield the apostolic chair to Stephen III., in 768, and was dragged before a council in the lat- eran, (his eyes having been mercifully torn out, that he might be exempted from the pain of seeing his successful competitor,) he was sternly asked, why he, a layman, had dared, in defi- ance of the laws of the church, to ac- cept ordination as a bishop. Constan- tine answered, that of such ordina- tions there were many examples in the church; of which he mentioned, particularly, the cases of Sergius of Ravenna, and Stephen of Naples, who of laymen were ordained metropoli- tans, in the late pontificate. Jf pain and fear had not confounded his recol- lection, he might have mentioned many more instances of the same gross irregularity, and produced a multiplicity of examples of men who were consecrated high priests, without being priests. He might have named Cyprian, ' the apostle of high-church,' who, according to Pontius, his biogra- pher, was only what was called a ne- ophite, or one newly converted and baptized, when he was elected and ordained bishop of Carthage ; and Nectarius, whom the second general council appointed to succeed Gregory Nazianzen, in the see of Constantino- ple ; and Philogonius, who was, with- out ceremony, taken from the bench, on which he sat as a lay-judge, and placed on the episcopal throne of An- tioch ; nay, and as great a saint as any of them, Ambrose of Milan, who was elected bishop before he was bap- tized, and ordained a few days after. No person who is conversant with ecclesiastical history, needs to be in- formed, that after the time of Con- stantine (the antipope) such trans- gressions of the canons occurred fre- quently. Some of them were shock- ingly flagrant." " Pope Alexander II. condemns or- dination per saltum, that is, leaping to a superior order without passing through the inferior." Art. Ordination, Rees' Cyclop. Mr. Percival himself allows that there " are many instances to be found in church history, of persons conse- crated to the episcopate Irom the laity." (On Apost. Sue. Ap. p. 110, Eng. ed.) Now, Dr. Field, who is at least as good authority as Mr. Percival, says : " A bishop ordained per saltvm, (i. e, that never had the ordination of a presbyter,) can neither consecrate and administer the sacrament of the Lord's bodv, nor ordain a presbyter." Of the Church, B. 3, ch. 39, p. 157, fol. ed. 1635, in Powell, p. 310. See instances of those introduced to the episcopate immediately, in Plea for Presb. p. 19. 2) See further. Palmer, vol. ii. p. 432, and Bingham, vol. vi. pp. 108 and 109. 3) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 121. 4) Bingham, vol. vi p. 492. 5) Ibid, vol. i. 358. 6) Ibid, vol. i. p. 360. 7) Bingham, vol. i. 361, and vol. vi. p. 495. 8) Ibid, vol. vi. p. 493, and vol. i. p. 331. 9) Ibid, vol. i. p 363. 10) Ibid, p. 365. 11) Ibid, vol. i. p. 366. LECT. v.] THE QUALIFICATIONS OF BISHOPS. 117 baptismi — nor to any one unbaptized, or not baptized in due form* — nor to any baptized, or even re-baptized by heretics or laymens — nor to any who had not first made all their family catholics'* — nor to soldiers, actors, and numberless other descript and nondescript characters/ 1) Bingham, vol. i. p. 309, and Blair's Waldenses, vol. i. p. 40. 2) Bingham, vol. vi. p. 493. 3) Ibid, vol. i. p. 370, &c Fur- ther, in the reign of James I. the words " lawful minister were in- serted in the rubric for private bap- tism, to prevent laymen from pre- suming to baptize." Rymer, vol. xvi. p. 57.5, in Origin of the Prayer Book, p. 100. See also Lond. Chr, Obs. for 1811, App. p. 832. " Baptism (Presb. Letters, pp. 297, 298) ought unquestionably to precede consecration. So thought Cyprian, and that ' great and respectable coun- cil,' the first council of Nice, and the composers of the apostolical constitu- tions ; in a word, all that you account respectable in christian antiquity." " Buttiie most terrible consequence of all is, that, when the present epis- copal clergy of Scotland look back to their spiritual progenitors of the seventeenth century, tliey can discern nothing but a number of pagans dress- ed in canonicals. If their ancestors, after the flesh, were unbaptized per- sons, as all presbyterians are ; (and I am much misinformed, if several of them have not this dreadful retro- spect,) then they have nothing heredi- tary to depend on for their admission into heaven ; but must be obliged, like those who call themselves ' cler- gy ' of the establishment, to trust to ' repentance toward God, and faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ.' " " Unless," says Dr. Mitchell, ad- dressing the non-juring successor, Bishop Skinner, (Presb. Letters, p. 223,) " you liave sacrificed some of your distinguishing principles to the treaty of friendship, into which you have lately entered with that church, you must maintain that baptism by mid wives, or any of the laity, male or female, is not valid, and that it leaves the person to whom it is administered, as much a Jew or pagan as it finds him." 4) Bingham, vol. i. p. 371. 5) See in ibid, vol. i. pp. 370, 392. But further, (Presbyterian Letters, pp. 227, 228 :) " One may be inca- pacitated by one's sex as well as by one's age, for ordination to a baptism ; and it is not beyond the bounds of rational belief, that you have some fe- male ' authors and predecessors ' be- tween you and the apostles. It is a canon of the New Testament, that women shall not be ordained ecclesi- astics of such an order, as entitles them to speak in the churches. Yet there are at least fifty Latin authors, including Platina and some Greeks, who relate that a lady, most of them say of English extraction, of the name of JoUana, or Joan, did slip, somehow, into the chair of St. Peter, and occu- pied it till she was brought to bed. What effect this remarkable event had, during the two years five months and four days that Joan filled the pa- pal see, on the stream of succession, in so far as the validity of your orders is concerned, I do not know, and I presume you are alike ignorant. For aught any body now alive can tell, the crosier may have descended to our Scottish primers, from a hand, which Nature and the New Testament ap- pointed to hold no staff but the distaff. " I am perfectly aware of the fact, (that Joan succeeded St. Peter) being disputed. It would be strange if it were not, in the church of Home, which conceals, or denies, or expun- ges from all records, under her con- trol, what she does not choose to acknowledge. " I am aware, also, that some prolest- ants have submitted to the labor of investigating the evidence, on which the truth of this curious fact rests, and have expressed themselves dissatis- fied with it. Yet Fra Paolo, one of the most learned and intelligent Ro- man catholic writers of his own or any other age, acknowledges that it has never been disproved, and nays, that though he is disposed to believe it false, it is not on account of its ab- surdity, — that age, (the middle of the 118 THE QUALIFICATIONS OF BISHOPS. [lect. V. Those, says Palmer, "are manifestly devoid of the qualifi- cations required by the apostles and the church," who have been guilty of crime, (see specifications,) who are illiterate, who are neophytes — that is, ordained inmiediately after their baptism, or before the canonical age,' or without examination — who are heretics, excommunicate and schismatics — those de- ficient in mind or body — those under the command of others — those ordained by a bishop who had no right, or whose ordination was in any degree doubtful,'^ or who had been ninth century) producing thinga as extraordinary as a lady being pope." See the truth of this history of the popess Joan proved by sixty-five po- pish autliors, several Greek authors, and by other evidence, — and all objec- tions answered — in " The History of Popery," «fec. by the authors of the Universal History, 4to. Lond. 1735, vol. i. pp. 299—303. 1) " How old," asks Dr. Mitchell (Pres. Lett. pp. 224, 2-25,) " was Hugh, the son of Count Herbert, when his father procured his exaltation to the archiepiscopal see of Rheims ? Just five years of age ; and yet iiis election was confirmed by the infallible Pope John. If Hugh was an apostolic bish- op, I suppose no body will dispute tiie legality and propriety of Caligula's appointment of his favorite horse to the consulship at Rome. Whether the venerable Archbishop Hugh was ordained, and began to perform his archiepiscopal functions, ' or admin- ister the blessings of the holy and ven- erable sacraments,' before his grace was thought by madanie la countesse, his mamma, to be quite fit for quitting the nursery; or whether the pope, de plenitudine p'>testati.s, permitted his grace to enjoy the revenues of his see in the nursery, and allowed another, such as the arch-priest of the church of Rheims, to perform the functions, in quality of his grace's lieutenant; and among other tlungs to ordain, I will not positively say." "John XT. the bastard of a former pope, was placed in the chair of St. Peter, before he was twenty years of age. Benedict IX. was made pope at the age of eleven, according to some, and of eighteen according to others." " It were endless to mention, by name, all the striplings, the adolcscen- tuli, as Baronius indignantly calls them, who were, at different periods of the Romish hierarchy, and in all the western nations of Europe, thrust into the highest seats of the church. I cannot, however, pass over two in- stances, which occurred in our own country, and so lately as the beginning of the sixteenth century. The duke of Ross, a younger brother of king James IV., and Alexander Stuart, James' natural son, were successively nominated to the archbishopric of St. Andrews, the former before he was twenty, the latter when he was four- teen years of age." 2) The author of the Rights of the Chr. Church, (London, 1702, edit. 3d., p. 327,) in controverting Mr. Dod- well's arguments, remarks, *' whether the papists have or have not done this, (neglected to continue their succes- sion) the English church, by his own reasoning, must be without bishops, because they who were ordained to sees already full, are, as he asserts in at least forty places, no bishops, and their consecrations null and void : and 'it was,' as he saith, 'a principle universally received in the catholic church, as ancient as the practice of two pretending to the same bishoprick, that the secundus was always looked on as nuUusforas alienus, so far from being a bishop of the church, that tlie attempt divided him from it. And this he saith is as evident from reason as from authority, because no man can convey the same thing twice ; and therefore, in all monarchical districts, none can suppose an anti-monarch's title good, till he has shown the first monarch's title is not so.' And con- sequently, the attempt to make protes- tant bishops of those sees which were full of otliers, must be null and void ; and if they were no bishops of ihose places to which they were ordained, they were bishops of no others, and therefore no bishops at all ; since none, as he owns, can be a bishop of the catholic church otherwise than by LECT. v.] THE QXrALIFICATIONS OF 01tf)AINERS. 119 deprived, and finally, those whose wives are of an evil char- acter.'" Such are some of the tests, by which each link in this " un- broken line from Peter to the present day "* is to be approved. But, in the third place, we must consider the qualifications which must be shown to have existed in each case of ordina- tion, in the ministers or ordainers. These also are required, by the canons of inspiration, to be faithful men, who shall be able to teach others, also, (2 Tim. ii. 2; and see all of chap. 2nd and 3d.) Faithfulness to God, to Christ, " to the truth and trust of the gospel," — to the glory of God and the salvation of men, — such only as have these gifts are scripturally empowered to ordain others. All the canons required that ordination, to be valid, must be performed " by a bishop, whose own ordination is in no degree doubtful."^ Now, according to these canons, all bishops should be consecrated by their metropolitan, and the synod of compro- vincial bishops,'* and yet by this single test, the entire succes- sion, both in the English and Romish churches, is completely vitiated." The canons are equally pointed in requiring, in order to any valid ordination, the presence of at least three prelates.^ All ordinations, by less than three prelates, are, by what may be termed, in church phrase, the universal consent of the catholic church — for this alivays supposes a difference of more or less extent — and sometimes an opposition on the part even of the majority — invalid.' Now, by this canon, also, the succession, being a bishop of some particular others before them, till they come to district. Nor could the death of the apostles. the popish bishops make those who " If we may believe Gregory of were not so much as members of Nyssa, (Dr. Mitchell's Presb. Letters, the catholic church, to become bishops p. 209,) it is a fact, that Gregory of it." Thaumaturgus was ordiiined, not by 1) See Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 437, two or three bishops laying their 438, and pp. 436, and 434, and 429, «&c. hands on him, but by Phedimus, a 2) Dr. Hook. neighboring bishop, who, at the time 3) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 43^). of the ordination, happened to be at 4) Ibid, vol. i. p 487. The Ni- the distance of three days' journey cene council enacted that " it is very from the person ordained. Tlie truth evident and certain, that if any one be is, Phedimus dedicated Gregory to the made a bishop without the concur- service of God at Neocesarea, by his rence of the metropolitan, this great own solitary prayers, in the absence council has decided that such an one of Gregory, and without his consent ought not to be a bishop." Cap. 7, either asked, or given freely, or ex- in Saravia, p. 187. torted ; and yet Gregory undertook 5) See Palmer, vol. i. pp. 487, the charge assigned him, without fur- 488. ther ceremony, and performed all the 0) Bellarmine allows that a law- parts of the episcopal function." ful bishop must be (VVillet, Syn. Pap. 7) See this fully argued in Palmer, p. 80) ordained of three bishops which vol. ii. p. 422, &c., and Bingham, vol. were ordained of others, and they of i. p. 1 J 7, and Dr. Mason, vol. iii. p. 68 120 THE QUALIFICATIONS OF ORDAINERS. [lECT. V. in the Romish and the English church, and in the Romish church in this country also, has been most certainly and palpably de- stroyed,' and clouded with " a very serious doubt on their ordi- nations generally ; "* " a doubt, too, which no after measures could possibly remove or efface," " since a true and valid epis- copal vocation is not merely probable, but certain and un- doubted."^ All the bishops present at an ordination are also required to " lay on their hands in the ordination of a bishop."* Bishops were not to ordain their own successors.^ They were to read the canons of the church to every one at his ordination.* They were not to ordain in another's diocese without consent.'' And the hands of the consecrating bishops were to be imposed ivhile the prayer of consecration was repeated.* A wrong baptism, ;ilso, is sufficient to vitiate the whole future orders received subsequently to it, so that the whole ordination of a church, and its succession, may be broken by one single case of invalid baptism, since it is plain, that "nihil dat, quod non habet." Now, it is a fact, that notwithstanding these canons, no one has ever been refused orders because not prelatically baptized.® VVe have thus, with as much brevity as possible, laid down the admitted canons or rules of common law, by which judg- ment must be rendered in this matter. The foundatiorj of prelacy in " the sure word of prophecy," from which we are admonished to let " no man move us," " must be tried so as by fire," by each of the canons we have drawn forth. The actual existence, and the genuine and unadulterated character of each separate link in the chain of personal succession from Christ, through his apostles, to the present time, must next be ascer- tained as by an experimentum crucis, by the application of all those numerous canons we have adduced, touching the form, the subject, and the ministers of ordination as to each individual. It must be known, that he was himself duly qualified for ordina- tion,— that he was duly invested with the sacerdotal power in all its plenitude of grace, and that he received his investiture from the hands of those who were each of them, in like man- ner, and in all respects, in a condition of "certain and undoubt- ed " fitness to communicate " a valid episcopal vocation.'"" This task must be undertaken and gone through with, and the result 1) See Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 469, 7) Bingham, vol. i. pp. 83, and 470,471,472. 395. 2) Palmer, ii. p. 473. 8) Palmer, ii p. 4G7. 3) Ibid, ii. p. 474. 9) See affirmed in Burnet on the 4) Bingham, vol. i. p. 121. 39th art. in art. xxvi. p. 388, 3e9. 5) Ibid, p. 135. 10) See Lend. Chr. Obs. 1840, p. 6) Ibid, pp. 391,392. 222. LECT. v.] THE PROOF UTTERLY IMPOSSIBLE. 121 brought clearly to light, by a direct or reverse progress, through every link in the catalogue of christian bishops, amounting, as has been stated, to some one hundred thousand.' " The un- suppliable defect of any necessary antecedent, must needs," as Chillingvvorth remarks, " cause a nullity of all those conse- quences which depend upon it. In fine, to know any one thing, you must first know ten thousand others, whereof not any one is a thing that can be known But then, that of ten thousand probables, no one should be false ; that of ten thou- sand requisites, whereof any one may fail, not one should be wanting ; this to me is extremely improbable, even cousin-ger- inan to impossible It is," therefore, " not a thing very improbable, that amongst those many millions, which make up the Roman " (and, we may add, the English) " hierarchy, there are not twenty true.'" 1) Since, a priori, we do not know but what this succession has been brolien, by one or many invalid links, it is no more than reasonable to require, as has been said by a very able writer, " that there should be very strong evidence indeed that the strictest regularity was observed in every generation ; and that episcopal functions were exercised by none not bishops by succession from the apos- tles."* That the ordination in the Romish church has not been validly perpetu- ated, see shown in Dr. Willet's Syn. Pap. pp. 81,82. " Whereas," says Dr. Field, (lib. 3, cap. 39, in Div. Right of the Min. Part ii. p 143.) " the fathers make all such ordinations void as are made by presbyters, it is to be understood ac- cording to the strictness of the canon in use in their times, and not absolute- ly in the nature of the thing ; which appears, in that they likewise make all ordinations sine tif.ulo to be void ; all ordinations of bishops ordained by fewer than three bishops with the me- tropolitane; all ordinations of presby- ters by bishops out of their own churches without leave. Whereas I am well assured, the Romanists will not pronounce any of these to be void, though the parties so doing are not excusable from all fault." Thus far Dr. Field. 2) See his entire and most con- * Review in the Edinb. Rev. for April, 1839, supposed to bo written by Mr. Macauley, wlio is himself an "piscopalian. 16 elusive argumentum ad hoviinem, and reduciio ad absurdum, in Works, vol. i. pp. 245 — 247, and again at p. 281. " To ascertain," says Archbishop Whateley, (Dang, to Christ. Faith, p. 180,) " their apostolical succession for eighteen centuries, you must examine all the decisions of general councils, having first settled the claims of each to divine authority ; you must consult the works of all the ancient fathers, observing what are the points wherein they agree, and which of these are essential points ; and this, after having first ascertained the orthodoxy of each, and decided on the degree of weight due to his opinion ; and for this purpose, you must ascertain also the characters and qualifications of those modern divines who have un- dertaken to select, translate, and com- ment upon, some thirty or forty, of those voluminous writers. To re- quire all this, of the great body of plain, ordinary christians, who, by supposition, have not sufficient learn- ing, or ablity to judge for themselves of the true sense of scripture, would be an absurdity too gross to be seri- ously intended by any one. If we were to tell a plain, unscientific man, ignorant of astronomy, and destitute of telescopes, that he must regulate his hours, not by the town-clock, but by the satellites of Jupiter, from ob- servations and calculations of their eclipses, no one could be made to be- lieve that we were speaking seri- ously." See the nature of our demands and 122 THE GROUND OF OUR CONFIDENCE. [lECT. V. Now, if these things be so — and these requisites are indeed necessary — and this personal succession, of validly ordained pre- lates, is needful to the certain present enjoyment of those heavenly gifts on which salvation depends, — then most truly are we thrown upon a contingency, as hopeless as absolute impossibil- ity can make it ; since it is very sure that there is not, on these principles, and when brought to these tests, a single prelate in existence, either according to divine or ecclesiastical right/ The jeoparding of the present character and vitality of the church upon these conditions, is nothing less than to evacuate the very being of a church at all.'^ There is not the shadow of a shade, upon which its fabric can be thus made to rest. This whole boasted claim " is a mere assumption, a baseless theory "^ — and only involves in its own ruin its presumptuous authors.* We bless God, that this wild hypothesis rests not upon a single text in his entire word, — that he never staked the salvation of millions of unborn souls upon a contingency like this,^ — and that even were this chain of personal ministerial succession shivered into atoms ; we can still rejoice in the suc- cession of God's word in its purity — of his ordinances in their sanctity — of his gifts in their plenitude — of his graces in all their fulness — of his church in all its glory — and of his Spir- it in all the blessings of his divine and enriching presence. We may be anathematized and stand excommunicate from the Roman or the Anglican churches, but we are not thereby, God be thanked, aliens from the body of Christ, which is His church. We may not belong to the church prelatical, but we may nevertheless — and oh, this is far better ! — we may be liv- ing members of the church spiritual. We say, with the an- cient Albigenses, when thus treated by the Romish hierarchy, " we are christians, you are episcopalians."® We, my brethren, are not Anglican, not Roman, not protestant episcopalian, — we take " christian for our name," and presbyterian " for our surname." We belong to no sect or party, — we tie our faith to no fathers, councils, or authorities. We hazard our salva- the impossibility of their fulfilment, 4) See this proved by Dr. Barrow laid down by Dr. Rice in his Review on Supremacy of the Pope, Suppos. of Bishop Ravenscroft, in the Evang. 7th. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. pp. 550, 451. 5) If this apostolic succession is See also Note B. the only ground of true and heavenly 1) See Calvin Instit. B. iv. oh. v. grace, then must every behever, in § 3. order to have true peace of mind, as- 2) See Burnet on the 39th art. p. certain for himself the validity of the 338. See also Bishop Hoadley in Presb. claims of their respective ministers. Def p. 40. 6) See Faber, on pp. 89, 92, 101, 3) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 518, and 93. see p. 526. LECT. v.] THE GROUND OF OUR CONFIDENCE. 123 tion, and the salvation of our children, upon no " fabulous and endless genealogies and questions, which are not of goodly edi- fying. We have too much to do with realities, to be drawn aside by shadows.'" We rest our claim to the attention and regard we expect from our people, not upon our proving that all other denominations are churchless, Christless, and graceless — nor upon long-drawn catena of misquoted and misrepresented fathers — but, upon our manifestation to the consciences of them that hear us, of the truth as it is in Jesus — upon our exhibition of apostolic doctrine and apostolic practice — and upon our zealous efforts to impart to them, as instruments in God's hands, all spiritual gifts. These are the seals of our ministry, and these the evidences of our divine mission. God has not left us, brethren in the Lord, without authority, nor can any human anathema silence his voice, or prevent the outgo- ings of his gracious Spirit, in raising up, qualifying, and sending forth many laborers into the harvest of the ministry. 1) This is the language of the this theory. Charge, edition 1838, see bishop of Chester, as applicable to page 3. ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE FIFTH. NOTE A. The following able remarks are from the Labyrinth, or Popish Circle, by Episcopius. ("Taken from the Southern Christ. Advocate, March, 1841.) The controversy respecting the succession is useless and endless. Antk^uity and Succession is the endless burden of the papal song, and yet this is worthy of the highest admiration, that the principal declainiers on this topic are those who, perchance, never thoroughly examined the books and his- tories of the men from whom that antiquity and continued succession must be drawn and supported; — Or, if they liave examined them, they are by no means fit persons to investigate tliem witliout affection or prejudice, since they are accustomed either foolishly to believe by means of some proxy, who in their estimation is most intimately acquainted with the matter, although such person is not unfrequently destitute of all correct knowledge of things : — or, without sense or judgment they eagerly catch at every word or syllable which they imagine may be rendered at all subservient to their purpose. How irksome it must be to descend into the arena of disj)utation with such persons, every one will perceive. For who does not see the great labor that is required to determine questions which are to be demonstrated from the memory of past ages, from various books and histories, and which, even when established by solid reasons, so as to close the door to all future exceptions, shall still fail to produce any good effect in the miuds of the opposite party ! Wherefore they who inculcate upon the body of the people, such matters as these, do nothing but involve them in an inextricable maze, out of which the unskilful multitude either despair of a happy exit, or, if they have any hope, remain still in the same uncertainty, being fatigued and confused by the too difficult labor of investigation. It is impossible for any other result to follow : and this, indeed, is the most ready and effectual way of acquiring power to lord it over the consciences of simple people, and having bound them in a gordian knot, to persuade them to the belief of any thing. But let us put both these things in a little clearer light. I establish the first by the following arguments : — No man is able to deny that for the asserting of the antiquity not only of the church, but likevi'ise of a continued and uninterrupted succession of bishops in the church, it is necessarily required (1.) a certain, undoubted, and accurate knowledge both of Latin and Greek authors, and of all the histories which have been written on the subject ; and (2.) that to this knowledge ought to be added a sound and acute judgment, by which the examiner may discern with exactness, in their pages, the genuine from the spurious and adulterated books, true histories from interpolated ones, and those which have been fabricated by party feelings, passion, and preconceived opinions, from those which have been composed by persons who had no such undue bias or prejudice : so that he may reconcile contrary statements, and faithfully supply defects. Every one must at once perceive what labor, time, and anxiety this would require. Even among the most learned, during the entire space of 1800 years, not one has hitherto been found, who was adequate to this weighty performance. Are the uneducated and unskilful common people, then, who are considered by the papists to be unqualified for the examination of any one of the books of the holy scriptures, sufficient to undertake and go through this great work ; — accurately to search all those volumes of ecclesiastical history with which whole barns migiit be filled and whole ships laden ? The laity therefore in the Romish church, who, laying aside the holy scriptures, never cease to prattle NOTES TO LECTURE V. 125 about antiquity, and continued succession, betray a mind sufficiently stupid and foolish because they know nothing more, perhaps much less, about true antiquity and succession, than about the holy scriptures j or rather they are alike ignorant of both. It is true, indeed, that a catalogue and index of bishops may be easily com- posed, in which the series and order in which they succeeded each other may be exhibited. But that is nothing to the purpose ; for the Greek church, the Ethiopic, and others, have composed such catalogues in favor of their several pretensions. — "The church of Constantinople has one," says Bellarmine, "from the time of the emperor Constantine, in an uninterrupted series, and Nicephorus likewise deduces the names of all the bishops, even from the time when the apostle Andrew flourished." Yet Bellarmine, and with him all papists, deny that the Greeks can of right claim to themselves a proper suc- cession. A succession of persons, therefore, is not deemed to be sufficient; but an additional requisite is, that it should be a legitimate succession, and such a one, that there shall not be found, in the line of the successive bishops, a single heretic, atheist, or apostate. ] . It is required, that it be legitimate ; for, as the papal decree has it, (Dist. 79.) " if any one shall be enthroned in the apostolic see, by bribes, by human favor, or by popular or military tumult, without the unanimous and canonical election both of the cardinals and of the inferior clergy, let him not be account- ed a successor of the apostles, but of the apostates.' ' 2. It is required that there shall be no heretic in the succession of bishops ; for it is on this account, as cardinal Bellarmine, and other popish doctors affirm, that the succession of the Constantinopolitan bishops (those of the Greek church) is not to be esteemed legitimate, because there have been heretics in the number. (Liv. iv. De nolis Ecclesiae, chap. 8.) If therefore any one wishes to form a correct judgment of the succession of the bishops of Rome, according to the canons of the Papists themselves, he must ascertain both these points with the greatest certainty. But how is this possible .'' Who can know, without a shadow of doubt, whether all her bishops obtained the episcopate lawfully ? Did those of them who gained their dignity in the succession by simony, that is by money and gifts, (as Simon Magus wished to do,) or by force, intrigues, factions and bri- bery ? But further, if any person desirous of becoming acquainted with their history, shall discover that even the writers most devoted to the claims of the church of Rome frankly confess, not only that one or two, but that many dif- ferent bishops of Rome attained to the pontifical dignity, who were convicted of open heresy, and accounted (by these chief writers of their own church) impious scoundrels, atheists, schismatics, ruffians, and debauchees, who by gifts and bribes, by force and factious, without any previous choice, or subse- quent approbation on the part of the clergy, intruded themselves into the suc- cession by foul machinations and dishonest stratagems, by deceit, and by the influence of their harlots, and kept mistresses, — what diligent inquirer, 1 ask, can extricate himself from that maze of perplexities in which a knowledge of these circumstances will have involved him.'' If you say, " Credence in this matter is to be given to the best and to the most faithful historians," you fall into a new labyrinth : for I ask, who are those historians, and by what are they to be distinguished .' Why should any one, by such a remark, derogate from the credit of the popish writers ? For they cannot be deemed heretics, or hos- tile to the church of Rome, who were most subservient to it ; and some of these writers were the greatest flatterers of the popes, and the most zealous abettors of the papal dignity. The papist must therefore allow, that writers of this character must have been constrained by the undoubted and known truth of the thing itself, to admit these facts into their writings. And suppose, for the sake of argument, that they who have recorded these corruptions had not been writers devoted to the papacy, what just reason can be given, why they should not be entitled, as faithful writers, to equal credit with the advocates of the pope, and of his assumptions .'' Friendship is as powerful as enmity, to pre- vent an author from recording the truth. He wlio would write a faithful his- tory for future ages, ought to be free from all bias ; but by what reason can we persuade ourselves, and convince our own mind, that there has ever been any such writer, especially if we live not in the same ago with him .-' lu this 126 NOTES TO LECTURE V. case, liowever, the testimony against the integrity of the succession of the Roman bishops, is given by writers whose prejudices were ail in favor of the papacy. He who divests himself of preconceived opinions, and who considers these things without prejudice, will clearly see that those who endeavor to shelter themselves under the plea of antiquity and succession, involve themselves in a labyrinth in which they are easily entangled, from which it is scarcely possi- ble for them to be freed." Very pertinent also are the remarks of Bishop Hoadley. (Preservative, p. 75, &c.) " 1 do not love, I confess, so much as to repeat the principal branch- es of their beloved scheme ; they are so different, whencesoever they come, from the voice of the gospel. When they would claim you, as their fellow- laborers the papists do, b}' telling you that you cannot hope for tlie favor of God, but in the strictest communion with their church, (which is the true Church of England, governed by bishops in a regular succession,) — that God hath himself hung your salvation upon this nicety ; — that he dispenses none of his favors or graces, but by the hands of them and their subordinate priests ; — that you cannot be authoritatively blessed or released from your sins, but by them who are the regular priests ; — that churches under other bishops, (i. e. other than in a regular succession,) are sehismatical conventicles, made up of excommunicated persons, both clergy and laity ; out of God's church, as well as out of his favor : — 1 say, when such arguments as these are urged ; you need only have recourse to a general ansvi'er, to this whole heap of scandal and defamation, upon the will of God, the gospel of Christ, and the Church of England in particular : — that you have not so learned Christ, or the design of his gospel, or even the foundation of this particular part of his church, reformed and established in England. The following arguments will justify you, which therefore ought to be frequently in the thoughts of all, who have any value for the most important points. God is just, and equal, and good : and as sure as he is so, he cannot put the salvation and happiness of any man, upon what he himself has put it out of the power of any man upon earth, to be entirely satisfied in. — It hath not pleased God, in his providence, to keep up any proof of the least probability, or moral possibility, of a regular uninter- rupted succession. But there is a great appearance, and, humanly speaking, a certainty of the contrary, that this succession hath been interrupted." NOTE B. There is still another source of uncertainty, to which we may here allude. According to Maimbourg, the Jesuit, (Hist, du Grand Schisme, D'Occident, in Bait. Lit. and Rel. Mag. Ap. 1840, p. 14G,) there have been about thirty- one established methods by which to make the popes the visible heads of the church. It appears that the election was made for the first five centuries by the clergy and the consent of the people — that the Arian King, Theodoric, usurped the right to create the pope himself, which example was imitated by the Gothic kings who followed him, — that this right was retained by Justin- ian, and afterwards regained by the tyranny of the marquis of Etruria and the counts of Tuscany, who created and deposed popes at their pleasure, instru- ments of their passions — and that for some centuries this power having been obtained by the cardinals, is still retained by them. Most certain it is, then, that either this office is of divine right, and then the mode of its transmitted inheritance must be equally of divine appointment, in which case it cannot be pretended that any valid or proper succession has been preserved, unless there are some thirty-one modes of such succession laid down in the word of God ; for Maimbourg himself asserts that in the great Schism whose history he writes, " it was morally impossible to decide who were true popes, and who anti-popes ;" — or this office is not divine, but an usurpation and a despotism, and in this case it is equally a matter of indifference whether there have been thirty, or thirty thousand ways by which its retainers have gained possession of the papal chair. Most true it is, that if its present incumbents are validly elected and introduced, and therefore true successors for eleven centuries af- ter Christ, no true pope could have occupied the see of Rome. See also Father Paul's Treatise on Benefices and Revenues. Westminst. 1727, p. 26. LECTURE VI. THE PEELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SDCCESSION TESTED BY SCRIPTURE, The claims which are involved in the doctrine of the apostol- ical descent, as maintained by ??mnyof its advocates, are not less arbitrary and despotic ; not less exclusive of the just rights and privileges of other sovereignties ; nor less regardless of their interest and happiness; than were those of the Babylonian despot. This doctrine being supposed true, there is but one church on earth, and that is the prelatic — there is but one order of ministry, and that is the succession of prelates — there is but one channel of efficacious grace, and that flows between the high embankments of prelacy — and there is but one cove- nanted gift of plenary mercy, and that is deposited in the hands of prelates. This doctrine, in all its nakedness, and boldness, is proclaimed, as the fundamental principle of all church claims whatsoever, by the doctors of the Vatican and the Sorbonne ; by the doctors of Maynooth, and the doctors of Oxford ; by the Roman and the Anglican church. " It is the mystic pasan of sacerdotal power and glory." Nor is this doctrine, at least in those essential elements, which drag with them, by necessary consequence, the whole train of awful and soul-shuddering consequences, received merely by those who are denominated high-churchmen, and who love and admire the church with an almost idolatrous attachment; but it is also, as would appear, avowed by many of those who are dis- tinguished as evangelical, or low-church episcopalians. 128 THE THEORY ADOPTED BY LOW-CHURCHMEN. [lECT. VI. " Few episcopal readers of the tracts," (I quote from the Epis- copal Recorder of Philadelphia, May 9, 1840, the organ of the low-church, or evangelic episcopalians)* can hesitate to approve 1) The Rev. John A. Clark, one of the editors of this paper, in his " Letters on the Church," and which are generally very unexceptionable in their spirit and language, nevertheless declares, " To my mind, this question assumes a vast importance from a deep-rooted conviction, not only that OURS is VERILY THE CHDRCH of Christ, but," &c. " That the evangelical clergy," says R. M. Beverley, Esq., (Heresy of Hu- man Priesthood, London, 1839, p. 81, Note,) " are by their position continu- ally in danger of lapsing into the vor- tex of Puseyism, is apparent in their writings. ' I wrote to remind you, good proteslants,' says the author of the Velvet Cushion, ' that you owe to popery almost every thing that de- serves to be called by the name of a church.' (p. 17.) And of the O.xford Tracts, Mr. Bickersteth says, ' It is true 1 strongly deprecate many of their statements and views as errone- ous in themselves, and leading to still more dangerous errors. But there is too much seriousness, conscientious- ness and impartial truth mingled with those views, for me ever to have expressed the utmost abhorrence against them." (Letter in the Record, April 4, 1839.) " That against this abomination of desolation, set up in the holy place, scarcely an evangelical voice, minis- tering at the altar, has been heard long and loudly to protest," says ihe London Evangelical Magazine, " that the press has not teemed with the ex- posure and reprobation of this old her- esy of Rome, so daringly paraded in the halls and the sanctuaries of the protestant reformation, has been to us a matter of astonishment. Has apostolical succession so blinded their understanding, that the successors of the Venns, the Cecils, and the New- tons, can thus suffer the glory of their ministry to depart without warning or remonstrance ? Have tlie senseless pride and folly of sacerdotal power, by which babes are converted into be- lievers, and scoffers and infidels are sent straight to heaven, taken such possession of their hearts, that for the sake of being Anglican priests, they can cease to be evangelical divines ? Be it so ; while we deeply lament it, we fear not for the ark of God. There are other churches in which the sa- cred light of truth shines with undira- med, if not with perfect lustre." " I have just seen," says a corres- pondent of tlie same Magazine, " a publication entitled, ' A Doctrinal Cat- echism of the Church of England,' &c., said to be the production of a highly Calvinistic divine, who offici- ates in an episcopal chapel, in the west end of the town, not a hundred miles from Tavistock place, in which occur the following questions and an- swers : ' 1. Who are your lawful and spirit- ual pastors .'' The ministers of the Church of England in these realms. ' 2. What are they called ? Bish- ops, priests, and deacons. ' 3. Are not dissenting teachers ministers of the gospel .'' No ; they have never been called after the man- ner of Aaron. ' 4. But do they not say, thai God has called them inwardly ? Yes ; but if he had, he would have called them according to the order of his word out- wardly. ' 5. What do you mean by the or- der of his word ? They should have been appointed by " those who have public authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard," and who are also tlie apostles' succes- sors. ' 6. Who are they ? The bishops of the Church of England, in the Eng- lish church. ' 7. Who consecrated the bishops ? Their spiritual predecessors, and they theirs, and so on, until you come to apostolical times and apostolical men, and so to Christ, the founder of our religion. '8. Who ordains priests and dea- cons ? The bishops, with the help of their presbyters. ' 9. Is it not very wicked to assume this sacred office ? It is ; as is evident from the case of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, mentioned in the xvth chap- ter of Numbers. ' 10. Who appoints dissenting teach- ers ? They either wickedly appoint each other, or are not appointed at all ; LECT. VI.] LOW-CHURCH TENDENCIES. 129 the avowed design of the writers at the commencement of the series, or to acknowledge that there are many things in them deserving of the warmest commendation. There are certain fundamental principles recognized, precious in themselves and highly valuable and conservative when carried only to their legitimate results, which, however they may be presented as novelties, or as old truths long buried and forgotten, the churchman will recognize as familiar elements of his creed, which have always formed essential parts of the constitution of his faith. If the writers had confined their discussions to the divine institution of the ministry — the apostolical succession — the defence of liturgical services — an exposure of the evils of schism, and the modern rationalistic theology ; if they had displayed far more zeal than they have, to revive the wholesome administration of discipline in the church, and a more reverent observance of the festivals and fasts — my thorough church principles would have prompted me to bid them God-speed, and be a zealous co-operator with them in their good work. If they had not gone beyond these points, though some might have questioned the validity of some of the arguments employed, and others have been dissatisfied with the results at which they arrived ; yet none, I believe, would have complained of their well-intended efforts to fortify the church in these times of peril, by grounding her more thoroughly in the intelligent attachment of her members. The peace of the church would have been undisturbed, her landmarks unremoved, her foundation untouched. When we speak, therefore, of the Oxford tracts, we speak not of the truths they contain or advo- cate, which are received and acknowledged by all sound church- men, but of those things which constitute the'w jpecuKarity, their characteristic traits — distinguishing them from the wellknown and long-received theology of our church." It is thus more and more apparent, as we advance, that it is and so, in either case, their assuming views, are now becominsf the most the office is very wicked. rampant advocates of the Oxford her- '11. But are not dissenting teach- esy. It is said that with very fewex- ers thought to be very good men ? ceptions, such as Baptist Noel, there They are often thought to be such, are no representatives in the establish- and so were Korah, Dathan, and Abi- ment, of the Scotts, Newtons, Venns, ram, till God showed them to be very and Cecils of the last age. Two sons wicked. of the estimable Wilberforce, both '12. But may we not hear them ministersof that church, are said to be preach.' No; for God says, " Depart among the most zealous defenders of from the tents of these wicked men." Puseyism. This is a statement for Again : " It is mentioned in the Lon- which we were not prepared, although don Patriot, a paper not friendly to we have seen in our own country, the English established church, that some singular instances of low-cliurch the evangelical party in that church is episcopacy suddenly veering to the rapidly diminishing, and that they opposite extreme. "(The Presbyterian.) who formerly professed low-church 17 130 PRELACY NOT IN SCRTPTURB. [LECT. VI. all important, necessary, and advisable, that these claims, by which we are to be annihilated in our standing, character, and hopes, as a christian church, should be brought to the balances of the sanctuary, of history, and of sound reason, and there tested. For upon this issue depend the everlasting destinies of millions in past, present, and long-coming ages. In our former discourse we made an entrance into the courts of the temple, and there, with the aid and assistance of these very men by whom we are to be adjudged, brought forth those balances or tests, by which the real merits of such claims are to be tried. We now proceed to an actual experiment of the question, and to make it manifest that, when weighed in these balances, they are found, like the doomed Belshazzar, Tekel — Tekel. We affirm, then, that these claims are found radically de- fective when brought to the balances of scripture. Scripture knows them not. They are neither in it, nor of it, nor accord- ant with it. They can only be imputed to that sacred volume, when it is opened amid the gloomy shadows of darkening ages, and when its meaning is eked out by the torturing crucible of ecclesiastical comments, groundless analogies, and the most inconclusive and illegitimate inferences. It is only when thus seen through the stained light, which streams upon the sacred pages from the cloistered windows of cathedrals, abbeys, and monkish cells, that the scriptures can be made to speak in the tones, and in the language, of prelacy. For this doctrine of apostolic succession, and for its distinctions of orders and functions, as of divine right and de Jide, and therefore es- sential ; we dare boldly challenge the production of any thing like a warranty, from the only infallible rule of faith and prac- tice. These distinctions, we aver, are the offspring of time and custom, and the progressive advancement of spiritual despotism in the church. They are not, therefore, " de ,/?rfe," but are " dejure ecclesiastico ; '^ and their authority can rise no higher than its source, and must sink with the depression of that source to its just subordination to the higher authority of God's only and true record. Such prelatic distinctions and deductions, with all their attendant claims, are on the evidence of a firm defender of episcopacy, " glaringly at variance with the usage of the apostolic church,'" and could only have arisen when " churchmen had renounced all respect for the example and in- junctions of the inspired founders of Christianity." These " divine episcopal prerogatives," this " consummation of church 1) Im&c Taylor in Spiritual Deapotism, p. 208. LECT. VI.] THE VARIATIONS OF PRELACY. 131 power," irresponsible and uncontrollable, is not apostolic, — however it may be ancient Christianity. There is not, we re- peat, a single text in the Bible, from which they are fairly de- ducible. Indeed, we have already shown, that but few of the advocates of this system have been hardy enough to bring prelacy to the test of scripture at all. It is allowed by most, that the doctrine is not there, in any degree of plainness ; by many more, that it is the result of a legitimate legislative power possessed by the church, and that it is, therefore, binding ; by others, that the polity of the apostolic ages was of necessity immature and un- fitted for the perfect condition of the church ; and by still others, that no form of polity is, in itself, enjoined, required, or essen- tial. Nor have those, who venture to test episcopacy by scrip- ture, been able to agree among themselves on the first princi- ples of their sacred institutes. Some base their theory on the extinct Jewish sacerdotal orders ; some make Christ the first link in the chain of prelates, and the first of the order ; some trace their high pedigree to the apostles ; some transform the humble presbyters, as referred to in the epistles, into prelates. All are obliged to dress up the missionaries of the cross, who went forth as evangelists to preach the gospel, and to set in order what was wanting in the incipient and chaotic mass which formed the crude materials of the early church ; in the pontifical robes of gowned and mitred prelates.' Nor is there one advocate, who can stand firm on the foundation of scrip- ture, and build from its materials alone, the fabric of prelacy. We find even the crowned champion, who has lately carried off the laurels, (episcopalians being judges,) in his battle for the scriptural authority of episcopacy, actually substantiating, as we have seen, an arch stone of the whole building, on the authority of a father, who lived in the fifth century ! According to some, the essence of episcopacy consists in three orders, essentially distinct, and ordained de jure divino, and by inspiration of the Holy Ghost ; so that the one cannot perform the functions of the other with any propriety, nor with any efficacy what- ever. But it is now granted, by Mr. Palmer, that the orders of bishops and presbyters are identical, differing not in essence or nature, but only in degree and in a very few functionary offices.* The order of deacon, he says, is not a spiritual order at all, but only a temporal order, and not formally pos- 1) See Wks. on Episcopacy, p. 2) Palmer on Church, vol. ii. pp. 420. See Episcopacy Tested by Scrip- 375, 400, 398, 403, 439. ture. by Bishop Onderdoak, and gen- er&IIj. 132 SCRIPTURE PROOF CHALLENGED. [lECT. VI., sessed, either by their ordination or by the ritual, with any cure of souls, or jurisdiction, or power of celebrating divine service, or any duties, other than of a " temporal, or at least a very infe- rior character."' In short, there is no unison whatever among prelatic divines, ex- cept in the opinion, that prelacy must be upheld and maintained.* " My antiquity is Christ Jesus," said Ignatius ; and we deny the authority of this true and only valuable antiquity, for this system of prelacy ; as it assumes to be the only efficacious fountain of that plenitude of episcopal grace, which is to flow, in augmenting power, along the growing lines of apostolical descent. It is not our purpose here to enter into the argument from the identity of bishops and presbyters, as the one order of the christian ministry. This position, as we have shown, is now in some measure granted by one of the ablest advocates of the prelatic system, and will come under review at another stage of our discussion.^ Nor is this question essential to the present inquiry, which is — supposing this distinction to be allowed — Do the scriptures teach, that the order of prelates is essential to the continuance of the church, so that without it, the church is deprived of its vital organ, — its brain, — the very source of all its living energies? Do they teach, and where do they teach, that this order, by divine appointment, is the sole and exclusive fountain and depository of heavenly influences ; and that through it, as such, these influences would be continued, in an unbroken personal succession, along which this electric power might in- visibly and potently communicate itself, to the end of time ? This is the fact to be made plain from scripture ; and that, too, not by strained analogies, or far-fetched inferences, or fanciful and gratuitous interpretations, between which and those adopt- ed, as the basis of the papacy, there is no essential distinction ; so that, if prelacy be true, and on these grounds ; the papacy can- not be proved untrue.* When we come to substantiate, as we hope to do, the scrip- tural claims of presbyters to the true apostolical succession, we shall feel called upon to advance those scriptural grounds, upon 1) Palmer, pp. 408,375,404, 405. that this succession, as far as it was 2) See Note A. transmitted at all, was lianded over to 3) For this discussion see our presbyters or bishops the Word of God subsequent volume. makes certain — but that it was given 4) " Even allowing the truth and to any order of diocesan prelates, is necessity of the doctrine of apostolical what never can be shown, even were succession, there is still a most impor- Timothy and Titus both supposed to tant question, viz. in what line of be (incredible supposition) apostles." church polity was it to run ? Was it See Arciier's Six Lect. on Puseyism, to he prelatical or presbyterian .' Now Lect, v. LECT. VI.] PRELACY OVERTHROWN BY SCRIPTURE. 13^ which such claims are based. But in canvassing the scriptural title of this doctrine of prelatic succession, which is made to su- persede and to overthrow every other, we cannot be expected to discover any such scripture proofs for its support, when even our opponents have failed to produce them from the divine record.^ On the contrary, as has been already seen, but little pretension has been made, by the ablest defenders of this sys- tem, to any thing like an express divine warrant. As, therefore, those particular passages which are adduced in refutation of the claims of presbyters, and in substantiation of those of prelates, will be more fitly considered when we are prepared to advance our own demands, we will in this lecture present some general considerations, by which we would hope to show, that this entire scheme is most gratuitously ascribed to God's holy word. Now, that we may not unnecessarily prolong this discussion, we would remark, that it has been fully and elaborately shown, by a recent and very learned episcopal writer of the evangelical school, that this whole system of high-church prelacy, and this exclusive claim to apostolical descent in particular, is in direct 1) That prelatists can make some show of scripture proof, and appear to rest upon it as authority, is nothing to the point, since, as Dr. Bowden al- lows, fWks. on Epis. vol. i. p. 109,) " it is scarcely possible to produce texts of scripture for any point what- ever, that may not be obscured by plausible objections. Ingenuity is nev- er at a loss ; and when it is excited to exertion by prejudice, and by an at- tachment to a particular hypothesis, it is extremely difficult to diminish its vigor, and to divest it of all its subter- fuges." "They cannot, however, prove," Bays Dr. Mitchell, in his Letters to Bishop Skinner, (p. 85,) " that any subordination, implying authority on the one hand and sul)jection on the other, existed among christian minis- ters in the apostolic church ; nor can they find their three orders among the offices instituted by the apostles. Hence, lest the exhibition of the three orders, consisting of our Lord himself, his apostles, and the seventy, should not put to silence all gainsayers, they have recourse to the following curious strat- agem. They fix upon a passage, in which Paul enumerates eight different orders of ecclesiastical officers, who were all supernaturally endowed and set in the church, not by the apostles, who were themselves one of l.he eight orders, but by Jesus Christ. Without deigning to give a reason for their re- jection of five of those orders, as not making part of the apostolic model, they do, without any ceremony, seize upon three, and then hollow in the ears of presbyterians, " these seem to be all the standmg orders established in the church. Behold the divine model of the ' sacred hierarchy.' Adopt it and be saved, or ' reject it, and go to perdition, as you please ! ' " " 1 have looked over my Bible with some attention," (says Sir Michael Foster, Knt, in his Examination of the Scheme of Church Power, 1736, p. 8,) " and do not find any of the powers his lordship speaks of vested in the episcopal order, exclusive of the church, or body of believers. I have likewise consulted some learned men who have made these matters their study, and they tell me, that none of the bishops of the first three hundred years after Christ claimed any .separ- ate exclusive powers for the exercise of church discipline, but left those matters to the provincial and diocesan consistories, which, in the purer ages of the church, were composed of bish- ops, clergy, and laity." 134 PRELACY VERSUS SCRIPTTTRE TEACHING. [lECT. VI. antagonism to the whole spirit and genius of our Lord's teach- ing. This heavy charge he substantiates by an examination of several of the most prominent of our Lord's parables and pre- dictions/ The same conclusion he has also drawn from an extensive induction of particulars in the Book of Acts, the first and the only inspired record of the early church ; and in which, if any where in scripture, these doctrines must have been fully brought out. It is unnecessary for us, as this work has been republished, and is in circulation amon^ us, to enter at length into this same argument. We would, however, call attention to a ievf remarks. When prelatic writers quote in proof of their exclusive pow- ers such passages of scripture as these, — " as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you" — "I am with you always, even unto the end of the world" — "I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed me,"* — it is sufficient to reply, that their applicability depends on the assumption as true, of the very question in dispute ; and that they can have no pertinency whatever, as an argument in favor of prelates, until the ap- pointment of such an order of ministers, as of permanent and necessary standing in the church, has been otherwise made plain.^ Until this is done, we claim all such passages, in all the fulness of their meaning, for the ministry of the church in 1) See Ancient Christianity, vol. delivered with a Bolemn design of fix- i. See also Potter on Ch. Govt., pp. ing a constitution for succeeding 124, 125, who explains the parables as ages." referring to church offices while there, "I have been sometimes disposed is manifestly no allusion to different to think," says Dr. Mitchell in his orders, but to one only. Letters to Bishop Skinner, (p. 87,) 2) See Percival on the Apost. " that ' Lo, I am v;ith you always Succ. p. 61. unto the end of the world,' means, ' I 3) Paley,afler quoting these very will never cease to support the reli- passages, (as my Father hath sent, gion which I have commissioned you &c.,) adds: (Works, vol. vi. p. 91,) to publish ; ' and that it is parallel to " These are all general directions, the promise which follows : ' On this supposing, indeed, the existence of a rock will I build my church, and the regular ministry in the church, but gates of hell shall not prevail against describing no specific order of pre- it ;' and that both promises refer rath- eminence or distribution of office and er to the stability and duration of the authority. If any other instances can religion itself, than to those of the be adduced more circumstantial than hiffhest order of its ministers. I was these, they will be found, like the the more confirmed in this opinion, by appointment of the seven deacons, having read that Christianity has sub- the collections for the saints, the lay- sisted in some places, and even flour- ing by in store upon the first day of ished, independently of diocesan bish- the week, to be rules of the society, ops. But it seems 1 have been in a rather than laws of the religion — mistake. Both the passages referred recommendations and expedients fit- to, must relate to the duration of epia- ted to the state of the several churches copacy, till the heavens and earth fly by tiiose who then administered the away : so that ' On this rock will 1 affairs of them, rather than precepts build my church ' must eigaify, 'On LECT. VI.] UNIVERSALITY OF PBESBYTERT. 135 general. And since it is not disputed that presbyters were di- vinely instituted as a perpetual order in the christian ministry ; while for the order of prelates, we boldly deny that there is any warrant from God ; therefore do we appropriate these glorious declarations — until wrested from them by well-grounded assur- ance — to the order of presbyters. It is " indeed," says Dr. Mitchell, in his Letters *to Bishop Skinner, " an apostolic precept, which our vindicator does not suffer us to forget — ' obey them that have rule over you, and submit yourselves ; for they watch for your souls, as they that must give an account.' But the obedience and submission here enjoined, of whatever nature they may be, are exacted from the people to their pastors, not from one order of ecclesiastics to another. Nay, I can produce some passages in which all christians, both pastors and people, are commanded to ' be sub- ject to one another, and to submit themselves one to another in the fear of God.' But I have not met with a passage, which says either explicitly, or by implication, ' presbyters and deacons, obey them that have the rule over you, for they waich for your souls.' When high-church shall show me a passage to this purpose, I shall acknowledge that her divine model, like the image of the great goddess Diana, and the Pal- ladium of Troy, undoubtedly fell down from Jupiter."" It is certainly very remarkable, that we may apply to presby- ters the words of Jablonski, as quoted by Mr. Percival, and which he applies to prelates,' " that there is no doctrine or tenet of the christian religion, in which all christians in general have, for the space of eighteen hundred years, so unanimously agreed, as in this of ' presbytery, as being a certain and necessary order of the christian ministry.' " " In all ages and times down from the apostles, and in all places through Europe, Asia, and Africa, wheresoever there were christians, there were also presbyters ; and even where christians differed in other points of doctrine this rock will I build the episcopate,' loins who should succeed in preach- and Presbyterians and independents ing and baptism, and through whom ' shall not prevail against it.' " a successive powerful assertance of the We will here present also the judg- spirit is to be transferred in and through ment of Archbishop Usher, as given those to the end of the world. ' ° by Dr. Bernard, (Certain Discourses This very promise, (John xx. 21 - by the late Archbishop of Armagh, 23,) was embodied by the English re- Lond. 1657, p.l57.) " That last speech formers in their office for the ordina- of our Saviour, (Matt, xxviii., Lo I am tion of presbyters, and was continued with you, (fee, ) cannot be limited to in its application to them until the year the persons of the apostles, (with whose 1661. See also Note B. deaths these administrations did not 1) Letters, p. 84. expire,) but must be understood col- 2) See Percival on Apos. Succ. lectively of the whole body of the p. 53. ministry, then, as it were, in their 136 UNIVERSALITY OF PRESBYTERY. [LECT. VI. or custom, and made schisms and divisions in the church, yet did they all remain unanimous in retaining their presbyters."^ As there is this universal consent as it regards the order of presbyters, while for the order of prelates, as held forth in this doctrine of prelatical succession, there can be given no proof ei- ther from holy writ, or the earliest ages,^ — then surely these and 1) Dr. Edwards, a very learned divine of tlie reign of Queen Anne, CTheolog. Reformat, vol. i. p. 523,) after a careful examination of the sev- eral texts bearing on the subject, draws the following conclusion : " Thus we can show the time when we are sure THERE was a pRESBYTEKY ; but we can't say there was episcopacy at THAT time in the church. This is owned by some of the most celebrated writers of our church ; and even Mr. Dodwell, who was thought by his friends to be as able a defender of episcopacy as any they had, confesses there were no such fixed rulers as bishops in the church at first. (De JureLeic. cap. 3, § \4.) Dr. Whitby shows the same, and is large in the proof of it, (Ann. on 1 Thess. ch. 5.)" Dr. Edwards then goes on to chastise a confident braggadocio, the author of the " Rehearsal," and asks, " Where, then, is our great boaster, who chal- lenges all mankind to prove that pres- byters were before bishops ? Is it not plain, from all the afore cited scrip- tures, viz., Acts xi. 29, 30; Acts xiv. 23; Acts XV. 2, 4, 6, 22, 23; Acts xvi. 4 ; Acts xx. 17, 28, and Titus, i. 5: James, v. 4; 1 Pet. v. 1; and the suffrage of episcopal writers them- selves, that presbyters had the start of bishops, whatever this pretender makes a show of, and notwithstand- ing his telling us, that this is the single point, on which the whole con- troversy depends.' If it be so, he must own himself baffled, and all his pretensions are empty and insignifi- cant." See also note C. 2) " As for those proofs," says Mr. Baynes, in his Diocesan's Tryall, Lond. 1621 p. 45,) " that bishops have been, throughout all churches from the beginning, they are weak. For first, the council of Nice useth utt a^x.'^c, not simpliciter, but secundum quid, in or- der happily to that time wherein the custom began, which was better known to them than to us ; the phrase is so used, Acts XV. 8, in respect to some things which had not continued many years. They cannot mean the apos- tles' times, fur then metropolitans should have actually been from the apostles' time. Secondly, the phrase of the council of Ephesus is likewise equivocal ; for they have reference to the fathers of Nice, or at least the de- crees of the fathers, who went before the council of Nice. For, those words being added definitiones JYiccnce Jidei, seem to explain the former, canoncs apostolorum. It is plain, the decree of the council doth ascribe this thing only to ancient custom no less than that of Nice, Constantinople, and Chal- cedon ; and, therefore, cannot rise to the authority of sacred scriptures. Let him show, in all antiquity, where sa- cred scriptures are called canons of the apostles. Finally, if this phrase note rules given by the apostles, then the apostles themselves did set out the bounds of Cyprus and Antioch. As for the authority of Cyprian, he doth testify what was communicated in his time, bishops ordained in cities ; not universaliter, as if there were no city but had some. Secondly, he speaketh of bishops who had their churches in- cluded in cities, not more than they might meet together in one, to any common deliberations. They had no diocesan churches, nor were bishops who had majority of rule over their presbyters, nor sole power of ordina- tion. As for the catalogue of succes- sion, it is pompcE aptior quam pugna; Rome can recite their successors. But because it hath no bishops, ergo, oecu- menical bishops, is no consequence. All who are named bishops in the cat- alogue were not of one cut, and in that sense we controvert." " Now as to the business in hand," says Bishop Croft, in his Nalied Truth, or the True State of the Prim- itive Church, (Scott's Coll. of Tr. vol. vii. p. 302,) " I cannot yield, that the scripture is very doubtful in it, or scarce doubtful at all ; for, though in scripture it is noti« terminis s^id, pres- LECT. VI.] Christ's coNDEMNATroN of prelacy. 137 all similar passages, must be understood of presbyters, and must be considered as conclusive warrant for their divine prerogatives. According to the plain and evident meaning of his words, our Lord Jesus Christ expressly denounces this system of prelatical supremacy, in its embryo spirit, when he told his disciples — " ye know that they who are accounted to rule over the Gentiles, exercise lordship over them, and their great ones exercise au- thority upon them. But so shall it not be among you." (Mark x. 42, 43.) For, in making their ambitious request, the sons of Zebedee desired not merely an elevated post of honor, but such an one as would exalt them above their breth- ren. It was the desire of official pre-eminence, and a higher rank and order in the arrangements of their fondly imagined hi- erarchy, which our Saviour so severely rebuked, when he told them, that among the rulers of his spiritual kingdom — the ministers of his church, — there should be no such distinctions of rank, all being of one order, and equal in power. i To strengthen this conviction in their minds, our Lord presented to them his own example, saying, " For even the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto, but to minister."^ So, also, when the disciples had contended among them- selves who should be greatest, (see Mark ix. 33 - 37,) that is, who should be first amongst the apostles, in their expectation of the speedy establishment of his kingdom, our Lord "checked their ambitious designs," by the declaration, " He that is greatest among you," in his own ambitious aspirations, " let him be as the younger."^ bytery and episcopacy are both one alleged distinctions between bishops and the same order, yet the same cir- and presbyters, largely confuted in the cumstantial expressions are (as 1 have Altare Damascenum Davidis Calder- showed) so strong and many, that they wood, p. 149-190, &.C., and cap. 4, are equivalent to a clear expression in p. 86- 143. terminis. Secondly. This is not a mat- 1) The Rev. T. H. Home, preb- ter of any indifferency, but of vast and endary of St. Paul's, says: "Jesus dangerous consequence, if mistaken. Christ prohibited all disputes con- That a church without such bishops cerning rank and pre-eminency in his as you require, cannot be truly called kingdom." "Ye know," says he, a church, and so we shall exclude " that the princes of the Gentiles ex- niany godly reformed churches ; for if ercise dominion over them, and they bishops be of such a superior, distinct that are great exercise authority upon order as you pretend, if the power of them. But it shall not he so among ordination be inherent in them only; t/om ; but whosoever will be great then, where no bishop, no true priests among you, let him be your minister ; ordained ; where no priests, no sacra- and wiiosoever will be cliief among ments; where no sacraments, no you, let him be your servant." Matt, cluireh. Wherefore I iiumbly beseech xx. 2-5 -27. you, be not too positive in this point, 2) Hinds' Family Lecturer, Ox- lest thereby you do not only condemn ford, 1829, p 127. all the reformed churches, but the scrip- 3) See ibid, p. 123. ture and St. Paul also." See their 18 138 Christ's condemnation of prelacy. [lect. vi. All spiritual jurisdiction, therefore, claimed by any one por- tion of Christ's ministers over otiiers, as a supreme order ; and as such, as necessary or of divine right, is a plain and palpable viola- tion of this enactment of the divine author of Christianity. Nor will it avail any thing to say, that Christ made to his apostles, on another occasion, a special promise of such distinction, when he said, " Ye shall sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel ; " for, in these words, our Lord had evident reference to the future retributions of the eternal world, when, as he de- clares, " the Son of Man shall sit on the throne of his glory." Thus plainly does it appear that the church of Christ, as de- signed by our " Saviour," was to be moulded in direct contra- riety to prelacy, and upon the very principles of presbyterian parity. And whereas this doctrine teaches, that the blessing of the covenant, and the favor of Christ, can only be found within the limits of this sacerdotal line of prelates ; it is to be observed, that we have declarations in scripture, which prove that the grace of God is not limited, in its bestowal, to such arbitrary boundaries as prelatic formalists would prescribe.'' When the disciples saw one who followed not with them casting out devils in Chiist's name, they were anxious to prohibit, and to depose him from his unauthorized ministry. But Jesus, we are told, not only sanctioned his ministry, and continued his favor towards him, as he did afterwards to ApoUos, (Acts xviii. 24,) but proceeded to chide his blinded and erring disciples, and to lay down this universal rule for the future guidance of his church ; " for there is no man who shall do a miracle " — or give manifestation of any spiritual power, in the preaching of the gospel — "in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me ; for he that is not against us 1) See Matthew Henry's sermon public worship, or so much as private *' On Disputes Reviewed." Wks, meetings; for Elijah would surely Lond. 1830, p. 781, § iv. on " Dis- have known of these, and been the putes about Precedence and Superi- principal among them : far less could ority." they have had organized churches 2) On this point, the language of with pastors and rulers over them, the Rev. Mr. Leslie, (who, in arguing without being known to Elijah and to with dissenters, is most severe and il- many more, even to their persecutors, liberal,) in his Short Method with the who found out the most private re- Romanists, is very strong. (Edinb. cesses of the primitive Christians, and 1835, p. 50. "But that state of the their meetings, though in the most church is better represented by the secret manner, for divine worship; seven thousand who had not bowed to and their bishops, too, whom they Baal, but of whom Elijah knew none, seized and dragged to prisons and to but thought he was ' left alone,' (Rom. martyrdom, for they could not lie hid, xi. 3, 4.) This was a state of segre- and the faith was then visible, though gallon; there were particular persons under persecution." See also Bax- who kept the faith, but invisible to the ter's Five Disputations of Church world or to one another, without any Government, Lond. 1650, p. 242. See also Note D. LECT. Vt.] CHRIST CONDEMNS PRELACY. 139 is on our part," (Mark ix. 38 -40.) So also that other decla- ration, which is agreeable to the promise made in the ministe- rial commission, " where two or three are gathered together in my name, there am I in the midst of them." We have also passages which give fearful warning of the guilt which is incurred by those, who arrogate to themselves offices and powers unauthorized by God's word. The fate of Dathan and Abiram, of Korah and his company, of Jeroboam also, (see Numb. ch. xvi. and 1 Kings, xiii. 34,) and of the seven sons of Sceva the Jew, as recorded in the New Testa- ment,^ (Acts xix. 13-15,) should admonish all who would usurp a power and dignity which Christ never gav^ to them, but contrariwise forbade, that they shall not escape the indig- nation of God. Not less plain are those express precepts, in which we are called upon to beware of such daring presumption, on the part of all who should be found treading in the steps of the ancient rabbis, and, like them, extorting from their followers a homage to which they have no title. " Be ye not called rabbi," says Christ to his disciples, and through them to all his future minis- ters; "for ONE is your master, even Christ, and all ye are BRETHREN ; and call no man your father," (or right reverend father in God,) " upon earth ; for one is your Father, which is m heaven. Neither be ye called masters," {viu^VjyviTCii leaders or guides, the very idea conveyed by the term prelate,) " for ONE is your master, even Christ." (Matt, xxiii. 8-11. See also Mark x. 4-2-45 ; Mark xx. 25 -28 ; Luke xxii. 25-27. Now, the very head and front of the offending of these ancient rabbis was, their ostentatious assumption of such prelatic thles ; their bold pretensions to such prelatic deference and regard, and 1) "The rebellion of Korah and heads. The case is plain enough, it his company," says Mr. Percival and was the Levites and the people rebel- the whole high-church party, (see ling against the priests ; and not the Powell on Ap. Succ. p. 301 ,) " is anal- priests against the high priest." ogous to the rebellion of presbyters " Mr. Percival is certainly outwitted against bishops. Indeed I Now in attempting to make friends for the who were Korah and his compa- high-church in the cases of Jeroboam ny .' Who? Who.? Yes, Mr. Per- and the seven sons of Sceva. Where cival, were THEY priests or lay- can the parallel for the former be men.? What does this mean — 'Seek found but in heresy, the head and ye the priesthood also ? ' If they fountain of whatever prelatical suc- werc p7-i'S^5, how could they seek the cession high-church has? And who priestliood .' Dathan and Abiram were can avoid likening the latter, who Reubenites, and could not be priests, were sons of a chief of the priests, and riieij vom. of t/icm loere priests at all ! who seem to have resented tlie inter- Fie ! fie ! ye queen's chaplains and ference of the heretic and schismatic Oxford tractmen, to trifle thus with Paul with their peculiar commission, the public mind ! But your violation to Mr. Percival et id omne genus." of truth will return upon your own (See Powell, p. 300.) 140 THE APOSTLES CONDEMN PRELACY. [lECT. VI. their authoritative requisitions, to be followed in these traditions of the elders, (i. e. fathers,) which they taught.' Nor were the apostles themselves inattentive to these divine injunctions? In- stead of claiming a prelatic authority to interpret the word cf God, and thus to dictate our faith, they ware careful to declare that, although employed by God as his inspired agents to com- municate his will, yQl, iiersonally, they were themselves equal- ly bound to receive it with the very humblest of their followers. " Not," says Paul to the Corinthians, " that we have dominion over your faith, but are helpers of your faith, for by faith " — as wrought by the convincing power of God's spirit in your own minds — " ye stand." (2 Cor. i. 24.) " For we preach not our- selves, but Christ Jesus the Lord ; and ourselves your servants for Jesus's sake." (2 Cor. iv. 5.) Therefore does the apostle Peter solemnly call upon the ministers of Christ, with whom he identifies himself, saying, "I, who am also a presbyter" — to " feed the flock of God, taking the oversight (or episcopate) of it, " not," says he, " as being lords," (or rulers, or claiming the exercise of superior and lordly functions) "over God's heritage; but " contrariwise, by your equality and brotherhood, as min- isters, '* being ensamples to the flock." 1 Pet. v. 1 -3.2 But still further, it is clearly foretold that such arrogant pretensions to higher seats in the house of the Lord, and to superior eminency, would be made in the coming ages of the church ; and that they must be earnestly contended against. For instance, there are some spoken of (in 2 Cor. xi. 12,) who "transformed themselves into apostles of Christ" — by actually assuming the title, and claiming a succession to the powers and functions, of the apostles — against whom the apostle denounces " sharpness according to the power which the Lord had given him." (2 Cor. xiii. 10.) Thus also does Paul, in his last solemn interview with the Ephesian ministers, forewarn them, that " of THEIR owNSELVEs" — evcn among those who were ministers of Christ — "shall men arise, speaking perverse things to draw disciples after them." These prelatic and ambitious aspirants after power and official pre-eminence, he calls " grievous wolves" who should " not spare the flock," but make it subservient to their own aggrandizement. (Acts xx. 29 — 31. So also, we are taught, in connexion with the mention of Diotrephes, whom Oe- 1) See marginal note in Bagster's p. 151 and note,) then how very poi.t- Comprehensive Bible in Matt 23. edly does it prohibit tliis lord-hishnp- 2) If we understand this passage ing over tiie clergy, by these self-styl- ofthe apostle as prelatists would have ed successors of tiie apostles, who thus us, and as the Vulgate renders it, contradict the precept of their exem- " neither as being lords over God's plarsinthe plainest possible manner, olergy/' (eee Saravia o« Priesthood, LECT. VI.] THE APOSTLES CONDEMN PRELACY. 141 cumenius, Bede, and some others, think to have been in the min- istry. Whatever he was, his course is plainly stated, and ils rep- robation as plainly expressed. He "loved to have the pre-em- inence." The original word is Cp/AoTr^wTfuwv that is, one " who loveih the presidency or chief place, and who therefore magnified himself in his office, and behaved haughtily in it'" — just like these prelates who "prate against us," their ministerial brethren, " with malicious words : " and not content therewith, neither do themselves'* receive" us as" the brethren," but " forbid them" — that is, their more evangelic brethren — " that would ; and cast them out of the church" — calling them Socinians, and rational- ists, and venturing to make ternis of communion for the church of God which he never framed. Surely to such, the language of our Saviour is as applicable, as to the more ancient — and therefore, in their view, more catholic — fathers ; " woe unto you scribes and pharisees," prelates, " for ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men" — by these unauthorized doctrines and terms of communion — " neither suffer ye them that are entering to go in." (Matt, xxiii. 13.) The apostle Jude, also, tells us of some in his time, whose "mouth spoke great swelling words, having men's persons in admiration, because of advantage" — men who "despised the dominion" — and supreme authority of God's holy word — "and spoke evil of dignities" — by denying to other ministers the equal prerogatives assigned to them " by heaven." " These be they," says the apostle " who separate themselves" — from their brethren and claim to be the only true church and the only true ministers, and to have the only true ordinances of Christ, (Jude v. 8, 16, 19,) — and who " murmur and complain" that any otiiers should be received and acknowledged as such ; and that God should so abundantly bless their labors. Indeed, the very last book in the Bible is chiefly occupied, in depicting the misery and ruin, the spiritual tyranny and wicked- ness, and the abominations, which should be foisted into God's worship and held forth as his doctrines, by those wearing the garb of the ministry. Of these persons it is in so many words revealed, that they should lay claim to this very character of being suc- cessors of the apostles and invested with their personal and spir- itual authority. And it is here made our imperative duty to " try them who" thus arrogantly " say thky are apostles and ARE NOT ;" in the certain assurance that we shall find their cre- dentials utterly vain and false. (Rev. ii. 2.) " One would have thought," to appropriate the language of Mr. Percival — "that the sentence concerning certain false teachers "whom I have 1) B^ Bagster*8 Comprehensive BiW«, marginal note. 142 1*0 COMMISSION FOR PRELATES. [LECt. VI. delivered unto Satan, that they m&y learn not to blaspheme," — ( 1 Tim. i. 20,) had been sufficient to appal these prelaiic succes- sionisls when they venture actually to deny the Holy One and the Just, the privilege or the right of having any other church than among themselves. "But thus it is that one evil step draws another ; they who began by carping at the authority of" presbyters, " presently proceeded further to carp at that of the apostles," and to frame apostolical canons, rites, ceremonies, or- ders, and traditions of their own devising, " and who will not probably be deterred from carping at that of our Lord himself."^ For what else is it, after such solemn rebukes of the very spirit of prelacy by our Lord himself — after finding that the same names, qualifications and duties are given, in his word, to all his ministers; and that, in all the apostolic churches, instead of prel- acy, there was to be found presbytery ; and instead of different orders, ministerial equality — what else, I say, is it than carping at the Lord himself — to set at defiance his teaching, and the ex- ample of all the apostolic churches — by the obstinate intrusion, as of divine right, of this system of prelacy ? This doctrine will be found unsupported by the word of God, if we proceed to consider the nature of that ministerial commis- sion, under which all who labor in word and doctrine, must claim their authority. There is but one commission given by Christ, and by virtue of which, ministers claim authority to teach, and are impelled to undertake the difficult and laborious office of the minister. For, however Christ may have commissioned the twelve and the seventy also, for a temporary agency, in delivering a definite, and limited, and preparatory message; it was only when he had ac- tually founded the christian church, and was about to ascend, as its head, to the supremacy of his mediatorial throne, that he gave that perpetual commission, which was to remain in force to the end of the world.* This is the well-head of all ministerial Older, power, and dignity. Here the Divine Legislator of his church, looking from the heights of his ascending glory, upon its coming fortunes, has expressed his will, as to the character 1) See Ancient Christ'y. vol. i. ford, vol. i. pp. 123 and 153, where pp. 405, 407, 420, 422, 423, 424, 425, these views are fully avowed. 426.435,430,455,457. "The third ordination," says the That these principles are contrary to Rev Mr. Pratt, (Old Paths, p. 59,) the spirit of the New Testament, see '• of the apostles, when they were in- shown in Unity and Schism, pp. 121, vested witli all power and authority to 122, and Presb. Def, pp. 40,41. act in Christ's stead, and to bind and 2) See Rise and PrOjjressof Chris* loose in his r.hurch, took place after tianity, by the Riv. S. Hinds of Ox- our blessed Lord's resurrection, and immediettely before his ascension." LECT. VI.] JJO COMMISSION rOR PRELATES. 143 and functions of its officers. And will it be pretended that, in this only formal enunciation of the ministerial commission, there is either an allusion to three orders, or to prelates, or to the sep- arate functions of ordaining, governing, and teaching ? Or is the commission limited by its own express terms, to prelates and their successors, to the end of time? There is but one com- mission ; and this commission addresses itself, in broad terms, to all the ministers of Christ ; lays down for all, one and the same functions; and makes to them all, one and the same promise. There is, therefore, and there can be, but one order of christian ministers, by whatever name they may be called, or in whatever way their functions may be systematized by ecclesiastical appoint- ment, or their talents and services appropriated by ecclesiasti- cal authority. Let then prelates show some divine commission by which their order is separately instituted. Let them, who claim the exclusive enjoyment of Christ's gifts, show the testa- ment that disinherits their brethren, and in which the common Saviour of all has disowned a portion of his own commissioned servants.' For it is not to be imagined that any act emanating 1) See this subject more fully considered in the proposed volume. That this commission was re- ally intended to authorize and apply to presbyters, we are most certninly assured by the reformers of the Eng- lish church, who actually embodied it in tlie form of ordination for presby- ters. It was thus appropriated to presbyters alone, and by the English church herself, which continued that form until the year 1661, when dis- tinct forms for the ordination of pres- byters and bishops were first intro- duced. " It is admitted on all hands," says Dr. Bowden, (Works on Epis. vol. ii. p. 142.) "that this promise implies a continuation of the gospel ministry to the end of time, and that the commis- Bion empowered the apostles to preach, to administer the sacraments, to gov- ern the church, and to ordain others to the same holy office." " The truth of the proposition," says Dr. Cooke in his Essay on the In- validity of Presbyterian Ordination, (Works on Episc. vol. ii. p. 202,) " is S ranted. It is true that Christ gave ut one commission for the office of the gospel ministry : but the inference is denied ; it is not true that the office of course is one." " It may be as well proved from thence," says Dr. Bowden, (Works on Episc. vol. i. p. 173,) " that all eccle- siastical teachers had, in the first age, the powers of the apostles, as they have since, the powers of bishops, properly so called. For there is no DIFFERENCE AT ALL MADE in THE COMMISSION.'' Now this conclusion we think inev- itable and fair, on the principle that " ubi lex non distinguit non est dis- tinguendum." And that we are not bad reasoners, let an English prelate testify. " Truly," saj's B.shop Croft in his True State of the Church, (Scott's Coll. of Tr. vol. vii p. 300,) '• I must commend Petavius, if he will thus in- geniously confess the truth, for I shall by and by fully declare that 't is the diversity of commission, and not of order, that enables men to act diverse- ly, and that a bishop without commis- sion can do no more than a presbyter without commission ; and therefore I further beg of Petavius, that, till he can prove the contrary, he would con- fess them also to be of one single or- der, called only by divers names, priest, or bishop, and one chosen out of the number, not the rest abased, but he exalted, with authority to gov- ern. This is the rational and com- mon practice of all societies, corpora- tions, colleges, monasteries, conclave 144 PRELACY CONTRARY TO THE PROMISES. [jLECT. VI. from men, from sinful creatures like ourselves, should be of force to convey such an awful power,^ wrapped up, as it is, in such terrible mystery. " Clearly not — no command of an earthly king, nor ordinance of an earthly les;islature, nor decrees of counsels, nor authority of fathers," could invest an order of men with power over the gifts of the Holy Ghost.'^ " He alone," it is confessed, " is evidently entitled to confer this power, who himself gave, in the first instance, that Spirit to his church. It is to him such commission must be traced, in the case of every individual who would establish his right to this" dread suprem- acy.^ Nor is this doctrine less opposed to the promises of scripture. Christ promised to be himself always with his ministers to the end of the world. All power is his, and with him, and by him, and through him; so that, without him there is neither power nor gifts in his church. Now where, in all the Bible, does Christ say he will be only with prelates? Where does he say he will impart these sacred gifts only by and through prelates, and by the imposition of their talismanic hands ? And where does he say that he has left these gifts, in some way of unintelligible and inscrutable mystery, to be carried down, upon the equally undis- coverable, indescribable stream of apostolic succession ? We ask where ? That this promise of Christ, which is bound up with the ministerial commission, in particular — and that his promises to his church generally, — are not so limited, but are made in their fulness to all his ministers, and to all the members of his body, the church — whether admitted through the door of prelacy or of presbytery — is in itself clear to every candid ex- of cardinals, and what not : t.here is no was praepositus only, one of them new order supposed in any of these, placed with authority over them, no but only a new election, and a new more; nor doth the name of bishop, in authority given according to the fun- the original Greek, signify any more damental constitulion of eacli society, than the overseer sfthe rest." The pope himself, with his triple 1) See Oxf. Tracts, vol. i. p. 30. crown and triple dominion over all " The awfulness of the priestly office." patriarchs, archbishops, and bishops, Tr. 100 of the Prot. Episc. Tr. Soc. p. pretends to have no new order of 12. popeship, but only the new authority 2) " Again," says Mr. Baynes, conferred by his election: why then, (Diocesan's Tryall, pp. 71, 72,) '• God may not presbyters, chosen to preside hath described the presbyter's office, over the rest, without any new order, as amply as any other. A legate de- do the like .' And for this very rea- pendeth on none for instructions, but son I conceive Justin Martyr uses the on him that sendeth him ; now every name of president always for bishop ; minister is an embassador of Christ, and St. Cyprian, also a bishop himself, Uy their reason a minister should be and most glorious martyr, he calls accountant to man for what he did in himself and other bishops generally his ministry, if his exercising of it did by the name of prospositus, as if this depend on man." were the main distinction betwixt 3) See also Oxf Tr. vol. i. p. 30. himself and his presbyters, that he LECT. VI.] THE PROMISES VERSOS PRELACY. 145 aminer ; and may be abundantly established by the authority of episcopalians themselves. These promises build the church on the truth as it is in Jesus; and not on apostolic succession.* They refer all spiritual and saving gifts to Christ, as their only and immediate source ; and not to the mysterious agency of an intermediate apostolical descent. The apostle, therefore, dis- claimed all authority over the faith of the churches; while these boasting successors base all their pretensions on their authoritt/ — and yet call themselves successors of the apostles. These prom- ises being left to the church, and to all believers^ — by what logic is it proved that prelates are, and, of right constitute, the church ? And if they are to be limited to the clergy, or even to prelates, then in what sense are they true of those — and they are not a few — who have been, to use the words of one of their own- selves," " drunkards, whoremongers, adulterers, dogs, enchanters, and the many who died, such as God's word hath excluded from the kingdom of heaven, and whom hell must swallow up with open mouth .'' " " Are they " — we ask with this most vaunted divine, " THE CHURCH, and may hell gates prevail against them and not prevail against the church ? "* Does the Holy Spirit pass in suc- cession, in the plenitude of episcopal grace, through those who resembled the archbishop mentioned by this writer, who gave ev- idence that he was passing straight to hell as duke, while he was most canonical in his archiepiscopal descent?® And if so, then what kind of grace is that which can thus transmit itself unpol- luted through the foulest channels ? It is, as the apostle says, (1 Cor. viii. 4) " nihil in mundo.'"^ Besides, when they thus limit the promises of God to the church, as one; and in her prelatical form; seeing that the church is, in fact, not now one, even in her prelatical phase, but 1) See Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 159. no respecter of persons, are infallibly 2) Ibid, p. 160. entailed to a certain succession of 3) See Jackson's Wks fol. vol. men, without all respect of learning, . p. 437. wit, or honesty. You must prove that 4) Jackson's Wks. vol. i. p. 425. the Holy Spirit is a private spirit, and 5) Jackson's Wks. vol. i. p. 425. might err when he said ' the Lord G) See Ibid, pp. 426, 427. That giveth grace to the humble ;' and that is " nothing in the world." our Saviour's words ' ventus spiral To appropriate these promises of ubi vult,' did not import (as he meant) God — the rich treasures of heavenly that his Spirit might enlighten whom grace and the glorious inheritance of he pleased. For if all these and that liis spirilual commonwealth, wherever other ' Deus cujus vult miseretur,' found, in any of its members, — to then who can hinder God," &c. "That prelates '■ you must prove," says Dr. men should learn to rely on his mer- Jackson, whom they themselves de- cy and providence and not on the nominate one of the greatest divines, authority and skill of men." and who was a president in Oxford, 7) See Jackson's Wks. fol. vol. i. " that the best gifts of God, the pecu- p. 302. liar attribute of whose glory it is to be 19 146 THE PROMISES VERSUS PRELACY. [LECT. VI. is divided into parties, who mutually excommunicate one the other, and demonstrate the invalidity of each others' claims; they therefore cut off all possible communication with heaven, since this condition of the promise has, of a long period, yea, even for ages past, been notoriously broken and set at naught.' And further, on this part of our subject ; — to appropriate tiiese promises to the prelates or bishops of the church ; as the source of all spiritual gifts, to the clergy ; and thence to the laity; is to render the spiritual presence of Christ with the clergy essential to the perpetuity of the church. Without this presence with each and every one of the successors, in the line of apostolical descent, the promises are falsified, the succession interrupted, and the current of vital influences impeded. Now will any sane-minded christian man unblushingly affirm, that Christ has been so present with all, who must be enrolled in the black list of vile apostate successors of apostles ? And, if any are bold enough to make such an affirmation, are they ready to give the proof of it ? For surely they will not first demand infallibility in giving us a correct interpretation of the promise, and then make the promise guarantee the certainty of that which is most uncertain, and palpably impossible.^ We are aware that it is urged, that this uninterrupted succes- sion is made certain by the immutable promises of Christ, and therefore, whatever obscurity may attend its progress, we are required to believe implicitly in its certain and valid continuance. This argument might have some force, were it only proved that there is in the word of God any such promise, securing any such result. This, however, we deny. And therefore, to insist upon this argument is only another application by "the daughter," of a course of reasoning very agreeable to " her mother." The pre- latical Church of England is the true church, because she alone retains the apostolical succession, and that she does retain this succession is undeniable, because she is the true church, and must therefore have it. We are not by any means to imagine, that the promises of Christ secure to the church an unfailing possession of pure and incorrupt doctrine. On the contrary, the most grievous errors in doctrine and practice have been, as is allowed, permitted to corrupt the church.^ Are we, then, to seek the fulfilment of these promises, in the preservation of an unbroken succession 1) See Newman on Romanism, p. vin Instit. vol. ii. pp. 313, 317,321, 246. London ed. Also, Faber's Alblgen- 2) See this granted by Faber in ses, p. 15, and Hooker in ibid. his Albigenses p. 27. 3) See Oxf. Tr. No. 30, 35, &c. See on this subject generally, Cal- LECT. VI. j THE PROMISES VERSUS PRELACY. 147 of prelaticaliy ordained ministers? But this can be no mark by which to discover the real nature and intention of that com- mission, under which the christian church holds its being. The very question at issue is, whether Christ or his apostles have chartered such a prelatical corporation, for until this is proved, it is in vain to appeal to promises which have reference to the church universal, and not to an order of self-constituted dignita- ries. The mere fact of a succession of such men, can never give them a divine right to the privileges they claim. Until such a charter is produced, from Him v^hose sole prerogative it is to grant it, all such assumed powers must be regarded as self-orig- inated and usurped. Besides, if these promises of Christ are to be so interpreted as that the only true church, is that, which continues to pre- serve this uninterrupted succession; then, as these promises run on to the very end of time, it cannot be certainly determined, until the end comes, to which, of all the churches who have claimed them, these promises really belong. For many churches, which were certainly of apostolic origin, and which prelatists as- sert, were prelaticaliy organized, (as, for instance, some of the seven churches of Asia,) have now ceased to exist. They have not continued in any form whatever. Either, therefore, these promises do not necessarily imply that every true church, when once constituted, would continue to enjoy this prelatical suc- cession, or the promises have failed in their accomplishment ; and it is now an impossibility to find any true church by this mark, until the consummation of all things. Then, and not till then, can this interpretation of the promises be urged as the ground of their claims, by any of the churches that may have existed in the course of time. It is, therefore, very reasonable to conclude, that such never was the intention of their divine Author in giving these promises to his church and people. Will it be urged upon us impatiently, that the prelatic inter- pretation of these promises is sustained by the authority of the church in all ages, and must, therefore, be received, whatever seeming difficulties may attend it, in the opinion of self-consti- tuted judges ? We must be permitted to reply, that it is utterly in vain to tell us that the prelates themselves — for, after all, this is what is meant in this question by the church — have affixed such an interpretation to these promises of the word of God, (supposing now that the assertion is true.) — since the very question in debate is, whether they interpret lightly. Their right of interpretation must not surely be assumed, when the very thing which they invite us to discuss is, whether they 148 THE PROMISES VERSUS PRELACY. [LECT. VI. possess any such power." That they have any such power, we deny, and we will hardly be convinced by their assertion, that they have ; and much less by their accompaniments of anathemas and excommunications. " Never cease," says the Hon. and Rev. Mr. Noel, " to ask for plain and positive scrip- ture proof, from scripture, that a Roman catholic council," (we say, that a number of prelates, called the church,) " composed of a small part of the clergy, themselves a small part of the whole body, the pious persons, among whom are a small part of Christ's universal church; that this small fraction effractions in the church, distinguished neither for piety nor learning, is thus gifted" by the Lord, with such an absolute supremacy over his own inspired word.^ Even, however, were this exclusive power admitted, our right to investigate its extent, and to test its claims, as these are pre- sented by Christ in his word, must still remain ; and our right also to weigh the grounds of their interpretations, and to question their interpretations themselves. For any body of men " to de- cide who are, or are not, partakers of the benefits of the chris- tian covenant, and to prescribe to one's fellow-mortals, as the terms of salvation, the implicit adoption of their own interpreta- tions, is a most fearful presumption in men not producing mirac- ulous proofs of an immediate divine mission."^ 1) See the Hon and Rev. B. W. to the Christian Faith, Lond. 1839, p. Noel, in Romanists and Protestants, 230. p. 10. See this also fully argued by Bishop See also Bishop Hoadly's celebrated Davenant in his Letter to DurjBus sermon before George 1 , on the nature " De pace inter Evangelicos Eccl. res- of the kingdom of Clirist. taurandam adhortatio," Lond. 1640, 2) Archbp. Whateley's Dangers pp. 10-15, 30, 35, et passim. ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE SIXTH. VARIATIONS OF PRELACy, OR, LEiRNED EPISCOPAL DOCTORS VERSUS JURE DIVINO PRELATISTS. We shall here illustrate this disunion in the unity of this prelatic bodj, by a reference to a few particulars. I. On the ofRce of the apostles, and whether they had any successors. Until Christ's death, the apostles were presbyters, and Christ alone was bishop. 1. This is affirmed by Stillingfleetjirenicum, Part 2, p. 218. Spanheim Op. Theol. Part 1, p. 43G, in Ayton's Constit. of the Ch. p. 18 Dr. Hammond's Wks, vol. 4, p. 781, who makes them deacons. Mr. Brett, Divine Right Epis- cop. Lect. 8, p. 17. 2. This is contradicted, and the apostles made bishops during the same time, by Bishop Jer. Taylor, Episcop. Asserted ; Dr. Scott, in Christian Life, vol. 'A, p. 338; Dr. Monro's Inq. into the New Opinions, p. 96; Mr Rhind, Apol. p. 50 &c. ; Willet, Synopsis Papismi, p. 236; Archbishojt of Spalato, in Ayton's Constit. of the Ch. Append, p. 7 ; Jeremy Taylor, (bishop,) Wks. vol. 7, p. 7, &c. who contradicts himself in Wks vol. 13, p. 19, et. seq. Archbishop Laud is very positive in affirming that Christ chose the twelve, and made them bishops over the presbyters, (Laud on the Lit and Episcop. p. 195,) and Bishop Beveridge is as confident that Christ chose these same twelve as presbyters and not bishops. (Wks. vol. 2, p. ]12) Again Laud asserts very positively, that Christ ordained them, since the word used by St. Mark is iTroina-ev. He made them. (Ibid, p. 196.) Beveridge on the contrary declares that Christ did not ordain any of them during his life, and adduces in proof, the use of this very term vrotiKTi J'aJ'iKu.. (Ibid, vol. 2, p. 112. 3. Others, again, affirm that the apostles were not commissioned till after Christ's resurrection. Mr. Sage, quoted in Ayton's Constit. of Ch. App p 5, 6 ; Saravia's Priesthood, Spanheim Op. Theol. Par. 1,436. Stillingfleet Irenic. p. 117, 118, and Par. 2, 218; Whitby Annot. Luke 10, 1 ; Dr. Hammond in Ibid ; Bellarmine de Pontif lib. 4, cap. 25; Bishop Heber in Life of Jeremy Taylor, Wks. vol. 1, p. 185. II. The apostles were extraordinary officers, and could have no successors. 1. This is affirmed by Pearson on the Creed, p. 16, " who are continued to us only in their writings;" Whitby in Comment. Pref to Titus; Bishop Hoadly, see Wks. fol. vol. 2, p. 827; Dr. Barrow in Wks. fol. vol. 1, p. 598; Dr. Willet in Synopsis Papismi. fol. p. 164, 165 ; Bishop Fell on Ephes. 5, 9 ; Hooker Eccl. Pol. B. vii. § 4, vol. 3, p. 187, Keble's edition ; Sadeel ; Chil- lingworth ; Hinds' Hist, of Rise and Progress of Christ, vol. 2, p. 70 — 87; Hinds on Inspiration, p.117 ; Lightfoofs Wks. vol. 13, pp. 26, 27, 30, 70, 98, &c. and in other works ; Palmer on the Ch. vol. 1, p. 169, 170; Bowers' Hist, of the Popes, vol. i. 5, 6 ; Potter on Ch. Govt. pp. 121, 117, Am. ed.; Steele's Phil, of the Evid. of Christ, pp. 102, 105, 106, 107; Dodwell Parones, ad. ext. p. 68, comp. 11,54, 55, 62, apud Ayton; Bishop Davenant on Col. vol. i. 150 NOTES TO LECTURE VI. Ch. 1 ; Mr. Brett, Div. Right of Episcop. Lect. xii. p. 26, apud Ayton ; Stil- linfffleet, (the dean and not the bishop,) Irenic. Par. ii. pp. 299 — 301 ; Span- hefm Fil. Dissert, 3 numb. 25, 37, 34 ; Archbishop Tiilotson, see quoted in Presbyterianism Defd. pp. 117, 118. 2. This is most resolutely disproved by Laud. See his Three Speeches on the Liturgy Episcop. &c. in Oxf. edit. 1840, p.issim ; Dr. William Nichols in his Defence of the Ch. of England ; " Bishops are successors to the Apostles, both in name and thing," says Leslie in Letter on Episcopacy, in The "Scholar Armed, vol i. 04, et alibi ; Beveridge in Wks. vol. ii. pp. 88, 93, 120, 147, 149, 167. 278; Law in his Second Letter to the Bishop of Bangor See, in Oxf. Tr. vol iii. p- 156 ; Stillingfleet, (the bishop, not the dean,) in Wks. vol. i. p. 371 , in Art. Bishop. Rees' Cycloped. ; Bishop Hicks, Mr. Rhind, Dr. Scott, Dr. Mun- roe, see Ayton's Orig. Constit. of the Ch. App. p. 8, Lect. ii. ; Bishop Hon- ieman, Survey of Naphthali, Par. ii. 191, &c. in Ayton; Bishop Hall; Episc. by Div. Rights, Par. 2. III. The divine and exclusive right of three essentially distinct orders is clearly established in scripture. This is affirmed by prelatists generally. That there were only two distinct orders, is affirmed by Bishop White. In closing his dissertation of episcopacy, (Lect. on the Catech. &c. Philad. 1813, p. 468,) he says, " In the discussion of this subject, the author has con- fined himself to the single point of establishing two distinct orders of the min- istry : resolved into one order by many bodies of professing christians." In the episcopal charge delivered by this same writer in 1834, when urging the duty of sustaining Ihe episcopacy, he says the reformers " found that in the origin of the ministry," (The Past and the Future, Philad. 1834, p. 13.) "it com- prehended THREE orders." As to this third order. Bishop White, in a letter to Bishop Hobart, thus expresses himself: (see in Memoir by Dr. Wilson, p. .365:) " But can it be imao-ined that an order instituted for the purpose of serving tables,' should in the very infancy of its existence have the office of the higher order of the ministry committed to them.' I do not deny either the right or the prudence of allowing what has been subsequently allowed to this lowest order of the clergy. All I contend for is, that at the first institution of the order, there could have been no difference between them and laymen, in regard to the preaching of the word and the administering of the sacraments." As to deacons. Bishop Croft, in his Naked Truth, thus delivers himself. (Scott's Coll. of Tr. vol. vii. pp. 307 and 308.) " Having thus stated and united the two pretended and distinct orders of episcopacy and presbytery, I now proceed to the third pretended spiritual order, that of deaconship. Whether this of deaconship be properly to be called an order or an office, I will not dispute ; but certainly no spiritual order, for their office was to serve tables, as the scripture phrases it, which in plain English, is nothing else but overseers of the poor, to distribute justly and discreetly the alms of the faith- ful : which the apostles would not trouble themselves withal, lest it should hinder them in the ministration of the woid and prayer. But as most matters of this world, in process of time, deflect much from the original constitution, so it fell out in this business ; for the bishops who pretended to be succes- sors TO THE apostles, by little and little took to themselves the dispensation of alms, first b}^ way of inspection over the deacons, but at length the total man- agenjent, and the deacons who were mere lay-officers, by degrees crept into the church ministration, and became a reputed spiritual order, and a necessary degree and step to the priesthood, of which I can find nothing in scripture, and tlie original institution, not a word relating to any thing but the ordering of alms for the poor. And the first I find of their officiating in spiritual mat- ters, is in Justin Martyr, who lived in the second century." That there was only one essential order in the christian ministry, is also affirmed. Jeremy Taylor says there is " only one order," and that bishops are the " only order," See in Powell on Ap. Succ. p. 17; Palmer on the Church, vol ii. And while it is asserted in the Book of Common Prayer, that three orders are clear, &c.. Hooker shows that this whole subject is entirely beyond the reach of ordinary men. See as quoted in Lecture iii. p. 71. NOTES TO LECTURE VI. 151 That this was also the opinion of a large portion of the early English church was made apparent. See Lecture iii. p. 71. It was our design to have pursued the illustration of this subject to a much greater length, and as it regards various other points of disagreement. We will however desist, and refer the reader to the following sources of informa- tion on this subject. Dr. Mason's Wks. vol iii. pp. 71, 143,144,150; Andersons's Defence of Presbyterian Church Government, pp. 30, 31, 110; Plea for Presbytery, Glas- gow, 1840, p. 290; Dr. Mitchell's Letters to Bishop Skinner, p. 36, «&c. ; Dr. Ayton's Constitution of tlie Primitive Church, Appendix ; Well's Vindic. of Presb. Ordin. p. 35 ; also The Sum of the Episcopal Controversy, &c. by William Jameson ; Lect. of History in the University of Glasgow, Glasg. 1713, pp. 78, 126, in the Old South Church Library And now we may fairly say, as Dr. Bowden has taught us to say, — " This makes the notion ridiculous. Pray sirs agree among yourselves, and then you may with more decency contradict us." Wks. on Episc. vol. ii. p. 127. NOTE B. Thus also speaks the Hon. and Rev. Baptist W. Noel : " This " (Matt, xvi.) we are told, (see Romanists and Protestants, p. 8,) gives to the church its au- thority, ' The gates of hell shall not prevail against it ;' and limits this authority to the successors of Peter in the Roman church. ' Thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church.' To the second of these conclusions that the Roman church is intended, a man of plain sense might demur on these con- siderations : " First, That the rock may not be Peter, but that doctrine which Peter had just before professed, — the divinity of the Lord Jesus, on which the universal church is unquestionably built. " Secondly, That if the church is built on Peter, it is equally built on the other inspired writers. ' Ye are built,' says Paul, ' on the foundation of the apostles and the prophets.' (Eph. ii. 20.) " Thirdly, That, in point of fact, several churches, as those of Greece and Macedonia, were built on Paul ; having no more connexion (that we know of) with Peter than with any other of the twelve apostles. " Fourthly, That it is very improbable that Peter was ever bishop of Rome, the prevalent tradition being that he was bishop of Antioch. " Fifthly, That though Peter be allowed (which he cannot) to have been the great founder of the universal church, there is no mention here of his succes- sors at Rome ; and the promise, therefore, if it belong to any particular visible church, may belong to his Greek successors, rather than to the church of Rome. " And now, what is the promise itself, whether it belong to the Greek or Roman catholic church .' Where is a word of infallibility ? If any visible christian church, with a pure faith and wholesome discipline, with faithful pastors and pious congregations, maintains its ground against the devil and the world ;■ even though it does not grow in numbers, or send the gospel to the heathen ; though it want infallibility, and err in matters of subordinate importance ; yet surely it has not yielded to the gates of hell. " But, lastly. Though the Greek and Roman churches, and all the visible churches of nominal christians, with the greater number of ecclesiastics who preside over them, should degenerate into a corrupt practice and a false belief, still, if there be found amongst them some faithful pastors, through wiiose ministry a few real christians are preserved unharmed by the plague of super- stition, to maintain the doctrines of the gospel and exhibit its morality, then is there the church of Christ still subsisting ; and the promise still holds good ; for the gates of hell have not prevailed against it; and this is the real meaning of the promise." 152 NOTES TO LECTURE VI. NOTE C. "It is certain," says one, " that those who ordained others in the primi tive cliurch were, presbyters, but it is doubtful whether tiiey were bisliops. I suppose every one will grant, that it was the practice i'roni the times of the apostles for ministers to ordain ministers: but all who have read any thing of this controversy, know that it is disputed whether there were, in the first ages of the church, any such thing as bishops in the modern sense of the word. N'lw this dispute very much weakens the evidence of a succession in a line of bishops, but does not at all affect the evidence of a presbyterian succession ; for these persons certainly were presbyters, or ordinary ministers of the gospel, whether they had any higher character or no. " There is no accounting for the succession, in the catalogue, which pre- latists present, without supposing that some of the first persons named in it were presbyters, or such officers whereof there were a number in the same church, who governed it jointly. Here 1 shall use the words of the author of An Historical and Rational Inquiry into the Necessity of an Uninterrupted Succession of Diocesan Bishops, page 31. ' Supposing there should have been such a succession of persons from St. Peter as are mentioned, yet those that are mentioned as his next successors might not be a succession of diocesan bishops superior in office to presbyters, but rather a number of presbyters that governed the church in common. Presbyters they are called by Irenseus, (Fragment of the Epistle to Victor, about the Easter Controversies,) who having occasion to mention the practice of the church of Rome before Soter, he calls them the presbyters that governed the church, which he now presided over. And when we consider the uncertainty of the accounts, concerning the order in which they succeeded, sometimes one, sometimes another being men- tioned as the immediate successor of St. Peter and Paul, and so the like varia- tion in the account of the second and third successors; it is not improbable, that they might govern the church togetlier in common as presbyters, (for such Irenseus calls tliem,) and that their governing the church in common, is no improbable conjecture. I find it espoused by the learned Vossius, and main- tained by iiim, (vols 2, Ep. and fin. Cla. Colellerii,) where he lays down this as the form of government in the Roman church: 1. Linus, Cletus, Anacletus, 2. Cletus, Anacletus, and Clemens. 3. Cletus, Anacletus. 4. Anacletus, Solus. 5. Evaristus, who began a succession of single persons, whereas before there used to be two or three. The reasons by which he enforceth this order, are the acts of Pope Damasus, who saith expressly, that Peter ordained two bishops, Linus and Cletus, to govern the people, while he gave himself to prayer and preaching. And he observes, this passage is not in the printed books, but in the written copy, and so quoted by Marianus Scotus. Linus being taken away by martyrdom, Clemens is put in his place with Cletus. And this he proves thus : Cletus is said to sit from anno 76, to 83. Clemens is said to sit from 68 to 79. Therefore these two persons coincide ; but the for- mer quotation from Damasus shows that Cletus was made pastor before 76, yea, by the aposile liimself ; and then he shows, that though Clement was sent into bai)ishment about 79, yet Cletus was not alone, but Anacletus with him, who survived all these, and suffered martyrdom about 95. He observes, that Eusebius was the first who assigned to the distinct persons certain years, one succeeding another, who did very ill, because, according to him, Clement suc- ceeded Anacletus, anno 93, whereas the epistle written in his name was writ during the standing of tiie temple, that is, before the year 7L But see the epistle itself. By all this it appears that these several persons. Linns, Cletus, Anacletus, were not so many diocesan bishops that governed the church of Rome, one succeeding another; but so many presbyters (as IrenjBus calls them) that governed that church, sometimes two, and sometimes three togeth- er.' Thus far this author : to which I shall only add, that I know of no other scheme on which the difficulties that occur in the succession of these persons can be solved ; and if this be admitted, it destroys the succession in a hne of bishops, and establishee that in the line of presbyters. " The objections made against particular persons, through whom the line VOTKS 70 l.ECTUKE VI. 153 must run, do generally, if not universally, relate to their character as bishops, and not as presbvters. Thus, for instance, none dispute Dr. Parker's ordina- tion as a presbyter : but many question, for the reasons that have been men- tioned, whether his consecration as a bishop was regular or even valid. Now, thousrh our ordinations are derived from him, as well as yonr's ; yet they are not at all affected, according to our principles, by the dispute about his conse- cration ; for we believe that he had pnwer to ordain a.s a presbyter: whereas, according to your own principles all your ordinations do absfilutely depend on the validity of his disputed consecration. If his consecration was invalid, all your ordinations are likewise invalid : and as his consecration is, at best, much disputed, and very doubtful, 't is impossible that your ordinations, which depend upon it, should be clear and indisputable. " Upon the whole, if I was now to be ordained, and thought it my duty to seek ordination wliere there was the fairest probability of being within the uninter- rupted succession, I should think myself much safer in taking presbyterian ordination, than episcopal orders. But, after all, as the gospel has not by express and positive prescription, m^ide an uninterrupted succession of regular ordinations, in any line whatever, absolutely es.sential to the ministerial char- acter, I conceive we have no right to make it so ; and since God has not in his providence kept up clear and certain evidence of the fact, I can't but think it is very dangerous for us to pretend to it ; and that it is in effect giving up the cause of Christianity to make the lawfulness of the ministry, and the validity and effect of gospei ordinances, absolutely to depend upon it." So in the Sketchof Hist, and Princ. of Fresb. in Eng. p. 3d: "And no scripture can be adduced to prove that the twelve apostles, either received a commis- sion to ordain, or did ordain, or gave authority to ordain ; while it is quite clear that others ordained who were not apostles, (Acts xiii. 1, 3 ;) or, if the apostles ordained successors, it was simply successors in the ministry of the gospel, not in the apostleship. Indeed, not one single passage of scripiure can 1 e adduced to show that consecration and ordination are two distinct things, — tiiat there is one way of appointing prelates, and another way of appointing priests or presbyters, the former of which is transmissible, and the latter not trans- missible." Baxter uses another argument to show the unscripturality of prelacy. " I prove," says he, (Five Disputations on Chr. Gov. 1658, Disp. 1, Arg. 10, p. 51 ; see" also p. (J7.) " the minor according to their own interpretation of Titus i.5, and other texts. Every city should have a bishop and it may be a presbytery, (and so, many councils have determined; only, when they grew greater, they e.vcept cities that were too small ; but so did not Paul.) But the episcopacy of England is contrary to this ; for one bishop only is over many cities. If therefore they will needs have episcopacy, they should at least have had a bishop in every city. Now, when the apostle formed new cl uches with officers over them, he gave them no authority to institute any different kind of churches, or any different order of ministers, but only such as he had appointed t-) succeed them in the same office." " Now, if the apostles," says Mr. Baynes, (Diocesan's Tryall, p. 60.) " had done this with retnrence to a further and more eminent pastor and governor, they would have intimated somewhere this their intention : but ihis they do not; yea, the contrary purpose is by them declared For Peter so biddeth his presbyters feed their flocks, as that he doth insinuate them subject to no cthiT but Christ, the arch-shepherd of them all. Again, ihe apostles could not make the presbyters pastors without power of government. There may he governors without pastoral power; but not a pastor without power of governing. For the power of the pedum, or shepherd's staff, doth intrinsically follow the pas- toral office."' NOTE D. I -WILL here give another illustration from the Old Testament, taken from a very rare treatise of Matthew Henry, not found among his published works, and preserved by the Rev. Shepard Kollock. It is •' A Brief Enquiry into the Nature of Schism." (Lend. 1717, pp. 5, 6, 7.) " Only one scripturo occurs m 20 164 NOTES TO LECTURE VI. the Old Testament, which perhaps will help to rectify some mistake about Bchism. It is the instance of KIdad and Mcdad, who propiiesied in the camp. The case, in short, is this ; Eldad and Medad were persons upon whom ihe spirit rested, i.e. who were by the extraordinary working of the spirit endued with gifts equal to the rest of the seventy elders, and were written, i. e. had a call to the work, but they went not out unto the tabernacle as the rest did, though God himself had appointed that they should, v 16. And they proph- esied in the camp, i. e. exercised their gifts in private among their neighbors, in some common tent. Upon what inducements they did this, doth not appear ; but it is evident that it was their weakness and infirmity tlius to separate from the rest of their brethren. If any think they prf)phesied by a necessitating and irresistible impulse, they may remember, that the spirit of the prophets is subject to the prophets. " Now, if some of the schismaticating doctors that the church has known had but had the censuring of Eldad and Medad, we should soon have had a judg- ment given ai;ainst them much more severe, than would have been awarded to him that gathered sticks on the sabbath day. " And 'tis confessed, all the circumstances considered, it looks like a very great irregularity, especially as an infringement of the authority of Moses, which they who prophesied in the tabernacle under his presidency manifestly owned and submitted to. " Well, an information was presently brought in against them, v. 27. Eldad and Medad prophesy in the camp, that is, to speak in the invidious language of the times, there' s a conventicle at such a place ; and Eldad and Medad are holding forth at it. " Joshua, in his zeal for that which he fancied to be the church's unity, and out of a concern for the authority of Moses, brings in a bill to silence them ; f«>r as hot as he was, he would not have them fined and laid in the jail for this disorder neither ; only, my lord Moses, forbid them : not compel them to come to the tabernacle, if they be not satisfied to come, only for the future prohibit their schismatical preaching in the camp. This seemed a very good motion. " But hold, Joshua, thou knowest not what manner of spirit thou art of. Dis- cerning Moses sees him acted by a spirit of envy, and doth not only deny, but severely reprove, the motion, v. 29. Enviest thou for my sake? Would to God that all the Lord's people were prophets, provided the Lord will but put his spirit upon them He is so far from looking upon it as schism, that he doth not only tolerate but encourage it. And O that all those who sit in Moses' chair, were but clothed with this spirit of Moses." LECTURE VIL THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION TESTED BY SCRIPTURE. THE SUBJECT CONCLUDED. We have already brought this prelatic doctrine of apostolical succession to the balances of the sanctuary. VVe have shown, first, that when thus tested, it is found to be contrary to the spirit and teaciiing of the scriptures — secondly, to that one ministerial commission upon vvliich the christian ministry rests its entire authority, and which recognizes only one order: — and thirdly, to the divine promises, as contained in scripture, and which cannot, without the greatest violence and arrogance, be exclusively appropriated by the clergy of any denomination, or by any particular or self-styled Catholic church.^ ]) As a further exhibition of the importance attaclied by its advocates to this doctrine, tniie tlie following : *' Such, therefore, as have laid aside ordination by the highest grade of the ministry, and substituted in its place ordination by the second grade, have lost tiie sacerdotal ofRce ; and this of- fice being essential to the very exist- ence of tTie church, they can no longer be regarded as in a church slate." Dr. How's Vind. of the Prot. Ep. Ch. p. 123. Haxter, in his True and Only Way of Concord, (bond. 1680, Pt. iii. p. 90, 91,) gives tiie following abstract of DodwelTs doctrine on this subject, whose book he professes to answer : " 1. That the ordinary means of sal- vation, are, in respect of every particu- lar person, confined to the episcopal communion to the place he lives in, as long as he believes in it. " 2. That we cannot be assured that God will do for us what is necessary for salvation on his part, otherwise than by his express promises that he will do it. " 3 Therefore we must have interest in his covenant. "4. Therefore we must have the sacrament, by which the covenant is transacted. " .5. These, as legally valid, are to be had only in the external communion of the visible church. " 6. This is only the episcopal com- munion of the place we live in. *• 7. The validity of the sacraments depends on the authority of the per- sons, by whom they are administered. "8. No ministers have autliority of administering sacraments, but only they that have their orders in the epis- copal communion. " 9. This cannot be from God, but 156 SCRIPTURE FACTS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VII. We will now endeavor lo show that this doctrine of prelati- cal succession (for we ourselves claim a ministerial, — ihoui^h not a lineal and personal, succession,) is equally as contrary to the facts of scripture, as it is to its spirit, its principles, its teachings, its promises, and its predictions. Ordination, we are told, hy the imposition of the hands of a prelate, is essential to the validity of the ministry,' to the efficacy of ordinances — and to the visibility and perpetuity of the churcii of Christ.'^ And this succession is mediately derived from the apostles, the first duly commissioned prelates of the church. Now, is it not a most wonderful thing, that ordination should make individuals now, what it did not make them in the days of the apostles?^ For the apostles were not made bishops by ordination ; neither were they ever ordained at all, as prelimi- nary to their ministry.* And when they, in joint conclave, filled up the vacant see, which had been voided by the death of the apostate metropolitan Judas ; it is further true, that even when thus left to themselves, our Lord having gone to heaven, "they did not ordain in the manner afterwards adopted, by the by a continued succession of persons orderly receiving authority Ironi those who had authority to give it them, (viz. bishops.) from those first times of the apostles, to ours at present. " 10. That the Holy Ghost is the instituter of this order, and to violate it, by administering without such or- dination, IS TO SIN AGAINST THE HoLY Ghost, the sin that hath no other baciufice and promise ok pardon. "II. Thai the ordained have no more or other power than the ordainers intend or profess to give them " 12. That it is certain, that the bishops of all former ages intended not to give presbyters power of oidaining or administering cut of their subjec- tion ; ergo, they have it not." 1) Mr. Keble laborsto prove, that it is the doctrine of the Church of England, that the Holy Ghost is re- i lly communicated by a supernatural f;ift, with the imposition of the |)re- ate's hands, and that thus" the episco- pal succession is a channel of special graces." He shows, that the words in the ordination service are to be taken literally, not as a prayer, but as ex- pressive of an actual bestowment ; for which, he says, '-the language of which the, (viz. Mr. Whitgilt,) was so un- rivalled a master, fails him, as it were, in his endeavor to find words to ex- press the greatness of the gill which lie there apprehended." According to Whilgifl, " the, Slime power isnoio airen, (Mr. Keble's italics.) as was originally given to the apostles. So that " he which receiveth the burden is thereby forever warranted to have the spirit with him and in him, for his assistance, countenance and support." " Wheth- er, theiefore, we preach or pray, l)ap- tize, &c., our words, judgments, acts, aid deeds, are not ours, l)nt the Holy Ghost's. ' " The power ()f the minis- try giveth daily the Holy Ghost." For all this, lie adduces also the au- thority of Hooker, (Priniit. Trad. p. 102-104,) as he might also that of Bishop Beveridge. See Wks. vol. ii. passim. 2) See Palmer, i p. 161, &c. and vol ii. p. 440, 443. 3) Baxter, in his True and Only Way of Concord, Lond. 1681, p. 212, largely proves, that in cases of neces- sity there maybe a true bishop or pres- byter, without any ordination. So als:> in Part iii. p. 79. 4) Bishop Beveridge aflirms, that Christ, during his personal ministry, did not ordain the apostles. Wks. vol. ii. p. liG. LECT. VII.] SCRIPTURE FACTS VERSUS PRELACY. 157 laying on of hands.'" Such, then, was the case as it regards Matlliias.'^ Ordination, therefore, can never continue in succes- sive iinpartations, what it never originated. JNor can it be either a necessary and inseparable sign or seal of that grace and au- thority, with which it never was connected by divine appoint- ment,— or under divine teaching and example ; — since without it, those very gifts were bestowed on the very persons, who are made the patterns of all their successors. So utterly unknown was this theory of sacramental ordina- tion, as the great means of all clerical grace, to the sacred writers, — that when Paul the apostle, who had already ap- proved his apostleship, by many a hard encounter, and by nu- merous seals of his ministry ; — when this same Paul was to be sent forth on a mission to the heathen — he was, by the express dictation of the Holy Spirit, ordained with the imposition of the hands of tliree brethren belonging to the church at Antiooh, called teachers and prophets, and of whom therefore it were an absurdity too gross for the most credulous to believe, that they were prelates and not rather simple presbyter-bishops.' Timothy, in like manner, was set apart by the laying on of the hands of a presbytery or company of presbyters. And who can imagine, that, at this period, there were prelates numerous enough to have canonically consecrated Timothy ? And who can believe these prelates would be denominated by the name of that very order which it is now " a fundamental article" "of the very substance of the faith," and "essential to salvation," — to believe to be excluded, by divine appointment, from such a blasphemous presumption as the attempt to ordain, and above all, to ordain a prelate ? But let us imagine Timothy to be, for a moment, duly consecrated a prelate. In the very fact, that the Holy Ghost, in recording his ordination, uses words which, by the universal suffrage of the Latin, and many of the Greek fathers,^ and by the interpretation of common sense, refers to presbyters,* — there is demonstrative evidence, that no such 1) So say the Oxford tractators, cienl Church, proposed in the year vol. i. p. 33. 1641," (London, printed IfioC), p. 3,) 2) See ibid. "Iirnat'us understood Uie community of 3) Acts xiii. 1-3. See this case the rest of tlie presl)yters or elders who more fully considered afterwards, when then h;id a hand, not only in the delive- it will be shown that the passage refers rv of the doctrine and sacrnnients.but to rirdinalion, and tliat this ordina- also in the administr.ition of the disci- lion was certainly presbyterian. See pline of Christ, for further proof of the forthcoininij volume. which we have that known testiniony 4) See Palmer, vol. ii. of TertuUian, in ills general apology 5) "By the presbytery," says for Clirislians. " The presidents who Archbishop Usher, in iiis " Reduction bear rule therein are certain approved of Episcopacy into the Form of Synod- elders, who have obtained this honor, leal GoveromRBt received Iq the An- not by reward, but by good report." 1S8 SCRIPTURE FACTS VERSUS PRELACY. [LECT. VIl. distinction, as is contended for, was, at that time, or by the in- spired penmen, ever dreamed of. A steady and exactly-defined constitution of oflicers, never fails to be quickly followed by a well-marked usage, assigning certain designations to certain functionaries ; to disturb which, becomes an affront to dignities, and is instantly resisted. " On this rule we conclude, with some degree of assurance, that, during the apostolic age, forms of government and the dis- tribution of public services were still open to many variations and anomalies. No writer of the age of Cyprian uses the words bishop, presbyter, and deacon, so indeterminately, or so abstractedly, as do the apostles.'" It is granted, however, that " the same appellations are in- discriminately given to ministers in the New Testament,"* so that from the use of the separate titles, it is impossible to argue to any separate order or function, as belonging to those upon whom these titles are conferred. Now, in our judgment, no other admission is necessary in order to establish the certain fact, that tliis doctrine, which lodges in prelates the sole origi- Apologet. cap. 39. " With the bishop, who WIS the chief president, (i. p. 4,) . . . the rest of the dispensers of the word and sacraments joined in the common government of the church." This he goes on to prove from antiqui- ty, and tlien adds, " True it is, tiiat in our church this kind of presbyterial government hath been long disused ; yet, seeing it still professeth that ev- ery pastor hath a right to rule the church, (from whence the name, rec- tor, also was at first given unto him,) and to administer the discipline of Christ, as well as to dispense the doc- trine and sacraments, and the restraint of the exercise of that right proceed- eth truly from the custom now received in this realm, "no man could doubt," &c. (p. ().) Again, in 1 Tim. iv. 14, and C Tim. i. 6, it is said : " St. Paul was the principal and the presbyters were }iis assistants, according to the consti- tution and custom of our church in ordination. The bishop is not to do it alone, but with the assistance of at least three or four of the ministers, which was alter the piittern of primi- tive times." (Certain Discourses by by the late Archbishop of Armairh, Lond. IG5f), p 1*3) Jeremy Taylor says, the presbytery that ordained Timothy was a company of bishops, and yet, that all antiquity declare it was a cotop.iny of presby* ters. See Episc. Asserted, p. 191, in Powell, p. 21. 1) Spiritual Despotism, p. IG6. See also 164, 105. 2) Boyd on Epis. 1839, p. 42. Bishop Seabury allows, that Paul, in Acts xxviii., calls " presbyters overseers, in Greek, bishops of the church of God, and says they were made so by the Holy Gliost." " They had, therefore, received some part, at least, of the apostolical commission; " by what process of division we are not well able to divine ! " But," he adds, " whatever share of apostolical authority these bishops lield, whether the ichole or only a fxirt ; or, however they came by it, ("strange doubts for a jure divi.no prelatist, the compunctious visitings, no doubt, of conscience and common sense.) they were manifestly subject to St. Paul's authority.' How this was, the doubting bishop seems to leave uncertain, since, as he further adds, (p. 183.) " it does not appear that St. Paul had any further personal in- tercourse with the church or clergy of Ephesus." He further allows, (p 8(i,) that " it is true, that in most of St. Paul's epistles, the apustles of the churches to whom he writes are not mentioned; and probably, at the time of writing those epistles, there were NONE APPOINTED." LECT. VII.] SCRIPTURE FACTS VERSUS PRELACY. 159 nal, and exclusive power of the sacred ministry, to be derived from tliem to presbyters and deacons, is unsupported by scrip- ture. Bishop Croft, in his "True State of the Primitive Church," has this language :' " And I desire you to observe, that of those two names, presbyter and bishop, if there be any dignity and eminency expressed in one more than the other, sure it is in the name of presbyter, not bishop ; because the apostles them- selves, and the chief of the apostles, (as some would have it who stand highest on their pantables,) are in scripture styled presbyters or elders, as the word in our English translation sig- nifies, but never bishops, as I remember. And, therefore, I can- not but w'onder why that haughty head of the papists should not assume to himself the title of his pretended predecessor, St. Peter, presbyter rather than bishop, unless it be by God's providential disposure, to show his blindness in this as well as in other things, and make him confute himself by this name of bishop, which was never given to St. Peter, no more than St. Peter gave unto him the headship of the church." " The word bishop, eTCKTKOTrog, indeed, is never used in the New Testament to signify the office of oversight over ministers, but only over the flock of Christ.'"* Not only does this conclusion follow, for the reasons already given ; it will also follow from another view of the matter : for, if prelatists " admit, and always have admitted,"^ that " the same appellations are indiscriminately given to ministers in the New Testament," then is it assuredly impossible to con- fine to any one order, what may be alleged as belonging to individuals whom prelatists w^ould rank in the order of prelates ; since, in every such case, the term employed has, as they say, no peculiar meaning, and may be as well applied to presbyters as to prelates. An order of prelates, as distinct from that of pres- byters, can never be proved from scripture, since, on these principles there are no terms by which any distinctive order may be pointed out, and all powers exercised by any function- aries, may, by the very admission of our opponents, be regard- ed as exercised by presbyters under the names of apostles, or evangelists, or prophets ; to whom were granted, by our Lord, to meet the exigencies of the church, in her incipient state, extraordinary powers. It will also appear, to every un- prejudiced mind, that there is, in this admitted fact, that " the same appellations are indiscriminately given to ministers in the 1) See Scott's Coll. vol. 7, p. 298. 3) Boyd on Episcopacy, p. 42. 2) Powell on Ap. Succ. p. 78. 160 BCBIPTCRE FACTS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VII. New Testament," a very strong presumption in favor of the presbyterian doctrine, that there is but one order of teachino;, or ministerial officers in the church, of equal official power and dignity. There are, however, various designations by which these officers are entitled ; while it is also true that they were originally distinguished by their spiritual gifts and powers, and are now made to differ, even as one star difFereth from another in glory, by iheir mental endowments, or their ministerial attain- ments. In perfect harmony with this conclusion, is the fact, that not one single exain[)le of prelatical ordination can be produced from the word of God. There is not a single instance in which any individual was set apart to the sacred ministry, by the instru- mentality of only one ordainer. In every case, in which we have any intelligible record of the fact of an ordination, we find that it was accomplished by a plurality of ordainers. So it was in the cases already mentioned, and so was it also in the ordinations spoken of in Acts xiv. 23, and which were solemnized by Paul and Barnabas, who, as we have just i>een, and shall see more fully afterwards, had received only presbyterian ordination. For this purpose do we find a plurality of presbyters in many or all of the churches planted by the apostles; as at Ephesus ; at Antioch ; and at Philippi ; and with whom doubtless both Timothy and Titus co-operated in carrying out the injunctions of the apostle ; Timothy and the apostles having been themselves thus set apart to the woik of the ministry, and the apostles having sanctioned it by their own practice. It is indeed said, that Paul instructed Timothy to "lay hands suddenly on no man." But surely this does not neces- sarily teach that he was to do so alone, when he did deliber- ately enter upon that important duty ; no more than the injunc- tion given to this same individual, by this same apostle, "give attendance to reading, to exhortation, to doctrine," implies, that no other minister at Ephesus was at liberty to attempt the same duties. And, besides, it was customary in the later church, in the imposition of hands, for each ordainer to place only his right hand upon the head of the consecrated person ; the very mention o{ hands in this direction may, therefore, impliedly refer to the co-operation of other presbyters in the act of ordination.^ But, however this may be, no record can be shown of any ordination, where there were not present at least a plurality of persons. Nor is the declaration of Paul to Timothy, to " stir up the gift of God which was in him, by the putting on of his hands," in any thing contrary to this conclusion. This passage 1) Se« Bjnii Concilia, vol. 2, p. 982, and Plea for PresbyUry^ p. 27. LECT. Vn.] THE DECISIONS OF SCRIPTURE VERSUS PRELACY. 161 cannot, to say the least, be ever shown to refer to ordination at all. On the contrary, there are, we think, good reasons for in- terpreting it as having reference to the communication of some spiritual gift.' Such gifts, we know, were very commonly im- parted by individuals singly ; and since they were extraordi- nary, and temporary, there was no necessity for that security which is required in the consecration of ministers. Ordination, too, as has been shown, was never, so far as is recorded, per- formed by one individual alone. This view is, we think, forced upon us by the language. For if the word " gift " is made to refer to the office of the ministry, it were nothing short of ab- surdity to ask any minister to "stir up the sacred office of God, which sacred office is in him, by the putting on of hands;" whereas it would be perfectly correct to exhort such an one, to whom had been imparted some spiritual and internal gift, to "stir up this gift of God that was thus in him." And when we look to the whole passage, we find that the apostle speaks to Timothy of the " unfeigned failh that was in him," and " where- fore,'^ adds the apostle, "stir up the gift of God which is in thee ;" " for God hath not given us the spirit of fear," " be not thou, therefore, ashamed of the testimony of the Lord," Sic. We are, therefore, led to conclude that the allusion of the apos- tle here, was to tiie bestowmentof an abundant measure of faith, in the way of supernatural gift, by his hands to his son Timo- thy, and not to ordination at all." But to proceed, we further remark, that the opposition of this doctrine of apostolical succession — by the personal and hereditary transmission of heavenly gifts — to many of the de- cisions of scripture, is not less palpable. The truth — the whole truth, and nothing but the truth of God, as it is cemented together in the writings of the apostles and prophets, — this is the foundation, and the only sure foundation, on which the church can rest. That is the church, which has this truth for its ground, and which, as a pillar of testimony, publishes it to the world. That is not the church of God, which is not found holding forth the truth ; for it is against this truth, as a rock immovable as the everlasting hills, that the gates of hell shall never prevail. '^ Such is the judgment of God's word. And we are here required to keep aloof from all 1) Bishop Hoadly says, as in- Works on Episcopacy, vol. i. p. 146.) deed any one would judge, " that this 2) See this meaning developed in word rather imports the extranr dinar xj Plea for Presbytery, p. 26, 23. qualijicaliovs given to Timothy from 3) See this fully shown when we above, for the better execution of his come to discuss what is the true apos- ofEce, than the office itself." (See in tolical succession. 21 162 THE DECISIONS OF SCRIPTURE VERSUS PRELACY. [LECT. VII. pretended ministers who are not men of God, and who do not preach the glorious gospel of the blessed God.' They who " handle the word of God deceitfully," (2 Cor. iv. 2 ;) who "have corrupted the word of God," (2 Cor. ii. 17;) "de- nied the resurrection," (Cor. xv ;) — such teachers " are to be held accursed by us," (Gal. v. 12, and 1 Tim. vi. 3 — 5 ; 2 Thess. V. 15; Rom. xvi. 17, 18; 1 John iv. 1 j Acts xx. 29, 30 ; Rev. ii. 16 ; Rev. xviii. 1 — 4.) Of all the qualifications laid down any where in scripture for the office of a christian bishop, never is it prescribed as neces- sary, that he should be able to authenticate his lineal descent, through a personal succession, from the apostles. And yet, by the theory in question, this is made to be the first and most ne- cessary mark of a true christian bishop.** How are christians directed in scripture to try the character of their teachers ?^ " Beware of false prophets," said our Lord, " who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." But how shall we beware of them, or by what criterion shall we distinguish the false from the true ? Shall we critically examine their spiritual pedigree, and see whether, by an uninterrupted succession of regular baptisms and ordina- tions, they be regularly descended from the apostles ? Impossi- ble. A method, this, which would involve every thing in impene- trable darkness, and plunge all the hopes and prospects of the christian into a scepticism, from which there could be no re- covery. On the contrary, the test he gives is plain and famil- iar. Mark his words : "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire. Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them." And the apostle John says, "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God." And how are we to try them ? The sequel plainly shows, that it is by the coincidence of their doctrine with that of the gospel. The like was also the method prescribed, under the former dispensation, by the prophet. " To the law and to the testimony," says he, " if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them." A very different mode of trial would now be 1) Matli. vii. 15-20, and xv. 14. Lect. on Popery, Puseyism and Prot- John, X. 5. 2nd Cor. ii. 13, with estantism. Lect. v. § 2. 23. 3) Campbell's Lect. on Eccl. His. 2) See Rev. T. Archer's sixth Lect. iv. p. 60, ed. third. LECT. VII. J DECISIONS OF SCRIPTURE VERSUS PRELACY. 163 assigned by a zealous patronizer of the hierarchy, popish or protestant. " Who are false prophets?" asks Tertullian, ''but false teach- ers— who are false apostles? but they who preach an adulterated gospel.'" " The church is not bound, therefore, to an ordina- nary succession, as they call it, of bishops ; but to the gospel. When bishops do not teach the truth, an ordinary succession avails nothing to the church : they ought, of necessity, to be forsaken." So speaks Melancthon.* Now, by this decision, the fair fabric of apostolical succes- sion is scattered to the four winds, and blasted for ever. In Jackson's Works, there is a chapter in which he professes to show that " the Romish church hath defiled the catholic faith, and by defiling it, hath lost true union with the primitive and apostolic church."^ Hear also the great and good Bishop Jewell : " The grace of God is promised to pious souls, and to those who fear God, and is not affixed to bishop^s chairs, and personal succession. For that ye tell so many fair tales about Peter's succession, we demand of you wherein the pope suc- ceedeth Peter ? You answer, he succeeded him in his chair ; as if Peter had been some time installed in Rome, and had sol- emnly sat all day v\ith his triple crown, in his poniificalibus , and in a chair of gold. And thus, having lost both religion and doctrine, ye think it sufficient, at last, to hold by the chair, as if a soldier that had lost his sword would play the man with his scabbard. But so Caiaphas succeeded Aaron ; so wicked Manassas succeeded David ; so tnay antichrist easily sit in Peter^s chair.^'* But, as the present succession of the Anglican church must stand or fall with this corrupt and faulty source, therefore is it associated with it in its merited condemnation. It has been already shown, on the testimony of a learned epis- copal writer, who has lately investigated the sul)ject, that this system stands inseparably connected with that apostacy predict- ed by the apostles ; (see 2 Thess. cb. ii., 2 Pet. ch. ii., iTim. ch. iv., &ic.) and is, therefore, involved in the condemnatory sentence passed upon it.* And we are afraid we shall make it 1) De Prescript, c. 4. 5) That the mystery of iniquity, 2) In Powell on A p. Sue. p. 151, spoken of by the apostles, refers, in its where are similar statements from consummation, to the papal primacy, Ambrose, Peter Martyr, Bishop Jew- and in its progress to that prelacy on ell, &c. which it was based, has been shown 3) See vol. iii. p. 870. by presbyterian writers in former 4) Def. of Apology, p. 634, Edin. times as it has recently by Mr. Tay- 1^9- lor. Thus it is largely handled by the 164 SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VII. too plainly evident, when we come to investigate the decisions of scripture respecting schism, that it must be also reprobated as schismatical by the just judgment of Heaven. We allow these arguments at present to pass with this mere allusion to them, and would bring this question finally, as it re- gards the tests of scripture, to what we would term scripture MANIFESTATIONS, or the testimony of God's word, as it is inter- preted by the workings of God's grace, in the dispensations of bis mercy.' Do other denominations, beside those which are prelatical, claim to be, in truth, churches of Christ? Then, what is easier than to bring them to the test of experiment, and prove them in this same confident boasting? If churches of Christ, then it is but fair that they should be required to show the signs of a church. If good and not wild olive trees, then should they be found, not merely garnished with leaves, or even fair seeming blossoms, but laden also with fruit, fit for the master's use, and worthy of the care bestowed upon them by the husbandman. " By their fruits ye shall know them." This is a rule given to us by the Lord himself; and in no case could it be applied more safely than in the present. For, assuredly, if we are not churches of Christ, but mere human conventicles, and volun- tary societies; — if we are not true worshippers of God, but mere " meetingers," who rather offend and provoke him by our unauthorized forms; — if the promises of grace apply not to us, and are, therefore, unfulfilled in us — if our ministry and our sacraments are no better than mere mockeries — then it is most truly an easy thing to make evident the fact, that, like the fleece of Gideon, we remain dry, while they enjoy the refresh- ing dews of divine grace. God is not a man, that be should lie ; neither hath he said what he will not accomplish, whether it be in giving or in withholding. For he is faithful who hath pro- mised, and he cannot deny himself; and surely no second Pro- metheus can steal down grace from heaven, and thus vivify, w'ith divine energy, the lifeless carcass of a mere self-willed cer- emonial. author of Causa Episcopatus Hierar- ages," says Dr. Owen. (Works, vol. 19, hici Lucifuga, Edinburg, 1706, ch. iv. p. 132,) "was moulded and framed lect. 2. p. r!!i3-162, and 410. after the pattern of the civil govern- It is tliere shown that this was the mentofthe Roman empire, is grant- opinion of Beza, (p. 126,) and other ed ; and that conformity (without of- protestant divines. fence to any be it spoken) we take to The powers assumed by the prelacy be a fruit of the working of the mys- are also particularly shown to be con- tery of iniquity." demned in such passages, and to be 1) See some remarks on this point in principle identical with the papacy, in Dr. Mitchell a Letters to Bishop " That the state of churches in after Skinner, p. 45. LECT. VII.] SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. 165 As a criterion of the true church, nothing can be fairer than to take the evidence of facts, in proof of the withholdment, or bestowment of the promised blessings of Heaven ; seeing that to the true church it is secured as a divine gift, that whatsoever she binds on earth shall be bound in Heaven. This canon of judgment is allowed even by Dr. Wiseman, the learned advo- cate of Romanism, and by Dr. Hough, the able episcopal re- viewer of his disingenuous and Jesuitical work against protest- ant missions. " It must be," says Dr. Wiseman, " an impor- tant criterion of the true rule of faith, delivered by our blessed Redeemer to his church, whether the preaching according to any given rule has received the success promised in this engage- ment on his part ; or whether its total failure proves it not to have satisfied the conditions which he required.'" Consonant to these views, are those of Mr. Bristed, himself an episcopalian, as contained in his thoughts on the American- Anglo churches. " However this may be, one thing is certain, that there is no exclusive church, to the professing members of which eternal salvation is exclusively confined. For it is man- ifest, that divine Providence blesses every sect and denomina- tion of christians among whom the doctrines of the cross are faithfully preached ; whether they be episcopalian, or presbyte- rian, or congregational. All these religious bodies have been blessed, as instruments in the hand of God, and under the quick- ening, sanctifying influences of the Spirit, to the conversion of sinners, the purifying of the life and conduct, and the salvation of souls ; as is evident, by a cloud of witnesses, in different ages, and in every clime. '"* " Now, if any one church, whether Greek, or Latin, or prot- estant ; either as a whole, or in any of its various parts, sub- divisions, or sects, were an exclusive church: the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church, would not bless the min- isters of any other denomination with his presence, nor aid them with the illuminations of his spirit. It behooves us, therefore, to extend a catholic spirit of love, esteem, and reverence, 1) Lectures on the Romish church quos homines cliristo uniri, in chris- during the Lent of 1836, p. 109, 110, to manere et per christum ad vitam and p. 27, lect. 7, and Hough's Vindic. eternam perdue! possunt, eos ab hoc of Prot. Missions, p. 104, so also by viniulo salutis humanae, fundamento Bishop Davenant. " At quot spectat alienatos et divulsos nemo afRrmare ecclesias integras utrum fundamento aut cogitare potest." Bishop Dave- suo salutariter maneant conjunctae nant ad Pacem Eccl. Adhortatio Cant, necne, ex operationibus quae ab eisdem 1640, p 59, and p. 101, chap. 8. exerceri indies possunt et Bolent est 2) The same rule is adopted by Btatuendum. In quibus enim eccle- Mr. Newman (on Romanism, p. 53,) siis illi actus omnes exercentur per in reference to the Romish church. J66 SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VJl. towards all, of whatsoever denomination or persuasion, who preach Jesu? Christ, and him crucified, in purity of doctrine, in singleness of heart, in simplicity and in trutli." *' A good old divine says : ' I have seen a field here, and another there, stand thick with corn. An hedge or two has parted them. At the proper season, the reapers entered. Soon the earth was disburdened, and the grain was conveyed to its destined place ; where, blended together in the barn, or in the stack, it could not be known that a hedge once separated this corn from that. Thus it is with the church. Here it grows, as it were, in differ- ent fields, severed, it may be, by various hedges. By and by, when the harvest is come, all God's wheat shall be gathered into the garner, without one single mark to distinguish that once they differed in the outward circumstantials of modes and forms.' " If there were an exclusive church, membership in which is essential to salvation, and all out of its pale were consigned to perdition, or left to an uncovenanted contingency, it is fair to infer, that the Holy Spirit would have revealed it in the word of God, as plainly as he has revealed any other truth, belief in which is necessary to salvation ; as for example : ' Thou shall love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy strength :' or, 'He that believeth (in Christ Jesus) shall be saved ; he that believeth not, shall be damned.' But, as this is not done, does it become christians, who profess to serve one and the same Master, to love one common Lord to condemn those who differ from them in opinion about church order, and church government, about external ceremonies, rites, and discipline ? " The Rev. Charles Leslie, who in his reasoning with non- episcopalians, is most unsparing and relentless, yet, in arguing with the Romanists, urges this very point with great force. " For what," says he,' " have we to do to judge them that are without? — Them that are without, God judgeth,'"' And God did judge one who was without, that is, out of the pale of the church, to be the most beloved of God, and that ' there was none like him in the earth.'' And he is put upon the level with the greatest in the church, * though Noah, Daniel and Job, were in it,' he* And as God chose a Gentile to be the great example of patience to all ages;^ and of another Gentile it was said by Christ, '1 have not found so great faith, no, not in Israel. 'e And He who said often to his disciples, ' O ye of little 1) Short Method with the Ro- 4) Ezek. xiv. 14. manists, Edinb. 1835, p. 40-48. 5) James v. ]1. 2) 1 Cor. V. 12. 6) Lukevii.9. 3) Job i. 8. LECT. VII.] SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. 167 faith ! ' and upbraided his apostles with their unbelief;' yet said to a woman of Canaan, (who would not be discouraged for the objection he put against her, of her not being within the pale of the church, but without, among the dogs,) 'O woman, great is thy faith ! '* And of the ten healed, there was but one thankful, ' and he was a Samaritan,'^ that is, a schismatic, a stranger, as Christ here calls him, and said to him, ' thy faith hath made thee whole.'* And the pattern of charity is placed in the person of a Samaritan, in opposition to both a priest and a Levite :* which makes good what St. Peter said of Cornelius a Gentile,* * Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons ; but in every nation, he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.' This is the doctrine which Christ taught,® when he reminded the Jews that a widow of Sarepta, a city of Sidon, and Naaman the Syrian, were pre- ferred to all the widows and lepers in Israel ; which so enraged the Jews, tenacious of the privilege of the church, that they 'thrust him out of the city, and led him unto the brow of the hill, (whereon their city was built,) that they might cast him down headlong.' And it is said, that they were ' filled with wrath.' The like fury they showed when St. Paul told them that the gospel was to be extended beyond the pale of their church, and that God had sent him to the Gentiles : ' And they gave him audience unto that word, and then lift up their voices, and said. Away with such a fellow from the earth ; for it is not fit that he should live. And they cried out, and cast off their clothes, and threw dust into the air.'^ And the like rage is seen among the zealots of your church, when they hear of the gospel being extended out of the pale of their communion ; though to christians, who hold the three ancient creeds, and have every thing essential to a church, except what Rome has made so, viz. the universal and unlimited sovereignty of her bishop : which is the great bone of contention, wherein Rome stands single by herself, thrusting all other christian churches from her ; like a man in a boat who thinks he thrusts the shore from him, whereas he only thrusts himself from the shore ; as Firmilian said to Stephen, bishop of Rome — 'Do not de- ceive yourself — you have cut yourself off from the church ; for he is truly a schismatic who has made himself an apostate from the communion of ecclesiastical unity ; for, while you think 1) Mark xvi. 14. 5) Luke x. 30, i&c. 2) Matt. XV. 26, 28. 6) Acts x. 34. 3) Luke xvii. 16. 7) Luke iv. 25, «&c. 4) Luke xvii. 18. 8) Acts xxii. 22 168 SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VII. you can excommunicate all other churches from you, you have only excommunicated yourself from them.' "> Now, on this ground, we challenge inquiry, and are willing to abide the issue. What, then, is the conclusion, as to the divine purpose towards the presbyterian denominations gener- ally, and our own specially ? The fact must be, either that there is, or that there is not, among them any real christians and heirs of heaven, or if any, so few as to come under the denomination, if we may so speak, of sporadic or miraculous cases, and which do not, therefore, conflict with the general rule, that upon us and upon our chil- dren, no dew from heaven, nor any spiritual gift, grace, or bless- ing, ever descends. Now, although it is unquestionably true, that the prelatic theory does necessarily exclude from all the means of salvation, and therefore, from their result — that is, salvation ; — all who are out of the pale of the church ; although many of its advo- cates insist on this conclusion, and boldly avow it — yet as men's hearts are not, after all, so callous as are ofttimes their abstract conclusions, we do find some relentings in the bosoms of even hio-h-churchmen. Many, therefore, are found willing to admit the claims, personally considered, to a high order of christian char- acter and piety, of numbers " among presbyterians at least, (I use the language of the Oxford tractators,) whose piety, resigna- tion, cheerfulness and affection, have been such, under trying cir- cumstances, as to make them say to themselves, on the thoughts of their own higher privileges, ' Woe unto thee, Chorazin, woe unto thee, Bethsaida.'"^ Their sympathies thus rise, "against their abstract positions," and forbid that they " should be so hard-hearted, as to condemn, by wholesale, the multitudes in various sects and parties whom they never saw."^ This con- clusion is most cordially adopted in reference to multitudes among us, and on principle and conviction too, by all that por- tion of the episcopal denomination who are usually termed evano-elical or low-churchmen, and with whom we can most cor- dially fraternize. Such episcopalians feel called upon to in- dulge these views, because, as they themselves say, to use the words of one of the most gifted and eloquent of their divines, " the gospel teaches us to regard all who give proof of having received favor of the Lord, as his true followers — as children of the same father — memJDers of the same family — clinging to 1) Cyprian, Ep. 75, p. 228. Edit. Government, p. 12, 13, 28, 29, where Oxon. i^ '3 distinctly shown that persons may 2) Oxf. Tr. vol. 1, p. 334. be true christians, and yet out of the 3) Ibid, and also Potter on Church church. LECT. Vll.] SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. 169 one cross — actuated by one aim — animated by one hope — and travelling to the one home.'" What we therefore demand is, that the piety of those who really act up to their profession in the judgment of even their fellow- members, in the presbyterian church, should be brought to all the tests of true and unfeigned religion, before God and our Father; and that like the gold of the furnace, it should be therein tried so as by fire. We challenge the proof of our christian char- acter as a whole — for we claim no perfection, but eschew all such claims, as coming from a deceived heart — whether that char- acter be according to godliness, and whether we be in the faith. We are willing to give a reason of the hope that is in us, to any man who will ask us ; and to square our experience of the inward power and working of Christianity, with that of any to whom God has made known the communication of his grace. To God's word we implicitly and reverently bow. To God's will we would in all patience, and resigned humility, constantly submit. To God's sovereign mercy in Christ Jesus, who is the Lord our righteousness, we would refer all our hopes and all our desires of salvation. And, by the grace of God, anfl not by any thing in us, or done by us, would we most thankfully confess we have attained, to whatever measure of the stature of Christ, we have attained. We thus offer to their examination, the criteria of our individual membership in the kingdom of grace, whatever may be the criteria of the true visible church. This latter point we know, involves many intricate questions of dark and ambig- uous meaning — involved in labyrinthine and misty speculations, which have been spun out into webs lighter than the gossamer's, and almost invisible to the most microscopic examiner. We, therefore, come boldly forward into open daylight, unfold our credentials and our experience — and call upon them to decide, not whether we are true, visible churches, but whether we are, in fact, true christians. Now we rejoice, that charity has here triumphed over bigotry and intolerance, and that our mani- festation of the truth is allowed by many to give " such proofs of personal discipleship, as are not to be questioned without impiety as well as uncharitableness.'"^ This, then, being the unvarying rule of practical judgment laid down in scripture, by which all men shall know the disciples of Christ; let us inquire, is the presbyterian church — our enemies themselves being judges — a safe church in which, as a ves- sel destined to the port of heaven, men may adventure the salvation of their immortal souls ? Now, a whole cannot be 1) Sermons of the Rev. Hucrh also Heber's Sermons in England, p. White, of Dublin, vol. i, p. 243. See 217, 223, et passim. 2) Anc't. Christ, vol. i. p. 489. 22 170 SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. [lECT. VII. different from its parts ; so that, what certainly belongs to each of its parts, and is inseparable from them, does not belong to the whole which is made up of those parts, and constituted by their union. This being granted, as a plain axiomatic proposition, we then proceed to its application, which is this. The individual members of this church, as far as they act out their profession, and thus give evidence of " Their heaven-wrought birth, Meekness, love, patience, faith's serene repose,"' — these all, either are, or at least may be, true christians, and in the way of salvation, and destined to " fill the thrones of heaven." For if, as is allowed — fully allowed — many are thus found, giving incontestable proofs, that " They are of the chosen few, The remnant fruit of largely-scattered grace, God sows in waste, to reap whom he foreknew Of man's old race ;"* then, as far as salvation is dependent on human instrumentality, or divine sovereignty — such might, in possibility, be the happy experience of all. It follows, as a necessary consequence, that the church, which these individuals compose, and of which they are the members, cannot be out of the way of salvation, or situated beyond the limits of divine grace and heavenly promise. It may not be, THE CHURCH — or the only church — or the exclu- sively true church of Jesus Christ — and such we never wish, nor desire that it should be ; but blessed be God, it may be, a CHURCH OF Christ, a true, and pure, and faithful branch of ihat one, universal, holy, and apostolic church, of which Christ is head, and all we are members. To deny this conclusion, from such premises, is not any better than to argue that a province or state is in rebellion, and its inhabitants, as a body, justly and deservedly held and treated as traitors; while at the same time, each single inhabitant is, in his own person, a faithful and loyal subject, although indeed, some may decline wearing a particular badge which some dominant party would enforce as a necessary sign of loyalty.^ To claim such universal, and exclusive dominion, in such a spirit of dicta- tion, is to impress schism upon the forefront of the claimant body. It is spiritual despotism, founded on a baseless assump- tion of authority never given, and rights never vested.* "Out of 1) Lyra Apostolica, p. 67, by the who resembles it to "the fashion of Oxford divines, or their coadjutors. their arms." 2) Ibid, p. 6b. 4) See it denounced as antichris- 3) That in this figure I do not tian, and antisocial, by a Romanist lower our denominational distinctions, quoted in Hough's Reply as above, p. Bee Ueber's Sermons on Eng., p. 223, 111. LECT. VII. i SORIPTDKE MANll'KSTATlONS VERSUS PRELACY. 171 the church, there is no ordinary salvation" — grant it. But who — ^vhat — where is the church ? and who is entitled to set up the boundary lines, and to say to the insulted Spirit of God — thus far mayest thou go but no further ? " Out of the church" — and who are thus out? "Is it," it has been asked, "those whom Hildebrand may have excommunicated, or whom Gregory the Great may have cursed, or whom Syricus may have condemned, or whom Liricus, or Stephen, or Sextus may have denounced as heretics and schismatics ?" — or is it those, whom Romanists and Anglicans consign to the hopelessness of that forged figment of the schools, God's uncovenanted mercies? Nay, we are taught, even by Archbishop Potter^ that we may be unjustly excommu- nicated, and still be in communion with Christ the head, and of course, with all his living members. And it is by claiming the benefit of this very principle — just, and merciful, and true — that the Church of England herself confidently hopes to bear unscathed the anathemas of " her dear sister Rome."* These prelatic, and exclusive, claims to the possession of the plenitude of grace ; and of sacraments exclusively effica- cious; are shivered and broken, by the admission, that without and beyond the church, and within the pale of other commu- nions, the gifts and calling of God are freely and fully bestowed. Grant but this, — as reason, charity, and the most plain, pal- pable, and undeniable facts require, — and such views are self-contradictory, and in plain opposition to the evident mani- festations of the divine presence. They are sheer absurdities, as well as gross impieties. It is as if a company of men, for the purpose of building up some village or town in an opposite lo- cation, should asseverate of an existing town, that its situation was essentially and necessarily fatal, and must prove destructive to the lives of all who venture to reside within its limits ; while, at the same time, the most general health prevails through the community, and every inhabitant speaks in praise of the salu- brity of the atmosphere, and the delightfulness of the climate. There is, then, no alternative. Consistency demands the sac- rifice, and it must be made. The church — the church is to be preserved, and for her a stern denial must be given to all love, charity, sympathy, and kindness. There is no way left, therefore, but to stand firm and im- movable in the assumption — the temple of the Lord — the temple of the Lord, are we, — to deny the operations of the Holy Spirit, wherever else they may be witnessed ; — to reject as spurious, fanatical, and unsound, all extraneous evidences of 1) On Ch. Gov. p. 38, 29 2) Seee. g. Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p 136. 172 SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. [LECT. VII. piety and grace ; — and to consign to deserved perdition, the millions of schismatic and rebellious outcasts, who will not go to heaven under prelatic orders. " Oh fools, to dream of showing mercy, — Arm earth, hell, heaven, 'gainst their ungodly cause, And sweep them to the appointed pit of hell."' But in either case — take which alternative they may — the advocates of this doctrine of prelatic apostolical succession, as the conveyancer of heavenly grace — are involved in inextrica- ble perplexity and absurdity. Do they admit, as many do, and as Archbishop Potter teaches, that it is not easy to give a distinct and certain account what were the particular offices of these persons, (the orders of the church;) and which of them were extraordinary and temporary, and which designed for the constant and lasting use of the church ; since the scriptures do not speak clearly, and learned men have differed in their judgments about them ;"' — then is it assuredly certain, that scripture does not authenticate the pre- latic claims to a transcendency of power and privilege. Do they, on the other hand, admit that the fact of our personal Christianity, as exhibited in the lives and character of multitudes among us, is manifest, with a clearness not to be gainsayed ; and stands, therefore, upon evidence incomparably stronger than can be given for their exclusive pretensions to be the only true church? — then do they, equally, overthrow their own position, since it is by the combination of such christians, our churches are made up ; and since there is in their Christianity a demon- stration of the presence and power of Christ within them, to save, to sanctify, and bless. Or will our opponents break away from every restraint of charity, and sear, as with a hot iron, the bowels of compassion, that stir and agitate their hearts with compunctious visitings of kindness ; and will they boldly pronounce the doom of the vast and growing majority of protestant Christendom ? — then must we leave them, like Acetius, " to climb alone into heaven by their own ladder," to sit down upon its thrones, and wield its scep- tres.— We may, however, still be permitted, and thanks be to God, by whose gracious providence we are — to throw ourselves into his hands, and, as we desire to know and to do only his will, so to hope that every door is not shut against us, and that 1) Milman's Anne Boleyn, vol. 2) Potter on Ch. Gov. p. 93, iii. p. 28. See also pp. 97, 91, 92, also, pp. 85, 86, That this consequence is inevitable, 88. ■ee urged in Anc't.Christ'y.Tol.i.p.490. LECT. Vll.] SCRIPTURE MANIFESTATIONS VERSUS PRELACY. 173 this merciful and holy God hath not so stated our case, as to reduce us to the necessity of sinning against conscience, en- lightened by his word, in order to escape from a state of dam- nation ; or that our crime, if it is a crime, is so inexpiable, that nothing less than our eternal ruin can satisfy for it.' Truly we may say, with St. Augustine, although he himself assisted pow- erfully in forging fetters for the future officers of the Inquisition — " Misericordia Dei liberam esse voluit, servilibus oneribus pre- munt, ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum, qui etiamsi tem- pus libertatis non agnoverint, legalibus tamen sarcinis, non humanis presumptionibus subjiciuntur."* " For one institu- tion of God's," says he, " there are ten of men's ; and their presumptuous devices are more vigorously pressed than the divine prescripts — whereby the state of christians was rendered far more intolerable than theirs under the law ; their impositions being from the pleasure of God, but these from the will of pre- sumptuous men, enthralling that religion which God, in mercy, would have had free." After all, then, supposing this whole doctrine to be true in theory, of what value is it ? — since it is not found true in actu- ality. God is not more their God than our God — nor Christ their Saviour more than ours — nor the Spirit more their sancti- fier than our sanctifier — nor the promises more richly fulfilled in their experience than in ours — nor does salvation come of their church more than it cometh of our own^ — and it is, says WicklifFe, " a thousandfold more grace to be a minister as Christ has ordained, and by grace that God himself giveth, than to be a pope or other prelate."'' But little as the doctrine may be worth, even for the purpose of aggrandizing one denomination, and of humbling others ; the guilt which is involved in this appropriation to one particular and visible church, of those privileges and rights, which are the patrimony of the church universal — this guilt is not light, nor will its authors be held excusable by Him, who is the common Father of us all. " I know not," says Bishop Heber, " any su- periority, except that of truth, which one religious sect has a right, as such, to demand over another, and I am confident that truth, wherever that is found, cannot be more effectually for- warded, than by the friendly intercourse, in good works, of those who conscientiously differ."^ 1) See Howe's Reply to Stilling- 3) See Anc't. Christianity, vol. i. fleet's Sermon on the Mischief of Sep- p. 4SG, 492. aration, in Wks. vol. iv. pp. 422, 440. 4) See in Brit. Ref. vol. i. p. 221. 2) See the whole passage in 5) Sermons in England, p. 217 and Epist. 119, Januario, cap. 19. p. 223. " Who," asks Dr. Rice, in his 174 WHAT WE MUST DEMAND, [LECT. VII. To substantiate any other claims than these, whose validity depends on the manifestation of an unbroken line of personal successors from the apostles, we require to have exhibited to us, not the last footsteps in this march of onward progression — but their continuance through the recesses of that unfathomed darkness which lies in the remote ages of the past ; and their sure termination in the person of the Son of God, The rigid uni- formity of every movement must be ascertained and made clear by observation. It must be demonstrated that no break, or in- formality, nor the absence of any necessary element, in the working out of the countless experiments, by which this myste- rious agency has been elicited and transmitted ; has ever oc- curred, to mar its progress, in any portion of its traceable course. And when this has been made apparent, of every step in the ascending or descending series ; we then demand, that the establishment of this divine right, by the appointment of the only King in Zion, shall be made equally sure. Nothing short of this will satisfy us. For, it is not a question of mere ancestral pedigree, whereby the pride and vanity of some anti- quated family are to be gratified ; and when we are fully satis- fied to look upon their genealogical tree, with all its well-mark- ed limbs and branches. But that, surely, must be a chain of adamant, and safe anchored within the vail, — on which is to be made dependent the destinies of millions. And that pedigree Review of Bishop Ravenscroft, (Evan. and Lit. Mag., vol. ix. p. 547,) " can perceive any difference in the minis- trations of religious teachers, arising from a difference in their ordination ? What visible difference in the effect of their labors .'' A pious, zoalous episcopalian preaches the gospel ; sin- ners are converted; the faithful are edified ; the afflicted are comforted. A presbyterian preaches the same truths, and the same effects follow. No man in the world can point out the smallest difference between the penitence, the faith, the love, the hope, the comfort, produced by the instrumentality of these different preachers. The character of holiness formed by the truth in each case is, as far as it goes, precisely the same character. Yet Bishop R. and his brethren of the high-church, would wish us to believe that there is a most material difference in these two cases, arising solely from this fact, that one preacher was ordained by a diocesan bishop, and the other by a presbytery. The converts made by the instru- mentality of the presbyterian, believe the doctrine, because it is Christ's doctrine ; rely on the promises, be- cause they were made by Christ; re- ceive the sacraments, because they were instituted by Christ; cherish the hope of salvation, because it is war- ranted by the truth which Christ has revealed, and the work which Christ has wrought by his spirit ; yet this hope is unscriptural, because, forsooth, his religious teacher has not received a character of authority transmitted through bishops and popes for l&iOO years. Whereas the episcopalian, who exercises the same repentance, the same faith, the same love, and no more; who receives the sacraments as signs and seals of the same cove- nant of grace, and cherishes precisely the same hope of salvation, has the warrant of heaven for all, because his religious instructer has the character of authority ! Pretensions like these stumble belief — create offence — and awaken suspicion." LECT. VII.] AN APPEAL TO PRELATISTS. 175 must surely be legally attested, which is to wrest, from its present claimants, a long-possessed, and dearly-bought inheritance, se- cured to them by blood. You, (we address this prelatic church,) you arrest the angel having the everlasting gospel to preach unto all nations, and charge him to proclaim it to those only, who will receive it, as interpreted by your decisions. You hush the sounds wliich warble from the angelic choir, who announce, in rapturous exul- tation, a Saviour who is a propitiation for the sins of the whole world ; and you require that they shall celebrate a Saviour whose blood is efficacious only for all prelalists. You imprison that light of heaven which was designed, in the overflowing munificence of its bounty, to enlighten all men ; and would thicken into deeper gloom that darkness, which already en- shrouds man's rugged and hopeless path. Now, surely, in so doing, you can direct us to that voice from heaven, by which such supernatural authority has been committed into your irre- sponsible hands? Why, then, is it, that, as we urge on our way through the pages of the New Testament, we find, as we close book after book, that, whatever else it may contain, and whatever other information it may convey, it contains not, and conveys not, this grant, so unspeakably important, desirable, and necessary, your doctrine being true ? And why is it, that, in support of these claims, as we have already seen by the testi- mony, even of their defenders, there is not a word of clear and distinct revelation, so that they are inferrible at all, only by them, in whose favor they are boldly set forth ? " Whether these episcopoiy" says the author of what has been termed, by the Edinburgh Review, "the most original, compre- hensive, and profound contribution, which any living writer, in our own country, has made to the science of ecclesiastical poli- ty"— after going through an analysis of the New Testament^ — " whether they all ruled with equal power, or submitted to the guidance of a senior, or president ; we are not told." '•' The present constitution of the church, although it emanated from the apostles, is," says Mr. Dodwell, one of the most renowned champions of prelacy, "more recent than all the writings of the New Testament, and is not to be expected to be found there. "2 This writer also denies that any of the apostles had a successor but Judas the traitor.^ Bishop Davenant, also, and multitudes more in the Church of England, deny that the 1) Isaac Taylor on Spiritual Des- Ch. Gov. p. 98. See also Mr. Rhind, potism, p. 444. on ihid. 2) Paroenes, Lecture xiii. p. 54 3) Paroenes, Lee. vi. p. 2. Lee. See in Anderson's Defence of Pres. xv. p. 62. See xvi. p. 68. 176 PRELACY CLEARLY OVERTHROWN. [lECT. VII. apostles, as such, had any successors.' The Romish church, also, expressly contradicts this theory, and affirms, as a doctrine fundamental to the salvation even of Anglican prelates, and of the substance of the faith, that of all the apostles, not one had a lineal successor, save and except only Peter, and that in the pa- pal chair. " The apostles " says Mr. Dodwell " ordained no bishops but presbyters only." Nay, says Dr. Hammond, an au- thority equally strong, " the apostles at first ordained no mere presbyters, but bishops only."^ Thus is it certain, as Arch- bishop Potter declares, that " the scriptures do not speak clearly, and learned men have differed in their judgments about" the whole matter.^ But how is this, when the principles of church government came directly within the sphere of the apostolic writers, and when, if there is any thing, (prelacy being true,) on which we should have expected full and accurate and indubious legis- lation, this is that very subject ? For the apostles being in- spired by Christ, to write what would be necessary, not only for the churches as then existing, but as they were designed ever to remain ; and thus prospectively to instruct us on whom the ends of the world have come ; it is impossible to believe they could have left this whole doctrine, essential as it is declared to be, in such confessed ambiguity and silence. Since, then, this doc- trine of apostolic succession is not found drawn out in the ecclesiastical records, canons, or decretals of the inspired writers; the only legislators of Christ's church — it is not — it cannot be — and it is sinful to make it appear to be — a doctrine of God's word, or essential to the salvation of men. Mr. Leslie, indeed, has ventured to declare that by the appli- cation of his four celebrated rules, there is given an infallible demonstration of prelacy." But if his infallible demonstration proves any thing, it proves its utter unscripturality. For that the system of prelacy was publicly instituted in the face of the world, which is one of these rules, either by Christ or his apos- tles, is a petitio principii, assuming as undeniable what we most confidently dispute ; since for any thing like satisfactory evi- dence of this fact, the world has yet to wait. Neither can it be shown that during the first ages of the church, the system of diocesan prelacy was attested by public monuments, or by out- ward and unquestionable acts. None such are to be found in the apostolic or primitive age of the church. And, although we 1) See Lecture x. 3) The Oxford tractatnrs, we 2) See Diss. Cap. 19,20,21,22. showed, give up scripture as to any Vind. of chap. ii. Annot. on Acts clear evidence. See Potter; also at pp. lib, and 14 a. See Anderson, Def. 107,109,110. of Presb. p. 112. 4) Letter on Epis. in Scholar Armed, vol. i. p. 56. LECT. VII.] PRESBYTERY DEMONSTRATED. 177 must allow that such a system has existed from a later period in the greatest portion of Christendom, yet do we deny that it can be shown to have commenced from the time of Christ, which is yet made essentially necessary by Mr. Leslie's fourth rule.' But on the other hand, that an order of ministers have ex- isted in the church, from the very time of Christ, is plain and undeniable. And that presbyters, as an order of christian minis- ters, have thus existed, and have been perpetuated in the church, is also allowed ; for, as most prelatists teach, the apostles were certainly of this order during our Lord's ministry — and others expressly so denominated were afterwards appointed to succeed them in the christian ministry. By these famous rules, there- fore, of Mr. Leslie's, we have an infallible disproof of the ex- clusive claims of prelacy, and an infallible demonstration of the truth of a presbyterian ministry. Our conclusion, therefore, is, that prelacy has no foundation in the word of God. It has never been mentioned, or alluded to, by Christ, except it be in those passages where its essential spirit is most pointedly condemned. Nor has he left a com- mission for any but one order of christian ministers, to the end of time. And as he employed only one order of ministers, under the same commission, with the same powers, and for the same objects, during his life ; so must we certainly conclude that the church, under Christ, was presbyterian, and not prelatical; Christ still being regarded by presbyterians as presiding over his church and ministers, with the same authority as when visi- bly manifest in the flesh. Neither is prelacy laid down by the apostles, the next master-builders of the christian church. They never mention three orders of bishops, priests, and dea- cons. They always interchange the titles and offices of bish- ops and presbyters. They ascribe to presbyters all the powers now properly claimed by prelates. These powers were exer- cised by presbyters, and with their sanction, even during the life-time of the apostles. The churches established by them, were placed under the superintendence and government of a council of presbyters. They, themselves, received ordination at the hands of presbyters. And while they are never called 1) The scriptures, says Mr. (af- of Rome, was there in the year 34. terwards bishop) Lowth, furnish us See Defence of Remarks on a Sermon with two remarkable periods of time, by William Lowth, B. D., by John from whence we may date the insti- Norman, of Portsmouth. London, tution of the episcopal government. 1724, p. 25; in Boston Athenaeimi, The first commences from St. Paul's B. 121. While the original of pres- release from his imprisonment at byters is therefore clear and certain, Rome, when Timothy was made even the warmest advocates of prelacy bishop of Ephesus, &c., i. e. about G3, cannot agree upon any time when its and yet James, the pretended bishop first introduction took place. 23 178 PRESBYTERY DEMONSTRATED. [lECT. VII. bishops, they are identified with presbyters, in their ordinary and perpetual ministerial character, with whom they sat, as co- members, in the same synodical assembly. The church, there- fore, as it existed under apostolic regimen, was presbyterian, and not prelatic. Nothing like a definite and express testimony, in favor of these prelatic claims, can be produced from any portion of the New Testament ; nor any other evidence, unless it be of that analogical and inferential kind, which prelatists themselves teach us to reject ; while we are, every where, in this word of God, warned against the encroachments of this very system, as it should, " by degrees," {^paulatim) make its way to its present established claims, prerogatives, and powers. But, on the other hand, we have clear and evident testimony from scripture, for every essential feature of the presbyterian system. That presbyters are a divinely appointed order of christian ministers, who ever have continued, and will continue to the end of time, never has been questioned. That these presby- ters have ascribed to them, in the word of God, all the rights and powers included under ordination and jurisdiction, cannot be reasonably doubted. (See 1 Thess. v. 12 with 17 ; 1 Tim. v. 17 ; Heb. xiii. 7, 17 ; 1 Cor. v. 13; 1 Tim. iv. 14; 3 John ix. ; Titus iii. 10.) These powers were not only exercised upon the apostles by presbyters, and by presbyters during the lives of the apostles, but were also committed to them by the apostles in their last farewells, as to the highest officers in the church ; and as their proper successors in the government of the church. (See Acts xx. 25, 27, 28, 29; 1 Pet. v. 1—4, with 2 Pet. i. 13, 14.) That the ministers of the churches should be elected to their office in those churches, by the suffi-ages of the members, and not by any prelatic, or close corporation of vestry-men ; is another title-deed which the ministers of the presbyterian church can produce — which scripture makes necessary — and which prelatical ministers have not. (See Acts i. 15, 16,21 — 23; Acts vi. 3 ; Acts xiv. 23 ; and 2 Cor. viii. 19, 16.) And thus might we proceed to show our divine warrant, for presbyterial and synodical assemblies, and for other features of our scriptural system. But enough has been said to make it clear, how indubitably certain it is, that the church of Christ, when tested by scripture, and fashioned after the pattern of God, is presbyterian, and not prelatic; and that this doctrine of prelatical apostolical succession, when tested by scripture, must be condemned. In fine, therefore, we may say of the attempts to rest this LECT. VII.] HOOKER VERSUS PRELACY. 179 prelatic doctrine upon the basis of God's word, what Hooker says of the tenets he controverts. " Howbeit, examine, sift, and resolve their alleged proofs, till you come to the very root from whence they spring, the heart, wherein their strength lieth ; and it shall clearly appear unto any man of judgment, that the most, which can be inferred upon such plenty of divine testimo- nies, is only this, — that some things which they maintain, as far as some men can probably conjecture, do seem to have been out of scripture not absurdly gathered. Is this a warrant suffi- cient for any man's conscience, to build such proceedings upon, as have been, and are, put in use for the establishment of that cause ? " 1) Works, vol. i. p. 187, Hanbury's ed. LECTURE VIII. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION BROUGHT TO THE TEST OF HISTORY. We have been engaged in an examination of the prelatic doc- trine of apostolical succession. We say, the prelatic doctrine of apostolic succession, because, as we hope to show, there is a view of this doctrine which is scriptural, reasonable, and of great mo- ment. There is no other foundation on which true Christianity can rest, than the doctrine of apostles and prophets ; and only they who remain steadfast in holding the truth can be regarded as the legitimate successors of these founders of the christian church. This scriptural view of the doctrine of succession, breaks down all middle walls of partition — rejects as Judaical, the separation of the christian temple into outer and inner courts, of greater and less privilege and sacredness — merges all dis- tinctions, except such as are necessary to the government of the church, into the brotherhood of one heavenly family — and allows no other diflferences than such as arise from the manifestations of the truth, and the zealous discharge of christian obligation. There is thus conferred precedence upon none. None are by birth, inheritance, or the monopoly of some exclusive charter, invested with the privileges of the christian church. The church is a house of prayer for all nations. The promise is to believers, and to their children — to them that are near, and to them that are afar off; so that should any particular church become apostate — deny the truth — and yet say, " we have Abraham for our father," — ours are the promises and the oracles of God, and the priesthood and the succession — God is still able of those who are esteemed, by such pharisees, graceless as the stones of the 182 WHAT HAS BEEN PROVED. [lECT. VIII. valley, to raise up children unto Abraham, and to send them ministers after his own heart. The prelatic doctrine of apostolic succession represents the spiritual interests of the whole human family, as intrusted by God, to one visible corporation — the church ; to which, for this end, is committed a plenary authority, to draw at will upon the divine treasury. — This power or gift is a personal right, vested in each successor of the apostles, by the imposition of prelatic hands ; and has been transmitted — as it could not otherwise have been transmitted at all — in an unbroken line of prelates from Christ to this present hour. Beyond the jurisdiction of this body, in w^hich Christ resides, there can be no spiritual safety or happiness. We have exhibited this doctrine in the language of its advo- cates. We have also, by their assistance, laid down the canons, by which the evidence presented must be tried. And we have brought the whole question to the test of scripture. The posi- tion has, we trust, been abundantly established, that a doctrine which is made essential, and of the substance of the faith, must appear to have been clearly and certainly revealed in scripture.' Now, by the confession even of its advocates, this doctrine is not thus to be found — if found at all — in the word of God. It was also shown, that in order to give validity to these high claims, it is needful, not only to make manifest the fact, that such a system was acted upon by the apostles, in their adminis- tration of the affairs of the first churches, but that they insti- tuted such a system as the perpetual and unalterable order of the church. Of this we have discovered no evidence whatever, nor can such evidence be produced. Further: it was made to appear, that even had this system been thus instituted by the apostles, it would still be necessary, in order to brand any deviation from it — not in a spirit of self- willed resistance, but of a godly desire to carry out the teaching of our Lord, — with a measure of guilt so foul, as to be atoned for only, by exclusion from the favor of God, and from the enjoyment of his grace; — to prove that the system was made essential, and held forth as among the articles of faith. But for this, no such proof can be advanced from the word of God. Weighed in the balances of truth, this prelatic doctrine of apostolic succession is therefore found \vanting. It is clearly adulterate, and is not the pure fine gold of the sanctuary. It may be jure ecclesiasio, but it cannot be jure divino. It may be de canonico, but it cannot be de fide. It may be de jure 1) See in Lect. ii. iii. and iv. LECT. VIII.] THIS SUCCESSION A FACT TO BE PROVED. 183 regum, but it cannot be pretended to be de jure regis regum. It may be delivered ex cathedra, but it cannot be proclaimed " as by commandment of the Lord." To impose it as a heavy burden upon the consciences of all men, is wantonly to usurp the throne of judgment — for all judgment is committed unto the Son. — It is to affront the supremacy of Him, who has not vacated his throne, but ever lives as head over all things to his church. As a question of conscience, the matter is thus clearly decided. No possible doubts or fears can have place respecting it. We may sit unmoved and unharmed, whatever fiery assaults may be made upon us, and their comminations, anathemas, and badly mimicked fears, we may treat as the idle wind, which we regard not ; " for where there is no law, there is no transgression." But satisfactory as is the conclusion to which we are thus led, it may be well, for our full confirmation, to bring this doctrine to the tests of some other principles ; and first let us try it by the standard of history. To this investigation we are indeed challenged in a voice not less bold and confident of victory, than that of the giant Philis- tine, when he scowled defiance upon the army of the Israelites. Peradventure, if God shall give his assistance, this boasting may be found as vain and profitless, even though a David may be wanting to fio-ht the battles of the Lord. The cause is safe, whatever may be the portion of its advocates, since victory is al- ready sure. — " These," we are told, are "mainly matters of fact, resting upon history, and not on preconceived opinions, and con- troversalists must be reminded that they are to be dealt with as facts, and can be met only by historical contradictions.'" So says Bishop Seabury : " there is no other way left to obtain a valid commission to act as Christ's ministers in his church, but by an uninterrupted succession of ordinations from the apostles. Where this is wanting, all spiritual power in Christ's church is wanting also."^ The fact, then, to be proved, is, as the same writer states it, the derivation of their power from the apostles, through epis- copal (prelatical) ordination, — in other words, the apostolical succession. " This succession has been handed down," it is said, " with scrupulous care from the earliest times, and at the refor- mation, was rigidly preserved in the Church of England."^ In 1) Oxford Theology in the Loud. "We must be as sure," they say, Quarterly Review, April, 1840, p. 294. " that the bishop is Christ's appointed This is an elaborate defence of the representative as if we actually saw Oxford Theology, perhaps by Southey. him work miracles as St, Peter and St 2) Sermons, vol. i. p. 12. Brit. Paul did." Oxf. Tr. No. 10, p. 4. Crit. Oct. 1839, p. 309. 3) Brit. Crit. Oct. 1839, p. 309. 184 THE EVIDENCE REQUIRED FOR THIS FACT. [lECT. VIII. Other words, the whole power of the ministry is derived from the apostles through a line of prelates personally succeeding them, every link of which is unbroken and perfect, and which line can be still made clear by every prelate. It must then, as we have already shown, be made manifest that not a single link is wanting in this entire chain.' It must be proved that each individual in this succession had received an ordination, which in its form was perfectly valid and beyond doubt.^ It must be further proved of each individual, that as a subject for that ordination, he was in all respects duly qualified, both as required by scripture and the canons.^ And further still, it must be proved in regard to each individual, singly and separately considered, not only that he was a fit subject for or- dination — not only that he was ordained in due and regular form — but also that all this was true of each of his ordaihers. They also, it must be shown, were in number, in character, in standing, and in qualifications, such as to give validity to their act, and thus efficaciously to communicate the plenitudo sacer- dotii ; the plenitude of sacerdotal grace. A failure of '^ proof for the historic fact,'" in any one par- ticular, regarding any one individual, in this apostolical succes- sion, throws doubt upon the whole ; and the certainty of an unbroken line being thus destroyed, the whole pompous fabric crumbles into dust. When a perpetual succession of prelates who have been found duly authenticated in each of these particulars, and wanting in none, is established, then, and not till then, may our faith be challenged.* Till then, we will continue to rejoice that the reformers wrenched this chain from the hands of apos- tate Rome, and fastened it afresh to the rock of scriptural trutli.* Let us first inquire, therefore, whether these conditions can be met in any fairness, as it regards the period immediately subse- quent to the establishment of Christianity. Supposing the foun- dation to have been as securely laid, as we have found it utter- ly insecure, the next most important step would be to approve as sound and good the first links, by which the whole succession is attached to tiiis adamantine rock. — Thus only can it be demonstrably transmitted, in uninterrupted succession, to the present time. Now here we boldly deny, that there does exist any such historical evidence in the first age of the church, as to stamp any traditive doctrine on this point, with a clear and full apos- 1) See Brit. Crit. Oct. 1839, p. 4) See Chillingworth, vol.i. p.tOG. 309. ' 5) See Voetius Desperata Causa 2) See ibid. Papatus, Amsterdam, 1535, p. 268, 3) See Lect. V. Lib. 11, Lect. 11. Cap. xix. LECT. VIII.] PETER NEVER AT ROME. 185 tolical character. There is no such thing as an universal agree- ment either as to the facts, or as to the doctrine founded upon thein, and therefore no title of undoubted authority. As the Anghcan church traces up her succession through the Romish church, so that its vaHdity depends upon the validity of that church,' what is the proof, we ask, for tlie succession, as commencing with Peter, and descending to the present occupant of the Roman papal throne ? This chain, on which is suspended the whole character and hopes of the British hierarchy, is, we aver, defective at the very point where the firmest coherence is needed. " It is indistinct and attenuated, and open to valid objections, at its commencement, where it should have been clear and uncontroverted." The very basis on which the whole succession is founded, is still open to serious disputation, as untenable and groundless. For that Peter ever was at Rome at all, is a question on which learned men have given very different vievvs.^ On what authority is it asserted, that Peter ever was at Rome at all ? Besides one or two other fabulous legends about the aeronautic flight of Simon Magus, and the personal encounter with our Saviour, when the apostle was again denying Christ by a base and unmanly flight — it is alleged that the sepulchre of St. Peter is to be seen at Rome at this day. But even were the real body of the apostle enshrined at Rome, we know that the translation of the bones and bodies of martyrs from one place to another, is no unusual thing in the history of Rome. But again, how are we to believe that the body ol St. Peter is actually at Rome, when, as Dr. Fulke says,^ "half his body is at Peter's in Rome, the other half at Paul's ; and yet he hath another head at John Lateran ; and his nether jaw, with the beard upon it, is in France, at Poictiers ; at Triers, many of his bones ; at Geneva was part of his brain, which was found to be a pumice stone : like as Anthony's arm was found to be a hart's pissel." 1) " From the church of Rome," stands or falls, with the opinion that says Dr. Geo. Miller in his recent Let- the church of Rome "never erred in ter to Dr. Pusey, (Lond. 1840, p 6,) fundamentals." See Neal's Puritans, " corrupted though it was, we profess vol. iii. p. 189. See p. 193. to have received the sacred orders of " I agree with the Romanists inres- our priesthood, and the commissioned olutely maintaming the doctrine of the authority of our episcopacy; and we apostolical succession." Pratt's Old are accordingly ever ready to acknowl- Paths, p. 221 . edge, as already invested with the 2) Spiritual Despotism, p. 303. holy orders of our church, and there- 3) See this question discussed in fore requiring no new ordination for Bowers' Hist, of the Popes, vol. i. admission among our clergy, those of ch. i. the clergy of that church, who have, 4) Conf. of Rhem. Test, on Rom. from time to time, connected tliem- IG, p. 185, Am. ed. and Dr. Willet, selves with ours." Syn. Pap. p. LGO. Laud confesses that this succession 24 186 PETER NEVER AT ROME. [LECT. VIII. Tliere is no agreement as to the time, when tlie apostle should have visited Rome/ The time specified is absolutely contra- dictory to scripture history .'^ There are several considerations grounded upon scripture statements, which involve this assump- tion in impenetrable obscurity, and make it more dlfllcult to believe than to reject the story, as " but a fable. "^ It is also not improbable, that Peter died at Antioch, and not at Rome." The arguments against the supposition by many learned men, have never been satisfactorily answered,* while they have been considered irrefragable even by Romanists themselves. « Thus much may suffice, as to the uncertainty which surrounds the question, whether Peter ever was at Rome at all. But that Peter was the fixed and resident bishop of Rome, is a most untenable position, and contrary to all reason.' 1) Orosius, Jerome, and Damasus differ. See Willel, Syn. Pap. 161. 2) Ibid. 3) See Bradford, Let. to Lady Vane, in Brit. Ref. vol. ii. p. 101, and in Fathers of the Engl. Ch. vol. vi. p. 139. Tiiis martyr-bishop there prom- ises more fully to establish this point in a Treatise on Antichrist. See also Fulke, as above, and Dr. WiUet, Syn. Pap. p. 161, 102. Dr. Barrow in Wks. fol. vol. i. p. 599. 4) See Auth. inWillet,Syn.Pap. p. 162. 5) See Illyricus, lib. contr. primat. pap. Uldariciis Velenus ; Calvin, Inst, lib. 4, c. 6, § 16 ; Ma^deb Cent. Cent. l,lib. 2, c. 10, col. 561, in Dr. Willet. Cranmer denies that Peter vi^as at Rome. See in Burnet's Hist, of Re- form, vol. iv. pref B. 2, A. D. 1534. See others in PowtU on Ap. Succ. p. 107; Zancliius de Eccl. cap. 9; Bp. Bull's Vind. of the Ch. of Engl. p. 73, 75, 78; Oxf edit. Owen's Wks. vol. xix. p. 202. " As to what is re- corded in story ; the order and series of things, with the discovery afford- ed us of Peter's course and place of abode in scripture do prevail with me to think steadfastly he was never there." See also Frid. Spanheim, filio in quat. dissert. T. 2, Opp. p. 333, seq ; Spanheim, Hist. Christ. § 1, p. 569 ; Ayton's Orig Const, of the Ch. p. 483, where Scaliger in Euseb. p. 189, and Wales, in Euseb. p. 2, 10. See also Spanheim, Miscell. Sac. Antiq. 1. 3, dissert. 3; Bishop Reynolds against Hart, cap. ii, in Div. Right of M'ai. Ft. 2, p. 115; Dr. Whittaker, lib, de Pontif. qn. 2, cap. 15, in ibid, p. 117; Junius, Contro. lib. 2, cap. 5, not. 18; and ibid, p. 124. On the whole subject, see a full and learned reference to various authori- ties in Fabricii Lux Evang. under the head of ** tradiliones minus certEe." p. 95 - 98. 6) Lyranus, in Dr. Willet. 7) See this matter discussed who full authorities, in Dr. Willet, Syn- Pap. p. 163, 164, and again at p 168. See also fully argued by Dr. Barrow on the Pope's supremacy, in Wks. fol. vol i. p. 599-602; Spanheim's Eccl. Hist. Wright's Transl. p. 146, n. 3. See also Bishop While's Lectures on the Catechism, Dissert, i. § 2, p. 411 - 4 J 7, Philad. 18J3; Dr. Rice in Lit. and Evang. Mag. vol. ix. pp. 72, 73; Campbell's Lect. on Eccl. Plist. Lect. xii. p. 215; Bayne's Diocesan's Try- all, Lond. 1621, p. 31. See also Tracts, by the ever- memorable John Hales, Lond. 1721, p. 206 ; " Yea, says he, that he was bishop at all, (as now the name of bishop is taken,) may be very ques- tionable ; for the ancients, that reckon up the bishops of Rome until their times, as Eusebius, and before him Tertullian, and before them both Ire- naeus, never account Peter as bishop of that see ; and Epiphanius tells us that Peter and Paul were both bishops of Rome at once ; by which it is plain, he took the title of bishop in another sense than now it is used ; for now, and so for a long time upward, two bishops can no more possess one see, than two hedge-sparrows dwell in one bush. St. Peter's time was a little too early for bishops to rise." LECT. VIII.] PETER NEVER BISHOP OF ROME. 187 That Peter occupied that chair as the head of the papal succes- sion — as the exclusive source of transmitted grace to the church ; is a gross and palpable fabrication, destitute of all scriptural basis, or historic verity, and the pregnant source of innumerable crimes, and the blackest enormities that have stained the bloody page of ecclesiastical history. " All unavoided is this doom of destiny." The very core of the papacy is rottenness. The comer-stone is wanting, and its airy castle topples to the ground. There is uncertainty, to say the least, around the very charter from which this whole succes- sion dates its lineage. God in his merciful providence has thus baffled the devices of Satan, and wrested from him this prime principle of intolerance and heresy — the very pillar and ground of the unity and infallibility of Rome. But let this pass, and supposing Peter to have been bishop of Rome. Whom, we inquire, did this imaginary pope — or these popes ? — choose and ordain to be his successor ? No one could have dared to assume the apostolate of Peter and the pri- macy of Rome, the destined mistress of the world, unless called as was Aaron — unless called, chosen, and invested with the keys of earth, hell, and heaven, by the divine apostle. Who was thus chosen, called, and ordained ? We ask and demand an answer — Who ? "These great apostles," answers Dr. Hook, "successively ordained Linus, Cletus, and Clement, bishops of Rome," from whom " the prelates in these realms derive their mission by an unbroken, spiritual descent."^ And " this continued descent is evident to every one who chooses to investigate it." Most boldly spoken. And now, surely, we will have the proof; " for these are matters of fact resting on history, and not on precon- ceived opinions, and controversialists must be reminded "2 of this. Unlock, then, your doors, ye guardian prelates ; summon to your aid the whole orders of " bishops, priests, and deacons, who can, if they please, trace their spiritual descent from St. Peter or St. Paul."* Let it please you to bring forth the priceless Sybil leaves, on which are charactered, in burning proof, strong as of Holy Writ, the insignia of this early royalty. Oh, why so tantalizing to a world ready to pay all due homage to your just honors ? or so modest, as to conceal from view the evidences of your unpretending greatness ? To be most serious, (where gravity itself might be overcome, to see this mountainous fabric in laborious agony) here, again, 1) Dr. Hook's Two Sermons, 3d 2) Edinb. Rev. Oxf. Theol. Ap. ed. Lend. Ib37, pp. 7, 8. 1839, p. 294. 3) Dr. Hook, as above. 188 PETER HAD NO SUCCESSOR. [LECT. VIII. confusion becomes worse confounded. There is no proof what- ever, either in the New Testament, or in any authentic docu- ment of the apostolic remains; or in any veritable authors ; that the apostles called and invested any single individual named or nameless, with the prelacy of Rome. Irenffius is the first writer they produce. He testifies that Li- nus was the first occupant of the see of Rome, though how he came there, or when, or by whom ; or whether validly ordained, or himself a valid subject for ordination, he does not tell.' He does not even say which of the apostles delivered the episco- pate to Linus ; nor that he was ever ordained by the imposition of hands at all, and thus received the communication of the plenitude of episcopal grace. And, more than this, what Irense- us does say, he does not pretend to authenticate by testimony, but gives it as " that which is held as a tradition from the apos- tles,"— if, indeed, as Grabe argues, this does not refer exclu- sively to the fidem, or faith, of which he speaks, and not to the successiones or succession.^ To Linus, Irenaeus says, succeeded Anaclelus,' to him Clemsens, and to him Evaristus, and Al- exander. Now Irena3us wrote the treatise from which this testi- mony is derived, about the year A. D. 176, or 192.* The next witness is Eusebius, who was consecrated bishop about the year A. D. 320.^ He says that " after the martyr- dom of Paul and Peter, Linus was the first that received the episcopate at Rome ;"® and that after holding it twelve years, he "transferred it to Anacletus,'" who was "succeeded by Clemens."* Now let us be permitted to cross-examine this wit- ness. We would then inquire what Eusebius knows about this mat- ter, from actual documentary or other sufficient data, especially as it is pretended by some that he had by him such existent records ?^ Eusebius answers in this same work, (chapter iv.) " but how many, and which of these, actuated by a genuine zeal, were judged suitable to feed the churches, established by these apos- tles, IT IS NOT EASY to shovv, further than may be gathered from the writings of Paul." On what, then, we would ask, did this writer rely, as the source of his information ? He frankly declares, " that he was obliged to rely much on tradition, and that he could trace no footsteps of other historians going before him only in a few narratives." Let us further inquire, then, if 1) Adv. Haer,iii. 3. 7) Lib. iii. § 13. 2) Jrenffius, cap. iii. § 2, p. 175; 8) Ibid, § 14. Grabe in Dissert, iii. § 4. 9) See Eccl. Hist. Leipsic edi- 3) Ibid, § iii. p. 174. tion, vol. i. p. 187, Notes. 4) Lardner, vol. ii. p. 166. 10) See his introductory chapter, 5) Ibid, vol.iv. p. 72. and Dr. Miller on the Min. p. 129. 6) Eccl. Hist. iii. § 2. LECT. VIII.] PETER HAD NO SUCCESSOR. 189 Eusebius knows whether any individual apostle did really de- signate Linus to the episcopate at Rome ? Eusebius gives no answer to that question. Let us again ask, whether Linus was actually ordained by imposition of hands ? Eusebius does not say. Was it during the life of tiie apostles Paul and Peter, that this Linus received the episcopate ? " No" says Eusebi- us, " it was after their martyrdom.'" But pray, inform us, what was the nature of that episcopate which Linus thus receiv- ed after the death of the apostles ? This, Eusebius does not determine, so that whether he was a presbyter-bishop, or a dio- cesan-bishop ; whether a governor of presbyters, or himself a presbyter, or presiding moderator, president, or senior among other presbyters ; whether he was a bishop of the church at Rome, or of the whole region around Rome ; whether he had under him the orders of presbyters and deacons, who were ex- cluded from all right to ordain ; and whether his office was con- sidered as of divine right, in its superiority ; all this, which is of the very essence of the prelatic doctrine of apostolical succes- sion, is left entirely undetermined — nay, rather determined against its claims, since we are referred, by Eusebius, to the Acts of the Apostles, and to the Epistles, where, as we have already seen, prelacy is not to be found. Linus, then, not receiving his office till after the death of the apostles, could not receive it from them : and could not, of course, transmit, in succession, any gifts, graces, or powers, which he never received. He was never invested with this of- fice by the apostles, for he received it after their death, and, of course, whatever virtue there is in Romish succession, must originate with, and terminate in Linus, and not in the apostles. Neither do Irenaeus nor Eusebius give any proof, but only a tradition, in the one case a hundred years old, and in the other, more than two hundred, and in both cases delivered after the hierarchy had entered on its progress, and the prelatic spirit had wormed itself into the bosom of the church, and corroded that vital energy which lay in its purity and simplicity. We know not, and it is impossible that we now should know, who was the first stationed minister or pastor at Rome. We know not who succeeded him, nor how this successor was appointed, nor when, nor how ordained ; and that he was a diocesan prelate of the first order, having under him two other orders, essentially distinct ; and that he was the first link in the electric chain of celes- tial grace — these are figments which break in the rough and uncivil hands of stubborn historical verity, like a rope of sand. 1) fj.iTct TJtv Holuxh K.CU IXsTg" fAu^'Tugiu.v , ch. 11, § 1, vol. i. p. 187. 190 Peter's successors not to be found. [lect. viii. A poor foundation this, whereon to build the destiny of mil- lions !' But, perhaps, what is wanting in the testimony of these two early traditionists, (and to whom, although they do not verify this baseless theory, we yet owe much,) may be made up by the clear, full, universal, and unvarying testimony of other writers. Nothing of the kind is, however, true. The case of this totter- ing erection is made infinitely worse, by the very attempt to re- new or strengthen its frail foundations. Irenaeus and Eusebius, we have seen, place Anacletus next to Linus, as having receiv- ed the episcopate from him. Now Tertullian, and several others assure us, that this is an entire mistake, for that Clem- ens was first of all, and the next lineal descendent of Peter, or whosoever it might be. Epiphanius and Optatus again seri- ously affirm, that Anacletus and Cletus were before Clemens. Jerome, Augustine, Damasus, and others, difier from them all, and assert that Anacletus, Cletus, and Linus, were all ante- rior to Clemens, and the first links in this chain of living ener- gy. Damasus is of opinion that Peter ordained two succes- sors, and not one merely. Vossius declares, that before the time of Evaristus, two or three successors sat together on this episcopal throne. "^ 1) Thus it is shown, that the whole of tliis stupendous pantheon rests upon tlie two pillars of Irenaeus and Eusebius. But Irenteus, besides tJiat he gives no positive testimony as to what is of importance in tlie case, does actually, in other parts of his writings, show that by bishops he meant presbyters, and that he had no conception whatever of modern bish- ops or prelates, (as in Lib. 4 cap. 43, and Lib. .5, cap. 2.3; and see Div. Right of the Min. Pt. 2, p. 115-117.) If Irenaeus, therefore, proves any thing in the case, it is that presbyters are the only true successors of the apos- tles. As to Eusebius, being more in the dark, and less liable to detection, he is rather more bold. But as Scaliger, with the approbation of Bishop Rey- nolds, affirms, Eusebius read ancient history parum atlente as tliey sliow by many proofs. All he declares is only on the authority, that sic scrihitur, so it is reported, and his only references are to unexisting records. (See Div. Right of Min. p. 04.) On the doubtful credit to be attach- ed to Eusebius in this matter, see also Henderson's Review and Con- sid. Edinb. 4to. 1706, p. 331, 371- 373, where he quotes Scaliger, Dido- clave, Stillingfleet, «&c. ; Mosheira's Commentaries, vol. i. pp. 135, 297, 2'J4; Stillingfleet, Irenicum, p. 341; Plea for Presbytery, Glasg. 1840, p. 248. We may here apply the rule laid down by Bishop Lloyd. " But for the number of witnesses, I think that is not much to be considered when they come, (as these do,) all in file, one af- ter another, so that all their strength is resolved into the credit of one author." Hist. Acct. of Ch. Gov. in Great Brit, and Irel. Lond. 1684, Pref Again, he makes it a chief argu- ment against the Scottish claims " by showing the distance of time at which the first author of them lived, from the persons and things of which he writ." Ibid. "It is a shrewd presumption against the truth of any matter de- livered in history, when it is said to have been many ages before the time of him that was the first author that mentioned it." Ibid. 2) See Dr. Miller on the Ministry, p. 327. LECT. VIII.] Peter's successors not to be found, 191 Irenapus and Eusebius then declare, that they knew no more about this whole matter than we ourselves are still able to discover, from the apostolic records ; while that which they did know, most effectually cuts up by the roots, this goodly tree of prelatical succession. And all the fathers and writers alter them affirm, and deny, and contradict, and make doubly uncertain, this first stage in the progress of a succession, which is, never- theless, as these modern divines teach, " evident to every one who chooses to investigate it ; and an unbroken line from Peter to the present day, which every bishop, priest, and deacon, can trace !" This may be true, however doctors may differ ; for we are required, on this system, to believe what is plainly contrary to fact and evidence, with an implicit faith. i But sure we are, that every ecclesiastical writer, of any name or honesty, will assert the fact, that the order of this primitive succession cannot be determined." The facts in the case are irrecoverably lost, and are buried, by a gracious Providence, at the very bottom of that fathomless gulf of oblivion, into which the memory of man pierceth not. Nay, this order of primogeniture is a subject of controversy even within the bosom of the Romish church itself Tertul- lian, we have seen, makes Clement the immediate successor of the apostle Peter.^ In this he was followed by Ruffinus, and by the Latins generally, among whom, in the fourth century, this opinion universally prevailed. But Jerome rejected this opin- ion, and placed Linus first, who was, of course, ordained by St. Peter. Tertullian, however, assures us that Clement was thus ordained ; while the apostolical constitutions, which place Linus first, tell us, in the most express terms, that he was or- dained, not by St. Peter, but by St. Paul."* Now, however, it is believed, as a matter of faith, in spite of all contradictory evi- dence, both from the Greek and Latin church, that Linus was the first bishop of Rome.^ In the English church, the same controversy has prevailed. Dr. Hammond will have it that Clement, Linus, and Anacletus all succeeded Peter, and held co-ordinate jurisdiction ; the first over the Jews, and the others over the Gentiles.* This theory Cotelerius rejects as without any support, while Dr. Pearson 1) See Dodsworthon Dissent, and 3) De Prcescript. heret. c. 32. Ilef. in Lect. 4, p. 83. 4) See B. vii. ch. 46. 2) See Hind's Rise and Progress 5) See Bower's Hist, of Popes, of Christ, vol. ii. p. 165, who thinks vol. i. p. 9. there were two churches at Rome ; 6) Hammond I. 5, c. 1. Gieseler's Eccl. Hist. vol. 1, p. 66 ; Stillingfleet, Iren. 192 Peter's successors not to be found. [lect. viii insists that it is, as Cyprian says, contrary to the evangelic law, and to the rules of the catholic institution, for two bishops to preside together in one city.' This, also, was determined on in the council of Nice,^ and became a settled proverb, " one God, one Christ, one bishop," — two prelates being regarded, as Tlieodoret testifies, infamous.3 So that " whoever is made bish- op after the first, is, says Cyprian, not a second bishop, but no bishop."'' Archbishop Potter again asserts, that "Clemens not only conversed with the apostles, but was ordained bishop of Rome by St. Peter."* Bishop Pearson proves that Linus died before Peter, and how could he succeed him ? Thus is it made apparent, in what palpable and gross dark- ness, in what impenetrable obscurity, the prime question, on which this whole cause rests — the corner-stone and foundation on which the stately structure of the prelacy, Romish and Angli- can is built — is involved. Irenaeus positively declares that the church, at Rome, was only founded by the apostles Peter and Paul, who left Linus in charge, while they pursued their course. Of necessity, there was no succession in the case whatever, and their authority, the apostles still held in possession. Eusebius, and Epiphanius both affirm that Peter and Paul were, at the same time, both bishops and apostles.** Both, therefore, were bish- ops, or neither, and if both, then is the origin of this succes- sion, according to Cyprian, the council of Nice, Theodoret, and Dr. Pearson, infamous, uncanonical, and invalid. Ruffinus again affirms that Linus, Cletus, and Clemens all held the see of Rome, during the life-time of St. Peter,' and thus is it trebly sure that Peter never transmitted his apostle- ship, in the plenitude of episcopal grace, through the Romish succession. " It may now be inquired," to use the words of Mr. Bower, in his History of the Popes, and who gives abundant evidence to show that there is every doubt, whether Peter ever was at Rome, and that it is certain he never was the bishop of that place, as that word is now understood, — " if St. Peter," says he " was bishop of Rome, who placed him in that see ? Did our Lord appoint him? Did the apostles name him ? Did the people choose him ? To these queries no answers have been yet given, but such as are so ridiculously weak, that it is not worth my while to relate them, nor the readers to hear them." 1) See Cyprian, as quoted in full, 5) Epiph. hcer. 7.Bower, ibid.p 6. in Potter on Ch. Gov. p. IGl, 162. 6) Ruff, in Prsf. and Clem. Re- 2) Bower, ibid p. 10. cogn. in ibid p. 5. 3) Ibid p. 8. 7) See ibid, p. 6, et preced. 4) See Potter on Ch. Gov. p. 123. LECT. viii.] Peter's successors not to be found. 193 St. Peter, either alone, or jointly with St. Paul, appointed the other hishops of Rome. Now, when he appointed others, did he resign his episcopacy or retain it ? If he resigned it, he did not die bishop of Rome, which shakes the very foundation of the pope's claim to supremacy. If he retained it, then there were two bishops, " or three, or even four," as some would make it, " on the same see at one time,"' which, according to the canons, would, of itself, blast all claim to validity of succession.2 *•' Upon the whole matter," says the very learned Dr. Cum- ber,'' "there is no certainty who was bishop of Rome next the apostles, and therefore the Romanists (and the prelatists) build upon an ill bottom, when they lay so great weight on their personal succession." Cabassute, the learned popish historian of the councils, says of the whole matter, "it is a very doubtful question."* Prideaux assures us " no certainty is to be had." Howell, another thorough churchman, after fully exposing what he calls the stupidity and l^ibles of the Romanists on this point, adds, "hence it is evident, how very doubtful and uncertain is the personal succession of the Roman bishops." Platina ac- knowledges that the authorities on the succession of the popes are full of confusion.^ Of this and the whole series of succes- sions, Bishop Hoadly remarks, " the learned must have the least assurance, and the unlearned can have no notion" whatever, "but through ignorance and credulity."* It is scarce possible, in the nature of things, that such facts could come down to us fully authenticated, through three centuries of 1) Bower, vol. i. p. 8. Willet, Syn. Pap. p. 67, and Fulke's 2) Tliis uncertainty will be appa- Conf. Rheni. Test. Rom. 16, § 4. rent from tlie following table, which Also Riddle's Ecclesiastical Chro- will at once show how the fathers nology, p. 60. CaJaniy's Def. of Non- differ and contradict one the other. It conformity, vol. i. p. 163, Lond. 1703. is taken from Hanbury's edition of " Would it not," says Calamy, Hooker, (Lond. 1)^30, vol. iii. p. 100.) " tempt a man to wonder, after all this, Authorities. — Irenceus, century II. to find such a stir made about the ta- 1. Linns made bishop by Peter and bles of succession in the several Paul; 2. Anacletus ; 3. Clement. churches from the time of the apos- Tertullian, century II. Clement ties, as a proof that diocesan episeopa- first after Peter. cy had its rise from them .' Alas, the Eusebius, century IV. Linus first head of the Nile is not more obscure after martyrdom of Peter. than the first part of these tables." Origen, century III, ibid. Vol. i. p. 162. See this further illus- Epiphanius, century IV. Peter and trated by Mr. Drew, in Dr. Bancrs's Paul. Original Church of Christ, p. 216. ° Damasus, century IV. Peter 25 3) Roman Forgeries in Councils years; came to Rome in the begin- Part I. c. 1. in Powell p. 107, where, ning of Nero's reign. (N- B. Nero see the testimony of Cabassute. reigued but 14 years.) 4) See quoted in Powell on Apos- Jerome, century V. Peter 2-5 years ; tolical Succ. p. 107. till last year of Nero's reign. 5) See Ibid, pp. ]08, 109. On the uncertainty of these first 6) See also Calvin Instit. B. iv. links in the succession, see also Dr. eh. 6, § 15, vol. ii. p. 275. 25 194 Peter's successors not to be found. [lect. viii. almost uninterrupted persecution, during which records were not reo;ularly kept, if kept at all — for they would only be sources of evidence against christians — and when, if attempted, they were so likely to be destroyed/ The whole question, therefore, as to the origination, and the first successions in the church at Rome, as was the case with hard questions in the court of the Areopagites, may be postponed ad diem longissimam. It is a gordian knot, which all the ingenuity of man can never untie. But, nevertheless, upon its resolution depends the whole order of the Romish prelatical succession; and upon this depends the succession of the prelatic Church of England ; and upon this de- pends the succession of the protestant episcopal church in this country — and upon this, the whole system of the prelacy, with all its claims to exclusive prerogative and divine right. The whole Christianity of these churches is, by their high-church de- fenders, interwoven with the unbroken order of a lineal episcopal succession, from the apostles to the very individuals by whom they are now governed, and in whom the mysterious gift resides, to be in like manner transmitted, by their manipulations, to all succeeding prelates, to the end of time. The foundation of this stupendous system, on which our destiny as a church, as they would teach, hangs trembling, we have now examined, and the first and most essential link in this chain we have brought to the test of historical fact, and they have been found, tekel. They are unsound. They are brittle. They are worse, for they are mere fables, and a huge mass of endless genealogies. This boasted foundation is infinitely too small for such an immense structure. That "huge and hoary castellated edifice," to which these rulers of a subjugated world would betake themselves, " closely tenanted" as it is, " even to the very attics," with mitred heads and robed dignitaries, is leaning toward its fall ; the wash- ing tide, at every flow, wastes more and more its insecure foun- dation ; and while it overhangs the fearful gulf below, the touch of history is alone sufficient to make this stately church a heap of ruins. 1) See Hill's Lect. vol. iii. p. 432, 8vo ed. LECTURE IX. THE PRELATICA.I. DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION BROUGHT TO THE TEST OF HISTORY. THE SUBJECT CONCLUDED. The question involved in this prelatic doctrine is, we are told, one of facts. Such is the representation given of it by its ad- vocates, and we are reminded, that by its accordance with the facts of history must it stand or fall. On this subject, we have already given the opinion of several writers. But the same ground is as confidently assumed by prelatists in this country, as will appear from the following statement given by the Rev. William Staunton, in his Dictionary of the Church.i In explaining this doctrine of " uninterrupted succes- sion,"* this writer traces, as he supposes, the regular " links of the chain," in historical progression from Christ downwards. He defines the doctrine thus : It is " a perfect and unbroken transmission of the original ministerial commission from the apostles to iheir successors, by the progressive and perpetual conveyance of their powers from one race of bishops (i. e. pre- lates) to another." " The validity of the ministry," as he allows, " depended alto- gether on the legitimacy of its derivation from the apostles, — and therefore, " infinite care was taken, in the consecration of bishops, to see that the ecclesiastical pedigree of their consecra- tors was regular and indisputable." " And 1 suppose," he quotes with approbation, " it cannot bear any dispute, but that it is now more easily to be proved that the archbishop of Canter- bury was CANONICALLY ordaincd, than that any person now 1) N. York, 1839, 2nd. ed. 2) See p. 458, &c. 196 THE SUCCESSION HAS NO BEGINNING. [lECT. IX. living is the son of him who is called his father ; and that the same might have been said of any archbishop or bishop, that ever sat in that or any other episcopal see, during the time of his being bishop." " Such, then, is the uninterrupted succes- sion ; a FACT to which every bishop, priest, and deacon, in the wide world, looks as the ground of validity in his okders. Without this, all distinction between a clergyman and a layman, is utterly vain, for no security exists that heaven will ratify the acts of an illegally constituted minister on earih. With- out it, ordination confers none but humanly derived powers ; and what those are worth, the reader n)ay estimate, when we tell him, that on proof of a real fracture in the line of transmission between the first bishops of the American church and the in- spired apostles, the present bishops will freely acknowledge themselves to be mere laymen, and humbly retire from their posts.'" Now, if this line of succession is firm any where, it nmst surely be so at its commencement. We have therefore entered at some length upon an examination of the first links of this boasted hierarchy. It may, we suppose, be safely assumed as an axiom, that what has no bejiinning can have no continuance and no end. And yet here, at the very outset of this gorgeous procession of popes and prelates, with their two attendant orders of priests and deacons, and after the most diligent search, we can discov- er no head — since that Peter ever was at Rome, is a matter of great uncertainty, — that he was ever bishop of Rome utterly incredible — and that he was the first of an order of popes or diocesan prelates, an assumption without any manner of proof, human or divine. And while we are taught to believe that "order is heaven's first law," this august pageantry is led on by a host of crowded candidates for primacy and succession, who can be reduced to no terms ; and between whose rival claims the universal church has, as yet, been unable to decide. Where, with "peremptory expectation," we look for assured certainty ; all is doubt, ambi- guity, and confusion. Not one single canon we have laid down, has been met in the attempted substantiation of the very first links in the chain. The facts themselves, and every thing about the facts of any importance, are equally covered with mysterious darkness. Taking, therefore, the Bible as our guide, and appealing to historic fact as our evidence, " we spurn with- 1) So under " Schism," p. 418, he rial authority without which there can speaks of that " succession of ministe- be no church." LECT. IX.] THIS SUCCESSION HAS NO CONTINUANCE. 197 out a doubt," the long train of pernicious absurdities, which are involved in this dogma of an unbroken prelatical succession.' " If," says the author of " The Rights of the Christian Church,"^ himself an episcopalian, "there is a line of succession on which the very being of the church depends, happy they who lived in the earliest, when the line was entire ; while we, at so great a distance, can meet with nothing except uncertainty, perplexity, and despair. How can the majority of the christian world, the simple and unlearned, judge when this line is broke, and when not ? What can be more absurd, than to send them to fathers, councils, and church history, for their information ? If there was a particular set of men who, under a certain form, were to govern the church, and this was necessary to its being, Infinite Goodness would no doubt have made it most conspicuous to the bulk of mankind who they are. But what other judg- ment, upon this hypothesis, can the most knowing make, than that 'tis placing the government of the church on such a foot as must destroy the church itself." " It is probable," says Dr. Claggett,^ " that the Roman church wants the first, — and that there is now no true pope, or has been for many ages, for that church to be united to. For by their own confession, a pope simoniacally chosen, a pope intrud- ed by violence, a heretic, nay, more, an atheist or an infidel, is no true pope. And many such there have been, of one sort or other, whose acts, therefore, in creating cardinals, &c., being in- valid, it is exceedingly probable that the whole succession has upon this account failed long ago." For, as he adds, " while there was no certain pope, there could be no certainty of the validity of any acts necessary to continue a succession of true popes." Passing now from this threshold of the temple, and entering within the wide portals, which, like those of Egyptian Thebes, bespeak for the divinity worshipped there, a power and glo- ry coextensive with our spiritual nature; we find ourselves mournfully impressed with the striking analogy in the fate of both. All is " ruin wild and waste." The mighty fabric of ages has fallen. Its collossal pillars are in the dust. Its glory and its garniture are no more. The sands of the desert have overwhelmed, even the dilapidated relics which lie far buried beneath their increasing mass. Such is the prospect which opens before the inquirer, who undertakes to trace out the relics of this apostolic succession, amid the desert wastes of church 1) See Spiritual Desp. p. 327. 3) Notes of the Church, p. 181. 2) P. 350, Lond. 1707, ed. third. 198 THIS StrCCESSION HAS NO CONTINUANCE. [LECT. IX. history. Confusion thickens upon him at every step, while his covetous guides become the more vainly confident and garru- lous, just in proportion as the absence of all marks of truth leave room for imagination to weave its fictions, and superstition to enforce its drean)S. " The religious system professed in the christian church had, in the course of two hundred years, reckoning from the death of the last of the apostles, become capitally distinguished from the Christianity of the apostles.'" Already had the prela- cy erected itself into an established system, and triumphed over the lower orders, now reduced to comparative vassalage ; and over the laity, now excluded from their rightful participation in the administration of the affairs of the church. Of course, every thing was made to conspire to the glorification of this first order of the ministry — the prelates — who were in the third century formally inducted into the office and undisputed title of suc- cessors of the apostles.*^ Very little credence can therefore be given to the tales re- corded of their own greatness and inherent dignity, by those who persecuted, even to banishment or death, such refractory sons of the church as dared to question their title-deeds of offi- cial sanctity and supremacy. Of all authorities drawn from the fathers in support of this system, we may say, many are to no purpose — many are am- biguous — many refer simply to authority and office, without determining the meaning of the words, and are irrelevant — many are spurious and forged — and all are the declarations of men, taught to believe that the advantage of the church was to be sought as paramount to all other claims whatever."* The line of prelatic succession, therefore, which wants co- herence at its very starting point, becomes more and more at- tenuated, until we find it broken by a thousand intersecting claims, decree;, anathemas, canons, and usurpations. By mak- ing diocesan prelates the only representatives and successors of the apostles, the standing of all the churches in the first and purest ages is for ever blasted ; since there was no such offi- cial personage as a prelate, to be found in all their catalogues — no dioceses having been erected until the fourth century.* The same conclusion may be drawn from innumerable other 1) Spirit. Desp. p. 32G, and Anct. 4) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 544, and full Christ, part 5th. on in Clarkson's Primitive Episcop. p. 2) See Binjjham, b. 2, ch. 2, and 226 and 230 ; Baynes' Diocesan's Try- Cyprian in Schism, p. 124. all, Lond. 1621, where this subject is 3) See Palmer on the Church, fully argued. Baxter's Treatise on vol. ii. part 7, ch. 3. Episcopacy, Lond. 1681, part i. LECT. IX.] THE ROMISH SUCCESSION HERETICAL AND VILE. 199 facts, having reference to the subject, the form, and the minis- ters, in the case of each separate consecration. But it is ako- gether unnecessary to go into this investigation at any length. Contested elections, — the decrees of councils — the rivalry of opposing claimants — excommunications, anathemas, and deposi- tions, which affected all the acts of the individuals to whom they applied — the intrigue, violence, and bloodshed, with which such contests for office were carried on, — the undenied, because undeniable atrocity, atheism, infidelity, licentiousness, heresy, and murder, which characterized many in this " unbroken suc- cession,"— these facts, which even Baronius could not deny, who confesses that, in a succession of fifty popes, there was not a pious man — that there were no popes at all for years together — at other times two or three at once — and between twenty and thirty schisms, one of which lasted for thirty years' — these plain and incontestable facts render all such investigations su- pererogatory to the clear decision of this question. It never yet has been determined what popes have been true popes — which of the rival claimants are to be received — nor what councils are to be our guide in coming to a conclusion.' But, again, we are taught, as by Bellarmine, that heresy, when held by any church, and persisted in by that church, is sufficient to destroy its claim to be a true church.^ Now, that which is of sufficient potency to overthrow the pretensions of any body to the character of a church, must necessarily be de- structive, also, of the claims of such a body to an apostolical succession, since this is, itself, one of the assigned marks of a true church. And will any man venture to deny, that among those whose names are necessary to make up the line of this prelatical succession, there have been many who have been avowed heretics, and who have employed all their influence for the promotion of heresy ? Was not this the case with Zepherynus, Marcellinus, Liberius, Felix, Anastasius, Hono- rius, and, not to enlarge, with John the XXIII., who denied a future life ?* 1) See in Neal's Puritans, vol. iv. 4) See Bishop Williams in Notes p. 211, and Edgar's Variations of of the Ch. p. 102. Also, Dr. Thorpe Popery, and Newman on Romanism, in ibid, pp. 131, 132, § 7. lect. xiv. " Infallible Heads of the Infallible 2) See this strongly urged against Church^ — " John XXII. was a here- Romanists, (though the author was tic, and denied the immortality of the committing suicide,) by Mr. Newman soul. John XXIII. Gregory XII., and on Romanism, pp. 151, 152, and see Benedict XIII., were all popes and Palmer, vol. ii. part 6, ch. vi. p. 432, infallible heads of the church at the &c. And against prelatists generally, same time, and the council of Con- in Plea for Presb. 1840, p. 84, «&c. stance cashiered the whole of them as 3) De Not lib. iv. cap. 8. Palmer illegitimate. The council of Basil on the Ckurch. 200 THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION BROKEN. [lect. IX. Without attempting to go into any consecutive or elaborate examination of the history of this succession, some general re- marks may be satisfactory to those who have not access to other sources of information. Not to speak further of tlie asserted unchristian character of the Romish prelatical succession, it can, we think, be clearly shown, that many links are defective and invalid, even in the chain of the Anglican succession, and that it can be made to rest upon no tenable or sufficient ground. It can be clearly shown, we say, that many links are defective and invalid, even in the chain of the Anglican succession. At a certain period, the see of Armagh was occupied for eight generations by individuals who had never received any ordina- tion ivhatever. Hooker admits that ordinations had oftentimes been effected without a bishop to ordain, "and therefore," he says, " we are not simply, without exception, to urge a lineal de- scent of power from the apostles, by continued succession of bishops in every effectual ordination."^ Stillingfleet declares, that " by the loss of records of the British churches, we cannot draw down the succession of bishops from the apostles' times. "^ There is, in fact, no reckoning for the first five hundred and ninety-six years, until the time when Augustine was sent from Rome to re-establish Christianity in Britain.^ Nor is the record .convicted Pope Eun-enius of schism and heresy. Pope ftlarcelHnus actu- ally sacrificed to idols. Pope Liberins was an Arian, and subscribed to that creed. Anastatius was excommuni- cated as a heretic by his own clergy. Silvester II. sacrificed to the devil. Formosus was promoted to the chair through perjury. Sergius III. caused his predecessor's body to be dug out of the grave, its head cut off, and then flung into the Tiber. Boniface de- posed, imprisoned, and then plucked out tlie eyes of his predecessor. In a word, many of the popes have been atlieists, rebels, murderers, conjurors, adulterers and sodomites. Papal Rome has far exceeded 'n crime her pagan predecessor. It is not, there- fore, to be wondered at that the popes, though always assuming a new name, yet never take the name of Peter. It is a curious fact that they .always shun it. Those who have received that name at the font have always changed it when they reached the chair. Pe- trns de Tarantasis cliano-pd his name to Innocent IV. PctrusCaraf became Paul V. Sergius III 's christian name was Peter. This practice looks like conscious guilt. I'hey fear the name of Peter would but too plainly show their apostacy from the apostle Peter's virtues ; and men would be apt to exclaim, " how unlike is Peter the pope to Peter the apostle." Stevens' Spirit of the Church of Rome. See Note A 1) Eccl. Polity, b. 11). 2) Origines BritannicEe, Lond., 1685, pp 81, 8;?. 3) " Thus far, indeed, we have no mention of bishops in the British church, nor do we find any further information on the subject at all, until the year 314." Rev. Henry Gary on " the Apostolical succession in the Church of England," p. 8. According to Mr. Jones, of Oswes- tree, in his Historical Treatise " of the Heart and its True Sovereign," there was left in England in CfiS, but one remaining successor of Augustine and his monks, and tiiat was Winet, a Simonist. All the rest of the bishops were of British ordination, who, as this same divine of the Engli.sli church testifii's, all di'uied their ordination from Scotch presbyters. See Baxter's True and Only Way of Concord, Lond. 1(!80. Premonition, II. " A long interval of heathen dark- LECT. IX.] THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION DEFECTIVE. 201 of these five hundred and ninety-six years, any better kept at Rome than in Britain ; for if we come to RonTe, says Stillingfleet, " here the succession is as muddy as the Tiber itself," and " what shall we say to extricate ourselves out of this labyrinth ?'" Who can tell the date of the consecration of Augustine, about which a late prelatic advocate differs from himself in the small amount of fifty-four years, and in reference to which we find Baronius contra- dicting Bede, and Dr. Inett making confusion worse confounded T The archbishopric of Canterbury, says Dr. Inett, in his Origines Anglicanae, had been void from the year 1089, in all, about four years, and the bishopric of Lincoln about a year. Towards the end of the eighth century, this same see was divided into two parts for several years. Dr. Inett himself affirms, that "the difficulties in that see betwixt the year 763 and the year 800, were invincible."^ Speaking of the death of Dunstan, this writer further states, that Elihelgar "succeeded to the chair of Canter- bury the year following, but dying the same year, our historians are not agreed who succeeded, some confidently pronouncing in favor of Siricius. and others of Elfricus.'*'' It is also known that in the dark ages, there were many Scotchmen calling themselves bishops, who travelled over Eng- land, and of whom it is believed that some at least were settled in bishoprics, who ordained many ; and yet they are represented in the public acts made against them, to be of very " uncertain ordination."* It must be further stated that, as the whole virtue of Augus- tine's ministrations depends on the pre-established validity of the Romish succession, so also, as Fox relates, the first seven of the prelates of Canterbury "were Italians or foreigners."® The pope has also frequently consecrated archbishops of Can- terbury, as appears from Godwin's lives of the English bishops.'' But it has been already made to appear, that no dependence whatever can be placed upon the Romish succession, either as npss now followed, (i. e. the death of 1) frenicum. pirt 2, ch. vi. Germanus in 448,) to wit, until the 2) See Plea lor Presbytery, Glas- arrival of Autjustin from Rome, A. D. gow, 1840, p. 77. 596," that is,'- a century and a half." 3) See quoted in Plea for Presby- Rev. Henry Gary on the Apostolical tery, p. 78, from the original. Succ. in the Brit. Ch. p 12. " When, 4) Ibid, p. 79. however, the re-introduction of chris- 5) See specimens in Selden, as tianity was resolved on by Oswald, quoted in ibid, p. 79. who recovered his kingdom of North- 6) Book of Martyrs quoted in ibid, urnberland, that prince, who had lived p 80. many years among the Scots, obtain- 7) See in Plea for Presbytery p. ed a bishop from that country who 80, and in Powell on Ap. Succession. brought with him the usages of the " Is it not true, (Archer's Six Lect. Scottish church," that is, presbyteri- on Piiseyism, lect. v.) that twenty-nine anism. Ibid in ibid, p. 17. archbishops of the Church of England, 26 202 THE IRISH SUCCESSION DEFECTIVE. [LECT. IX. to its Christianity, or its continuity, or its validity, and hence all claims deriving their authority from it, must he rejected. The same remarks are applicahle to the Irish sees, in some of which, even the names of many of the incumhenls are un- known.' From Patrlcius upwards, for a space of four hundred years, there is no record or certainty. That he had no connexion whatever with Rome, is affirmed by many of the ablest anti- quarians.* According to the very best authorities, eight prelates in succession from Patrick were loithout orders.'^ Notwithstanding the undeniable certainty of many such facts as these now produced, we are actually challenged to exhibit between the seventh and the fifteenth centuries, were ordained directly by the pope, or by the pope's legate ? What do you make of their ' apostoli- cal succession ? ' iVay more, the arch- bishop of Yorli, Chichely, was ordain- ed by Gregory the Twelfth, one of the three pojies who were at that time con- tending for tile tiara, and who were all of them deposed. What do you make of .ill those whom he ordained ? What do you make of their ' apostol- ical succession ? ' Was it valid or not? '■ "Out of 36 archbishops of Canter- bury prior to Cranmer, 12 have been consecrated by the popes, so that through this source the Romish suc- cession has been introduced twelve times." Rev. Henry Gary on the Apostolical Succession in the Church of England, p. IS. 1) See in Plea for Presb. pp. 81, 82. 2) As Dr. Monck Mason, &c. see ibid, p. 82. Indeed, the very existence of such a character as St. Patrick is denied, and the whole legend regarded as a fabulous story. Such was the opinion of Ledwich in his Antiquities of Ire- land; Gordon in his History of Ireland, &c. See Stuart's History of Armagh, 1819, Introductory Dissertation. 3) Ibid. As to the succession in Ireland. Mr. Stuart in his Dissertation on the State of the Ancient Irish Church, (Hist, of Armagh, p. G22, app. xiii. and 623, 624,) says, " after the decease of the Irish apostle, ecclesiastical dignities wf>re soon monopolized by certain princely families, and transmitted in the same sept from generation to gen- eration. Even in Armagh, the prima- tial right seema to have been convert- ed into a kind of property, by a par- ticular branch of the Hi Nial race, which was probably sprung from Oaire the donor of Druimsaillech, to the founder of the see. St. Bernard rep- robates this practice in very vehement terms. He styles it " an execrable succession," and affirms, tliat prior to the primacy of Celsus, the see had been thus held by fifteen successive generations. " Verum," says he, " mos pessimus inoleverat quorundam diabolica ambitione potentum sedem sanctum obtentum iri hereditaria suc- cessione. Nee enim patiebantur epis- copari, nisi qui essent de tribu et fa- milia sua. Nee parurn processerat EXECRANDA succEssio decursis jam hac malitia quasi generationibusquin- decim et eo usque finiiaverat sibi jus pravum imo omni morte puniendain injuriam generatio mala et adnltera, ut etsi interdum defecissent clerici de sanguine illo sed episcopi nunquam." (Sanct. Berni. Vita Mai. apud Mess. c.vii. p. 358. Vita Mai. ut supra, p. 359.) " In the twelfth century, Pope Inno- cent HI. directed John Salemitan, his legate in Ireland, to have the practice abolislied by which sons and grand- sons were accustomed to succeed their fatliers and grandfathers in ecclesiastic benefices. (Alph. Ciac. Vit. Pont.) "Lanfranc, in an epistle written about the year 1074, to Terdelvach, king of Ireland, complains that in the Hiber- nian church, as constituted at that period, bishops were often consecrated by a single bishop — that Irish chil- dren were baptized without the chrism — and that holy orders were granted by the prelates for money." (Nazaren. Litt. II. p. 22. Vet. Epist. Syllo. p. 72.) LECT. IX.] THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION DEFECTIVE. 203 " a flaw in the long line of descent" of the English church; and it is confidently averred, " we can give you the lists of our bishops from tiie earliest to the present times.'" Tlie bold hardihood with which such assertions are made, is truly astonishing, when it is a wellknown fact, that some of the very pontiffs who consecrated, as we have seen, archbishops of Canterbury, were afterwards deposed, and all their former eccle- siastical acts pronounced invalid. Now, since the English prelates who were consecrated by these archbishops, never received any posterior ordination, all their acts must be in like manner, null and void. Thus, for instance, Henry Chicheley, or Chichesley, was consecrated by Gregory XII., who had been previously condemned in council, and all whose acts and pro- ceedings were formally annulled by another council at Con- stance, held in A. D., 1415.2 Chichesley, however, though himself a grievous persecutor of the true church of Christ, nevertheless continued for thirty years to confer orders on the bishops and other clergy of the Church of England. Was this not a flaw in the line of English descent ? Or can any prelate in existence attempt to prove that his succession, when traced up through past ages, will not be found to lose itself in some such bottomless abyss ? As prelatists rest their claims upon an unbroken line of valid prelatical succession, it is incumbent upon them to make mani- fest the certain existence of such a line ; and failing to do tliis, they must abandon their vain assumptions. It is, therefore, un- necessary for us to give any proof of an actual disruption of this chain. Its existence may be fairly denied, until this is produ. ced ; and its continuity challenged, until positively ascertained by competent judges. We have, however, done more than could be required of us. We have given reasons sufficient to invalidate this line, both as it regards its commencement and its continuance. Now, even could our opponents remove these apparent difficulties in every case but one, and there should remain evidence sufficient to de- stroy the valid connexion of the parts of this line in any single case, enough is left to invalidate the whole. But there is still remaining one general view of the subject, which is of itself sufficient to overthrow all claims resting upon the assumed validity, as a medium for communicating spiritual graces, of the Romish succession. That church, considered as the papacy, is, and has been, for a thousand, or perhaps sixteen ]) Letters on Episcopacy, by the 2) See Fox in Plea for Prcsb. p. Rev. A. Boyd, p ICd. 92. 204 THE PAPACY ANTICHRISTIAN. [tECT. IX. hundred years, an apostate system. There has ever been, we beheve, wilhui it, a true church, composed of many thousands or milhons now in glory. But llie ecclesiastical church system, known and recognized as the papacy, has been, and is novv,anti- christian.' We do not say that the Romish hierarchy has been, or that it is, exclusively antichrist; but that those principles, practices, and doctrines, by which that apostacy is characterized in the word of God, are found embodied in the system of the papacy. These principles, however, we believe to have been inherited by the present hierarchy from that of an age anterior to the time of Constantine ; and that they were the result of that evil and bitter leaven which had begun to diffuse its venomous influ- ence even when the apostles still presided over the infant church. There is the popery of Cyprian and of Dionysius, of Chrysostom and Augustine, of Ambrose and of Basil, as well as of Gregory IX.; and there is, in the one as in the other — differing only in degree — the same corrupting superstition, and the same grasping despotism. Now, what we affirm is, that the Romish church regarded as the embodiment, and visible exemplar of those principles and practices which we denominate — to abstract them from their accidental CO nexion with Rome — the prelacy — was and is esteemed, and upon grounds sufficient for every man who would listen to the warning voice of reason and of prudence, as anti- christian, and apostate. Whatever of truth she may retain, it is hidden, darkened, and withdrawn from common view, by the power of these ensnaring principles. As antichristian, was this system testified against by the most ancient Waldenses, one of whose oldest treatises is on anti- 1) " This conclusion," says Bich- Dr. McCrie, (Life of Knox, vol. i. p. op Hurd, (Inrod. to Study of the 60,) " the parallel passages in the New Proph. Serm. xii. Lond. 183!^, p. 239,) Testament, and showed that the king " that the -pope is antichrist, and the mentioned in his text was the same other, tliat the scripturf, is the elsewhere called the man of sin, the SOLE RULE OF CHRISTIAN FAITH, Were antichrist, the Babylonian harlot ; and the two great principles, on which the that, in prophetical style, these ex- reformation was originally founded." pressions did not describe a single That this was the opinio'i of the re person, but a body or multitude of formers, is, says Bishop Van Milderl, people under a wicked head, includ- certain, as also of modern divines. ing a succession of persons occupying See Boyle, Lect. vol. i pp. 312, 313. the same place." That the reformers " Or rather,'' he says, " it appears to be and tlieir successors freely, without a system of paganism grafted on chris- hesitation, declared popery to be a tianity. " lbid,p. 314. When Knox first damnable religion, see testified by undertof)k to show the Romish church Scott in Hooker's Wks. vol. i. p. 91, to be " the synagocue of Satan," from note, Hanbury's edit. Dan. vii. 24, 25," he compared," says LECT. IX. 1 THE PAPACY ANTICHRISTIAN. 205 Christ.' As such, was it denounced by the Albigenses, who never ceased to cry aloud and bear testimony against it, even when that witness insured to them a merciless and inhuman slaughter.* As such, in every age, was it held up to view by some warning voice, although too generally that voice was hushed in death, ere it had alarmed the slumbering conscience of the thoughtless.^ From the fourth century downwards to the period of the reformation, this system of church principles has been branded as antichristian, and the papacy as an apostacy.* As such, was it reprobated, as with one voice, by all the re- formed churches — by all the leaders of the reformation, — and by the greatest divines from that period until the present hour.* Now, when any visible corporation or association, calling itself a church, or church of Christ, or the one catholic church, rejects Christ's commanded doctrine, and teaches lor doctrines th& commandments of men, it thereby becomes, ipso facto, apos- tate.* The English divines unanimously agree that now the Romish hierarchy is thus apostate.'^ The errors of that church are shown to be even damnable to those who might know them to be such, and yet obstinately persist in their avowal.* 1) See largely quoted in Faber's Albigenses, pp. 301, 370 - 373. Also, pp 421, 420, 489. See the treatise it- self, given in Blair's History of the Waldenses, vol. i. appendix. 2) See Faber's Albio-enses, pp. 89, 92,93, 159, 161, 162, 248, 252. The Pateirnes, also, accused the church of Rome of being the seat of Satan. (See Blair's Waldenses, vol. i. p. 193 ) Nine bishops in Lombardy and the Grisons rejected the pope as a heretic in the sixth century. Blair's Wal- denses, vol. i. p. 80. 3) See the testimony of Vigilan- tius in the fourth age in Faber. 4) See ibid, pp. 294, 295, 298, 393. That it was so in the eighth century, as proved by scripture, and the testimony even of Romish writers, see shown in Nolan on the Millen- ium, pp. 76-89, et passim. 5) See Powell on A pp. Succ. pp. 113 &c. 134 &c. 140 ; Letters of the Martyrs, (Cranmer.) pp. 19.20. 9, and Ridley, pp. 45, 49, 52, 74 - 77, &c. As taught in the homilies, see Palmer, vol. i. pp. 306, 307. See also pp. 317, 310, and Powell, p. 113; Faber on Al- bigenses, pp. 25-27, 194,273,534- 540 ; and as to all the reformed churches, see ibid, p 160, and Brit. Ref. vol. i. p. 133, &c. ; (Cobham) p. 127, (The Lollards) pp. 129, 143, &c. ; Burnet on 39 Art. p. 243, where see Davenant. Bishop Hall's Wks. "At the lateanniversary of the Brit- ish Reformation Society, the Rev. E. Bickersteth expressed his perfect conviction, that popery was the pre- dicted apostacy, and that the pope was the man of sin, and that he was no churchman, who denied that the pope was the antichrist of scripture." N. Y. Obs. 6) So teaches even Palmer, vol. i. p. 64. So also Dr. Barrow on the Unity of the Church, Wks. vol. ii. p. 762. 7) See Palmer, vol. i. pp. 253, 282, 298, 304. 8) Chillingworth, Wks. vol. i. pp. 124, 137, 14G. During the preva- lence of Arianism in the churcli, as Hilary and Basil say, "the orthodox were hatched under the wings of the Arian priests." The church of Rome herself ar- gues, that idolatry unchurches any body guilty of it. Now, according to- the belief of all prntestant Christen- dom, the church of Rome, so far forth as she has acted upon the doctrine of transubstantiation, praying to angels and saints, «fec. has been guilty of idolatry. And so also will the church 206 THE ROMISH SUCCESSION APOSTATE. [lECT. IX. But transubstantialion, which is one of the worst of those errors, was established by the fourth lateran synod, in 1215, was beheved generally by the scholastic divines — and enforced in the council of Constance.' Purgatory, and the infallibility of the pope, were also enjoined by the council of Florence, and were, long before the council of Trent, held generally as re- ceived doctrines within the Romish church.* It is thus made clear, that the Romish hierarchy has been regarded as apostate by all the reformed churches ; as it was also by the Syrian church in Malabar.^ Of course, the prelatic succession, being exclusively managed, guided, and controlled, and made to subserve the purposes, and to meet the wishes, of the apostacy ; and not of Christ's true church, which lay enfolded within that apostacy, must partake of the character of its source, and is, therefore, an antichrislian and apostate succession." Let it also be here brought to view, that Christ's true flock, even while hunted as wild beasts, " protested (let us mark it) not so much against the papal tyranny as against the very practices and opinions which the Romish church had inherited entire from the Nicene church."* It was the prelacy, including the usurped dominion of the prelates, and all those superstitious doctrines whereby they exalted their supremacy over the hearts of men — as, for instance, the efficacious virtue of the sacraments when episcopally administered, prayers for the dead, absolution, pen- ance, asceticism, virginity, &c. — against which this loud remon- strance has been borne. Even, then, could we not make manifest in particulars, as might, nevertheless, most easily be done, that by every rule and canon of judgment, the succession from the apostles' times to the reformation, has been, in numberless ways, rendered invalid, in- of Rome insist, that during the previa- ed.,) admits this consequence. For lence of the heresy of Arius, the after quoting the strong expressions of church was idolatrous. (See Leslie's the Homily, (Perils of Idol. p. Ill,) Letter on Episcop. in Scholar Armed, he adds, " How could she (i.e. the vol. i. p. 72.) It follows, therefore, Romish church.) retain this divine that the line of the prelatical succes- mission and jurisdiction all this time, sion, which depends for its personal and employ them in commissioning continuity upon the continuance of her clergy all this time, (eight hun- the Romish church, as a true and dred years,) to preach up this detesta- sure church, must necessarily be in- ble idolatry .^" He argues that on this validated. ground she could give no orders in 1) See Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 222, succession at all. 224, 230. 5) See Anc't. Christ, vol. i. p. 4.53, 2) See Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 235, and Hough's Vind. as above, p. 70, 244 245. where, among other things in which 3) See Hough's Vind. of Protest, the Syrian church differed from the Missions, p. 70. Roman church, is the fact that "she 4) Dr. Milner,in his End of Con- holds two orders, the priesthood and troversy, (letter xxix. p. 184, Philad. diaconate." LKCT. IX.] THE ANGLICAN AND ROMISH SUCCESSION INVALID, 207 formal, uncanoiiical, and that it has been unchristian, and actu- ally voided and broken ; there is more than enough in this gen- eral and admitted charge, to bring into utter condemnation the " fundamental axiom " of prelacy, — her message and commission from heaven, countersigned and attested by an unbroken succes- sion of lineal and true descendants of the apostles, with gifts and graces from on high.' It is granted, that the prelatic Church of England cannot prove this succession without going back to the church of Rome, and connecting her present succession with tliat of the Romish hier- archy.** Indeed, it is shown by Bishop Godwin, in his lives of English bishops, that a large proportion of them were ordained at Rome, and by Romish prelates.^ It is also granted by our opponents, that a church might be- come so plainly apostate, as to lose its power of ordination.* Further, it is allowed that Rome is heretical now and has hereby forfeited her orders* — having bound the whole Roman com- munion in the council of Trent, by a perpetual bond and cove- nant, to the cause of antichrist.^ But on the ground assumed by the strongest advocates of these prelatic claims, to wit, that the Church of England is iden- tical with the church as it existed in England before the refor- mation— she being unchanged in every thing except her civil relations and some circumstantials — on this ground, we say, the Romish church is no more apostate now than it was before the reformation.'' For at that time the Romish and the Anglican churches, as far as England was concerned, were one and the same. If, then, the Romish church in England was not apos- tate then, neither is that church apostate now — but if the Ro- mish church is apostate now, then was the Anglican church before the reformation also apostate. Whatever is true of the Romish church, anterior to the reformation, is also true of the Anglican church, which was one of its branches. But the Romish church inculcates now only what led the 1) See Lond. Quarterly Review, thus consecrated ; and from 1119 to March, 1840. pp. 272, 274. 1342, 1 find twelve archbishops of 2) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p 88. Burnet York indebted solely to Rome for all on the 39th Art. p. 245. the gifts they conferred on others." 3) See this shown at large in 4) O.xford Tracts, vol. i. p. 95. Powell on Ap. Succ. sec. xii. p. 123. 5) Ibid. " Is it not a matter of indubitable car- 6) Ibid, p. 96, and Wordsworth's tainty that, from the seventh to the Eccl. Biog.. vol. iv. p. 94. fifteenth century, the archbishops of 7) Dr. Hook's Call to Union. Dr. Canterbury and York, as well as seve- Pusey's Letter. Dodsworth on Ro- ral of the bishops, were in general inanism and Dissent. Lond. Quart consecrated by the pope or his legates.' Rev. Ap. 1839. Oxf Theol. Palmer From 6G8 to 1414, 1 find no fewer than on Ch. &c. seventeen archbishops of Canterbury 208 THE ROMISH AND ANGLICAN STTCCESSION INVALID, [LECT. IX. English reformers, with all the reformed churches, and the true church of Jesus Christ in every past age, to hrand her as anti- christian, heretical, and idolatrous. The Romish hierarchy had, therefore, lost the privilege of ordination as well before, as she has since the reformation. Her orders, as these very writers insist, when arguing with her, were then just as much as now, to say the very least, of a doubtful character.* When brought to the test, either of scripture, of reason, or of the canon law, they are and were most demonstrably unsound, and a perfect nullity.'^ The conclusion, therefore, is inevitable. The orders of the English prelatic church, being derived from Rome, are less than nothing and vanity. Her whole unbroken line of pre- latic succession, idolized as it is, is what the apostle defines other idols, quite as rationally worshipped by their blinded devotees, a mere nothing in the world. Even in the fulness of its boasted sufficiency, it is in straits ; and when brought to the test of his- torical investigation, it perishes in the fire of probation, and is thus shown to be the hay, wood, and stubble, which cannot endure the breath of this fiery furnace. Seeing, then, that this prelaiical succe?sion is identified with that of the papacy, which has been pronounced apostate and antichristian by the universal judgment of all true christians, of every age and of every country, it is unnecessary to pursue its investigation with any minuteness beyond the period of the ref- ormation. Being, as we have seen, united up to that time with the stream of the papacy, it must with it be condemned. And as by the decision of the true catholic and universal church, this Romish hierarchy — and of course the prelatical or papistical succession — has been declared antichristian, so has this very hierarchy utterly repudiated the present claims of the Anglican prelacy to a true and valid succession. The existing orders of the English church are declared to be null and void, and without any foundation whatever, by that very power to whom she has subjected her character and claims, as a true church of Jesus Christ — and whom her divines are now courting as their dear sister, and reverencing as their honored mother.^ But even should we assume, as authenticated and genuine, the uninterrupted line of the Anglican succession, from the time of the apostles to the period of the reformation — and commence our examination of it with the reformed dynasty — there is as little ground for any rational faith in its unfounded assumptions. 1) Palmer on Ch., vol. ii. part vi. 3) See Palmer on the Ch., vol. ii. and vii. part ii. 2) See Powell, sect. xi. LECT. IX.] THK ANlJLli .AN S)t;COUsSU)\ WITHOUT HEUINMNG. 209 The present succession of the Anglican church was vitiated at its very fountain. Like that of Rome, it wants a begin- ning, or one duly and properly substantiated. Unless there has been imparted to this hierarchy a new implantation of the plenitudo sumnii sacedotii, by which " supreme power she can supply the deficiencies of dubious ordinations,'" and can " ani- mate a dead form with the inward grace of the divine commis- sion;"* and "remove all the impediments which prevent that grace from descending :"^ unless she can give miraculous evi- dence of such an immediate, and divine appointment and inves- titure — then is she assuredly despoiled of her principality and power, and her all-necessary succession hopelessly destroy- ed. For a valid consecration can be conferred only by those whose capacity to administer it is '' in no degree doubt- ful"*— "and since this divine grace or commission is only given to those who are thus lawfully ordained, and when (thus) actually ordained ;"* and " no such doubtful ordinations could be cured by their now combining, in numbers, to remedy the defect, so that ten or twenty bishops, themselves invalidly or- dained, could not confer a valid ordination"* — the prelatic Church of England has not now, and never can restore within herself, a true and valid succession. The history of the present Church of England, as established at the reformation, renders all pretensions to a divine right, or an apostolical descent for the order of her prelates, supremely ridiculous. " I allude," to use the words of Dr. Mitchell,'' "to the king's compelling all the bishops within his realm, to take out commis- sions from him, by which they acknowledged, that all jurisdiction, civil and ecclesiastical, flowed from the king, and that they exercised it, only at the king's courtesy ; and that as they had it of his bounty, so they would be ready to deliver it up at his pleasure; and therefore the king did empower them to ordain, give institution, and do all the other parts of the episcopal func- tion." " Thus," as our author remarks, " were they made," not Christ's bishops, but " the kind's ministers" or lieutenants. Does not this proceeding of Henry, taken in connexion with your scheme, present to us a curious contemplation? — a divine right established by human laws; and successors of the apostles, not merely nominated by a lay sovereign, but comini'^sioned to act in his stead, as his deputies or delegates, and removable from 1) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 474. 5) Ibid, p. 441. 2) Ibid, p. 431. 6) Ibid, p. 473. 3) Ibid. 7) Presb. Letters, pp. 274, 275, 4) Palmer, v«l. ii. p. 486. 276, 279, 250. Se« als* pp. 2^6, 8^6. 27 210 THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION A REGAL ONE. [LECT. IX. their office, as deputies ordinarily are, at his pleasure? 'But Henry iiad no riglit to the authority he assumed.' No matter, he exercised it ; and you derive your orders from bishops, whom he empowered to ordain, give institution, and do all the other parts of the episcopal function, in his name, and in his stead ; irom bishops, who had no authority, temporal or spiritual, but what King Henry gave them." " Thus it happens, for the ever- lasting honor and consolation of all high-churchmen in this island, that Henry VUI. and his delegates or lieutenants in the episcopal office, stand in the line of succession between you and the apostles ; and then unless you will all be re-ordained by the pope, or some patriarch of a Greek, Asiatic, or African church, or by the moderator of our general assembly, who would do it as well as any of them, Henry VIH. and his ecclesiastical lieutenants will stand to the end of the world, though your flocks should all go to perdition, because their bishops and priests are ' intruders and usurpers;' — a mortifying truth to men, whose pretensions are so high. But who can make that straight, which has, in the course of providence, been long crooked?" " On this footing," says Mr. Anderson, " was prelacy settled, even in England, at the reformation ; and 1 challenge any man to produce documents, where, even to this day, they have bet- tered its foundation, or settled it upon scri))ture authority, or divine institution." I am not aware, that any person has accepted this challenge.^ The ordination of Archbishop Parker, the trunk of their present succession, was confessedly "disorderly,'"^ and " a violent proceed- ing ;"^ and " carried on amid human sin," and a "scandal," and an " error." — It was, as many insist, and as the Romish church affirms, altogether a nullity, and in contradiction to all law. Now it is a poor excuse for this grievous sin to inform us, as Mr. Newman does, that " similar scandals" mark the entire chain of this prelatical succession up to the earliest age, so that " in truth the whole course of Christianity from the first, when we come to examine it, is but one series," as he allows, of such "troubles and disorders."* All the waters of a flood will not wash out "this especial stain, which is imputed to the Anglican ]) " The regal supremacy was 2) Lect. on Romanism, pp. 424 the leading principle of the reforma- and 429. tion, and hath been lately styled (by 3) Ibid, p. 417. the bisliop of L. and C, Charge, p. 4) See Newman on Romanism, 41.) the groundwork of it." Sir pp. 417 and 424, wlio breaks the force Michael Foster, Knt. Exam, of tlie of the Romish objection by showing Scheme of Church Power. This fact that " similar scandals " were corn- Sir Michael Foster, in the above work, mon in the Romish succession, up to demonstrates by a multitude of facts, the earliest ages. See pp. 418, 430. whose force cannot be resitted. See putiffi. LECT. IX.] Parker's consecration invalid. 211 church" when " a new succession was introduced'" — not by the authority of Heaven, but by the plenipotentiary authority of a woman, (Queen Ehzabeth,) who, althoui;h forbidden by express writ of Heaven to rule in the church at all, but rather commanded to be in subjection, was made by th.e traitorous conduct of these same prelates, arbitress of the truth, and sovereign lord, as well of the souls and consciences, as of the lives and floods of the people.'' Then it was that Christendom beheld the spectacle, never before witnessed in the darkest times of Romish despotism, *' tbe cruel and ridiculous usurpation of purely spiritual authority by tbe kings and queens of England."^ The facts relating to the consecration of Archbishop Parker, demand our special consideration. These show incontrovertibly, that the very fountain of that modern succession, from which the Anglican church derives all its pretended virtue, is fatally poisoned. The existing succession of that church can rise no higlier than its source, either as to antiquity or validity ; and is therefore recent in its origin, and doubtful in its character. For when Elizabeth came to the throne, and the reformation of the church was again commenced, all the bishops in the kingdom, except Kitchen of Landaff, refused to comply.* It was there- fore impossible to derive any canonical or valid succession from the ancient British line, since three are necessary to convey such succession. The whole chain of the present Anglican succession hangs, then, upon the validity of Archbishop Parker's consecration. Now he was ordained by not a single prelate of the ancient Brit- ish line ; but by four English bishops, who had been consecrated in the reign of Edward, and who were afterwards deposed in the reign of Queen Mary, by that very church, on whose author- ty the succession depends, — and had never been restored ; — that is to say. Barlow, Scory, Coverdale, and Hodgkins. Kitchen, the only remnant of the ancient British line, though appointed to do so, yet did not in fact, assist at the consecration of Parker. On this subject Mr. Jared Sparks thus writes :* " Again, the validity of Archbishop Parker's consecration, in the time of Queen Elizabeth, is well known to be, at least, very questionable; yet this is the origin of the present English succes- sion. Edward the Sixth abolislied the Romish form of ordina- tion, and substituted a new one in its place, which is still retained in the church. The old form was restored by Queen Mary, but rejected again by Elizabeth, and that of Edward adopted. When 1) Lect. on Romanism, p. 417. 5) See Letters on Min. Rit. and 2) Spiritual Despotism, p. 357. Doct of Prot. Epii. Ch. Bait, ld20, p. 3) Ibid. See all eec. viii. 3?. 4) Buraet UiCt of Refx 212 Parker's consecration invalid. [lect. ix. Parker was nominated to be archbishop of Canterbury, in 1559, she issued a commission to certain bishops to perforin the cere- mony of consecration, accordinj^ to the prescribed form. Some of them refused to comply, alleging that such a consecration would not be valid. She issued another commission to such persons, as she knew would not refuse, but whose episcopal authority was much to be doubted. The catholics immediately disputed this consecration, and have almost universally denied its validity. They profess to have proved, that Barlow, the consecrating bishop, was never himself consecrated. They say, that no record of this transaction was found or cited, till more than fifty years afterward, when the Lambeth Register was first quoted. And even this register entirely destroys the validity of tlie conse- cration, by showing it to iiave been performed according to King Edward's ordinal, which was not consistent with any former usage of the church. " I shall not pretend to decide on these objections of the catho- lics ; but if well founded, they must prove the invalidity of Parker's consecration, and the weakness of all pretensions in the Church of England to a divine succession. "To my mind these objections, and others, briefly and clearly stated in the memoir of the Abbe Renandot, are convincing. Some of them are partially removed in Courayer's elaborate an- swer, but he has by no means cleared the subject of difficulties."! 1) " The persons who consecrat- " Parker being in this way raised to ed Parker," says Dr. Rice, (Evangel, the see of Canterbury, proceeded to Mag. vol. X. pp. 38,39.) "were not bish- consecrate fourteen bishops in place ops at the time of performing the ser- of those who iiad been deprived by vice. The persons who performed this Queen Elizabeth, as supreme head of office, were Barlow and Scory, bish- the church. Here, then, we see that ops elect of Chichester and Hereford, almost all the bishops of England, C'oz3erersede successitm of the ministry. Its di- the necessity of proving facts in the vine institution, and the promise to history of man, by that which alone be with it, to the end of the world, is can prove tliem, credible testimony .' a better proof of succession than a You may demonstrate truths by rea- inillion of volumes would be. But, soning, but 1 never heard that reason- although I deem this a sufficient an- ing can prove historical facts; though Bwer to the objection, yet I will meet 1 know, that in tlie course of human it in another way : I say, then, that affairs, many facts occur that baffle we have records, equal to those for a all reasoning a priori, and set even the succession of the raanuscripts of the conjectures of the most profound wis- Bible." dom at defiance. Surely, you mean LECT. IX. J NO PBOOF OF AN UNBKOKEN SUCCESSION. 223 But to this, it must be replied, that there is no analogy in the case presented, in bar of our conclusion. For, in the first place, the very claim in question, is made to depend upon the unbroken line of this succession. In the second place, we re- mark, that the transmission of the sacred gift, is alleged to de- pend upon the personal validity of each descendant, in this hereditary line of apostolical succession. Thirdly, we would say, that, in the case before us, there is, as is confessed, no such statute of limitations. On the contrary, we are assured, that this lineal succession, and the claim resting upon it, is to continue to the end of time, as the peculiar mark of the true catholic church. And finally, we would say, that these breaks in the chain of this boasted descent, can be pointed out, at its very be- ginning, and from thence downwards, and that we defy all the industry of man to make good the soundness of any one pre- tended link in any part of this existing chain. The plea, there- fore, is unavailing, and our demand for the perfect establishment of the purity of each separate link, remains in all its force. Bring, then, these prelatical claims to the standard of histori- cal verity, and they are found to be incapable of any satisfacto- ry proof.^ Tried by those tests which are approved as just and necessary, not one single link in the whole chain can be sub- stantiated. We were, indeed, boldly told, that every individual in this Anglican hierarchy is able to bring out, from the sacred ark, this unbroken and uninterrupted chain, and exhibit it to the confusion of every doubting infidel. Now we have, with some diligence, put ourselves to school to many masters in Israel, and faithfully scanned their manuals of instruction. And we have wondered with an increasing amazement, that, up to this moment, we have been able to find so little beyond the reiteration of this same confident boasting. We have yet to find tlie man who, with the rashness of Phaeton, can cast himself upon the devious void of that bottomless abyss, by which we are dissevered from the birth-hour of Christianity ; to jost with us, when you speak of or an institute, it TS IMPOSSIBLE, proving facts by 'a clear, satisfactory at all events, to PROVE the FACT train of reasoning.' " of SUCH SUCCESSION, or to trace 1) That the succession tested by it down the stream of time. In this history cannot be sustained, see ar- case, the fact seems to involve the gued in Dr. Willet's Syn. Pap. pp. 82 doctrine; and if the fact be hope- B3. LESSI.Y obscure, the doctrine is ir- The Rev. J. E. Riddle, in his recent recovekably lost." " It is impossi- and very extensive work on " Christ, bie to prove the personal succession Antiquities," and under his " Plea for of modern bishops, in an unbroken Episopacy," «!kc (Lond. 1839, p. Ixxii. episcopal line, from the apostles or Pref. ],) says. " whatever may become men of the apostolic age." of the apostolic succession as a theory 224 THE SUCCESSION UTTERLY HOPELESS. [lECT. IX. and who, having carried this golden chain safely and unharmed across tliat perilous way, can grasp, with firm hand, the throne of apostolic power, and fix it in that sure foundation. It is not the closing links in this progression, of which we stand most in jeopardy, and for which we demand far — far clearer evidence; though even these, as we have seen, are but of a very doubtful character, if not, indeed, hopelessly uncertain. We can, how- ever, for argument's sake, suppose our skepticism silenced, though not satisfied, as far as regards the period of the refor- mation. But how can any man attempt to sustain the validity and the certainty of this personal succession, during all previous ages? Who shall lift this ponderous chain, even at its connexion with the reformation, and carry it backwards, until it is appended to Christ Jesus, the rock of ages — the cause of causes ? — so that from him may proceed that influence which may propagate downwards to the very last point, in the lengthening series. We again challenge the proof which has been so boldly offered. And, in default of this — and assuredly it is wanting at every stage — we fearlessly scout the whole hypothesis, as wild, chi- merical, fictitious, and unsupported either by history or scrip- ture. ADDITIONAL NOTE TO LECTURE NINTH. NOTE A. As to the character of the individuals who constitute this line, it is unnec- essary to enlarge much. A few notices may be given of these infallible heads of the infallible church. Episcopius, in his Labyrinth, or Popish Circle, Arg. vi. (republ. in S. Chr. Advoc. Ap. 2, 1841,) in refuting this claim of the succession, says : " But who shall show us the truth, and give us the fullest assurance of it .'' Shall the true church .■' But where or which is that .' This cannot be shown. For after the succession of persons has been proved, it is still neither certain nor indubitable, that the church which has the succession, has the truth on its side, or has always been exempt from heresy ; and by consequence, whether it has the right and power of determining that it is the true church. What church then is it which will infallibly point out to us and say, " This is true ;" and that, on the contrary, is heretical ? For a church that is without the suc- cession, cannot, according to the Jesuits, do this, nor can even that church which has the succession, as appears from the principles already laid down. What end is there then to all this ? It is impossible for a papist to untie this knot. To this I also add, let it be granted that no heretical bishops have intervened in the line of succession, but only such as have by force, faction, popular tumult or bribes, intruded themselves into the apostolical see, — where then, 1 inquire, will be the succession ? For must we believe that holy and saving truth can better consist with these nefarious practices, than with heresy or error .'' Nay, further, — if it is a matter of historical record, that for fifty or eighty years together, there have been two or three popes at the same time ; one of them denying to another the very name of christian, reproaching each other with the appellations of heretic and antichrist, and each pronouncing the other an unlawful pope ; that one cut off two of the fingers of his prede- cessor ; dug up the bodies of others from their graves, and having insulted their ashes, ordered them to be cast into the Tiber; — that sometimes all the three popes together, were condemned and degraded by a general council, as false popes, heretics, and ungodly wretches, not even to be reckoned in the number of christians ; and that nevertheless many bishops and clergy were ordaiued by these false popes, — in what manner is the broken thread of the succession to be united .' For, if it be said, for example, ' That the pope is to be accounted a true one, who, in the time of the council of Constance, was by common consent, put in the place of the three popes deposed by that coun- cil, and who succeeded to the last deceased legitimate pope, the apostolical see having in the meantime been vacant, and usurped by force;" he will enter into a new labyrinth, because many of the popish doctors, Bellarmine in particular, and all the Jesuits, deliver and urge it as their opinion, that the council of Constance is, in this respect, to be regarded as unlawful, inasmuch as it decreed that a council is above the pope, and because it was not approved by that impious man, Pope John XXIII. or XXIV. who had convened it, and was by its sentence deposed, or by the pope whom the council appointed in his stead. For if this council is not in that respect to be considered a lawful one, how then shall a lawful succession be established ? Would the approval of so infamous a man as Pope John, who was charged by the council itself with atheism, have rendered this assembly a lawful one.' It is shameful to make such an assertion ; and it would be much more shameful to assert, that 29 226 NOTE TO LECTURE IX. the council wag unlawful, solely because it was not approved by him. Or would it have been a lawful council, if it had received the approbation of the succeeding pope ? But it will then indeed appear to be unlawful ; because the man who was constituted pope by this council did not say that lie and others in similar circumstances with himself were subject to a council ; but on the contrary, in imitation of Lucifer, son of the morning, strenuously asserted that he was superior to any council, — though it is highly credible, that he approv- ed of the decree of the council before he was chosen pope. Now who does not see in all this, a circle of absurdities ? For whichever way you take it, the perplexity presents itself, if the authority of the council of Constance was not higher than that of the i>opc, it could not have deposed the pope; in this case, therefore, those infamous popes are to be reckoned among the legitimate- ly succeeding bishops, in a continued succession, which was not interrupted by reason of their heresy, atheism, simony, violence, and other abominable wickedness. On the other hand, if an interruption through these crimes and heresies be granted, then the succession is at once vitiated and destroyed, for the same reason as that which Bellarmine gives, to prove that the succession in the Greek church ought not to be accounted a legitimate one." Pope John XH. in a synod held at Rome, was (Bishop Fowler in Notes of the Ch. p. 255, from Luitprand Hist. lib. n. cap. 6 — 10, pp. 153 — 158,) for- mally accused before Otho the Great, viz : " The ordaining a deacon in a sta- ble; the committing of adultery and incest ; the putting out the eyes of a holy man ; the drinking a health to the god of this world ; the invoking of Jupiter and Venus when he was at dice, in favor of his cast. The synod sat, the wit- nesses were ready, his piesence was urged by the emperor and by the synod. He refused to appear ; and instead of purging himself, he sent this menace to the synod, ' That if the fathers deposed him, he would excommunicate all of them, and make them incapable of ordaining and celebrating mass.' " The following is the confession of Father Paul of the order of the Servites, and consulter of state of the republic of Venice, in his Treatise of Benefices and Revenues. (Westminster, 1727, pp. 60 — 63, without the notes, and p. 64.) " From this time until the year 963, during the space of 80 years, wherein Italy labored under the extremes! confusions, as well in the civil government as ecclesiastical, especially in the papacy, we must not expect to find any traces or form of good government in the church, but a mere chaos of impie- ties, and a general preparative and forerunner of the miserable revolutions and disorders wliicli followed. " Popes were then excommunicated b)' their successors, and their acts cursed and annulled : not excepting the very administration of the sacraments. Six popes were driven out and dethroned by those who aspired to their places ; two popes put to death, ond Pope Sleplien VIII. wounded in the face, with so much deformity, that he never appeared in public. Theodora, a famous courtesan, by the interest and faction she had then in Rome, got her professed lover chosen pope, who was called John X. And John XI. was chosen pope at the age of 20 years, the bastard of another pope, dead 18 years before. And in sliort, such a series of wild disorders gave occasion to historians to say, that tiiose times produced not popes, but monsters. " Cardinal Baronius, being under some difficulty how to treat these corrup- tions, saith, that in those days the church indeed was for the most part without a pope, but not without a head ; its spiritual head Christ being in heaven, who never abandons it. In effect it is certain, that Christ hath never yet forsook his church ; neither can his divine promise which he hath made us f. lil, that he will be with it even to the end of the world. And on this occa- sion it is the duty of every christian to believe with Baronius, that the same calamities wliich happened in the world at that time, hath happened also at another. " So that a pope was not necessary to the existence of a church, even though there should never more have been a pope. " But the general state of the church was then in truth every where else as deplorable. Princes gave bishoprics to their soldiers, and even to little children. Count Herebert, uncle to Hugh Capet, made his son archbishop of Rheims; and Pope John X. confirmed it." NOTE TO LECTURE IX. 227' " How hideous," exclaims Baronius, (ad. ann.OOOin Presb. Let. pp. 251,25Ji,) " was the face of the Roman church, when filthy and impudent whores governed all at Rome, changed sees at pleasure, disposed of bishoprics, and intruded their gallants and their bullies into the see of St. Peter ! The canons were trodden under foot," &c. " He acknowledges with a candor that is highly honorable to him, that the episcopal succession did actually fail in the ninth and tenth centuries ; for he calls the popes of those times usurpers (invasores apostoliccc sedis,) and not apostolic bishops, but apostates. Nay, he confesses explicitly, that the church was then, for the most part, without a pope, though not without a head, Jesus Christ being in heaven. Platina joins the cardinal, and says, that, when almost all the popes were raised to the throne by simony, by violence and out- rage, or by the intrigues of vile courtesans, the see of St. Peter was seized, not possessed, and seized by monsters, not popes. And yet those holy usurpers, apostates, and monsters, and the apostates and monsters whom they set in every part of the western church, are your spiritual progenitors ! I congratu- late you on your descent from ancestors so illustrious. They seem to me to connect you rather with Herod and Pontius Pilate, Nero and Caligula, than with Christ and his apostles." Hear Bishop Burnet. In his Work on the Articles, (p. 438 on Art. 28,) he thus speaks : " The writers of the fourth and fifth centuries give us dismal repre- sentations of the corruptions of their times ; and the scandalous inconstancy of the councils of those ages, is too evident a proof of what we find said by the good men of those days : but things fell lower and lower in the succeedinor ages. It is an amazing thing, that in the very office of consecrating bishops, examinations are ordered concerning those crimes, the very mention of which give horror. Dc Coitu cum Musculo etcum Quadrupcdibus." See on this subject, " The History of Popery," Lond. 1735, vol. i. pp. 9, 22, 45, &c. See also, " The Rights of the Christian Church," Lond. 1707, ed. 3d. p. 354, &c. And now, in conclusion, we may say with Chillingworth — " It cannot be believed that the spirit of God descended through that succession of prelates, who were so many of them so notoriously and confessedly wicked, because he is the spirit of truth whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him." See Chillingworth, vol. i. p. 400. Hear also Isaac Taylor : (Pref to Life of Luther, in Lond. Chr. Obs. Aug. 1840, p. 508 :) " Then again the historical proof, touching the church of Rome, is complete, showing first, and by the testimony of his adherents, so extreme a profligacy and ferocity to have ordinarily belonged to the papal court and hier- archy, as utterly to exclude the belief of a divine presence, favor, and super- intendence, connected with persons and with bodies of men thus flagrantly wicked and cruel. And secondly, the historical proof of palpable contrarieties and variations in doctrine and practice, is such as can never be made to con- sist with the theory of a divinely sustained infallibility." See also Voetius Desperata Causa Papatus, lib. iii. sect. ii. cap. i. Also Rutherford's Due Right of Presb. p. 235, «S:c. LECTUEE X. THE PKELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION BROUGHT TO THE TEST OF FACTS. It is of God's infinite and free mercy, there is such an insti- tution as the christian church. The church is the concentra- tion— and, in its visible form, the outward manifestation, — of all God's most gracious and innumerable benefits, conferred upon our fallen and apostate world. It is the ark prepared against that last and awful deluge, which is to overwhelm, in remediless perdition, the whole race of ungodly men, — into which we are now invited to enter ; — and by which all who do thus truly en- ter, and abide within it, shall be delivered in the great day of wrath. Not that there is any thing either in the forms, polity, or even in the doctrine and sacraments of the church, which, in themselves considered, are any the more available to salvation, except as they are quickened by divine influence, than there was any power inherent in the boards with which the ancient ark was constructed, apart from the upholding and directing care of the Almighty, to save and to deliver them that entered it. But God, in the one case absolutely, and in the other ordinari- ly, has chosen to bestow his mercy through the instrumentality of his own appointment; and so, by the church, is made known the wisdom and mercy of God, faith coming by hearing, and hearing by the preaching of the word. It is, therefore, all-important, to be well assured that we have committed our souls to a vessel, which will not founder in the dark night of coming tempest, when there will be no eye to pity, and no hand to save. Now prelatists, both Romish and Anglican — to speak of prela- cy as distinct from popery — affirm that there is 'but one church, and that is theirs — but one vessel of mercy aforetime prepared. 230 BISHOP seabury's view of this doctrine, [lect. X. and that they are entrusted with her exclusive management and control. Tliere is, therefore, no getting on board but by their express permission, and assistance ; and whatever other craft we may temerariously construct in the form and figure of a church, will avail us nothing in the hour of peril. Thus we are informed, " the church has within her power, a fountain of spir- itual blessings, which she can open and shut — having authori- ty, which all other denominations want.'" " The short of the matter is this " to use the words of Bish- op Seabury : " In the church of Christ, we have the gov- ernment, faith, sacraments, worship, and ministry or priesthood, which are by divine authority : In the use of them, we can as- suredly depend on the blessings which God hath annexed to them. To this church the Holy Spirit is given. As members of it, we receive his heavenly graces and influences, to conduct us to the hope of our calling — eternal life through Jesus the Redeemer. Out of the church, we are sure of none of these things ; because, out of the church, God hath not prom- ised them.^ "If then," he continues, "we receive the Holy Ghost, in virtue of our being made members of Christ's church, it will follow, that if we renounce his church, we renounce that Spirit which we received by coming into his church ; and, consequent- ly, we renounce all that God can do for us ; for all that God can do for us must be done by and through his Spirit." " Hence appears the absurdity of the right so generally claimed by christian professors, of forming their own church, or of joining any party of people whom they shall please to call a church. Christ has but one church ; and if we be not in his church, we are out of it; and, let our religion be ever so right and good in our estimation, it can have no warranted title to those privileges and blessings which are, by divine authority, annexed to the church of Christ." " If we set up a ministry by our own authority, and call our ministers Christ's ministers, it will confer no power from him upon them ; and the sacraments they shall administer can be only our sacraments, and not Christ's. Should they preach, and what they preach be true, they have no commission from Christ, and preach not by his appointment. If we wish to receive the full benefit of the government, ministry, sacraments, and faith, which Christ hath appointed for us, we must have them according to his institution, or we have no right to apply 1) Lond. Quart. Rev. March, 2) Sermon on Christian Unity, 1840. See p. 280. Episcopal Tracts, No. xliv. p. 7. LECT. X.] THE ROMISH VIEW OF THIS DOCTRINE. 231 to ourselves the gracious promises he hath made to his church — that is, we must have them according to his own commission and authority exercised in his church." So, also, in the Pastoral Letter of the recent provincial coun- cil of Roman catholic prelates, held in Baltimore, " united for the purpose of consulting how to discharge the weighty obliga- tions of their apostleship ;'" after a similar exhibition of the doctrine of the one church, which is, of course, that of which they are in possession ; and of the doctrine of the apostolical succession ; we are informed,' that " it is plain, that as the com- mission of the ministry was lodged with the whole body, (i. e. the Roman catholic church,) united to its head, (i. e. the pope,) no minority (i. e. the episcopal, presbyterian, or other churches,) however respectable, especially when opposed to the majority, and separated from the head, could lawfully claim to act under that commission ; nor could any individual, (as Lu- ther, or Calvin,) or voluntary association (e. g. the English church, or our own,) reasonably arrogate to itself the power of performing the functions of that commissioned tribunal," — which is "regularly commissioned, (in St. Peter,) and also regularly perpetuated,'" (in the Romish hierarchical succession.) That we are bound to worship God in this special manner, is, we are told, one of the first principles of the church,* of which church, " the innumerable separatists that have gone out from the great body," can be no part." You thus perceive, my brethren, by another illustration, the great practical importance which attaches to a proper under- standing of the subject in whose investigation we are engaged. These claims to universal spiritual " dominion over our faith," and of " lordship over God's heritage," and " to be called mas- ters on earth " — and to hold the keys of death, hell, and heav- en,— are rested upon the doctrine of a lineal succession of 1) Pastoral Letter, &c. p. 5, Bait, ties of Jesus Christ. In fact, the 1840. catholic church in all past ages, has 2) Ibid, p. 11. not been more jealous of the sacred 3) See p. 12. deposite of orthodox doctrine, than of 4) P. 21. the equally sacred deposites of /eo'z'^i- 5) Dr Milner thus states the doc- mate ordination, by bishops who them- trine, (End of Controv. Letter xxix. selves had been rightly ordained and p 177, Pliilad. Ed.) " In viewing it.Trot, bishops, over- never was any succession to any of seers." (Randolph's Enchri. Theol. them, except to Judas the traitor." vol. v. p. 204.) So also Dr. Hammond, (in ibid,) Spanheim Fil. Dissert, iii. num. 25, declares, that the word presbyter was 37 34, though a friend to hier. govt., "fitly made use of by the apostle* in Ayton. app. p. 10. LECT. X.] THE SUCCESSION THEREFORE BASELESS. 253 ulars, in which it is impossible that there should be any real suc- cessors to the office and character of the apostles.' But enough has been said to unbare the nakedness of this empty claim to an extinguished title, and an unexisting office. We must come, therefore, to the conclusion of the learned Whitaker," " munus episcopi nihil est ad munus apostolicum, that THE OFFICE of a BISHOP HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OFFICE OF AN apostle; " and with Cardinal Bellarmine,^ that "epis- copi nullum habent partem verae apostolicae auctoritas. Bishops HAVE NO part OF THE TRUE APOSTOLICAL AUTHORITY."* And since, as Dr. Chapman allows, this is the very hinge of our controversy — and it has been proved defective, and as such, to have been abandoned by men than whom none stand higher, either in the Romish or Anglican churches — we are brought safely to our conclusion, that when tested by facts, this pre- latic doctrine of apostolical succession is found to be what it is when tested by scripture, history, or reason, utterly vain and groundless. To what, then, shall we liken these prelates, and whereunto shall we compare these successors of the apostles, who think it no shame to obtrude upon the notice of the world titles which their ancestors were too modest to assume? and to glory in that to which they thought it not even " decent " to pretend ? They appear unto our minds, reflecting upon these things, as would the self-proclaimed successors of the supreme functiona- ries whom we may imagine to have been appointed by some 1) Orig. Constit. of the Ch. ch. Hoadly's Works, fol. vol. ii. p. i. § ii. p. 20. 827. 2) De Pontif. Quest, iii. cap. iii. See a full argument to prove they p. 69, in Powell, p. 48. had not and could not have, in Dr. 3) De Romano Pont. lib. iv. cap. Willett, Syn. Pap. p. 164, and again xxiv. in same. on p. 165. 4) " The ordination or consecra- This is admitted by Hooker, as it tion, whatever it might be, to that regards the special character of apos- ofEce of bishop, of itself conveyed ties, in Eccl. Pol. b. vii. § 4, vol. iii. p. neither inspiration nor the power of lti7, Keble's ed. working miracles, rchich, with the di- Burton's Hist, of the Ch. ch. viii. red commission from our Lord himself , p. 177, Am. ed. distinguished and set apart the prima- That the apostolic office and the ry apostles from the rest of mankind. prelatical are irreconcilably different, It was only IN a very limited and see shown by Dr. Barrow, Pope's Sup. IMPERFECT SENSE, that they could, Supp. iii. Works, vol. i. fol. p. 598 even in the sees founded by tiie apos- See this subject well illustrated in ties, be called the successors of the Dr. Mitchell's Letters to Bishop Skin- apostles." Milman's Hist, of Christ. ner, p. 72. vol. ii. pp. 70, 72. See also full on in the Altare Da- Our blessed Lord is " the bishop mascenum Davidis Calderwood, p. (that is, overseer) of our souls, as the 190, &c. apostle calls him. It is a sacrilege, See also Colman's Christian Antiq. therefore, to lake that regard which is p. 69; Peirce's Vind. of Dissent, part du* to him and plac« it upon others." iii. ch. i. p. 44, &c. 254 THE PARABLE OF THE PRELACY. [lECT. X. eastern monarch for some great and special ends. Tliese we will suppose received their office by the special favor of their prince, were named after a peculiar title of royal bestovvment, were enrolled in garments of official splendor and most marked distinction, were empowered to discharge functions of the most rarely delegated trust, and seated upon thrones of imperial grandeur around their favoring monarch. And now, in a distant age, and a remote province ; when direct exposure of their claims is deemed impossible, impostors are found boldly demanding from the over-awed multitude, that submissive reverence and obedience, which were due only to the true, and original, and exalted nobility. These individuals have no immediate appointment by their sovereign ; no certi- fied and honorary titles ; no royal robes of office ; no insignia of authority ; nor any privileged admission to the royal presence ; nor any confidential use of the royal signet. And yet, in con- scious destitution of one and all of the essential and distinctive marks of this noble order, they erect themselves into an aris- tocracy ; and, in the absence of the sovereign, subjugate the rightful officers of the kingdom, deprive them of all dignity, re- duce them to the condition of servile obeisance to their com- mand ; and " load themselves to suffocation with unearned emoluments, and trail after them as they go, a long purse, crammed with the price of ruined subjects," "the victims of their aristocratic rapacity.'" Oh, when their sovereign Lord returns in great power, and takes to himself the sword of vengeance, will he not speak forth in anger, and confound them and their abettors with perpetual shame ? He that hath ears to hear let him hear. 1) Spirit. Desp. pp. 395, 397. ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE TENTH. NOTE A. So also Dr. Hammond in Luke vi. 13. " The name (apostle) hath no mor ) in it than to sijrnify messenger or legate." " Amonff the Jews all sorts of messengers are called apostles. So Abijah (1 Kings, xiv. 6.) is called (j^Khi^ai curscTToxisc. that is, a harsh apostle or messenger of ill news. And in the Old Testament the word is no otherwise used. Among the Talmudists it is used of them that were, by the rulers of the synagogues sent out to receive the tentlis and dues that belonged to the synagogues. And in like manner the messen- GEKS of the church tiiat carried, letters congratulatory, from one to another, are, by Ignatius, called (TsotT^o^cu and bioTrgiT^wrAt, the divine carriers or ambassadors; and so in the Theodosian (J ode x, tit. de Judaicis , di\tosU\W a:e those that were sent by the patriarch at a set time, to require tiie gold and sil- ver due to them." " The reader will observe," says Mr. Powell, " that St. Paul does not num- ber Titus with these apostles, or more properly, messengers ; tind for this plain reason, these messengers were persons chosen or ordained by the churches to this business, — Titus was not; but only sent in company with them by the apostle ; they, therefore, were messengers of the churches, and they only ; (2 Cor. viii. 23 ;) " Wliether any do inquire of Titus, he is mv par t?ier and fcllow-lielper concerning you ; or our brethren be inquired of, they are the messengers of the churches, and the glory of Christ." " In Phil. ii. 25, it seems to be used again to mean a public m,^sscnger, a. messenger of the church, sent on their public business. Bishop Taylor here actually perverts the sense by a false translation. He renders a-vti^yoc, my ^^ compeer," in order to raise Epaphro- ditus, as a prototype of modern bishops, to equality with apostles. He would thus make Priscilla and Aquila, (Rom. xvi. 3,) apostolic compeers, tou; a-uHpyiui /uiu ; and perhaps Priscilla would stand as a prototype for a race of female bishops ! Will he also make apostles themselves compeers with God, because they were workers together with him, ©liu ycig itrjuiv irvvi^yoi? (1 Cor. iii. 9.) The apostle's language, however, is distinct, as before : — '• Yet 1 suppose it necessary to send to you Epaphroditus, my companion in labor, trvvifiyc'/ y.iij, but YUUR messenger, vfji.mvi't dTroa-oxov." (Phil. ii. 25.) Dodwell has the candor and good sense to see this. •' But we may easily gather from the epistle to the Phillippians to what the office of Epaphroditus, as anaj)ostle or messenger, referred ; (chap. iv. v. Id :) ' But 1 have all, and abound : I am full, having received of Epaphroditus the things which were sent from you, an odor of a sweet smell, a sarrifice accepta- ble, well pleasing to God.' His office, therefore, bi.lungcd to PECUNIARY affairs. Rem igitur pecuniariam speclabat ilia legatio." Powell, pp. 38, 39. NOTE B. We will here add a very interesting passage from this same work bearing on this same subject, (pp. 164, Ifi?.) " Indifference to preaching has charac- terized all spiritual declensions in the churches : and every revival of religion 256 NOTES TO LECTURE X. has been produced by, and accompanied with, an increased zeal and desire for the preaching of the cross. In proof of this, I refer you to the history of every church in every by-gone time. But you need not lead far. Most of us can refer to the days of our childhood, when a teii-minutes' sermon — if sermon it might be called, that unction of truth had none — once on the Sunday, was enough for ears polite — and when our cleriry were the sportsmen of our fields, the stewards of our race-courses, and the beaux of our ball-rooms; and the ' Family Bible ' was a ' Sunday book.' Howbeit, tliose were the daj's in which our grandmoihers wore black in lent, and our church bells rang duly, wo say not how persuasively, every Wednesday and Friday through the year; the penance of the rapid parson, and the droning clerk, whom the attendance of some half-dozen card-playing septuagenarians brought within the compulsory limits of the law. We have seen great changes, and these are things out of memory, save to our gratitude that they exist no longer. " But what in scarce the third part of a century has made so great a differ- ence.' "The foolishness of preaching,' the zeal lor preaching, and the demand for preaching ; first out of our church, and subsequently in it. Our gospel preachers have changed the tastes of the people, and the opinions of the people have affected the whole character of the ministry. The moral essays have succumbed to empty pews; the dissipated churchman has become the marked exception among a body of truly pastoral clergy ; the knowledge of divinity is now necessary to reputation in the profession of it ; self-interest looks for spir- itual jrilts in the incumbency ; and wliere the truth is to be heard, the week- d ly bell no longer rings in vain. We have been witnesses of this great change : and we know it is attributable to God's blessing, not upon sacraments and church services — for they were always there : but upon the evangelical preaching of the cross in the churches. Must we live to see these steps retraced.'' Are our ministers to be taught once more that it needs no sacred study to read a form of prayer, and no spiritual experience to deliver sacra- ments, and nothing but ordination and a cure, to make a minister of Jesus Christ? " Shall our people be taught again, that all who love or need the word of life must forsake the church and betake themselves to the meeting-house .' We trust, and yet we fear. With deepest grief we see the leaven workinij far dis- tantly from where liie insidious mischief lurks. We hear the altered tone of some whose hearts we think unchanged : some who owe the conversion of their souls to tiie preaching of the gospel ; who loved it better than their necessary food ; have been cheered by it in their sorrows and checked by it in their sins; and would have made many sacrifices rather than forego it. Now they discover that preaching does not signify, they go to church to pray. We tell them, had they always thought so, they had not been what they are. Wiiy not.' There is a liturgy sufficient for the exhibition of the truth. It has not been found so ; and it has not been written so. The commission and command of Jesus is to preach and the blessing of the Father has ever been upon the hearing of the gospel. We appeal to scripture and we appeal to facts; we appeal to the experience of your own souls, which you are dulling into jndifferenfe, and chilling into stone, by withholding yourselves from the sus- tenation Gud has appointed for you; to feed not upon prtiycr, — that was never sppar;ited from the hearing of the truth, in public or in j)rivale; as if the urging of God's ffracicus message upon you, should supersede the responses of your soul to him, or the invitations of your grace indispose you to commu- nion with himself. They never did, they never could. Ynu know they did not; you know yon never joined the public services with less fervor, because you came to hear the truth from the pulpit; possibly you know, that till jou heard it from the pulpit, you never felt the value of the liturgy, or enjoyed those services at all. Alas ' the litursry itself is to share the degradation ; the value is to be in the place where it is said, the lips that utter it, tiie parish church, the canonical hours, the clerical vestments, the disused ceremonies. Give us votaries at once to count our paternosters, for our most spiritual litursry has become a dead-letter, too: waiting upon this mummery to give it elEcacy." LECTURE XI. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION ESSEN- TIALLY POPISH IN ITS TENDENCY AND RESULTS. We now proceed to show that this doctrine of the apostolical succession is, in its tendency, decidedly and essentially popish, and as such is to be eschevvei by every protestant who prefers spiritual liberty and pure doctrine, to spiritual despotism and cor- ruption. This truth has glared forth upon us already, in attempting to fathom the depths of that thick darkness in which its history is so impenetrably shrouded. But it will be important to bring it into tlie clearer ligl)t of a distinct discussion. For some time, we questioned the expediency of introducing this topic at all. We are well aware, that such a charge, alleged against any sincerely protestant communion, is, if not well sustained, the most opprobrious and calumnious with which we could assail it. We are also apprized that the abettors of this doctrine, from Laud to Percival, or Hook, disavow altogether any tendency toward Romanism, and even controvert many of its grossest errors ;' and that we may very easily be made to appear, by such representations, in the light of a false witness against men of learning, piety, and true devotion to the English 1) On the disavowal of this charge ormation, under the unfair epithet of the London Cliristian Obs. remarks, ultra-protestantism; but amidst all (Feb. 1841, p. 72.) •' True it is, that their foil-fencing with popery, they the Oxford tract sect are loud in manage never to put in a mortal thrust; their declamations agniiist what they there may be dust, and noise, and a call ' the errors of the church of little superficial wounding, but its vi- Rome,' — tliough not so loud as in tality is safe at their hands ; it plumes their denunciations of the fundamen- itself upon their aid; it boasts that tal tenets of the churches of the ref- they advocate its leading principles; 33 258 THE DEMAND FOR THIS DISCUSSION. [lect. XI. church. Notwithstanding, however, all this, and more than this ; and ahhough we may suhject ourselves to the charge of illiberality and harshness, we do not feel at liberty to "keep silence." The interests of truth, of charity, and of the great proiestant cause, demand the candid and explicit avowal of our sentiments and our fears. The very fact that the true charac- ter and tendency of this system is not understood by many who receive it; — by many of the clergymen, and we believe the greatest portion of the members of the protestant e[)iscopal church upon which it is fastening itself, and into whose veins it is infusing its poisonous influence, loudly demands that the subject should be fairly presented to their minds. The remembrance also of the open, avowed, and continual rep- robation of this doctrine, from the very first intimations of it until the present hour, as popish, and as dragging with it many popish consequences, by all our puritan, non-conformist, and presby- terian ancestors;' — equally requires that we, their posterity, should sustain them in their faithful contendings for the truth, as far as circumstances make necessary. The signs of the times, the ominous portents which skirt the lowering sky, and foretoken coming danger, the events which are daily transpiring around us, and the boasted and increasing converts to Romanism and and wherever the Oxford tracts have produced any effect, popery has risen in estimation. It is not indeed im- maculate ; that is not pretended — but it is much more estimable than prot- estant slander has accounted it ; and much is itlamented that the Anglican and Romanist churches do not better understand each others' good qualities, and make common cause against the incursions of that direful monster — protestantism." To the allegations that these Oxford divines are eminent for piety, for talent, and for opposi- tion to popery, see the reply of Bishop Mcllvaine in his " Oxford Divinity," &c., in which he shows that herein lies the greatest dangc from their writings. See pp. ]2, 27, &c , 30, 132, 133. Again, speaking of their service for Bishop Ken's day, he says, " a more barefaced insult, to all de- cent consistency with the principles of the Church of England was never perpetrated." p. 271. " You disclaim," says Dr. George Miller in his Letter to Dr. Pusey, (p. 26,) "and doubtless with sincerity, any intention, or wish, to return to the communion of the church of Rome ; but you do actually return to that assertion of church authority, which by degrees was matured into the monstrous usurpation of the pa- pacy." See on this apparent opposition to Romish errors, and the greater danger to be apprehended in conse- quence of it, Lond. Chr. Obs., 1839, p. (i31, &c. Bib. Report, 1838, p. 116. Mr Taylor, in the second volume of his Ancient Christianity, declares that " the controversy which has been originated by the Oxford tract writers involves nothing less than the sub- stance of Christianity itself,"' {Dedica- tion, p. 8,) -- that " the venom of the Oxford tract doctrines has been in- sidiously shed into the bosoms of per- haps a majority of the younger clergy of the episcopal church," (p. 3,) and that " this system differs from popery tlieologiraUy in several points, and politicully or ecclesiastically ; but that there is a spiritual and moral IDENTITV OF THE TWO." (p. 69.) See also Note A. 1) See above in Lect. vii. See Neal's History ; Price's History of Nonconform. ; Pierce's Vind. of Dis- senters, &.C. Lond. 1717, part ii. ch. i. p. 6, &c. LECT, XI.] THE PRINCIPLES OF POPERY. prelacy ; all conspire to determine the question of duty, and to inspirit us to put the trumpet to our mouths and blow an alarm in Zion. We will, therefore, proceed to a more full consideration of this charge against this system, and to place it in such a light as that it cannot possibly be denied. We will not, however, argue that, because this system is com- mon to the Roman, and to the Laudean sect in the Anglican church, therefore, the Anglican church is popish ; for it is very clear, how many things may be both scriptural and proper, although found in the Romish system, which, with much error, has also preserved much that is valuable and true. We will appeal, therefore, to evidence clear and incontrovertible; and which shall be authenticated by testimony from episcopalians themselves. This tendency we will illustrate in the first place, by showing the analogy between this doctrine, as embraced by the Romish and by the Anglican churches.* The church of Rome puts in the place of the one mediator Jesus Christ, not only angels, the Virgin Mary, and the saints, but the church in general, and every priest in particular. This vicarious religion, by which the heart is led to repose its cares, and to rest its hopes, upon something external to itself; — veiled as it is from full comprehension, by a character of mysteriousness and terror — is the very soul of superstition, and of the whole mass of Romish errors. Now the channel through which the full tide of this mysterious grace is made to flow is the church ; and that tide itself is invisibly conveyed by the agency of this lineal succession, on which the honor, the power, the efficacy, and the increase of the church depends. This is the idol, not only of rabbinical and Romish, but also of protestant popery; which has its traditionary legends also, of which this doctrine is the manifestation. Or we may say, that as there is Jewish popery, so this is Gentile rabbinism ; of both' which, it is the inevitable ten- dency, to exalt man and dethrone God ; to make void, and vain, and powerless, the divine record ; and to confirm human authority ; to establish a righteousness to be accomplished by works ; and to overturn that righteousness, which is by faith in the meritorious righteousness of another. These, therefore, are fundamental principles in the system of popery, that God has delegated to the visible corporation of the 1) That is, supposing this system 2) W hate ley on Romish Errors, to be embraced, as its advocates con- ch. ii. tend, by the Anglican church. 3) See Mc Caul's Sketches of Judaism, p. 2. 260 THE PRINCIPLES OF POPERY. [lECT. XI. church, the entire management and control of man's spiritual relations, and has, therefore, cominiited to their trust the pleni- tude of grace: That this visible society is, by express appoint- ment one, unchanged, and perpetual: That however wicked may be the persons who administer the government of this church, the church itself will be assuredly preserved indefectible, and its acts be ratified in heaven : And that the whole efficacy of the church depends on the transmission of this original com- munication of divine grace, in an unbroken succession of lineal descendants of the apostles. On these apparently harmless propositions is reared the entire fabric of that spiritual despotism, which at length usurped do- minion over the civil and religious interests of man — over his body as well as his soul — over his thoughts as well as his actions — which claimed to direct his understanding and to tutor his conscience — which haunted him with fear through life, with terror in death, and then " delving into the sepulchre," followed him with its persecuting anathemas to the very fires of that penal wrath, from which it alone could deliver.' Now every one of these principles, from which these conse- quences have flowed, are most certainly included in this prelatic theory; and are most fully avowed by its advocates. This doctrine of the apostolic succession is nothing more nor less than a second edition of the Romish anathema — extra ecclesiam prelaticam salus non esse potest.^ By confining to the clergy — and to one order of the clergy — and to a baronial and aristo- cratic class of the clergy — the exclusive, supreme, and heaven- appointed right to all ecclesiastical power and jurisdiction — with the uncontrolled power of continuing their own succession, and of interpreting, by their authority, (i. e. the church,) the laws and doctrines of Christ's kingdom — there is a foundation laid, broad enough to sustain the most unbounded exercise of ghostly tyranny. These avowed principles justify all those practices, which necessarily flow from them, and by which the church has asserted her right to a universal lordship over the bodies and the souls of men. This apostolical succession is distinctly affirmed by Mr. New- man, to be one of those many essential points, which the Romish and the Anglican churches, "in common both hold."^ It is the same " ruling, grasping, ambitious principle," in both. — In both, it is involved in that same profound obscurity which gives fitting room for fabulous legends, and unauthentica- 1) See Dr. Rice's Considerations Hough's Vindication, p. 64. He de- on Religion, pp. 79, 82, 83, 84. nominates this antichrist. 2) See Henry Martyn in 3) On Romanism, p. 56. LECT. XI. 1 THE PRINCIPLES OF PRELACY AND POPEKY. 261 ted affirmations. — In both, it is attended with the same errors in doctrine, and in practice. — In both, it places the efficacy of the gospel in its forms, and not in its doctrines ; and the true power and validity of the ministry, in its commission, and not in its character, and qualifications ; in its outward and gene- alogical relations, and not in any inward and spiritual call. — In both, it involves the absolute exclusion from the christian pale, of the greatest part of protestant communions. — In both, it presents an insuperable barrier to the reformation of what is corrupt. — In both, it implies indefectibility, and the continual presence of God's indwelling Spirit.' — And, in both, it is at- tended by the same insuperable difficulties, and monstrous con- sequences.^ Are we unjust in deducing such inferences from such premises ? Let us then put ourselves under the guidance of jNIr. Palmer. " If," says he, "communion with the Roman see (we say, the prelatical, or Anglican church) be, as they say, absolutely and simply necessary, so that he who is separa- ted from it, is cut off from the catholic church^ of Christ, then the Roman pontiff, (i. e. the church, i. e. the prelates,) must be infallible, in defining controversies of faith ; because it is not to be believed that God would impose the absolute necessity of communicating with him (i. e. it) otherwise. It follows equal- ly, that he (the church) must have absolute power in ecclesiasti- cal affairs ; for, if he (the church) enforces any thing under the penalty of excommunication, it must be obeyed. It also fol- lows, that the church cannot fall into heresy, even when not defining ex cathedra, because no one can be entitled to forsake his communion,"* &ic. &,c. This argument is just as conclusive when applied to the An- glican prelacy, as to the Romish hierarchy. Both make sub- stantially the very same claims, to be the one, catholic church of Jesus Christ, and both, therefore, are responsible for all the consequences which such claims necessarily imply.* 1) Mr. Gladstone claims inspira- lecture in proof of the indefectibility tion for the church, which is " an in- of the church, lect. viii heritance not only of antiquity, but 5) Thus Mr. Keble, in his Dis- also of inspiration " course on Primitive Tradition, instan- 2) See Lond. Chr. Ob., May, ces among other difficulties which he 1839, p. 2no. supposes must have lately exercised 3) " Individuals among us," says the minds of the Anglo-catholic cler- Dr. Pusey, (Letter, p 218, Eng. ed.) gy, '• how the freedom of the Angli- " are bound to remain in the church can church may be vindicated against through whose ministry they have the exorbitant claims of Rome, and been made members of Christ." See yet no disparagement ensue to the Miller's Li-tter, to p. 73. authority inherent in the catholic 4) Palmer on Church, vol. ii. pp. apostolical church." P. G, ed. iv. 529, 530 and see, also, pp. 4!i3, 497, In illustrating the guilt of one &c. 6ui. Mr. Newman has a whole church throwing off all fellowship 262 THE POPISH TENDENCY OF PRELACY [lect. XI. But clear as is this inference from tiie analogy between these two systems, in those elemental principles which sustain the whole fabric of Romanism, we are able fully to substantiate our charge, by plain and palpable facts. In order, then, at once and most clearly, to establish the popish tendency of this doctrine, it is only necessary to show, that with it, all those other doctrines which constitute what is now designated Oxford divinity, are necessarily connected ; and secondly, that these doctrines, thus springing from this dogma as their germ or root, and branching forth into all the ramifica- tions of the system, are to be pronounced Romish in their char- acter. Now, that this doctrine of prelatical succession does necessa- rily imply all those other doctrines by which the Oxford divin- ity is characterized, will appear from the fact, that these weighty consequences are deduced from this axiomatic principle by these divines themselves, while this connexion is urged upon their brethren as an irresistible argument for their adoption. In a very able and elaborate treatise on "The American Church," contained in the British Critic," for October, 1839, with others who yet hold to funda- mentals, Bishop Davenant remarks : " Non mirainur papistas, qui prseter ipsum christum aliud fundamentum personale, aliud caput, alium sponsum dederunt ecclesiap, omnes ecclesias abscindere et abjicere quantumvis fideliter et firmiter fiiristo adhseren- tes Nee miramur stultus eorundem clamores, quibus putant se perterre- facere posse ecclesias Chrisli." Ad- hortiatio ad Pacem Eccl. Cant. 1640, p57. 1) See on p. 308. That the British Oitic may be fair- ly quoted as high authority in this controversy, will appear, froin the fol- lowiniT communication, taken from the Charleston Gospel Messenger for April. 1841 " The, British Critic. — Mr. Editor, allow me, through your paores, to call the attention of your readers to the above valuable periodical, which in a recent number of ' The Banner of the Cross,' is thus highly commended by Bishop Doane, of New Jersey. ' It has been among my warmkst wishes that a publisher might be found who would give to the clergy and laity of our churches, and to all lovers of high intellect, imbued with primitive piety, and consecuated at the altar of tiie Holy One, an American edi- tion of this ablest of all the British periodicals, at a price accessible to all. I rejoice to say that better even than that is lo be done. Wiley and Put- nam, of New York, will import the British Critic, (two annual volumes of five hundred pages each, in quar- terly numbers,) if one hundred per- sons order it. It is an opportunity MOST AUSPICIODS to the BEST INTER- ESTS OF THEOLOGY and literature, and I venture in my zealous desire for its success, to call the attention of my brethren to it under my own name. I speak advisedly, for I have been a subscriber to it from the commence- ment of the present series, and the whole set, now twenty-eight, volumes, are on the shelves of my library, and AMONG ITS CHOICEST CONTENTS. It SHOULD BE IN THE HANDS OF EVERY CLERGYMAN, AND SHOULD CIRCULATE IN EVERY PARISH.' " " A subscription list has been left at tiie library, Chalmer's street, and at Mr. A. E. Miller's book-store. It is hoped that those who desire to see this valuable work circulate in our country, will use their influence in obtaining the requisite number of sub- scribers." Now let the reader contrast with LECT. XI.] MADE EVIDENT EY FACTS. 263 the writer says, " Now as to the American church, it has been her privilege to begin with so clear an announcement of that ru- dimental truth on which all true churches rest, that we cannot but believe she is destined, in spite of obstacles, to advance on- ward to the measure of the stature of its perfect fullness. She has got it in her, and with gratitude we add, that the most considerable of her bishops, living and dead, have developed it accurately no little way. They have gone forward from one truth to another ; from the apostolic commission to the succes- sion, from the succession to the office, — in the office they have discerned the perpetual priesthood, in the priesthood the perpet- ual sacrifice, in the sacrifice the glory of the christian church, its power as a fount of grace, and its blessedness as a gate of heaven." " They had felt and taught most persuasively the unearthly position in which all christians stand, and their real commu- nion in the invisible kingdom of God. You would not know whether you were in America or England, while their books were before you, in Birmingham or in New York, amid the col- lieries or sugar-canes. The external world sinks to its due level; and universal suffrage is as little found there, as in the house of commons. How much further they ought to have gone, what doctrines they left latent, and what they but half developed, we have neither purpose nor ability to say ; but without determining what would be presumptuous, so much we may safely maintain, that there is no conceivable point of opinion, or practice, or rit- ual, or usage, in the church system, ever so minute, no detail of faith and conduct ever so extreme, but what might be a legiti- mate and necessary result of that one idea or formula with which they started. Mammoths and megatheria are known by their vertebrae ; men's bodily temperaments have sometimes been dis- criminated by their nails ; and in like manner there is no devel- opment ever so ultimate, but may be the true offspring of the apostolical principle. A gesture, a posture, a tone, a word, a the above encomiam the following by any of its members is much to be opinion of this same work taken from deplored ; as the circumstance affords the London (Episcopal) Record, and lamentable proof either of great incon- they will at once perceive how mat- sistency or of great ignorance of its ters are working. real principles. Some are no doubt " Among these periodicals there are beguiled by the lofty pretensions that some worse than others. The most are made, and by the evangelic strain rampant in advocating what is popish that is occasionally adopted, without are the British Critic, the British considering that all this is in imita- Magazine, and the Church Magazine. tion of popery, which combines some " What circulation these periodicals truths with the grossest idolatry, and have, we know not. Their very ex- claims the higliest prerogatives, while istence is a disgrace to our church ; it adopts the most palpable errors and and that they should be countenanced the most puerile absurdities." 264 OXFORD DIVINITV ANU THE SUCCESSION. [lECT. XI. symbol, a time, a spot, may be its property and token, whatever be the real difficulty of ascertaining and discriminating such details ; nay, and it is not fully developed till it reaches those ultimate points, whatever real danger there be of formality." Did this writer thus characterize " the American church," unadvisedly, or without authority ? " We shall refer," says he as our authorities ' " to three bishops of their church ; and first, to the sermons of Dr. Seabury, of Connecticut, the first consecrated diocesan bishop." Among other things. Bishop Seabury is made to testify as to " the holy eucliarist,"^ " that there was, however, a great, and real change made in the bread and the cup, by our Saviour's blessing, and thanksgiving, and prayer, cannot be doubted." " They were, therefore, by his blessing and word, made to be, what by nature they were not." " The eucharist is not only a sacrament, but also a true and proper sacrifice, commemorative of the original sacrifice and death of Christ, for our deliverance from sin and death," " When Christ commanded his apostles to celebrate the holy eucharist, in remembrance of him, he with a command gave them power to do so, that is, he communicated his own priest- hood to them, in such measure and degree, as he saw necessary for his church, to qualify them to be his representatives, to of- fer the christian sacrifice of bread and wine." "The eucharist is also called the communion of the body and blood of Christ, not only because, by communing together, we declare our mutual love and good-will, but also, because in that holy ordinance we communicate with God, through Christ the mediator, by first offering or giving to him the sacred sym- bols of the body and blood of his dear Son, and then receiving them again, blessed, and sanctified by his Holy Spirit, and for a principle of immortality to our bodies, as well as to our souls." Similar evidence is then presented by the reviewer, from the writings of Bishop Hobart and Bishop Dehon.* " The reviewer, after fully presenting the evidence in the case, adds, "such are the principles of the American church, legitimately resulting from her idea, as catholic and apos- tolic."" Not less strong and conclusive in substantiation of this con- 1) Ibid, p 309. from him by the critic requires some 2) Ibid. p. 310. torturing to speak forth the anti-cath- 3) Ibid, pp. 312- 314. olic and Romish sentiments, for the 4) Ibid, pp. 314- 318. support of which his name is intro- It is but justice to this venerated duced. man to say, that the evidence adduced 5) P. 318. LECT. XI. j PREf.ATIi: 1'0P1%KY AND THE SUCCESSIOK. ^^^O nexioii between the doctrine of apostolical succession, I'.s their basis, and the worst errors of this whole system ; is the tesiimony of the London Christian Observer, the o.'gan of the low-church episcopalians in England. In that work for March, 1837,' it is said, " to their appalling invention, that the only way of restora- tion, is through penance, or, as Professor Pusey expresses it, through ' enduring pains, and abiding self-discipline, and con- tinued sorrow,' so as ' again to become capable of that mer- cy : ' — to their exaggerations of priestly absolutions, and the power of the keys, that frightful engine of despotism, the ful- crum of which, was the doctrine maintained in these Tracts, upon the apostolical authority, which every minister of Christ still possesses to bind and loose, the sacraments being the chan- nels for the conveyance of divine grace, and the priest who ad- ministers them having ' power over the gifts of the Holy Ghost,' * power over the things of the unseen world ; ' a power never more arrogantly assumed by Rome herself, in the madness of her spiritual tyrarmy, when ' drunken with the blood of the saints,' than in such passages as the following, by Mr. New- man, Mr. Keble, and Dr. Pusey, who actually dare to write, 'the fountain (of the Redeemer's blood) has, indeed, been opened for sin and uncleanness,' but it were to abuse the pow- er of the keys intrusted to us, (///) again (that is, after a first offence) to pretend to admit them ; and thus now there remains only the baptism of tears — " (May God forgive men, who thus awfully presume to limit the virtues of the Redeemer's atonement ; who substitute the penance of tears, for the blood of Christ, and who interpose between man and his God, to ' admit' or shut out from the kingdom of heaven, as they see fit, just as the popish priests did, to their own pontifical dignity, and great gain, though of this we accuse not the Oxford brethren, till Luther spoiled Setzel's trade) — to all such presumptuous fol- lies, and anti-scriptural dreamings, our homilies reply as fol- lows," &ic. To this, we may add the further testimony of Bishop Hoadly, who, in a work ironically dedicated to Pope Clement XL, thus satirically notices these arrogant pretensions of the English cler- gy, and this very connexion upon which we have been insist- ing. "Your holiness is not aware how near the churches of us prot- estants have at length come, to those privileges and perfections which you boast of, as peculiar to your own church. You can- not err in any thing you determine, and we never do : that is, 1) P. 152. 34 266 PRELATIC POPERY AND THE SUCCESSION. [lECT. XI. in one word, you are infallible, and we are always in the right. We cannot but esteem the advantaj^e to be exceedingly on cur side in this case, because we have all the benefiis of infallibili- ty, without the absurdity of pretending to it. Authority results as well from power, as from right, and a majority of votes is as strong a foundation for it, as infallibility itself. Councils that may err, never do !! " "There was no manner of necessity in your church, to discard the scriptures, as a rule of faith open to all christians, and to set up the church in distinction to tliem. It is but taking care, in some of our controversies, to fix upon the laity, that they must not abuse this right of reading the scriptures, by pretend- ing to be wiser than their superiors, and that they must take care to understand particular texts, as the church understands them, and as their guides, (the clergy,) who have an interpre- tative authority, explain them." *' Some have changed the authoritative absolution of the Ro- mish church, into an authoritative intercession of the priest, who is now become with us, a mediator between God and man. This creates the same dependence of the laity, upon the priests, and shows how dexterous we are in changing words, when there is occasion, without changing them at all." " As for us, of the Church of England, we have bishops in a succession as certainly uninterrupted from the apostles, as your church could communicate to us : and, upon this bottom, which makes us a true church, we have a right to separate from you, but no persons living have any right to differ or separate from us. Thus we have, indeed, left you, but we have fixed our selves in your seat, and make no scruple to resemble you, in our defences of ourselves, and censures of others, whenever we think it proper."' " The more exalted doctrine," says Professor Powell, of Ox- ford, in his "Tradition Unveiled,"* " of sacramental efficacy, of absolution, and of excommunication, were hardly separable from the claim to the exclusive commission of apostolic ordina- tion to administer them, and to a continuation of the apostolic powers in the episcopal hierarchy. All these soon became (from obvious causes) integral parts of the constitution of the church : and (by the aid of the discipUna arcani) soon enjoyed ]) Archbishop Wake was thus none of them below a deacon, because led by antiquity to admit the claims we do not read that the apostles had in part of all the Romish orders, any, yet we acknowledge the rest to (Exp. of Doct. of Eng. Ch. in Oxf. have been anciently received in the Tr. vol. iii. p. 153 :) " We maintain church, and shall not, therefore, raise the distinction of the several orders any controversy about them." in the church ; and though we have I) P. 60, Ox. 1839. LECT. XI.] PRELATIC POPERY AND THE SUCCESSION. 267 the sanction of primitive tradition. This it was which fixed the Jirst link in tl)e chain of the much-boasted apostolic succes- sion: a point important to be noticed, since the attention of disputants on both sides has been usually confined to the very subordinate object of tracing the subsequent links, which is a mere question of history." The same writer further says: '' If we look at the influence which the system exercises on the multitude of its followers, we shall perceive that it is precisely the same kind as that of the Romish church ; and though professedly at entire variance with popery in a literal acceptation, yet, in a wider sense, as referring to the ground and character both of doctrinal princi- ples and devotional and ecclesiastical practices, there is that community of spirit and tendency, which belongs to systems alike claiming an absolute authority over the conscience, grounded on an alleged divine comn.ission. And, in common with the system of Romanism, it maintains a powerful ascend- ancy from appealing to the same, and those some of the most prevalent, weaknesses of human nature. To the many, impa- tient of inquiry and indolently led by the pretensions of author- ity, it holds forth the sufficiency of an implicit uninquiring submission to the decrees of the church ; and to those who are anxiously seeking some means of satisfying or compounding with some slight demands of conscience, it proposes the com- fortable assurance of the efficacy of its observances ; proposi- tions wliich the mass of nominal believers will be always viell prepared to embrace.'" To this proof of our first position, it is unnecessary to add, as we might easily do, abundant testimony from other and numer- ous writings, as well American as English. Indeed, the doc- trine of prelatical succession being granted, we cannot see how all other doctrines which have gone forth from the church as the prophetical keeper and interpreter of the sacred scriptures, can be questioned ; since they are all educed by an easy process, from this "rudimental truth," and rest with it upon the divine authority of the church. It is only necessary, therefore, in order to establish the charge of a Romish tendency in this doctrine, that we should bring credible testimony from parties capable of giving evidence in the case, to the unquestionable Romanism of this doctrinal system." 1) Tradition Unveiled, p. 9. beast associated with the first beast, 2) In the Methodist Quirterly or the Romish church, described in Review, for Jan. 1(^41, (see pp. ti^- the Revelations of St. John, ch. xiii. Ij2,) there is an argument to show, 11-17. that the English church is the other 268 THE PRELATIC DIVINITY CONFESSEDLY POPISH. [lECT. XI. And here, truly, the only difficulty is, to select witnesses from the gatiiering multitude, who are all most eagerly pressing into the service, and demanding a hearing for conscience' sake. Beyond the pale of this new catholic church, there is one unmingled cry of unqualified condemnation uttered against the whole scheme, as heing necessarily popish in its innate propensi- ties— its natural longings — and its ultimate developements. With- in the sanctuary itself, there is the sound of many voices, rising in their tone of loud and most bitter lamentation, over the apos- tate tendencies of this semi-papal system. The London Chris- tian Observer, the veteran champion which has contended for pure and spiritual religion, against the host of the assailants, for the last thirty years, is heard from month to month, proclaiming to the friends of protestantism, that " popery is the ultraism of Oxford tract doctrine ; and Oxford tract doctrine is popery di- vested of its most startling results'" — that it undoes the refor- mation— and that if these doctrines prevail, there must be a second reformation in England. " It is," says this noble work, " afflicting beyond expression,* to see our protestant church — and in times like these — agitated by the revival of these figments of the darkest age of papal superstition. Well may popery flour- ish ! well may dissent triumph! well may unitarianism sneer I well may all protestantism mourn, to see the spot where Cran- mer and Latimer shed their blood for the pure gospel of Christ, overrun (yet not overrun, for, blessed be God, the infection is not — at least, so we trust — widely spread) with some of the most vain and baneful absurdities of popery." " The whole matter, doctrinal and practical, hangs together. It is essentially, — are we to have the Bible and protestantism, or the Missal and popery ? "^ " The Oxford tract divines just give Rome all that she asks as a basis for the establishment of her pretensions; while they undermine those principles on which the protestant reformation was grounded."* The same work for October, 1838,* declares, " If indeed we grant to Rome all that the Oxford tracts concede, there is so lit- tle left to contend for, tliat not a few persons are likely to follow the example of the lady, who being remonstrated with by Arch- bishop Laud, for turning papist, told him that she disliked a crowd, and as she saw which way he and his friends were trav- elling, she went on first. The Roman catholic priests confi- dently predict that the Oxford tract doctrines will afford power- 1) P. 661, for 1836. p. 187. and Aug. 18^7 and 1838, pp. 2) Ibid for 1836, p. 791. 651,711,719,723,749. 3) Lond. Chr. Obs. March, 1838, 4) Ibid, 1838, p. 820. 5) P. 616. LECT. XI.] PRELATIC DIVINITY CONFESSEDLY POPISH, 269 ful aid in preparing the way for the restoration of popery through- out England and Ireland, to the subversion of the protestant episcopal church as a national establishment, and its ultiaiale downfall as a religious communion. They are sanguine, also, as to the general effect of these doctrines, in weakening the gen- eral cause of protestantism tiirougliout Christendom." The Episcopal Recorder of Pliiiadelphia, the organ of congenial spirits in this American zion, is heard echoing back the cry of dani^jer and alarm.' Every where there is a stir in the camps of our brethren. There is a rushing to their negkcte I arms, and a busy preparation for the expected onset. Already have many single and chosen combatants, come forth between the opposing armies, and manfully contended for the faiih once delivered to the saints, against this new disguise, under which popery is coming in upon us like a flood. If we look to England, we recognize the noble bearing of her gallant bishops — John Bird Sumner, the bishop of Chester^ — Shutlleworih, now bishop of Chichestej-^ — Daniel Wilson, bishop of Calcutta,^ — Archbishop Whaleley* — and the archbishop of Cashel,^ as they lead on the sacramental host of God's elect. There too is that redoubted knight, who has made such proof of his literary prowess, in many a learned contest, the Rev. Georsje Stanley Faber, who in his work on primitive justification, has identified this system, as it regards that grand doctrine of our faith, with Romanism.'' There also may be seen the Rev. Mr. Bickersleth, who has been so eminently serviceable by his writings to the cause of truth and piety, boldly proclaiming the popery of these divines. ^ He says : — "A highly respectable, learned, and devout class of men has arisen up at one of our universities, the tendency of whose writings is departure from protestantism, and approach to papal doctrine. They publish tracts for the times ; and while they oppose the most glaring part of popery — the infallibility of the pope, the worship of images, transubstantialion, and the like — yet, though the spirit of the times is marked by the opposite 1) We mifjht, had we room, give 7) See the Primitive Doctrine of large extracts from this pnper. Justification Investirrated, with an 2) Lond. Chr. Obs, 183!), p. G23, Appendix on Mr. Newman's Lec- and in Popery of Oxf Tr. p. 9. lures, Lond. 1839, 2d ed. and as quot- 3) Ibid, 1840, p. (i40. and his work ed in Mcllvaine on Oxf Div. cli. ii. on Tradition, Lond. 1839, 3d edit. p 49, and in his Letter to the editor 4) Charge deUvered to his clergy of " The Churchman," from a per- in July, 1838. sonal communication. .5) Dangers to the Christian 8) See Lond. Chr. Obs. 1836, p. Faith. Lond. 1839. 775. 6) Lond. Chr. Obs. June, 1838, p. 393. 270 PRELATIC DIVINITY CONFESSEDLV POPISH. [LBCT. XI. fault, the very principles of popery are brought forward by them, UDciercieftMence to human authority, especially that of the fathers, the christian ministry and the sacraments; and undervaluing justification by faith. With much learning and study of the fathers; with great apparent, and doubtless in some cases real, devotion ; and adevotedness ascetic and peculiar; they seem to the author, as far as he has seen and known their course, to open another door to that land of darkness and shadow of death, where the man of sin reigns." In this judgment the British Critic, before it had become fully committed as it now is, to this system, was heard also con- ^ curring.' Nor have there been wanting many right-hearted men, who have heard the cry of their endangered Zion, and rushed forward to her rescue. Already has the press teemed with reviews, pro- tests, and larger works, unmasking the concealed popery of these divines, exposing their crafty steahhiness — and unbaring their insidious treachery against the protestantism of the English church." 1) See No. G7, p. 89, for July, 1838, and in Mcllvuine on Oxf. Div. p. 53. 2) Among these we would notice the following Works: 1. Oxford Tracts Unmasked, by Rev. Miles Jackson, of Leeds ; 2. Essays on the Churcli, by a Layman, a new ed. with some observations on existing circum- st!inces and dangers ; 3. Nolan's Catholic Character of Christianity, as recognized by the Reformed Church, in opposition to the corrupt Traditions of the Church of Rome; 4. Hook s Cull to Union Answered, Lond. 1839,7th ed. ; 5. The Popery of the Oxford Tracts Developed, Lond. 183!); C. The Listener at Ox- ford, by Caroline Fay. See her very strong exposure of the popery of its divines, at pp. 27, 3i), 48, 170, 173; 7. Powell's Essay on ihe Apostolical Succession ; 8. Episcopacy, Tradition and the Sacrann-nts, considered in reference to the Oxford Tracts, by the Rev. Wm. Fitzgerald, Dublin; 9. Ancient Christianity, by Isaac Tay- lor, vol. i. published, and vol. ii. in progress; lb. Holden on the Author- ity of Tradition in Matters of Relig ion, Lond. 1838: 11. The Popery of Oxford, by the Rev. P. Maurice, Chaplain of New and All Soul's Col- lege ; 12. A Letter to the Right Rev. Father in God, Richard, Lord Bishop of Oxford, containing Strictures upon certain parts of Dr. Pusey's Letter to his Lordship. By a Clergyman of the diocese, and a resident member of the university ; 13. Observations on Mr. Keble's Sermon on Tradition, by the Rev. T. Butt; 14. The Oxford Tract System considered in reference to reserve in preaching By the Rev. C. S. Bird ; 15. This charge is also fully urged against Mr. Manning, another coadjutor of these divines, by " Cleri- cus Cistriensisj" who enumerates, among the Romish features of his argumentation, " the same ideal vis- ion of unity, not of faith and love and holiness, but of a specifs of GENEALOGICAL DESCENT aiid sacerdo- tal orders, as essential to a gospel church." Lond. Chr. Obs. A p. 1839, p. 222 ; 16. See also the Summary of Dr. George Miller's Charges in his Letter to Dr Pusey, p. 70, &c. See tliis fullv argued in the Review of Tracts for 'the "Times, No. 90, Edinb. Rev. April, 1841, p. 146. Testimonies against the jiopery of these doctrines are given in tlie Tract on this subject, (Lond. 1839,) from Dr. Fawcett, Margaret Professor of Divinity, Oxford; J. H.Browne, archdeacon of Ely, and lite felluw of St. John's College, Cambridire ; the Rev. H. McNeile. of Liverpool ; Rev. H. Stowell, Minister of Christ's Church, Salford ; Rev. James Schol- field, Regius Professor of Greek, LECT. XI.] FKELATIC DIVINITY COMFESSEULY POPISH. 271 Most nobly, too, have our own American bishops, Aloore,' JNIcIlvaine^ and Meade,3 unfurled the banner of Christ's pure gospel, and proclaitned eternal warfare against this Romisli sys- tem of Oxford divinity. But overwhelming as is this array of testimony, in substan- tiation of the charge of a popish tendency, against the system maintained by the Oxford divines, — there is one remaining Cambridge; and the Rev. George Townsend, Prebendary of Durham. See also the testitnony of the Rev. James Graham, curate of the cathe- dral, Lonilonderry, in Presb. Def. p. 132 ; of Sir Thomas Bloomfield,in his Introduction to Meade's Sermon, pp. 38, 39 ; of Sir Jolin Sinclair in Report of the Edinburgh Celebration, p. 14. The clergy of ihe diocese of Ardagh, Ireland, specially convened Dec. 1838, unanimously protested against these Oxford divines. See in Presb. Def p. 170. See also an Address to the Clergy of Bath, by a large body of lay members of the Church of Eng- land, in which their popery is strong- ly exhibited. Record, Newsp. Feb. 1840, and Plea for Presb. p. 4r>6. The same charge has been urged against this system by the leading journals and newspapers in England and Ireland, including the London Times, by the Edinburgh and all the dissenting periodicals, and by almost the whole religious press in this coun- try, including the Epis. Recorder. See also the testimonies of Dr Clark, of Philadelphia, the Rev, Jo siah Pratt and Mr. Bickersteth, in Mr. Boardman's Letters to Bishop Doane, Phil. 1841, p. 22. See also the very strong declarations of the Rev. Dr. Beaseley, in ibid, p. 24. See also Archbishop Whateley's additional testimony in a late charge, in ibid. p. 48. Also, Mr. Boardman's very able Letter to Bishop Doane in the Pres- byterian. "At the late meeting of the Epis- copal Convention in Virginia," says the N. Y. Observer, "one subject of general interest was discussed, — the Oxford Tracts. It was probably intro- duced with such promptitude, that a full and explicit vote might be had on the matter at tne earliest period. The debate arose on the report of the com- mittee on the state of religion, of which Dr. Empie of Richmond was chairman. The committee, in this report, speak with entire decision on the subject of the Tracts, ' not only do we disi liiim all sympathy with them, but we denounce them as pop- ery in disguise ;' this, 1 think, is the lantTuage used, and )-ou will admit it to be sufficiently clear. One member appeared to advocate the other side of the question ; and one, though he did not advocate it, was not prepared to adopt what he considered the severe language of the committee s report. But when the vote was taken on the acceptance of the report, it was car- ried without alteration, and, I believe, with entire unanimity. This result, embodying, as it may fairly be pre- sumed to do, the public sentiment of the episcopal church in Virginia upon Oxfordism, no doubt created much pleasure in the bosoms of the bishops, one of whom. Bishop Meade, has re- cently published a work in defence of the truth against these errors." 1) The venerable Bishop Moore, is reported, in the Episcopal Record- er, to have exhorted his clergy, at the late Virginia convention, to give no place, nor countenance, no not for an hour, to THESE ABOMINATIONS OF POP- ERV, issuintr from Oxford, — I say abominations of popery, for I verily believe that the very worst elements of that system are insidiously wrapped up in these writings.'' 2) See Oxf Divinity compared with that of the Romish and Anglican Churches, jfec. Phil. 1841, p. 546; a work of great power, as may be seen from the fact, that no one has yet had courage enough to grapple with it, in any fair trial of its strength. This system Bishop Mcllvaine calls " pop- ery restrained." Oxf Divinity, p. 12. See also pp. 14, 17. 32, 132,' 175 263, 525. .507, 533, 537. 3) See a chapter on these testi- monies to this subject in Bp. .Meade's Sermon at the Consecration of Bishop Elliott. Appendix, ch. xv. p. 116, «fec. 272 PRELATIC DIVINITY EMBRACED BY ROMANISTS.^ [lECT. XI. source of evidence which must put the matter at rest, with all impartial persons. That this system harmonizes, very essen- tially, witli Romanism, is the unequivocal judgment of Roman- ists themselves. And first, let Dr. Wiseman and his coadjutors, in the Dublin Quarterly Review, be heard in evidence. " We see,'" say they, " learned and zealous, and we have reason to believe, in some instances, amiable men, contending in the spirit uhich belongs to a better church, and a better cause, in lavor of a rigid adherence to principles and doctrines which we must approve ; yet, thereby, departing from the consistency of their professed faith, and betraying how powerless they are, in wield- ing the weapons whicli it has long since blunted, and then thrown aside." " This tendency of the party at Oxford, to run into catholic principles for shelter, has necessarily attracted the attentii)n of many." " Nothing can be more clear, than that in the established church, there has been a series of learned divines, whose opin- ions approximated greatly to those of catholics ; who thought that the reformation, however necessary, over-did its work." " No one, we believe, save themselves, will maintain that they represent the English church, such as the reformation in- tended it to appear, in harsh and unyielding contrast to the catiiolic doctrine on the subject." Let us now hear the testimony of the Romish journal, pub- lished at Rome, as quoteil by the author of Ancient Christian- ity.* " The attention of all good catholics, and especially of the congregation for the propagation of the faith, cannot be enough excited by the present state of religion, in England, in consequence of the new doctrine, propagated with so much ability and success, by Messrs. Newman, Pusey and Keble, with arguments, drawn from the holy fathers, of which they have just undertaken a new edition, (translation,) in English. These gentlemen labor to restore the ancient catholic liturgy — the breviary, (which many of them, to the knowledge of the writer, recite daily,) fastings, the monastic life, and many other religious practices. Moreover, they teach the insufficiency of the Bible, as a rule of faith — the necessity of tradition, and of ec- clesiastical authority — the real presence — prayers for the dead — the use of images — the priest's power of absolution — the sacrifices of the mass — the devotion to the Virgin, and many 1) Lond. Chr. Obs. 1838, p. 822. bile avoicinamento fra protestanti alle 2) Vol. i. p. 406, in a passage dotrine Cattolicne. deiignated in the contents, — Mua- LECT. XI.] PRELATIC DIVINITY EMBRACED BY ROMANISTS. 273 Other catholic doctrines, in such sort as to leave but little differ- ence between their opinions, and the true faith, and which dif- ference becomes less and less, every day. Faithful ! redouble your prayers, that these happy dispositions may be increased ! " To these testimonies, we would only further add that of John, Bishop of Charleston, or as given in the Catholic Mis- cellany, and therefore, we presume, sanctioned by him.' " Our protestant American readers will be astonished to learn that an English protestant bishop, the Right Rev. Dr. Mant, has devoted some of his leisure hours to no less an extraordi- nary task than translating the hymns of the Roman breviary, used by the catholic clergy, into elegant and vigorous English, we presume, ' for the use of the law-established church.' Such, however, is the fact; and a selection of his 'Roman Hymns,' published by Rivington, of London, and copied into the English Catholic Directory, now lies before us. This is another of the signs of the times, (of which the Pusey tracts were the earliest,) proving that an extensive and most extraor- dinary movement towards the ancient religion is in progress in Great Britain. ' A straw will show How the wind doth blow.' And here is a whole sheaf of them. The learned doctors of the protestant English universities are devoting their talents to illustrating the dogmas of the catholic church. English prot- estant laymen, of every grade, are daily adding to her num- bers ; and lastly, and certainly not least wonderful, is this new evidence of her influence — a prelate of the church establish- ment can find no work so con2:enial to his taste as rendering into the popular tongue her ceremonial hymns, which have been bit- terly abused by many ignorant and bigoted writers of his own communion. If it were simply a love for this kind of compo- sition, and not for the particular songs in question, that induced the good bishop to undertake the business, Sternhold and Hop- kins left him work enough behind, upon the Psalms of David, to have occupied a life-time. But the fact must be confessed, there is latterly a dangerous but irresistible fascination in every thing popish, for the doctors and dignitaries of the English church. The establishment which resisted the radical batter- ing-ram is giving way under their disaffection, and her weeping friends may now exclaim with Berenger : — ' For the last shot that pierced her purple pall, Who but the rause of song the charge supplied.' 1) Number for March 14, 1840. 35 274 PRELATIC DIVINITY EMBRACED BY ROMANISTS. [lECT. XI. " We extract one of the hymns as an evidence of the perfect faithfulness with which the observances of tlie cathoHc church are preserved and insisted upon in this version of the protestant bishop.'" But for the present we conclude. I) The following additional tes- timony, from the Catholic Magazine for 1839, (pp. 165, 179, in Lond. Chr. Obs. Feb. 1841, p. 79,) may be added as a Note : " Most sincerely and un- affectedly do we tender our congratu- lations to our brethren of Oxford, that their eyes have been opened to the evils of private judgment, and the consequent necessity of curbing its multiform extravagance. It has been given them to see the dangers of the ever-shifting sands of the desert, in which they were lately dwelling, and to strike their tents, and flee the per- ils of the wilderness. They have al- ready advanced a great way on their return towards that church, within whose walls the wildest imagination is struck with awe, and sobered down to a holy calm, in the enjoyment of which it gladly folds its wearied wings, &c. They have found the clue, which, if ihey have perseverance to follow it, will lead them safely through the labyrinth of error into the clear day of truth. Some of the brightest ornaments of their church have advocated a reunion with the church of all times and all lands ; and the accomplishment of the design, if we have read aright the ' signs of the times,' is fast ripening. Her mater- nal arms are ever open to receive back repentant children; and, as when the prodigal son returned to his father's liouse, the fatted calf was killed, and a great feast of joy made, even so will the whole of Cljristendom rejoice greatly, when so bright a body of learned and pious men, as the authors of 'Tracts for the Times,' shall have made the one step necessary to place them again within that sanctuary, where alone they can be safe from the moving sands, beneath which they dread being overwhelmed. The con- sideration of this step will soon inevi- tably come on ; and it is with the ut- most confidence, that we predict the accession to our ranks of the entire mass." At a late meeting for repeal, the Rev. Mr. Hughes, a catholic priest, is reported to have said ; " Are protestants aware of the fact, that, out of fifteen thousand protestant clergymen in the Church of England, eleven thousand are now profes- sing the catholic doctrines of Dr. Pusey in the university of Oxford.'' Dr. Pusey and the Oxford pro- fessors of divinity, together with the great bulk of the Church-of-Eng- land clergy, have clearly seen the Church of England was in danger, and rapidly falling, and would no longer be perpetuated by any other means, except by establishing as close and proximate affinity as possible between its doctrines and those of catholicity, which have with- stood the persecutions and various stratagems and efforts of eighteen centuries to destroy them. I hold in my possession the works of Dr. Pusey, and were I to be concerned in a discussion on religion, I would not desire to be furnished with better works, replete with catholic authori- ties, and catholic arguments, than the writings of Dr. Pusey." ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE ELEVENTH. NOTE A. " Oxford Tractarians. — The line of defence now taken by some of the partial friends of the Oxford tractarians," says the London Record, "is this: — ' Though they may be wrong in some things, they have yet done great service in reviving important truths long neglected.' A more correct statement of the case would be this : — ' Though they have been right in some things, (and what heresiarchs have not been ?) they yet have done immense mischief in reviving pernicious errors long exploded by all true protestants.' We, in fact, know of no single truth, which may be viewed as a gospel truth, which these writers have revived : but we know of many errors, and those of the most deleterious kind, which they have brought forward anew, rendered plausible by a great show of learning, and circulated through the country to the confu- sion of minds of unstable men. " We consider their case a very awful one. They occupy respectable stations. They are connected with a university of high repute in the literary world. They themselves have acquired the name of being learned, and this, certainly to the full extent of what they are entitled. And they have also added to these advantages, by maintaining a conduct strictly moral, and unusually devout, and marked with a considerable degree of austerity. Possessing all these sources of influence, they employ all their talents and all their energies, in opposition, as we firmly believe, to the interest of true spiritual religion, and in behalf of that which is formal and spurious. To neglect advantages for doing good, incurs no small guilt ; but to employ them for doing mischief, incurs a much higher guilt. May they see the error of their way, lament the evils they have done, and henceforth employ their time and their talents in counteracting and neutralizing their effects! "Another thing maintained in their behalf by some of those who are partially their friends, is, that they are most unjustly accused of being Jesuits or papists. That they are really either one or the other under disguise, is what we never believed, though it has been thought by some that there are individuals of this character belonging to the party. However this may be, it is certain that they bear a nearer resemblance to Jesuits and papists than to any of the consistent maintainers of the principles of the reformation. Who can read poor Froude's Remains, without seeing that he was far more satisfied with the main principles of the Church of Rome than with those of the Church of England ? And all that has been advanced by papists against scripture and in favor of tradition, has been advanced by these divines, and that with all the subtilty and plausible learning of the Jesuits. Every one acquainted with the subject knows that that there is nothing new in what they have brought forward either on this, or on high-church principles generally : the whole has been fetched out of the exuberant stores of popery. In the controversies at the reformation may be found all the arguments now employed; but vwst of them, it will be noted, were employed by the papists against our reformers ; and not by the reformers against the papists. How, then, can any be blamed for calling these divines papists, since they themselves have mainly adopted their principles, and are constantly employing their arguments ? JSesides, have nol papists themselves recognized them as friends, as the active and efficient promoters ol' the funda- 276 NOTE TO LECTURE XI. mental principles of their system ? They are hailed in this country by Romish priests ; they are hailed in Ireland by Romish writers in reviews ; yea, they are hailed even at Rome as harbingers of good, as the advocates and defenders of tiiose principles which cannot fail eventually, if they gain ground, to lead to the re-establishriient of popery in this country." " T/ic Popery of Oxford. — It is a question considerably canvassed," says the London (Episcopal) Record, " to what extent Puseyism or tractarianism prevails among us. But wherever the truth lies in relation to its actual extent, there is no question that it occupies a much greater space than hitherto in the public eye. Not confined to the clergy, it occupies the attention of the laity; not shut up in the halls of Oxford, or confined to the columns of ' the tracts,' it engages the attention of the legislature, it is a chief subject in magazines and reviews, and even occupies with eager discussion the columns of the news- paper press. " Representations are given on the one hand, fitted, we think, to enlarge it beyond its due dimensions, and others are offered calculated to reduce it within limits beyond which it really expatiates. Let it be remembered, also, as an important paint of the case, that it exercises also a very important influence on society and the church, even where its principles and practices in their giossness are not received. " To attempt to judge of it, as we have seen done, by estimating the number of the London clergy who have bowed their neck to the yoke, will not lead to a just conclusion. It is said, that not one medical man who had reached the age of forty, at the time of Harvey's discovery of the circulation of the blood, ever received the truth ; and it is not to be expected that men of the mature age of the London clergy generally, should ha^tily give in to new dogmas of this description. We suspect the direct power and influence are chiefly dis- cernible among the younger clergy — among men at that unripe age, when it is diflicult for tlie mind to distinguish between truth and falsehood, to separate the precious from the vile, and when the influence of names and office and learning, real or assumed, exercise a prodigious effect in the formation of opin- ions. And its direct influence, we have no doubt, is very great indeed, in drawing up the greater proportion of the clergy, including no inconsiderable part of the beiicli of bishops, to higher church principles than those they pre- viously held, than which there cannot be a more captivating allurement for corrupt human nature. " But to whatever extent Puseyism has hitherto prevailed, we have reached the state of mind not to be greatly surprised though it had gained a tenfold higher point than we think it has hitherto reached. It is in its essential prin- ciple the religion of nature, as that stands opposed to the righteousness of God, and all men, till they are truly taught from above (except where early evan- gelical training has wrought speculatively into the mind, correct doctrinal truth,) will, as earthy, cleave to that which is earthy, and reject the spiritual, to discern which they have no appropriate sense. (1 Cor. ii. 14.) * * " They [the Oxford writers] have got anolher gospel, far more obviously and palpably so, than that embraced by the ancient Galalian church. In principle they are resting on works equally with the Romish apostacy. They deny this, of course, as boldly as Rome denies it; but this does not alter the case. No doubt many of tlit-m decry this and that thing in Rome. No doubt two recent articles in the Quarterbj Review, justly attributed, we have no doubt, to Pro- fessor Sewell, contain an elaborate and able attack on popery, exhibiting the danger of some of its principles, and of many of its machinations, to the peace and security of the state, and tothesafetij of that branch of the church of which he is a member. And it is asked, how is this fact consistent with the principles of Puseyism being naturally the same with those of popery ? The answer is at hand. The leading and fundamental principles of their theology may be mate- rially one, while in ilsdevelopenient in religious observances, popery may have sunk into practices not necessarily arising from its fundamental unscriptural principles, and adopted also designs of universal empire, which, though appro- ))riately following from her theological dogmas, and hostile to the civil and relinfious liberties of the world, are again not necessarily connected with her fundamental departure, in principle, fi-om the truth of the gospel. The tracta- rians and Rome may differ from one another, in these matters, consistently NOTE TO LECTURE XI. 277 with both of them being opposed to the fundamental principlt'sof our apostolic church, of our great reformers, and of tlie revelation of God to mankind. " Puseyism, then, is an unhealthy life which has originated in the church, dissipating the spiritual sleep in which multitudes of her members lay envel- oped. They have awoke to action, but they have not awoke to truth. They are teaching men, but it is not the gospel of Christ, but another gospel which they teach. We again refer those who doubt this fact, and who have any glimpse of the essential nature of the gospel of Christ, to professor Pusey's elaborated Treatise on Baptism, in the second volume of the Tracts for the Times. The diS'erence produced by the change we see is this, instead of men being left alone in a state of religious indifference, they are roused to action in a wrong direction. "From such defenders of our church, may God in his mercy deliver us. What we want for our security is, that the voice from the pulpit may concur with the voice from the desk; — that the trumpet from both may have one sound ; it will then be no ' uncertain ' one, but in accordance with the word of God. " The Puseyites desire another teacher than the word of God, and accord- ingly they bring forward another witness to the truth, ' antiquitv,' and place it on the same level. It is ' scripture a«^Z antiquity' whicli constitute their rule of faith. " This prop is indispensably necessary for their system. To make it stand they m\ist have another witness. Rome, agreeing witli them in this, proceeds a step further, and shuts from the eyes of the church the original and only true witness. " Puseyism, in fact, is but a revived form of opposition to the gospel. Spir- itual sleep as surely leads men to eternal ruin as a perversion of the gospel can i, to be a. true church. Nothing can be more exaiMly worded; but if it is a true church, it must be living, and if living, it must have the gifts of grace, whatever its corruptions may be. It cannot be an outside only. It must have a real faith, and heart, and obedience. It must be in the main orthodox, AS IT IS; for that church which holds aright the doctrines of the holy trinity, incarnation atonement, original sin, regenera- tion, and the last judgment, we take to be in the main orthodox. " Now taking the thirty-nine articles, as the exactestform of apostolic truth, still we must consider that the quakers and Dutch reibrmed deviate from them, as far as the Roman catholics. " The Rev. Samuel Wix," says Mr. Bristed, (Thoughts, &i;. p. 456,) " like- wise, is too stout an exclusive churchman, to desire to conciliate, or unite with any protestant dissenters. He prefers coalescing with the pope, to uniting with any non-episcopalian, however sound in scriptural doctrine ; however fervent in evangelical faith ; however pure and holy in a life regulated by the precepts of his blessed Redeemer. ' No,' says he, ' the union is not desired between members of tlie (English) church and schismatics ; but between the church of Rome, and the church of England ; if, indeed, they may be desig- nated as churches under different names. Union is not, indeed, nor ovght to be desired between the true apostolical church, and those who renounce apos tolical discipline ; but union between the church of England, and the church of Rome, on proper christian grounds." "The impiety of protestant non-episcopalians is far more injurious to gospel truth, than the errors attaching to the Roman catholic faith." The relationship of high-churchism and popery is thus graphically illustrated : (Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix, pp 554, 555.) In the market place in Dublin once — Ireland is the country of the bishop of Limerick, and other high- churchmen — it was proclaimed in good Hibernian brogue, "I publish the barms of marriage between the church of England and the church of Rome." A voice was heard in the crowd, " I forbid the banns !" " For what reason ^ " cried the herald. " Arrah," rejoined the other, " because the parties are too near akin." It is even so. There is near consanguinity between high-church all the world over. And it requires attention and care, to discriminate between what may pass for tolerable protestantism, among high-churchmen and down- right popery." That the very principles on which prelacy founds its apostolical traditions, have been made tlie basis of tlie Romisli traditions, is certain. " Besides, does not your cliurch in this matter infringe the law of charity in another point of view, for must not her anxious retaining and enforcing of her ceremonies tend to harden Roman catholics in their superstition.' It is certain that it has had this tendency in time past. Tims it lias been shown that Martiall, from the sign of the cross, as used by you, vindicates the popish crossing ; that Parsons and Bristowe, (two Romish ccmtroversialists,) regard the English Service Book as countenancing their Mass Book ; that the Rhem- ish divines extract from your 'Absolution of the Sick,' a kind of approval of their rites of absolution and auricular confession ; and lastly, justify their feast of the assumption of Mary, by reference to the various feasts observed by the Church of England. As a further illustration of this, it is stated in the life of Bishop Hall, that in his voyage up the Maese,he had what he calls ' a danger- ous conflict with a Carmelite friar, who argued from the English protestants, in- sisting on kneeling at the sacrament, that they recognized the doctrine of tran- substantiation. ' (Life of Bishop Hall prefixed to his Contemplations, p. Ifi.) Mr. Keble argues that the deposit committed by Paul to Timothy, (2 Tim. 1,14,) "did comprise matter, independent of, and distinct from, the truths. NOTES TO LECTURE TWELFTH. 297 which are directly scriptural" — "church rules" and "a certain form, arrangement and selection of the whole;" "and also a certain system of church practice, both in government, discipline and worship." (Keble on Trad. 4th ed. p. 21.) Fuither : " As often as Tertullianand Irenfeus have false teachers to reprove," &c. " do they not refer to the tradition of tiie whole cliurch, as to something independent of the written word, and sufficient at tliat time to refute heresy even alone." (See p. ii3.^ " Do they not employ church tradition as parallel to scripture, not as derived from it.? and consequently as fixing the interpreta- tion of disputed texts, not simply by the judgment of the churcli, but by au- thority of that Holy Spirit which inspired the real teaching itself, of which such tradition is the record ?" (p. 24.) On p. 25 he argues, that, had the scriptures not been written or perished, tradition alone would have been sufficient for the whole christian world. Nay, he goes on to say that " apostolical tradition was DIVINELY appoint- ed in the church, as the TOUCHSTONE of CANONICAL SCRIPTURE ITSELF." (p. 27.) And that " its despisers are despisers of the scripture itself." (p. 28.) And that " where scripture is silent, or ambiguous, consent of the fathers is a probable index of apostolical tradition." (p. 28, Note.) It is thus " presumption, irreverence, to disparage (he fatliers under a plea of magnifying scripture," since " the very writings of the apostles were to be first tried by it, before they could be incorporated into the canon." (p. 28.) Nay, without this tradition, Mr. Keble " does not see how we could now retain real inward communion with our Lord, through his apostles." (p. 38.) He also encourages us to hope that the church may even yet "be so happy as to recover more " of these " precious apostolical relics," by the supernatural guidance of the Holy Spirit. So that the canon of inspired rules and doc- trine, is yet open to alteration or amendment. (See p. 42.) 38 LECTURE XIII. THE PRELATIC DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION INTOLERANT IN ITS TENDENCIES AND RESULTS. We will now urge it as a distinct argument against this doctrine, that by its past working, and the facts of history, it is proved to be, in its necessary tendency, intolerant and despotic, antichristian and anti-republican. On this part of our subject, we have am- ple materials on which we might enlarge, but we will endeavor to be brief. That this doctrine — to wit — " that there is not one of these prelates who cannot trace his right to guide and govern Christ's church, and to ordain its ministers, through a long line of prede- cessors, up to the favored persons who were consecrated by the laying on of the holy hands of St. Peter and St. Paul,'" necessarily tends to the establishment of a spiritual despotism, is apparent, not only from its direct and necessary tendency to popery, but also, as has been in part shown, from other consider- ations. It clothes an order of men with a supremacy which is by divine right j and resistance, therefore, to which, is rebellion against God. It vests in this separate and exclusive order of ecclesiastical rulers, a separate jurisdiction, as well legislative, executive, as judicial ; and with which there is no right, in any lower order, or in the laity, to interfere. It asserts a claim of implicit obedience, on the principle of faith, and not of reason, to this church authority. This obedience is made to extend to the canons put forth by these ecclesiastics, as fully as to the word of God.* This authority of prelates, we are expressly told, not merely extends to those powers of administration and of superin- 1) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 232. pel Messenger, Aug. 1840, p. 155. 2) See form of consecration by the Also the British Critic, 1833, gp. 489, preBentbishopof Charleston, in Gos- 430,445. 300 PRELATICAL AUTHORITY DESCRIBED, [lECT. XIII. tendence over his clergy, quce sunt ordinis, but to a separate au- thority which is called jurisdiction ; and " which is vested in them as depositaries, by tiie apostles." This power is indefinite.* It involves "judicial proceedings before the bishop "** — and "criminal jurisdiction." This jurisdiction is further inherent in the bishop, and emanates from the word of God," and " which may be demonstrated to be inherent in episcopacy." This " canonical yoke " is to " be exercised after an inquisition," and " the inquisition should be conducted with secrecy, and in a summary manner ; " for " the principle on which all church dis- cipline rests, is obedience," and " the necessity of obeying eccle- siastical superiors."^ This authority of the prelates, who are, de facto, the church, is only limited by their own good pleasure ; and our security against oppression rests, we are gravely told, upon the improba- bility " that the bishops would oppress their clergy. ""^ Thus does the Romish church give us the assured promise of the Holy Spirit, that their infallibility will be infallibly right — and both on as good, but no better grounds, than the religion of Ormuzd, which forbade the Persian despot to ordain any thing but what was good and right, while at the same time it made right what- ever he did ordain ; and secured to him all authority to ordain whatsoever he pleased. This authority embraces, further, the interpretation of the Bible ; which is to be determined by the universal consent of these prelates, mysteriously preserved through an indeterminate period, which may be lengthened or abridged just as necessity may require. It includes, also, the power to decree rites and ceremonies, and, generally, to supervise and order the affairs of the sanctuary. In this plenitude of episcopal grace, is em- braced the power of absolution — that most tremendous engine of ghostly tyranny — and the powers of canonization, consecra- tion, and pronouncing of anathemas, which are also parts of this invisible jurisdiction. Now the very fact, that for all this assumption of supreme jurisdiction, prelates are without any shadow of support in the word of God, has only led them to insist upon it with the great- 1) " The indefinite nature of ppis- ' discipline within his diocese." Bishop copal jurisdiction." Cardwell's Doc- Gibson Codex Juris Ecclesiast. Ang- uraent. Annals, vol. i. pp.288, 317,412. lie. in Foster's Exam, of, p. 8. Also, 2) "The office of consecration pp. 10, 18, 47, 51, 103. WARRANTS evcry bishop to claim by 3) See an Art. on Ecclesiastical THK WORD OF GoD for the correcting Discipline in the British Critic, April, and punishing such as bo unquiet, dis- 1839, pp. 447, 44G, 429, 430, &c. obedient, and criminous, (i. e.) for the 4) Brit. Crit. 1839, App. p. 447, exercise of all manner of spiritual and Oxf Tr. vol. i. p. 327. LECT. XIII.] THE GROWTH OF PHELATICAL MODESTY. 301 er earnestness, and to enforce it with sterner measures of com- pulsory benevolence. For it being once assumed, that such an order, with such rights and duties, is essential to the existence of the church, and the church to the salvation of souls ; of course, all measures became necessarily right, and even merci- ful, by which this authority of prelates might be sustained against heretics and opposers.' Hence we find the earliest of the order, as, par eminence, Ignatius, leaning upon authority, for the preservation of their asserted dignity ; and thus " laying the first steps of the papal pandemonium,'"^ in their sacerdotal ambition. This prelatical arrogance had reached a height of preposterous extravagance, as early as the third and fourth centuries ; and was unquestiona- ably based upon the perversions of truth, and the corruptions of gospel simplicity, introduced as early as the first century.^ The martyr church thus became itself, by its inherited principles, the executioner of countless multitudes of martyrs. The prel- ates, at least some of them, of the Cyprianic and following ages, seem to have been filled to overflowing with the most enormous notions of spiritual transcendency, and divine prerog- ative ; and really to have believed, that they were ordained as the means of " immediate connexion between God and man — the chain between time and eternity."'* Heaven and earth 1) See Athanasius, in Potter on errors into the true faith ; and if the Ch. Govt. p. 171. Chrysostom, p. 173. actual infliction of death upon him Cyprian, pp. 164, 161. will deter others from injuring their " The following just remarks are own souls by the same or like errors, from an article in a late number of does not philanthropy require the the American Biblical Repository : stroke.'' One of the popes, in a let- " Real intolerance, the intolerance ter enjoining all true followers of the of the heart, is seldom or never seen church to ferret out heretics, and pun- by the possessor in its true light. It ish them with death if they proved is sincere, indeed; but there can be obstinate, sustains his injunction by no more hurtful form of bigotry than the following argument : ' The man that of deluded fanaticism. Instiga- who takes away physical life, is pun- ted by this spirit, men are guilty of ished with death. Now, faith is the unrighteous oppression, and verily source of rtc?'Wflnife ; for it is written : think they are doing God service. ' The just shall live by faith.' How Persecutors and persecuted, in multi- much more guilty, then, than a com- tudes of instances, have been alike mon murderer, and how much more animated with sincere zeal for what worthy of death, must a heretic be, they considered the right. ' There who robs people of their faith — of can be no doubt,' says the persecutor, eternal life ! ' ' that my views are correct, and that " Such is the sophistry with which he who does not adopt them endan- intolerance has in all ages deceived, gers his spiritual welfare. It must be or sought to defend itself." a benevolent act to appeal to the tem- 2) Spiritual Despotism, pp. 402, poral interests of my neighbor for the 491. good of his soul. Therefore I am 3) Osborne's Doctr. Errors of bound to try, by pains and penalties, the Apostl. Fathers, ch. xi. yes, if it be necessary, by the menace 4) Sec Chrysostom on the Priest- of death itself, to bring him from his iiood. 302 THE GROWTH OF PRELATICAL POWER. [LECT. XIII. were too poor, and kings too humble, to afford apt illustrations of the supereminence of their pontifical glory. To say aught against their order, or to do aught in contravention to their de- cisions, was sure to call down upon the guilty head the most summary vengeance, — deposition,' excommunication, and the brand of infamous schism, heresy, and conspiracy with the dev- il." Presbyters were in due season excluded from all synods and councils ; and in many cases, not even allowed to preach in the prelate's presence, or only as permitted by him.^ The laity were also deprived of all representation, in the government of the church, by the express authority of that passage of scrip- ture, which teaches us, that "it was not for beasts to touch the mount of God."* All remonstrance was, in this way, effectual- ly silenced, and borne down, and the very memory of it oblitera- ted from the knowledge of posterity. "The spiritual despotism that spoke in the popes, is now," as has been said, " sixteen hundred years old."^ The connexion of prelacy, as exhibited in the superstitious and tyrannous polity pursued from the sec- ond century, downwards, with the Romish hierarchy ; was acci- dental, and does not, by any means, constitute it what it ever was, and, when unchecked, ever will be, human nature being what it is. When unlimited authority is committed to a few rulers, with the power to judge between themselves and all who resist them, and when this power is sustained by the believed sanction of an immediate divine intercourse, and communica- tion, — what can prevent it from consolidating into the most in- tolerant despotism ? And again, let it be borne in mind, the very soul of such a system, is the doctrine of a supernatural efScacy, resident, by right of transmitted inheritance, in a line of prelati- cal successors.® 1) See as an illustration, the con- 3) See Note A. duct of Cyprian as quoted in Potter on 4) Spiritual Despot, p. 476. That Ch. Govt. pp. 165, 166. they anciently participated in the 2) " Thus," says Professor Powell management of church affairs in Eng- in his Tradition Unveiled, (p. 56,) " by land, see fully shown in Foster's Ex- virtue of this celebrated ' Disciplina amination of the Scheme of Ch. Pow- Arcani,' the tenets of any who ven- er, of the Codex Juris Eccl. Anglic, tured to oppose them, were unanswer- pp. 75, 84. He also shows that the ably proved heretical, and the catholic exclusion of the laity was owing to faith was found to possess a more and the over-ruling power of the church more precise and metaphysical form, of Rome. See p. 84. They had the power in their own 5) Ibid. p. 291. hands; and with an ascendency and 6) The history of this progressive a majority, it was easy by arts and system of church power, is thus given practices, obvious even to men less by Sir Michael Foster in his Exami- ekilled in the knowledge of human nation of Bishop Gibson, third ed. nature and the means of influencing 1736, p. 12. it, to maintain that ascendency, and " I take the case, with regard to advance it even to an exclusive do- ecclesiastical jurisdiction, to have minioQ.'^ been thus : when Christianity became LECT. XIII.] THE GROWTH OF PRELATICAL POWER. 303 The resulting effects of every doctrine, especially, if they have been found invariably consequent, when not hindered by some counteracting agency, are allowed to be a fair test of its inherent character and tendency.' We must judge of a system the public religion of the empire, the laity, who in the earlier ages bore a part in the provincial and diocesan consistory, finding themselves at ease from persecution, began to apply with more attention to their secular affairs, and lefl church matters to the bishop and his clergy ; the clergy being, for the most part, settled at their respec- tive cures, at too great a distance from the mother church to admit of a con- stant attendance at the diocesan con- sistory ; or perhaps, from a high opinion of the wisdom and integrity of their president, were contented to leave the principal weight of church government in his hands, especially when they looked on it as a barren point of pre-eminence, attended with no profit or distinction to compensate the burden it brought with it. I be- lieve it will appear upon inquiry, that episcopal jurisdiction had originally no better a foundation than what 1 have mentioned. But the first ciiris- tian emperors, finding the bishops in possession of a nominal authority, in- vested them with a real jurisdiction, which by the concessions of succeed- ing princes increased, till the bishops came to have cognizance, not only of such matters as now make the proper business of the ecclesiastical courts, but of many others, which the wisdom of later times hath restored to the civil judicature." " But, on the other hand, let it be granted that episcopal jurisdiction is of divine right, and let the imagina- tion be well heated with the beauty and expediency of ranks, degrees and orders in the church; and we shall find it not so difficult as some may imagine for weak people to advance in their conceits from prelates to pri- mates, and thence to patriarchs. King James I. had, or pretended to have, a zeal for the divine right of episcopal jurisdiction ; but he could not stop there : his principles carried him up to the spiritual supremacy of the pope, to whom he decljures him- self willing to submit, as patriarch of the west, and Primus Episcopus inter omnes Episcopos, et Princeps Episcopo- rum; even, says his majesty, as Peter was Princeps Jipostolorum. [First bishop amongst all the bishops, and chief of the bishops; even, says his Majesty, as Peter was chief of the apostles.] " 1 would not be understood to in- sinuate that the supremacy of the pope is a necessary consequence from the divine right of episcopal jurisdic- tion. But I believe 1 may venture to affirm, that the divine right appropri- ated to ecclesiastics is the cursed root of bitterness from whence the papal supremacy sprung. And if the princi- ple of a right of jurisdiction, underived from the civil magistrate, doth not always lead to the popery of the church of Rome, it leads to a state of things equally mischievous and more absurd, — 1 mean a popery at our own doors. Our ancestors at and about the time of the reformation had plain- ly this notion of the matter; and therefore they did not content them- selves with barely abolishing the usurped power of the bishop of Rome, but went to the root of the evil, and declared that all jurisdiction, as well ecclesiastical as civil, is vested in, and exercised by delegation from, the Crown." 1) Oxf Tr. vol. i. p. 327. " The connexion," says Dr. How, in his Vindication of the Episcopal Church, (N. York, 1816, p. 76,) " be- tween principle .^nd practice is most intimate. What, indeed, is practice but embodied principle ? The charac- ters of men are, every where, formed, in a greater or less degree, by the opinions which they entertain. Among the various sects of ancient philoso- phers, how constantly do we see their principles exemplified in their lives ! In truth, the doctrines which any par- ticular society may embrace, will, in time, mould and determine the char- acter of that society. Haughty prin- ciples, as a general rule, will produce haughty conduct ; licentious princi- ples will produce licentious conduct ; virtuous principles will produce vir- tuous conduct." 304 PRELATES HISTORICALLY DESCRIBED. [lECT. XUI. by its essential principles, and not by any occasional manifesta- tions it may make. Now, from a very early period in the his- tory of the church, no complaint is more frequently and loudly made, by church writers, than that which bears upon the de- generacy, corruption, and tyranny, of these rulers and gover- nors. Tlie rulers, says Chrysostom, after depicting the misera- ble condition of the church, are more guilty than any others.' Augustine represents the church as in a worse bondage, through their impositions, than it was under the law.** Nazianzen com- plains of the prelates, who, when they had overrun all things with violence, in fine, tyrannized over piety itself.' To escape from their impositions, Jerome, as Erasmus thinks, betook him- self to a cell. Chrysostom assures us that he feared nothing so much as prelates.* Theophilus of Alexandria declares, that the audaciousness and tyranny of the bishops, before, had ruined the nation, and dispersed the people through the world.* Isidore of Pelusium declares, that prelacy, as divers exer- cised it, is a tyrannical licentiousness, because they turned it into domination, or rather, to speak freely, unto tyranny.*^ He further says, that there were very few not thus guilty, and these were afraid to speak out against them.'' The tyranny of the prelates hindered any reformation.* Prosper thus bewails this matter : " But we, delighted with things present, while we hunt after the advantages and honors of this life, make all haste to be prelates, not that we may be better, but richer ; nor that we may be more holy, but more honored." " We decline the labor of our oflice, affecting only the profit and the dignity. "» This judgment is confirmed by Ambrose, and almost every writer. The pride, ignorance, and superciliousness, of even the chief of the western prelates, is exposed by Basil ; while in the east, as Sozomen declares, they were sick of their unworthy prelates, and languishing for want of some who would be truly pastors.'" What better could be expected, says Chrysostom, when the dignity is put to sale, and he carries it, not who has the richest land, but the fullest purse." Thus were the prelates generally the worst of their day, and their authority so degenerately abused, 1) Homil.29,in Act. testimonies see Socrates' Hist. lib. vii' 2) August. Epist. 119, Januario ch. vii. and ch. xi. Canon, in Cod. c. 19. clxxviii. and canon xii. 3) Orat. in laud. Athanas. 21. 9) Prosper de vit. Contempl. 1. i. 4) Epist. 13, and ep. 2. c. ii. 5) In Georg. Alex, vet Chysost. 10) Ambrose de Sacerd. degnit. c. 39. cap. V. Nazianzen Orat. Fiineb. 6) Isid. 1. V. ep xxi. and epist. ad Athanas. et Orat. in laud. Basil, theod. cxxv. leb. ii. Basil epist. xvi. 7) Ibid, ep. Ixxxix. 1. v. 11) Horn, in Ephes. and Isid. 1. v. 8) Ibid, 1. iii. ep. 223. For other ep. 276, 470. LECT. XIII.] PRELACY ALWAYS DESPOTIC. 305 that Theophilus, of Alexandria, rather than be controlled by any that were wise and prudent, as George, ol" Alexandria, and Palladius both affirm, actually filled the vacant see with fools.* Such is the representation given of the practical working of this theory, as drawn even by its advocates and its administra- tors. We may well believe, therefore, all that is charged upon it by the unvarying testimony of history.'' " Episcopacy, as developed in this theory of succession," says Professor Powell. a methodist clergyman in England, " as it has hitherto existed in the christian church, has been at the head of nearly all the oppression and persecution that have been found in the church to the present day. I believe abuse very early got into the church in an unguarded, uncontrolled form of episcopacy. It degenerated into tyranny of the worst kind. Popery is its genuine offspring.^ Let no man trust an unguarded episco- pacy," says he, " it will do what it has always done, viz. de- generate into popery."* Protestantism had its worst enemies among the apostolical succession bishops. I rejoice to ex- cept, after that time, such hallowed names as Cranmer, Laiimer, Ridley, Hooper, and Jewell ; but they are the exceptions and not the rule. And it must be confessed, that since that time all the persecution of the puritans and nonconformists originated generally with the bishops."* The bigoted intolerance of the Romish church was not abandoned when England separated from Rome. Popery still lived in the prelacy, and prelates were still found to be ani- mated with the spirit of popes. The inquisition was perpetu- ated in the star chamber and high commission court, and all difference of opinion brought to the test of power, and decided in the court of civil pains and penalties, of fines, imprisonments, and death." No sooner was prelatic authority fully established under the 1) Isid. 1. V. ep. 481, and 1. ii. ep. 3) On Apost. Success, p. 143. 1. Georg, Alex, vit. Chrysost. pp.202, 4) That popery would have been 203, and cap. xx. p. 185. Sozonien the result but for the puritans, &c. lib. viii. c. vii. see Edwards' Preacher, vol. ii. p. 183. See these and many other testimo- Life of Whitgift, p. 105, ed. 1699, and nies quoted in the original in Clarkson Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. pp. 33, 34. on Liturgies, pp. 18.5-198, Lond.lGbO, 5) Powfell ut supra, p. 144. See and ibid. Primitive Episcopacy, pp. also Neal's Puritans, vol. ii. pp. 3C2, 217-219, 1688. 368, 370, 496, vol. iii. pp. 7, 72, et 2) Ep. 1. Georg. Alex. passim. Howitt's Hist, of Priestcraft, Hierarchical Despotism was, as Mr. pp. 115, 167, 180. Taylor argues, one of the four first 6) See the spirit and tendency of characteristics of the ancient church, prelacy illustrated by a chronolooical and altogether irreconcilable with series of facts, in " An Answer to a apostolic Christianity. See Ancient Book entitled an Humble Renion- Christ. vol. ii. part vi. Advertise- strance," in which the original of lit- nient, p. 6, and the following part vii. urgy and episcopacy is discussed. as there promised. ° Written by Smectymnuus, Lond 39 306 PEELATIC TYRANNY IN ENGLAND. [lECT. XIII. preposterous and horrid tyranny of the theocratic monarchs, tlian Archbishop Bancroft, in 1588, declared the prelatic order to be, by divine right, the first order in the church, the only medium of divine grace, — and that all other ministers not or- dained by their manipulation, were spurious and without any authority. Thus was opened a fountain of bitterness, from whose pestilent stream England is now suffering in the schisms, feuds, and animosities within the hierarchy; — and in all the endless divisions of those without, and which are justly attributa- ble to these principles. Thus did this single doctrine become the fruitful source of evils, perhaps now only ripening to their dreadful maturity, 1641. Postscript, pp. 85-94. Old South Library. See also, "A speech of William Thomas, Esquire, in Parliament in May, 1641, being a short view and examination of the actions of bishops in parliament, from anno dom. 1116, to this present of 1641, in the several reigns of the kings and queens of this kingdom of England, &,c." In all and each of their times it is made to appear they have been most obnoxious to prince and people, and therefore that it is not fit or convenient that they should continue members of that hon- orable house, in which they have been so disloyally and traitorously affected to regality, and no less mischievous and pernicious to church and com- monwealth. Printed at London by Tho. Harper, 1641 . See Baxter's Five Disputations of Church Govt. p. 244. " It will not be denied," says Sir Mi- chael Foster in his Exam, of Bishop Gibson's Codex Juris Eccl. Angl. pp. 46,47,— " It will not be denied that our ec- clesiastical affairs were under a mere clerical administration from the year 1628 to the meeting of the long parlia- ment ; a period remarkably infamous for a series of weak, angry, ill-concert- ed measures ; measures calculated to beget in weak minds a veneration to- wards the hierarchy, but executed with a pedantic severity which pro- duced a quite contrary effect. Cer- tain enthusiastic conceits concerning the external beauties of religion, and the necessity of a general uniformity in the business of holy garments, holy seasons, significant gestures, church utensils and ornaments, seem to have been the ruling principles of those times. These filled the gaols with church criminals, and sent thousands of our most useful hands to seek their bread in foreign parts. Through the influence these principles had on our spiritual governors, multitudes of learned and conscientious preachers were silenced, and exposed at once to the two greatest trials which can befal human nature, public infamy and remediless want. These principles alone, and a conduct on our part suited to them, broke our union with the re- formed churches abroad, and foment- ed a war in Scotland ; which, together with a general alienation of affections at home, occasioned in great measure by a rigorous exercise of ecclesiastical discipline, prepared things for that scene of misery which ended in the ruin of our constitution. These were the effects of an administration purely sacerdotal in matters commonly called spiritual ! And though his lordship is pleased to say, that there are few times in which the church hath not been a sufferer under a different man- agement, 1 believe it would puzzle a wise man to show wherein the church hath been a greater sufferer than in the effects of Laud's administration, which takes in the whole period 1 have mentioned. For though he did not get to Canterbury till the year 1633, he was, notwithstanding, prime min- ister for ecclesiastical affairs from the moment he was advanced to the see of London, (an. 1628.") " Were the severities exercised to- wards the poor Wickliffiles conducive to the ends of religion and the interest of the church of God.'' They were the genuine effects of sacerdotal coun- cils. The laws, 1 say, under which the Wickliffites, our elder brethren in the reformation, suffered, were made at the special petition of the clergy. His lordship informs us, (c. 402,) that LECT. Xni.] THE PRELATIC TEMPER STILL INDULGED. 307 — as Mahomet concealed behind the truth that there is one God, the multitudinous absurdities of his system. Puritanism, nonconformity, and dissent in all its forms, were forced upon a reluctant and long-patient people, by the urgency of this doctrine, as practically enforced, under the arbitrary measures of Laud, and his ghostly successors. " The early intolerance of our English reformation, necessitated and justified," says Mr. Taylor, " the noble resistance made to it, first by the puritans, and then by the non conformists."^ Nor is this intolerance of the English church now obsolete. It is still found in her declarations ; it still blackens her formu- laries ; is fanned by the church, and " lingers in the tempers and upon the tongues of many of its ministers."^ This old leaven of popish intolerance yet " pervades the church, and infects the clerical order to a degree that involves the establishment in extreme danger."^ " It is but little understood," adds this writer, " to how great an extent throughout the country the church is putting the whole of her credit and future influence at jeopardy, by the inconsiderate and ill-timed arrogance of her clergy."'' " The same stern theoretic pride from which Rome drew her reasons of intolerance, is maintained, sometimes openly, and often indirectly, and insidiously, by staunch church- men, in this enlightened age."* And what is that theory, from which such consequences ensue ? Let this episcopal writer again state it. " Episcopacy on this theory is a divine institu- tion : — the whole efficacy of the gospel, and the saving virtue the statute of the 2nd of Henry IV- this their own parliament cease not to was so : and Sir Robert Cotton, speak- rage and roar against christian blood, ing of that act, says, * This was the tanquam leones rugientcs — for who- first statute and butcherly knife that ever did the fault, they cried, crucify the impeaching prelates procured or Christ, and deliver to us Barabbas.' " had against the poor preachers of " But I will not pursue an invidious Christ's gospel.' — ' At this time,' task : it is sutlicient to have just men- (8th Henry IV.,) says the same wri- tioned some of our parliamentary pro- ter, ' the clergy suborned Henry, ceedings in favor of the church and Prince, in the name of the bishops clergy, which appear to have taken and lords, of Sir John Tibbot, speaker, their rise from the petitions of the in name of the commons, to exhibit a clergy themselves." long and bloody bill against certain See Note C. persons called Lollards ; namely, 1) Spiritual Despotism, p. 361. against them that preached or taught 2) See Spiritual Despot, pp. any thing against the temporal livings 350-362, 349. of the clergy. — Wherein note a most On the intolerant spirit manifested unlawful and monstrous tyranny : for by the abettors of these principles, see the request of the same bill was, that the conduct of Mr. Newman and his every officer, or otiier minister what- associates toward Dr. Hampden, as soever, might apprehend and inquire described by Archbishop VVhateley, in of such Lollards, without any other Edinb. Review, April, 1841, p. 157. commission ; and that no sanctuary See also Note C. should hold them.' The same writer, 3) Spiritual Despot, p. 407. speaking of the parliament held in the 4) Ibid. p. 404. 5th of Henry V., says, ' The clergy at 5) Ibid. p. 405. 308 THIS INTOLERANCE EPISCOPALLY DESCRIBED. [lECT. XIII. of its sacraments, have been formally attached to this institution ; those therefore who reject it, reject the conditions of salvation ; and we dare not tell them they can be saved. In plain words, all separatists from the episcopal church, whatever piety they may seem to possess, are destined to perdition !" " Church principles, as at present professed, indulge men with a degree of liberty of mquiry, which the Romish church con- sistently, and mercifully, as well as absolutely prohibits. But, if any room be left for freedom of thought and inquiry, intelli- gent men, looking to the general and uniform tenor of history, can come to no other conclusion, than that Christianity, if it is to be understood, as the advocates of church principles do un- derstand it, must always be, as it ever has been, the nurse of superstition, the guardian of ignorance, the sister of despotism, and the promoter of cruelty. Nothing can exempt the religion of Christ from these fatal reproaches, if those doctrines are really part and parcel of it which the papacy did but amplify and realize. Infidels may confidently say — ' if the early and Nicene church did truly interpi'et the gospel, then the popery of the middle ages, is what we have to look to, as the final resting place to which it will lead us. If we are not to think at all, in matters of religion, we had better at once take refuge in the bosom of the church of Rome : but if we are permitted to in- quire concerning the tendency of religious systems, then it is manifest that Christianity, in the sense of the church of the fourth century, is nothing but a scheme of superstition, fanati- cism, and spiritual tyranny ; and that it corrupts the morals of the mass of men, not less than it shocks the reason of the few.' "^ Again he says : "If, therefore, when urged to submit them- selves to the gospel, they are told that what is meant, is Nicene Christianity, they must (if well informed in church history) re- gard such a proposal as involving the utter prostration of the understanding. What then ? we are to believe with Jerome — with Ambrose — with Palladius ! We are to dote with Cassian, and are to cringe at the feet of Basil, when required to listen to Christ, to Paul, to Peter."^ " But suppose such an inference were admitted, what would it have to do with the present question concerning Nicene church principles, as revived by the writers of the Tracts for the Times ? This, namely — that those principles embrace every element of the papal tyranny, cruelty, profligacy, and spiritual apostacy, and that if left to work themselves out, according to their prop- er quality, they could have no other issue." 1) Ancient Christianity, p. 420, 2) Ibid, p. 422, vol. i. vol. i. LECT. XIII.] PKELATIC ATTACK UPON THE RIGHTS OF THE LAITY. 309 " It is quite true, and we may perhaps live to see it to be so, that devoted men, sincerely embracing Nicene church principles, might, so long as they formed a weaker, and a suffering party, eminently exemplify the temper described in the sermon on the mount ; but then it is equally true, as we believe, that men professing such principles, if once seated in the chair of power, and holding an unchecked license to mould the civil and eccle- siastical constitutions of a country to their will, could and would do nothing else, but establish a ghostly tyranny, which, in less than a century, must place the lives, fortunes, bodies, souls, of the community, at the absolute disposal of a college of priests, and unmarried priests ! '" Now that such views and sentiments, involving every essential feature in the Romish spiritual despotism, are still cherished and maintained, and are now boldly avowed, by the English prelacy, is a fact, which we regret to say, is too susceptible of proof. The doctrine is now insisted on, that the interference of the laity in the ecclesiastical administration of the affairs of the church, is a gross violation of all law canonical or divine ; and the American branch of the Anglican hierarchy, is loudly called upon to rid herself of an unauthorized invasion of the aristocratic rights of the prelacy, by excluding their lay delegates from all episcopal conventions. Let the British Critic be allowed to speak to " the American church," in the name of this prelatic hierarchy :« — " To tell the truth, we think one special enemy to which the American church, as well as our own, at present lies open, is a refined and covert socinianism. Not that we fear any invasion of that heresy within her pale now, any more than fifty years ago, but it is difficult to be in the neighborhood of icebergs without being chilled, and the United States is, morally speaking, just in the latitude of ice and snow. Here again, as our remarks will directly show, we mean nothing disrespectful towards our transatlantic relatives. We allude not to their national character, or to their form of government, but to their employments, which we share with them. A trading country is the habitat of socinianism." The work then goes on to show the dangers to be dreaded by the prelacy, from the introduction into her communion of commercial men. " They want only^ so much religion as will satisfy their natural perception of the propriety of being religious. Reason teaches them that utter disregard of their Maker is un- becoming, and they determine to be religious, not from love and 1) Ibid, vol. i. p. 426. 3) Ibid, p. 323. 2) Oct. 1839, p. 321. 1310 PRELATIC ATTACK UPON THE RIGHTS OF THE LAITt. [LfeGT. Xlli. fear, but from good sense. Now it would be a miserable slander on the American church to say, that she suited such a form of mind as this ; how can she, with her deep doctrines of the apostolic commission and the eucharistic sacrifice ; but this is the very point; here we see around her the external influences which have a tendency to stifle her true developement, and to make her inconsistent and unreal. If in the English church the deep sea dried up more or less in the last century, why should it not in the American also? Let the latter dread her extension among the opulent merchants and traders in towns, where her success has principally been." Another ground upon which the Anglican mother is alarmed for the virtuous and established character of her American daughter is, that " in the American church, bishops do not as- sume sees, but are named from their dioceses. In spite of whatever precedents may be urged in favor of this usage, we are clear that it is a piece o( puras jmtas protestantismiis. It is diflicult to analyze its rationale, but we have no doubt about the fact. The church is in a country not of it, and takes her seat in a centre. If a bishop has no throne or see, where is the -one, 0 «f/, the never-dying priest continual, who is the living apostle of the church ? Is a bishop a mere generalization of a diocese, or its foundation ? a name, or a person ? Gene- ralizations are every where, persons have a position. Does a bishop depend on his diocese, or his diocese on him? Mean- while, the Roman catholics have located their bishops, and though their succession in the country is later than ours, they have thus given themselves the appearance of being the settlers, not visiters.'" The way being thus prepared, the writer proceeds boldly to advance the following sentiments :^ " But leaving these agreeable instances of the expansion of the apostolical idea, which show that we have every thing to hope of the vVmerican church, we must go on to allude, for our space will hardly allow us to do more, to a much more system- atic and overt deflexion from church principles, than any which we have yet mentioned, — the power usurped by the laity over the bishop's jurisdiction, which, at present, is an utter bar to the true developement of catholicity. The Americans boast that their church is not, like ours, enslaved to the civil power ; true, not to the civil power, by name and in form, but to the laity ; and in a democracy, what is that but the civil power in another shape ?" ]) Ibid, p. 326 2) Ibid, pp. 237, 329, 330, 332. LECT. XIII.] PRELATIC ATTACK UPON THE RIGHTS OF THE LAITY. 311 " Again, as to the third point, which is the one immediately before us, the introduction of the laity into the conventions, it is implied by the venerable Bishop White, in his Memoirs of the American Church, that that measure originated with him."^ " With all due respect to the memory of the venerable author of the pamphlet, we must express our strong feeling that such views imply an insufficient appreciation of the clevetope- ments of the apostolical succession. He advocated them in a pamphlet, published without his name, in 1783, and the princi- ple of lay government was carried by the convention. This was before the introduction of the succession from England, or Dr. White's own consecration. The only bishop then in America, was Dr. Seabury of Connecticut ; and he and his clergy strongly, though ineffectually, protested against it. He wrote to Dr. Smith, of Maryland, with his character- istic clearness and cogency, sweeping away the doctrine of expediency, and joining issue on the question of historical facts. ' The rights of the christian church,' he said, ' arise not from nature or compact, but from the institution of Christ ; and we ought not to alter them, but to receive and main- tain them, as the holy apostles left them. The government, sacraments, faith, and doctrine, of the church, are fixed and settled. We have a right to examine what they are, but we must take them as they are. If we new model the govern- ment, why not the sacraments, creeds, and doctrines, of the church ? But then it would not be Christ's church, but our church, and would remain so, call it by what name we please." "Such," says this work, "is the serviceable sketch Mr. Caswell gives us of the constitution of the American church ; according to which, it would appear, without going to more apostolical considerations, that those whose business or profession is not re- ligious, are, in matters theological and ecclesiastical, put on a level w^ith bishop and clergy. We are quite sure such a con- stitution cannot work well ; and if any one demurs, then we differ from him what is well, and what is ill. It may throw light upon its practical working, to quote a passage from anoth- er part of Mr. Caswell's work, which would seem to show that the laity, not to say the presbytery, would have no objection to the same high position in divine ministry, which they are allow- ed in convention." Now, let analogous sentiments to these be avouched as neces- sary consequences from some political theory embraced by a powerful party in this country ; — and how soon, how universally how unqualifiedly, would it be reprobated, as hostile to the genius 1) White's Memoirs, p 291. 312 THE POWER TO SUPPRESS HERESY NOW CLAIMED. [LECT. XIII. of American republicanism ! And if civil liberty springs from religious liberty, and never exists apart from it, then why shall we not as decidedly and plainly repudiate the introduction of a system, which avowedly draws after it such anti-republican posi- tions ?' The claim to unlimited power, to be employed for the sup- pression of heresy, and the compulsion of the refractory, is plain- ly asserted in unequivocal terms, and with unblushing effrontery. Thus Mr. Newman, in his Lectures on Romanism and Dissent : " If the christian church was intended to come on earth in the power and spirit of Christ himself, her Lord and defender ; if she was to manifest him mystically before the eyes and in the souls of men, who is on the right hand of God ; if her glory was to be like that of heaven, though invisible, her reign eternal, and her kingdom universal; if she was destined to compel the nations with an irresistible sway, smiting and withering them if rebellious, though not with earthly weapons, and shedding upon the obedi- ent, overflowing peace, and the holiest and purest blessings ; it is not extravagant to suppose that she also was destined to an au- thoritative ministry of the word, such as has never been realized. And that these prospects have been disappointed, may be owing, as in the case of the Jews, to the misconduct of her members. They may have forfeited for her, in a measure, her original priv- ileges."* The consistency of such arbitrary power, and unlimited obe- dience to canonical authority, on the part of the faithful, is thus made to appear : — " It has been argued by very high authority, that the arbitrary strictness of military discipline, is not inconsistent with the constitution of a free state, because enlistment is purely volun- tary. This argument applies with greater force to the church- man, whose canonical yoke is freedom itself, when compared with the bondage of the soldier, and who engages in his profes- sion at a more mature age, and with greater deliberation. "3 " Who does not lament," says Archdeacon Townsend,* " to read in tiie pages o^" the learned author of the History of the Arians,6 the defence of some of the worst principles on which the church of Rome established all its usurpation ? Who would believe, that in the present day, when the doctrine of toleration 1) See British Critic, Oct. 1839, 210, 220. Bib. Report, 1837, pp. 15 pp. 323. 320, 327, 329, 330, 332. That and 17. this exclusion of the laity was one 2) See at pp. 241, 242. powerful reason of consolidating the 3) Brit. Critic, April, 1839, p. ancient popery, see affirmed in Spirit- 446. ual Desp. p. 208. See also full proofs 4) In a charge to the clergy of from ancient authors in Clarkson's Allerton, and Allertonshire. Primitive Episcopacy, pp. 189, 197, 5) Mr. Newman. LECT. XIII.] THE PRELATICAL SPIRIT STILL EXISTS. 313 might have been supposed to have become an axiom with gov- ernments and individuals, that this learned and laborious mem- ber of the University of Oxford, when he is relating in very just language, the evil consequences of the conduct of the her- etics, who opposed in the fourth century, the doctrine of the divinity of Christ, declares, that it is ' but equitable to antici- pate those consequences in the persons of the heresiarchs, rather than to suffer them gradually to unfold, and spread far and wide after their day, sapping the iaith of their deluded and less guil- ty followers.' That is, it is better to injiict punishment upon the persons of the heresiarchs, than to wait to confute their opinions, because those opinions are injurious.^^ Mr. Townsend proceeds : " Could the church of Rome re- quire any other defence of its persecutions ? Who would be- lieve, that in the very same page in which this atrocious sen- tence is uttered, we should read this passage also ? ' The heresiarch should meet with no mercy. He assumes the office of the tempter, and so far as his error goes, must be dealt with by the competent authority, as if he were embodied evil. To spare him, is a false and dangerous pity. It is to endanger the souls of thousands, and it is uncharitable to himself.' Could the spirit of St. Dominic animate the inqxdsition with more intol- erable language 1 Is it to be endured in the present day, among a people who rightly and justly seek for liberty as well as truth ... that the episcopal church should be rendered odious by such language ? " This same Mr. Newman says, that the " English theology justifies absolute anathemas, where the primitive church sanc- tions the use of them.'" Nor is this a private opinion, but is in accordance with the canons. Thus, for instance, the fifth can- on of the church in Ireland stands thus -.^ " Whosoever shall separate themselves from the communion of saints, as it is ap- proved by the apostles' rules, in the church of Ireland, and combine themselves in a new brotherhood, accounting the chris- tians who are conformable to the doctrine, government, rites, and ceremonies of the church of Ireland, to be profane and un- meet for him to join with in christian profession, or shall affirm and maintain, that there are within this realm, other meetings, assemblies, or congregations, than such, as by the laws of this land are held and allowed, which may rightly challenge to them- selves the name of true and lawful churches, let him be excom- 1) Lecture on Romanism, p. 261. 2) See gloried in by Palmer on For what is meant by this anathema, the Church, vol. i. p. 218. see Burnet on the 39th art. p. 3. 40 314 THE PRELATICAL SPIRIT STILL EXISTS. [lECT. XIII. municated, and nor restored, until he repent, and publicly re- voke his error." So it is with the canons generally. " Thus it is evident," says Mr. Palmer, " that the Church of England requires and provides for unity and order within all her boundaries. Be- sides this, she does not hesitate to denounce those who sepa- rate from her, as guilty — of most grievous sin. Her canons pronounce, that ' whosoever shall hereafter separate themselves from the communion of saints, as it is approved by the apostles' rules in the Church of England, and combine themselves togeth- er in a new brotherhood,' accounting the Church of England unfit to be joined with in christian profession, shall be excom- municated, and not restored till after their repentance and public revocation of such their wicked errors. Those even, who shall maintain such schismatics, and allow them the name of a christian church, are equally excommunicated by the Church of England. Schism is condemned in every way. Its authors, its maintainers, its conventicles, the supporters of its laws, rules, and orders, are all subjected to excommunication, and regarded as ' wicked.' Can any more convincing proof be afforded that the Church of England provides assiduously for the maintenance of entire unity of communion."' Mr. Palmer is equally anxious to show, that this also is the spirit of the articles. " That she does claim it," he says, " is shown by Towgood himself, who remarks, that although it is said in the twentieth article that ' the church may not ordain any thing contrary to God's word, nor so expound one scripture, as to be repugnant to another, yet of this repugnance and contrariety the church alone, you will observe, and not every private person, is al- lowed to be the proper judge, for otherwise, the article is ab- surd ; it actually overthrows itself, and takes away with one hand, what it gives with the other.' He admits, that ' it does claim for the church some real authority,' &c. Such are the principles of unity maintained by the British churches. They may be accused of severity, by those who do not believe as she does, that salvation is olTered only in the church, (that is, the Church of England,) and that she herself is decidedly and un- questionably the church of God in these countries."^ " Each bishop is bound to correct and punish such as be unquiet, disobedient, and criminous, within her diocese."^ The agreement of the English with the Romish church, on these points, is presented in evidence of her true character and claims. 1) Palmer, vol. i. pp. 218, 219. 3) Consecration of Bishops. Palm- 2) Palmer, vol. i. p. 220. er, vol. i. p. 218. LECT. XITI.] PRELATISTS NOW CLAIM CIVIL POWER, 315 She urges unity of communion " as a matter of religious duty, and inflicts punishment on those who offend against unity.'" These persecuting and intolerant principles of Rome, " are attri- butes " we are assured, "of the Oriental and British churches."* And a " tribunal for the decision of controversies by irrefragable authority, has been, and will be again constituted, whenever the Divine Head of the church shall judge it necessary, for the pres- ervation of the true faith. "^ Until the church can erect this inquisition in her own name and authority, "the right and duty of the prince, to employ the civil sword in defence of the faith and discipline of the catholic church, is most fully admitted, even by those who limit his au- thority in ecclesiastical matters, so far as to render him rather the servant, than the protector of the church."'* It is the doctrine of the Church of England at this moment, that " the king's majesty hath the same authority in causes ecclesiastical that christian emperors of the primitive church possessed ; the denial of this position involving excommunica- tion, ipso facto. The same doctrine is taught by the thirty- seventh article, which declares that godly princes have the power to rule all estates and degrees committed to their charge by God, whether they be ecclesiastical or temporal, and re- strain with the civil sword the stubborn and evil-doers. And the law of England most certainly recognizes this principle, since, by existing acts of parliament, temporal penalties are imposed on any persons who, professing to be members of the church, either establish a worship different from hers, or dare to violate their obligation as her ministers by teaching doctrines contrary to those which she approves. The conclusion which I draw from all these facts is, that christian princes, members of the true church, have a right, and are bound in duty when necessary, to defend the faith and discipline of the true church existing in their dominions, by obliging its professing members to acquiesce in the one, and to submit to the other, by means of temporal powder." For this doctrine, the author quotes a whole host of popish and other authorities." He then goes on to say, " in fine, the doctrine and practice of these catholic and apostolic churches, and of our christian sovereigns from the earliest ages, have always been conformable to that universally received."* It may be well to hear in some particulars the length to which this authority of the magistrate extends, — an authority, 1) Palmer, vol. i. p. 287. 4) Ibid, p. 335. 2) Ibid, p. 289. 5) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 336. 3) Ibid, p. 287. 6) Ibid, pp. 337, 338. 32Q. 316 PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE. [lECT. XIII. be it remembered, which, when not assumed by the magistrate, devolves upon the church. " Another end of the state's pro- tection of the church, is the preservation of unity and subordi- nation in the church. Hence it is reasonable that the prince should have a right to command superfluous controversies to cease, a power which was abused by the Emperors Heraclius and Constans, in issuing the Ectheses and Typus ; and which the Emperor Charles V. exercised at one time during the reformation, as Joseph II. did in the seventeenth century, in that royal proclamation which still is printed at the beginning of the thirty-nine articles. Of course, the prince has also a right to urge the prelates of the church to suppress superfluous con- troversies, and to give them any temporal assistance requisite for the purpose."^ " Now it is certain that the christian kings of England have, like other christian princes, the right of protecting the church's faith and discipline, making laws conformable to them, conven- ing synods, presiding in them, confirming them, and obliging by the civil sword all members of the church, both clergy and laity, to profess its doctrines and remain in unity and subordi- nation. This is a power which may most justly be called gov- ernment, and it is this power to which the oath of supremacy refers ! "^ " Even if the throne were occupied by a heretic or a schis- matic, as James the II. was, the church might still very justly admit his ecclesiastical supremacy, that is, his right to protect the faith and discipline of the catholic church established among us, and to use the civil sword to oblige all its members to unity and obedience. "3 " It appears to me, on the whole, that though the only regular and ordinary mode of removing a bishop is by an ecclesiastical judgment, there are particular cases in which the temporal power is justified, even without any previous sentence by the ordinary ecclesiastical tribunal, in expelling a bishop from his see. First, the right will not be denied in a case where the occupant of a see is an usurper or intruder, uncanonically ap- pointed. Secondly, the practice of the church seems to favor the opinion, that when a bishop is manifestly heretical, when he manifestly and obstinately opposes the judgment of the catholic church, when he is manifestly and notoriously guilty of any crime which by the law of the catholic church involves his degradation, and when there is urgent necessity for his imme- 1) Palmer, vol. ii. pp. 342, 343. 3) Ibid, p. 347. 2) Ibid, p. 346. LECT. XIII.] PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF THE CIVIL MAGISTRATE. 317 diate removal, or difficulty in assembling a synod ; then a chris- tian prince may justly expel and drive him from his see, by temporal force, and procure the ordination of another bishop in his place ! "' " Let us first consider the laws now existing, which establish the discipline and doctrine of this catholic church. By the act J St Elizabeth, any minister of the church rejecting the use of the book of common prayer, or employing different forms and ceremonies, is liable to forfeit the yearly profit of his benefice, and to be imprisoned for six months for the first offence ; to suffer imprisonment for a year, and to be deprived, ipso facto, o{ his benefices, in case of a second offence, and for a third, to suffer imprisonment for life, besides losing his benefices. "2 "In accoi'dance with the principle involved in these laws, and in the articles and canons of the Church of England, I maintain firmly, that the state has a right, when necessary, to oblige members of the church, by temporal penalties, to submit to her ordinances, and neither establish a different worship, nor teach different doctrines from hers. It has a right to prevent per- sons from separating from her communion, and from troubling the faithful, sowing dissension in the community, and misleading the ignorant and weak-minded brethren. "» Subjection to this authority of the church is required, and her decision of all controversies to be received, " whether she pro- nounce rightly or not." Thus teaches Dr. Pusey, who in his letter to the bishop of Oxford says : " But the power of 'expounding,' 'decreeing,' 'ordaining,' implies that her children are to receive her expositions, and obey her decrees, and accept her authority, in controversies of faith : and the appeal lies not to 'their private judgment;' they are not the arbiters, whether she pronounce rightly or not ; for what sort of decree or authority were that, of which every one were first to judge, and then if his judgment coincided with the law, to obey ? Who would not see the absurdity of this in matters of human judgment ? "* So also Dr. Hook, of whom it is declared, that few persons have done more than he has for the church* — in his Call to Union — which is the very trumpet-blast of discord and disunion — boldly delivers himself. He quotes with approbation the following standing rule of the English, and, I believe, American-English church : — " and accordingly, in legislating on this subject, the 1) Palmer, vol. ii. p. 348. 4) Letter to the Bishop of Ox- 2) Ibid, pp. 363, 364. ford, p. 19. 3) Ibid, pp. 364, 365. 5) Lon. Quart. Rev. March, 1840, p. 285. 318 THIS PRELATICAL THEORY EXEMPLIFIED. [lECT. XIII. Church of England ordains that no one shall be accounted and taken to be a lawful bishop, ])riest, or deacon, among us, or be suffered to execute any of the ministerial functions, except he be called, tried, examined, and admitted thereunto, according to our form of episcopal ordination, or hath had formerly episcopal consecration or ordination." On this he proceeds to remark : "Now this regulation very naturally offends the various self- appointed ministers and teachers, who have of late years abounded in the land. They accuse the church of intolerance, bigotry, and ill. berality, since they conclude that she implies, by this regulation, the invalidity of all but episcopal ordination : and in this con- clusion they are the rather confirmed when they find our canons, denouncing as ipso facto excommunicated, not only those who affirm that the Church of England is not a true, and apostolical churchjOr that the form of God's worship in the Church of England is corrupt, but also those who, not being of the Church of England challenge to themselves in England, the name of true and lawful churches. Under such a reproach some of the members of our church are impatient, and deny that the conclusion must of necessity be drawn. Others, rejoicing in every thing to bear the scandal of the cross, admit the justness of the conclusion, but contend that the church is no more to be blamed for this, than a mirror for the wrinkles or deformities it may bring to view."* By virtue of this principle and authority it is decided, and by this decision you will perceive its practical operation, " that the presbyterians (of Scotland) were innovators. Their opinion was erroneous, but had it merely extended to a preference for the presbyterian form, it might have been in some degree tolerated: it would not have cut them off from the church of Christ: but it was the exaggeration of their opinion : their separation for the sake of this opinion, their actual rejection of the authority and communion of the existing successors of the apostles in Scotland, and therefore of the universal church in all ages, that marks them out as schismatics; and all the temporal enactments and powers of the whole world would not cure this fault, nor render them a portion of the church of Christ. With regard to all the other sects in Scotland which have seceded from the presbyterian community, the same observations apply to them all. Their predecessors, the presbyterians, voluntarily separated themselves from the catholic church of Christ, and they in de- parting from the presbyterian communion, have not yet returned to that of the true church, consequently, they form no part of the church of Christ ?"3 1) " Call to Union," p 24. 3) Palmer on the Church, vol. i. 2) Ibid, p. 25. p. 576. LECT. XIII.] THIS INTOLERANT BIGOTRY ILLUSTRATED. 319 " Such is the awful sentence which is pronounced on those Scottish martyrs, thousands of whom suffered on the gibbet, or were butchered in the mass, by the armed savages sent by Charles the Second and his brother James to dragoon them into conformity to prelacy ! Of such commemoration are they thought worthy, who, for conscientious adherence to the presbyterian worship, endured torture, imprisonment, exile and death, on a scale worthy of the persecutions inflicted on the christians, by heathen Rome ; and which Rome ecclesiastical did not equal, when the darkness in which she had enveloped the Scottish na- tion, was ' made visible' by the flames of martyrdom, in which Hamilton, Mill and Wishart were consumed 1 These new mar- tyrs to conscience, are declared to be schismatics ; and no part of the church of Christ. Such, also, is the judgment held to be due to the two thousand English confessors of 1662. Their separation from the Church of England, was founded not only in schism, but in heresy, and this being the case, they could not have been any part of the Church of Christ. The Guthries, Govans and Learmonths, of Scotland ; and the Howes, Bax- ters and Flavels, of England ; the Erskines and McCries, who belonged to christian bodies, derived from the church of which the former were ornaments ; and the Doddridges and Wattses, who have trodden in the footsteps of the latter — 'no part of the church of Christ ! ! ! ' It is worthy of these sentiments, that what is denied to those who are termed ' the presbyterian and puritan schismatics,' should be freely conceded to Romanists ; and that while ' the Roman churches ' are declared still to con- tinue a portion of the catholic church of Christ ! the Puritans, and the Covenanters, and all who have resembled them, should be consigned to perdition, as totally separated from the church of God."' All who oppose this " outrageous bigotry," as it is termed by Mr. Taylor, which was cradled in the despotic reigns of Hen- ry VHL, Elizabeth, and Charles H., are classed with "the wicked." Their errors are " wicked errors."^ Their principles, " pushed to their legitimate consequences," terminate in " so- cinianism "* — nay, in the licentious atheism of the socialists, which is, we are told, their " natural and necessary develope- ment."^ These are the " allies and supporters of Mr. Owen,"* and constitute the mass of his abandoned and wretched follow- 1) Schism, pp.250, 252. 4) Lond. Quart. Rev. March, 2) Palmer, vol. i. p. 218. 1840, p. 265. 3) Dr. Hook in Call to Union, p. 5) Ibid, pp. 273, 274, 284. 44, says, even low-churchmen should be Socinians. 320 THIS THEORY IRRECONCILABLE WITH LIBERTY. [lECT. XIII. ers. Such is the character given by a leading journal to the whole body of Enghsh dissenters from the establishment, at the present time, including thousands and thousands of Eng- land's best and worthiest inhabitants. There is, then, we affirm, and can be, no important distinc- tion between these principles and those of the Romish hierarchy.' The powers here claimed, constitute the sole and exclusive prerogative of Christ's royalty. Their assumption, by any set of men whatever, is an invasion of His sovereignty — a most wanton usurpation of His sceptre, — and stamps their defenders with the most revolting uncharitableness. Nor can we think that any thing is wanting to such persons, but the power — to renew those scenes, which crimson the very pages on which they are recorded. Can we be wrong in affirming that these principles, and this fundamental doctrine on which they are all based, are irrecon- cilable with republicanism, or with civil and religious liberty? Do they not lead their defenders to denounce the revolution of 1688, as a rebellion — and to mourn over the deposition of po- pish James — and the elevation, to the crown, of king William — as a national sin — for which England is even now suffering the just judgments of Heaven. - As it regards religious liberty, what can be clearer than the en- tire opposition to it, of these intolerant principles, as they have been developed in this lecture ? By rendering salvation in a great measure dependent on the clergy — they thus tutor the minds and consciences of their recipients, to a habit of subjection and unquestioning acquiescence. By connecting the nature and effi- cacy of the sacraments with the official sanctity of their adminis- trators, rather than the spiritual character and desires of the re- cipient— they still further entangle the minds and consciences of those, who feel that salvation flows through the episcopal chan- nel, which is in the exclusive keeping of the clergy. This in- fluence is further greatly increased by surrounding these sacra- ments with all imaginable mystery and awe. Interposing, as they do, a human mediation between the soul and Christ — by the very laws of our moral nature — the attention and regard must 1) See this shown in Hanbury's 2) So says Dr. Pusey in his Let- Hooker, vol. i. pp.28, 32. and in Tow- ter, p. 182, Eng. ed. See Miller's Let- good. See the valuable sermon of ter, pp. 45,73. See also note D., where Matthew Henry, on " Popery a Spir- will be found the very valuable letter itual Tyranny." Works, Lon. 1830, of the late Dr. Rice on "high-church p. 619, &-C., where the picture will be principles, opposed to the genius of found to bear a very striking resem- our republican institutions." blance to the daughter of this spirit- ual molher. LECT. XIII,] PRELATIC PRINCIPLES MTTST LEAD TO INTOLERANCE. 321 be withdrawn from that divine head and source of spiritual hfe, to these human deputies or vicars, on whom dependence is made immediately necessary. By further making the interpretations of the church as essential as the scriptures themselves ; and by re- quiring them to be implicitly received, this bondaLje is rendered still more insufferable.' By denouncing the exercise of private judgment as presumptuous arrogance, and seminal infidelity, and by thus necessitating, in every member, a condition of doubtful anxiety, which can only be relieved by having recourse to the church; these galling chains of spiritual despotism are fast riv- eted upon the helpless recipients of such opinions. - 1) " For it is notorious that a cer- tain set of men, most impudently as- suming to themselves the sole inter- pretation of the laws of this kingdom, and pretending- to an extraordinary zeal for the honor of its Founder, did set up and for many ages maintain a kingdom of tlieir own over the great- est part of the christian world ; the most impious and oppressive tyranny that ever exercised the patience of God or man ; an empire founded in craft and supported by blood, rapine, breach of faith, and every other en- gine of fraud and oppression." Sir Michael Foster, Knt. Exam, of the Scheme of Church Power, 3d ed. 1736. See also Anct. Christ, vol. ii. pp. 23, 24, 25, Eng. ed. 2) Hear how this point was argued in ancient days. Mr. Baynes, in his Diocesan's Tryall, (Lond. 1621, 4to. p. 73,) says : " Tliat which doth breed an antichristian usurpation, never was of Chrisfs institution But bishops' majority of power in regard of order and jurisdiction, doth so ; Ergo, That vfhicb maketh the bishop a liead, as doth infiuere derive the power of ex ternal government, to other his assist- ants, that doth breed an antichristian usurpation. But to claim the v;hole power of jurisdiction through a dio- cesan church, doth so ; for he must needs substitute helpers to him, be cause it is more than by himself he can perform But this is it which maketh antichrist, he doth take upon him to be head of the whole church, from whom is derived this power of external government ; and the bishop doth no less in his diocesan church, that which he usurpeth differing in degree only and extension, not in kind, from that which the pope arro- gateth." 41 The learned author of" The Rights of tiie Christian Church," (Lond. 1707, p. 313,) with whose work we have lately met, through the kind- ness of the Rev. Shepard KoUock, — himself a member of the Church of England, and while defending it against the non-jurors, sustains this view : " First, as to the form of government itself; if the making of laws, and the executing of them, (without both which there can be no government,) be in the hands of the same persons, the bishops, they will lie under a temptation to make such as regard their own separate interest more than the good of the church ; and having the executive power, they may abuse it without the least control, there being no appeal from them, nor ran the peo- ple (which cannot happen in a govern- ment founded by them,) have any right to redress themselves. This being a government so tyrannical in its frame and constitution, can we suppose the Divine Goodness would miraculously interfere to impose it on the church for ever ? The thing itself, without any other proof, is a sufficient demon- stration of its being a contrivance of the ecclesiastics." " The priesthood," says Bancroft, (Hist, of United States, vol. ii. p. 457,) " ordaining its own successors, ruled human destiny at birth, on entering active life, at marriage, in the hour when frailty breathed its confession, in the hour when faith aspired to com- munion with God, and at death." The prevalence of this belief in the inseparable connexion between prel- acy and intolerance is thus acknowl- edged by Bishop White : " In the minds of some, the idea of episcopacy will be connected with that of im- 322 PRELATIC PRINCIPLES ANTI-REPUBLICAN. [LECT. XIII. It was one of the loudest objections made to the Puritans, that their system impHed " a servile deference to a foreign ecclesias- tical authority.'" How powerfully and truly does this objection lie against this system, as far as it exists among us, not only in its avowed character in Romanism, but also in the increasing diffusion of these principles among the clergy of the protestant episcopal church ! Imbued with the spirit of docility and rever- ence for authority, the minds of all who submit to their influence, are inclined to look to the English hierarchy as the immediate source of all spiritual power, and as the great exemplar of all perfection.* We are now to have the Anglo-catholic church of America, and the Anglo-catholic clergy, and the Anglo-catholic theology .3 Should this system extensively prevail, we ask, therefore, what can prevent the growth, also, of an Anglo-political feeling, which may, in due time, repudiate a republicanism that has ever been reprobated, as indirect antagonism to prelacy? We have now, at some length, examined the doctrine of apostolical succession, as it is publicly taught, and zealously de- fended, in this country. The works, from which we have drawn our portraiture, are authenticated as among " the choicest con- tents" of episcopal libraries, and such " as should be in the hands of every clergyman, and should circulate in every parish."* We have analyzed the principles involved in this system. We have investigated its history, as developed in its practical work- ing, and as described by its most candid observers. We have pas- sed from its history in all past time, and in every country, where it has been established, to its present exhibition, by its living and ablest advocates, in their didactic treatises, which ought to be '* in the hands of every clergyman, and circulate in every parish." From all our investigations, conducted under circumstances of such undeniable fairness and impartiality, but one conclusion can moderate power ; to which it may be jurea his church in this broad conti- answered that power becomes danger- nent. Christians of the American ous, not from the precedency of one church, pray for and defend your man, but from his being independent." mother church, now that the unholy Case of the Episcopal Churches, 1782, alliance of papist, infidel and dissent- p. 18, by Bishop Wlilte. er, is striving to overthrow her," (that On the subject of the practical ten- is, we suppose, the establishment in dency of this system, as illustrated by England.) Odenheimer's Origin of historical facts, see Bishop Meade's the Common Prayer Book, p. 75. Sermon at the consecration of Bishop 3) These terms are already in use Elliott, appendix, chap. xvi. p. 118, on both sides of the water. &c ; see also Dr Rice's Considera- 4) Bishop Doane's Commenda- tions on Religion. tion of the British Critic. See quoted 1) Soame's Elizabeth. Rel. Hist. at page 262. p. 187. Palmer's Treatise on the Church is 2) "Whoever injures Christ's now republished under the superin- catholic church across the ocean, in- tendence of Bishop Whittingham. LECT. XIII.] THESE TENDENCIES NOT ASLEEP IN AMERICA. 223 possibly be drawn. That system of church principles, which is based upon the doctrine of apostolical succession, in its prac- tical working, is, and ever has been, intolerant.' It is, of course, impossible, in the present state of public sentiment, to carry into practical operation the principles which, as we have seen, are embedded in this prelatical system. Neither do we believe any open manifestation of such a spirit, would be tolerated by the members of the protestant episcopal church. The abettors of this system, in that church, cannot be, relatively to other denominations, very numerous. We are not, therefore, to estimate its tendencies, when thus so partially developed, and so kept under, by any present or actual devel- opements. These, however, though latent, are yet existent. They are in the system, and inseparable from it. Nay, we do find these tendencies actually manifested, to the full extent of their possible opportunities. For the only possible way in which this exclusive and anathematizing spirit could be exhibited, as it is restrained from any overt acts, is in words. And in what other way, than as indicative of this temper of mind, can we regard the introduction among us, as current and familiar terms of designation, of the words dissenter, schismatic, and secta- rian :* 1) While bishop of Oxford, Seek- er issued the following admonition, intended for his brethren in Convoca- tion, 1761, p. 19, (Oratio Synodalis, at the end of his Charges, Wks.) " We must always strive, not only to re- tain the form, but to renew the forge of the AKCIENT CHCRCH GOVERNMENT, 80 far as it is propped up either by DIVINE or HUMAN AUTHORITY. And till that be done, our polity will be i.AME and DEFECTIVE." " Now, what was this ancient church government.-'" asks Mr. Blackburne, archdeacon of Cleaveland, of Yorkshire, in his Criti- cal Commentary on his Grace's Let- ter, (p. 19,) " Even the model left us by some of his Grace's predecessors and their adherents, who never want- ed props for it, (if you would take their interpretations of scripture,) either from divine or human authority. And the force of it consisted, in put- ting a two-edged sword into the hands of church governors, to execute ven- geance upon the heathen, and punish- ments upon the people." [See Psalm xlix. 6, 7. To which Archbishop Laud prefixed this title : " The prophet ex- horteth to praise God for his love to the church ; eind for that power which he hath given to the church, to rule the consciences of men."] In plain English, power to correct heretics, schismatics and dissenters, with the wholesome severities of whips, pillo- ries, fines and imprisonments." 2) See Dr. Chapman's " Sermons to Presbyterians of all Sects," Hart- ford, 1836, paFsim. ; Dr. Bowden's Letters on Episcopacy, N. York, 1808, vol. ii. p. 230, et passim. ; Odenheim- er's Origin of the Prayer Book, Phil. 1841, p. 46, &c. This writer teaches (see pp. 81, 106, and Note M. p 148,) that the protestant episcopal church is " THE legitimate branch of the holy catholic church in these United States." Of course, we and all other denominations are illegitimate and bastard. It is in perfect keeping, when this writer styles " England's first Charles her martyred king, and England's BEST FRIEND AND BISHOP, her martyred Laud." p. 101 Dr. How's Vind. of the Prot. Ep. Ch. pp. 131, 130. The Rev. William Staunton, in his " Dictionary of the Church," (New- York, 1839, 2d ed. p. 419,) defines schism to be " a separation from the church catholic, but with more im 324 PRELATISTS INTRODUCING INTOLERANT EPITHETS. [lECT. XIII. What are we to understand, as American citizens, by these words as descriptive of religious denonrjinations, in this land of equal and impartial liberty ? " A dissenter," says Crabbe, in his work on English synonyrnes, " is one who dissents from the establishment,'" " a schismatic is the author or promoter of schism ; " and " a sectarian or sectary, is the member of a mediate allusion to it as a breach of unity with our own branch of that church; " and a schismatic, ■' one who voluntarily separates himself from the church, (i e. the episcopal church,) or is attached to a schismatical sect or party." p. 421. See also Bishop Doane's " Further Postscript to his Examination of Rlr. Boardman's Letters,'' Burlington, 1S41, pp. 189, 190, 199, where he seems to allude to us schismatists, " and worse," when he says, " the enemy will blaspheme." See Dr. Bowden's Letters, first se- ries, N. York, ISOd, vol. ii. p. 230. See also a recent sermon by the Rev. Thomas John Young, of John's Island, S. C, on education, published by re- quest of the clergy before whom it was preached, (Charleston, 1841, pp. 16, 17.) Thus the episcopal church is uniformly "the church." p. 17. So in Bishop Gadsden's Discourse on tlie late Bishop Bo wen, he speaks of "• the protestant catholic church," (p. 27,) and says, " our friend was a protestant catholic," (p. 47,) that is, " a moderate high-churchman." He also speaks of sects, p. 14. See also " Christian Ballads," late- ly published by Mr. A. Cleveland Co.'c, pp. 35, 102, &c. "The Genevan Schism, that is, the reformation on the continent, '• purely brought in the ne- ology of the continent of Europe, which denies the Lord that bought them ; " " the presbyterian congrega- tions, the relics of the puritan Sc/tism, with only two or three exceptions, deny the Lord that boug'it them ; and the congregational Schism of New England is the father of American Socinianism and the modern panthe- ism of Harvard University." p. 101. " In our own land, we often find the holiest and loveliest characters array- ed against what we knoio (his italics,) is THE CHURCH, the body of our bless- ed Lord and Saviour Christ." ji. 1(38. Well may this writer add, " I confess that for myself 1 have a passion for the BEAUTY OF HOLINESS, (his Capi- tals,) as exemplified in the liturgy and offices of the church." p. 109. In his "Christian Ballads," (New York, 1840,) is one entitled, " But Re- gicides found Dissent," (p. 35,) which he explains in his Notes to mean " the turbulent followers of Cromwell, and the murderers of King Charles and Bishop Laud," (p. 102.) Of these founders of dissent, he says, " Their hands are red with murder, and a prince's fall they sing. They would kill the Lord of Glory, should he come again as king." "These things," the author adds, " are too little known ; and this age is too careless in allow- ing the deeds of its fathers." (p. 102.) He thus politely apologizes for the arbitrary despotism of Charles, and the atrocious cruelties of Laud : " If King Charles had some faults, so had King David ; yet withal David was a man after God's own heart, and King Charles died a blessed mar- tyr If Laud had some superstitions, so had Cotton Mather ; and if Laud had Prynne's ears cropped, Cotton Mather burnt witches," 'r con- science. Much more is this the case with the ambitious and worldly-mind- ed, whom a love of wealth and influ- LECT. XIII.] PRESBYTERIANS NOT CHARGEABLE WITH THIS SPIRIT. 331 We heartily join in the unsparing reprehension of what- ever acts of cruelly and intolerance our ancestors may have, ignorantly, committed. We utterly repudiate the principles from which such a mistaken and unchristian policy took its rise. And we disown, as a true-hearted member of our church, any wlio may sanction such principles at the present day. But are they, we boldly ask, to be found in our standards? Are they maintained by our divines, as existing in those standards ? Or do we, in our conduct towards other denominations, give mani- festation of the existence of such latent sentiments, within our bosoms ? By our own words — by our sentiments, and by our conduct, let us be adjudged ; and by these, let our acquittal from such an imputation be, in all fairness, honorably declared. But to this subject w^e will have occasion to recur, when we come to speak of the true liberality and republicanism of pres- byterianism. ence induce to seek hio-h places in the the God of mercy, of the most holy churcii. Hence oria^inated «c^so/"?/»,i- and ever-blessed trinity, acts of eru- forviity, h/irh-roinmission. and star- elty have been perpetrated without cliamhir couits ; the inqvigUi-n. with number, of vvhicli fanatical and bloody- all its infernal apparatus ; the stake minded heathens might well be asham» and the wheel, as inslrumenls of con- ed." version. Hence, too, in the name of ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE THIRTEENTH. NOTE A. Dr. Bangs in his Original Church of Christ, (N.York, 1837. ed. 2d, pp. 201, 202,) tiius speaks of this doctrine : " The succession therefore is void. It is indeed ' a 'able ' of man's invention. 1 fearlessly pronounce it snch, and chal- lenge the proof of its reality. But to sweep tliis cobweb from the shelf of eccle- siastical libraries, where it has lain as an entangler for the flies of clerical upstarts, I will refer the reader to the facts distinctly stated in my previous numbers, which prove that presbyters did claim and exercise the power of ordination for more than 300 years, and in the Scotch cliurch till the year 430. " 7'his being the fact, it undeniably follows, that whenever the exclusive right of ordination was claimed — 1 do not say exercised, merely — by a third order as distinct from, and superior to, presbyters, it was an usukpation, and hence it follows that those who perpetuate this claim to the exclusion of all others, are upholders of an ancient usurpation over tlie rights and liberties of the ■preshijlers. This remark does not apply lo those presbyters who, for good and justifiable reasons, voluntarily relinquished their rights of order and jurisdiction. But L repeat, that thosewho set up this exclusive claim, tis an indispensable pre-rrquisile to a valid ordination, have usurped powers which did not belong to them, and that those who plead for its continuance in a third order, are justifie'-s of this same usurpation in defence of scriptural authority and apostolic usage." NOTE B. " I KNOW no way," says an old writer, " to judge of futurity, but by compar- ing it with things similar that are past. " Now, sir, on a review, as far as I recollect the history of England, to say nothing of the extravagant encroachment ol' the calholic bishops, who became so intolerable as to weary out tlie nation, and prt'pare in some measuie for a protestant reformation : 1 Siiy, not to mention these, have not the English bish- ops encroached more and more on the temporal and spiritual liberties of the nation, (ill they were at last the cause of beheading their king, and overthrow- ing the government.'' — Were they not always a public grievance, by abetting popery, ret:iining many superstitious rights and customs in their worship and government; introducing novelties in the church, making nearer approaches to the church of Rmne, to the great otlence of the pmtestant churches of Germany, Fiance. Scotland, and Holland .' — Have not those prelates embroil- ed the British island, and made the dissensions between the two nations of England and Scotland.'' — Who can avoid charging them with all the civil wars between the king and parliament? " Can it lip denied they hiive been the instruments of displacing the most godly and conscientious cleroy ; of vexing, ))iinishing, and banisliing out of the kingdom, the most religious of all conditions, who could not in conscience comply with their superstitious inventions and ceremonies .' — By such refu- gees, who fled from the persecutions of the imperious Archbishop Laud, were Boston, Rhode Island, &.c., first planted. NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. 33S " Have they not tried to bind the nation to themselves in perpetual slavery by their canons, &c. ? — Did they not often invade the civil liberty, by preaching passive obedience, and non-resistance, and declaring for arbitrary power, encouraging illegal projects to raise money williout parliament? — So glaring their conduct, that even their friends could say little for them. Lord P'alkland in a parliamentary speed) for them is obliged to own, ' While mass has been said m security, a conventicle has been a crime, and which is yet more, the conforming to ceremonies has been more exacted tlian conforming to Chris- tianity ; and while men for scruples have been undone, for attempts of sodomy, they have only been admonished.' " Obj. : ' But why reason from the abuse, against the use .' Many excellent persons of that order, have been an ornament to the nation.' " .^ns. : Doubtless there have in all ages, been very great, learned, pious and candid divines of that order, who.^e names with peculiar fragrance are trans- mitted to posterity ; nay, some few have appeared on the side of liberty in opposition to popery and arbitrary powers, particularly the renowned seven in the reign of James II. who were delivered with the highest applause from the tower. — But surely tlie most worthy prelates could not deny, that what I have said is true of the greater part of that order. Their power intoxicates, and leads to these dangerous measures. " I shall not now take time to lead you to different nations. — I would only request you to view the effects of introducing bishops witiiout the consent of the people in Scotland. — Please, sir, to read the Memoirs of that Church, the Cloud of Witnesses, Robinson's celebrated History, Bishop Burnet's and Croek- shank's, &c — Consider the diike of Lauderdale's, or the duke of York's con- duct there. — Beiiold tlie blood of thousands, of the most valuable persons of the kingdom, inhumanly shed ! Besides the many thousands banished, impris- oned and reduced to beggary : all occasioned by imposing bishops and their superstitions on the nation, contrary to their consciences, and many of these mischiefs happened after the restoration, when the nation enjoyed peace abroad. " Ohj. : But perhaps you will say, ' What attempts since the revolution have bishops made on the liberties of the people .' ' " jS«s. : The reason, sir, is abundantly evident. We thank God they have not Ind so much power. Their convocation, formerly the highest ecclesiastic court in the nation, since the glorious William HI. has not, that I have found, been permitted to act any thing, though they meet for the sake of form. You think it hard to be deprived of the privileges of other societies ; but you may blame the arbitrary spirit of your bishops, who have always infringed on ihe estates and consciences of the people. " Thai they are not to he tiusted yet with our liberties, may be inferred from their treatment of the ' Free and Candid Disquisitions,' a book drawn up by most dutiful sons of the Church of England, about twenty years ago, yet it could not be noticed by your bishops ; though they proposed in the most hum- ble and modest manner, a review and emendation of the almost innumerable errors and blunders, in your liturgy, matins, Athanasian creed, catechism, collects, prayer and supplicatory offices, rubrics, calendar, canons, homilies, oaths of churchwardens, ecclesiastic courts, pluralities, and non-residence, «&c. and cftered the authority of the greatest and best writers of the church. But bishops aie bishops still. " That we dare not yet trust bishops with our liberties : only recollect, sir, a recent specimen, the repeal of the stamp act; when the bulk of the nation saw it would ruin Britain and her colonie.'^ too, these reverend fathers in God, almost all insisted on the illegal oppression." See the tyrannous conduct of the prelacy in Scotland exhibited at length, in the Altare Uamascenum Davidis Calderwood, pp. 775 — 782. " Some may say," says Mr. Jameson, a very old and able writer on this sub- ject, " that the question is not of great moment. I affirm the contrary, were it but on this account only, that all the bloodshed, rapine, confiscation, banish- ment, imprisonment, fining and confining, that miserable Scotland has been harassed with above one hundred years, were occasioned by this controversy. It gave rise to all the mischief, butchery, hardship, and other pieces of most 334 NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. barbarous cruelty, that during all tliese years has been perpetrated." Sum of the Episcopal Controversy, Giasg. 1713, &-i:. Pref. in l.'ie Old South Ch. Lib. It is customary for prelatists to talk of the sufferings of presliyterians as imaginary. " O, sir," say ths authors of a recent "Plea for Presbytery," in vindication of the church, (Plea for Presbytery, p. 301.) "you know not the feelings of indignation that your words excite in many a heart. The sufferings of presbyterians all fancy and imagination ! No, sir, they were stern realities. The deeds of atrocity and blood ])erpetrated by the Church of England will slain her name until history be silent. Look to Scotland. No less than lioen- ty-two thousand Scottish presbyterians were, in thirty years, sacrificed to the demon of prelacy. Look to Ireland. Since first ])resbylery was planted incur island, it has been the object of unrelenting persecution. Often has our church been favor Dissenters passed among: many for a more heinous thing than a leaning to popery itself" (Vol. ii. p. 145, folio edition ) Here, again, 1 only ask, is it necessary, in order to one's being a good epis- copalian, that he should be a high-churchman ? Let any one answer who will. it is evident, that tiie distinction which originated two centuries ago, and wliich is as familiar as " household words " to every one versed in ecclesiasti- cal history, exists in lull force in this country. For proof, I refer to the events connected with the election of a bishop, assistant to the venerable Bishop While, of Pennsylvania ; and the attempt lo elect a successor to the late ven- erable Bishop Kemp, of Maryland. But 1 am required to show that 1 have given a just account of the principles of high-churchmen. And the very worth}' gentleman whose letter lias called forth these remarks, has intimated tiiat if I can do this, he is willing to give them u[) to my fiercest denunciations. Nothing can be moie easy than the task assigned. But as for the men themselves, I liave no denunciations to make. Only, if they nuist be ejjiscopalians, let them be such sons of the church as Tillotson and Chillingworth. As for the proof — why, gentlemen, {our ample paper, should you leave out every thing else for a week, would not old all the quotations at hand. I shall not, however, ask for more than a col- umn or so for this purpose. But first, allow me to make an assertion. There is not in the United States a high-churchman, who does not disown the validity of all but episcopal urdi- nation, and refuse to interithange ministerial services with clergymen of any other denomination : not one of them will acknowledge any of their ft Uow- christians in other societies, as members of the church of Christ ; nor will tiiey go to their communion table. If your respectable correspondent doubts this, let him ask the minister of his own parish. He, however, calls for proof. The following must suffice : — " When the gospel is proclaimed, communion with the church by participa- tion of its ordinances, at the hands of the duly aiitkori'.cd priesthood, is the in- dispcnsalile condition of salvation. Separation from the prescribed government, and regular priesthood of tlie church, when it proceeds from involuntary and unavoidable ignorance or error, we have reason to trust, will not intercept from the humble, the penitent, and obedient, the blessing of God's favor. But when we humbly submit to that priesthood which Christ and his apostles con- stituted ; when, in the lively e.xercise of penitence and faith, we partake of the ordinances administered by them, we maintain our communion with that church, which the Redeemer purchased with his blood," &.c. After another salvo for those who labor under involuntary error, the writer proceeds thus: " But great is the guilt, and imminent the danger of those who, possessing the means of arriving at the knowledge of the truth, ncgligcnthj or wilfully continue in a state of separation from tiie authorized ininisiry of the church, and participate of ordinances administered by an irrigular and invalid authority. Wilfully rending the ppace and unity of the church, hy separating from the ministrations of its authorized priesthood; obsiinately cimtemning the means which God, in his sovereign pleasure, Intli prescribed for their salvaliim, tliey are guilty of rebe'lion against their Almighty Lawiriver and Judge ; they ex- pose themselves to the awful displeasure of that Almighty Jehovah, who will not permit his institutions to be contemned, or his authority violated with im- NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. 337 punity." — [" Companion for the Altar," by the Rev. John Henry (now Bish- op) Hobart. New Yorl{,pp.202and204.] " Episcopalians present these doctrines to their hearers, in the full persttasion that the church, the jninistrij, and the sacraments, arc as distinctly and truly ap- pointments of God, for the salvation of sinners, as faith of the Gospel, and that only as these arc united in the profession of religion, can the hope thereby given to a man be worthy of the name of assurance. " Episcopalians consider the grace and mercy of the gospel as matters of strict covenant stipulation ; as bound up with the authority to dispense them ; •03 inseparable from that authority ; and only by virtue of that authority, (with reverence be it spoken.) pledging the glorious Source of all mercy and grace to his creatures." — Doctrines of the Church Vindicated, by Bishop Ravenscroft, pp. 31,32. " You ask, does episcopal, in contradistinction to presbyterial ordination, en- ter into the essence of the church of Christ .'' To this 1 answer, without the slightest hesitation, that it does; and for this plain reason — because I believe the one to have a divine and verifiable commission to ordain, which the other does not possess." — Id. pp. 43, 44. " The authority of Christ is the only warrant to act in his name ; and suc- cession from his apostles, the only satisfactory evidence, that any man or body of men are possessed of this warrant And, from the very nature of things, minislerial commission and authority can no otherwise be so verified, as to be consistent with assurance, as to the validity and efficacy of religious ministra- tions in the name of Christ. The ministry of the church is a substitution for the Lord Jesus Christ in person," &c. — Id. p. 47. " When you baptize, do you not profess to bring an alien into covenant with God, and seal him to the day of redemption ? When you administer the Lord's supper, do you not negotiate afresli th-"' pardon of the penitent, and replenish and confirm the grace of worthy partakers .-' When you visit the sick and dying, are not the consolations of religion at your disposal, according to the circumstances of the case .''" — Id. p. 28. Is not this proof enough ? I might go on to show that high-churchmen deny tlie sufficiency of the scriptures, and attribute to the church — by which they undoubtedly mean in this connexion, the clergy — the right of authorita- tively interpreting the scriptures. For that, says a bishop, is to be received as the true meaning of scripture, which the church, in every age, has declared to be its meaning. Allow me to repeat, gentlemen, that none of the opinions above staled, are necessary to constitute men episcopalians. Otherwise, Cranmer and his noble compeers and successors, down to the davs of Laud, were not episcopalians. Even the judicious Hooker, the mighty Chillingworth, the eloquent Tillotson, and hundreds of others, the ornaments of the Church of England, and in whose services the universal church has rejoiced, must be disowned as sound and true episcopalians. In my attack on high-church principles, then, might I not, with the utmost propriety, declare, that 1 make no assault on the episco- pal church — or on individuals as episcopalians — bul only as high-churchmen ? Suppose that an honest Englishman, in writing on the constitulion and gov- ernment of this country, should severely censure the enormous patronage of the federal executive ; might he not justly say, I am not censuring the Amer- icans, considered as republicans, l)ut as pursuing a practice not at all necessary, to say the least, to constitute them members of a free commonwealth.'' He might write as awkwardly as Jeremy Bentham, but my life on it, no one in a thousand of the citizens of this country would mistake his meaning, or rail against him as a hostile assailant. True, if we could not be republicans at all, without this great executive patronage, there would be no room for the dis- tinction. But as the case is, the distinction is made every day, and so respec- table and amiable a gentleman as your correspondent, required some excite- ment, surely, before he could refuse to admit it. Again : I am represented as injurious, for saying that high-church princi- ples are opposed to the genius of our institutions. It is useless to disclaim, in presence of heated partisans, all intention of doinor injury. But if I can fairly prove the soundness of my opinions, the impartial will acquit me of evil in- 43 33S NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. tention, in giving them utterance. 1 sliow no enmity when I tell the truth. Hear, then, my reasons. Tlie laws of our country secure perfect religious liberty to every citizen : and ail have equal rights. Methodists, baptists, presbyterians, lulherana, epis- copalians, &c. all stand on the same level. And the ministers of any one reli- gious denomination have, according to tlie law of the land, the same authority to leacli, and administer ordinances, as those of any other denomination. Mar- riage celebrated by a dissenter, is as valid, and as sacred, as though the service were performed b)' an archbishop. But the high-churchmen, to a man, main- tain that none have a right to teach or administer ordinances, save only minis- ters of their church. Indeed there is no church — tliere are no true sacra- ments— no valid administrations, but theirs. Now here is direct opposition. The law of the land says one thing ; high-churchmen affirm directly the con- trary. There is, indeed, a just distinction between civil and fcclesiastical rights; and the high-churchman is by no means charged with confounding them. He doubtless knows and admits that, in this country, the men whom he persists in calling dissenters, have a civil right to do what he denies that they are authorized to do by the law of Christ's church. But this does not destroy the force of the allegation. Because, the religious principle, when excited, is the most powerful in human nature. The interest created l)y religion is all-ab- sorbing in its influence ; it reaches to all n)an's relations and concerns. More than any thing else, it comes home to his " business and bosom." " It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three measures of meal, until the whole was leavened." One must be quite ignorant of the history of religion, to deny, that it is comparatively easy to persuade a man, that any thing is totally and absolutely wrong, which he believes to be opposed to the funda- mental principles of his religion. But the quotations made above, show that high-churchmen regard the particular form of the church, as essential to being of the church. It is, in fact, a question of church ok no church, and all WHO ARE not members OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH ARE UNDER " GREAT GUILT." The whole body of American christians, belonging to non-episcopal churches, are schismatics, and without any assurance of salvation, are left to uncovenanted mercies. It is the church, ministry, and sacraments, which render the scriptures sufficient, ^-c. I ask, then, is not a religious man, who has adopted high-church principles, under the influence of a cause, which op- erates against the American principles of perfect religious liberty .' Let intel- ligent and impartial men judge. It would require more room, I fear, than yon could afford, to adduce histori- cal evidence in support of these " reasonings " — for so with Mr. G's leave — pace tanti tiri, I must call them. Let me only ask, who supported the courts of high commission, and the star-chamber.' Who were the stanch advocates of all the arbitrary measures of the house of Stuart.' Who opposed the glori- ous revolution of 16S8 .-' and who were the enemies of our own more glorious revolution, but high-churchmen .' On the other hand, in all these instances, did not low-churchmen and dissenters, as far as politics were concerned, unite heartily, and cooperate vigorously .'' The faitliful records of history afford, on this subject, a series of most instructive facts, and warrant the strongest con- clusions as to the tendency of high-church principles. But while impartial men easily see the truth of these statements, it may not be so obvious to the most respectable and intelligent, whose minds are filled with the prejudices of education, and excited by the heals of controversy. And unhappily, this has long been a subject of controversy. How can it be otherwise, when high-churchmen proclaim, that all the authority of the church is in their hands ; but as for us, our ministers, they say, are intruders into the sacred office ; our sacraments arc invalid ; our hopes unwarranted ; and our meetings schismatical assemblages. In this state of things there will, AND THERE OUGHT TO BE, CONTROVERSY. ThE HIGH-CHURCHMEN WILL EN- DEAVOR TO SUPPORT THEIR DIGNITY; AND DISSENTERS OUGHT TO MAINTAIN THEIR RIGHTS, AND TO " STAND FAST IN THAT LIBERTY, WHEREWITH ChRIST HAS MADE THEM FREE." YeS, THERE MUST BE CONTROVERSY, WHILE EXTRAV- AGANT CLAIMS ARE PUT IN ON ONE SIDE, AND THE SPIRIT OF RELIGIOUS FREE- NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. 339 DOM EXISTS ON THE OTHER. But, it may be asked, do not high-churchmen declare that the effect, of wliich 1 speaic, has not been produced on their tninds ; and do tiiey not indignantly repel the charge made against their principles? Undoubtedly they do — and I admit, with the utmost sincerity. The reason is, without any very strong religious feeling, they are, in this country, under the influence of powerful, counteracting causes. A man's opinions are the results of all the intellectual forces which bear on his mind. And in a given case, to form any thing like a correct judgment rcsj)ecling the tendency of a particular sentiment, we must know all the circumstances which operate on the understanding. In the present age, a very great majority of our fellow citizens are opposed to high-church principles; and the current of public opin- ion in favor of liberty, civil and religious, is irresistible. The balance of all the forces which press the mind, is therefore in favor of the institutions of the country. But who can say that this would be the case, if a majority of the nation held high-church principles.^ In England, notwithstanding many a hard struggle, the act of uniformity was not repealed, until England had a presbyterian king, and lovv-churclimen got into power. The Corporation and Test Acts could not be abolished, until it was done by dissenters and low- churchmen. Who would not be sorely unwilling to trust his religious liberty with those who have power, and who sincerely believe that none but them- selves are of the true church, or have ecclesiastical authority.' I have never said, or thought, that any of my fellow-christians of any de- nomination, are, in this age, unfriendly to the institutions of our common country But 1 have said, and I do still believe, that high-church principles are, in their nature, opposed to the genius of American institutions. And how far the leaven may work, who can pretend to say ? The silent, 8tea.dy, pow- erful operation of a moral cause, such as that of religion, may, in this modifi- cation of it, produce results entirely unexpected, and undesired too, by any christian now living in the United States. If the records of past time afford any ground for reasoning, as to the future, I feel that I am justified in all that I have written on the subject. And feeling thus, I protest against the inference, that I intended to excite odium against any denomination of christians. I meant to show, that particu- lar sentiments, not necessary to constitute a man a genuine episcopalian, ought to be renounced. 1 meant to do all in my power to insure their renun- ciation ; and this in the full persuasion that the church would flourish more, and be better able to do her part in the great work which must be done by American christians, without these principles than with them. Believe ine, gentlemen, — all persons of truly liberal minds can believe — that my chief concern, as a minister of the gospel, is that the power of christian truth may be felt, and the blessings of genuine religion may be enjoyed, by all in our country. But this, I am persuaded, can never be the case, while the form and manner in which the truth is communicated, is regarded as equally essential with the truth itself. " In Christ Jesus, neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision, but a new creature." Your correspondent represents, in pretty strong terms, that I bring a chargfi of stupidity against great numbers, including many most able and respectable men, when I say that high-churchmen do not perceive the consequences of their own principles. I must confess that this charge surprised me not a little. And the more I have considered the matter, the more I am surprised that Mr. Garnett should have given it such a turn as this. Whether there are many thousands of high-churchmen in the United States, he certainly ought to know better than 1 do. But how he can speak so confidently, if the line of discrimination has not been clearly drawn between them and low-churchmen, it is not for me to say. I cannot believe, however, without very strong evi- dence, that in this country, and in the nineteenth century, there are many thousands of •protcslmits, who believe that cleraymen are the substitutes for the person (vicars) of Christ on earth ; that, by them alone, the Source of all grace can be pledged to falfd his own engagements ; that great guilt rests on a man for not being a member of the episco[jal church ; that ordination by a diocesan bishop is necessary to constitute a true clergyman ; that the administration of all others are entirely invalid and null ; and that none but episcopalians have any 340 NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. warranted hope of heaven, &c. I should suppose the number very small. But this does not much affect the main point now before us It is well known that the matters involved in the high-church controversy are very little studied by the great body of the people. 1 was once asked by a very intelligent episcopalian, with whom I had the pleasure of daily affection- ate intercourse, " What is tlie reason why our ministers say, you have no right to administer the sacraments?" Indeed, the subject of ecclesiastical polity is rarely made one of careful and continued examination. Its Idstory has never yet been adequately treated ; and it is not too nmch to say, that its bear- ing on civil and religious interests is not generally understood. The preju- dices of education, or family influences, for the most part, determine people's church connexions, and veiy often men become heated with controversy, be- fore they have thoroughly examined the subject in debate. It is so in politics, as well as religion. In all such cases, it is very common to say, without any imputation of stupidity, intended or understood, surely you do not per- ceive the consequences of your principles. To charge an adversary with con- sequences which he disavows, is intolerable. To state consequences as legiti- mately deducible fram his principles, is another affair. To state them as an objection to the principles themselves is a very common method of arguing. If the objection is decisive, and the antagonist still holds his opinion, whiit can one do, but say as in this case I have said to high-churchmen ? The present tariff is occasion of great controversy. Half the nation, and perhaps more, with the venerable ex- President Madison at their head, believe it to be constitutional ; very many of our ablest politicians, on the oth^r hand, think it a violation of the Constitution. What then ? Shall it be said that the ma- jority design to violate that sacred instrument .'' Surely not. Can they say any thing else than this .^ — Gentlemen, you do not perceive the consequences of your own reasoning on this subject. How furious umst be the partisanship of the man, who should start up and exclaim, " So you include us all in one sweeping charge of stupidity. Very modest, and very charitable, truly ! " It surely would not be worth while to take as much time to answer a declara- tion of this kind, as I have employed in hastily writing the above remarks A sense of justice, as well as inclination, prompts me here to remark, that, in the times of which I speak, only one man among the reformers had the penetration to discover a sure method, by which the undue power of the clergy may be restrained, even when religion has no connexion with govern- ment. He was bred to the law ; but having embraced the doctrines of the reformation, he became the best ecclesi.istical historian, and the ablest com- mentator on the Bible, of his age. His consummate knowledoe in these de- partments of learning, enabled him to approximate very nearly to the primitive polity and discipline of the church. And although his character was colored by the spirit of his times, yet he had the sagacity to see, that, by making all clergymen equal, and giving laymen a place in the government and discipline of the church, a complete check might be laid on clerical power. "When he had made this discovery, he boldly taught, that the only province of the civil magistrate was the protection of religion. It was this principle, and by no naeans his theological doctrine, which rendered him so obnoxious to the friends of arbitrary power, in every country. / speak of John Calvin. And it is right curious, that, in every age, down to the present, his biterest enemies have al- ways been found among those lohose church government most approximates to a monarchy. It is true, too, that all the principles of religious liberty which are now imbodied in the fundamental laws of our country, were taught by men of Calvin's school, long before the fathers of those who framed our institutions were born. These principles were brought with them, by many of the first settleis of this western wilderness. Our revolution only gave them clearer developement, and more universal acceptation. And now, while religion is es- tablished by law, in every other country in the world, in ours it is perfectly free Will it continue so .'' Who can tell .■' The causes which influence public opinion, and produce changes in national character, are slow in their operation ; and the result of our experiment is yet hid in futurity It is of the utmost importance, that the real genius and character of Chris- tianity should be generally understood. It cannot otherwise exert its full NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. 341 moral influence. All men ought to know, that he is a christian, entitled to all the privileges of the church and all the hopes of salvation, who so believes the truth as to repent and live a holy life; no matter by what name he is called, or from what minister he received the sacraments. Arrogant and exclusive pretensions produce discord ; and an undue regard to external observances makes infidels of some, formalists of others, and fanatics of others. 1 call that an undue regard, which values outward observances, not for the truth which they represent, but for the form with which tliey are clothed. The law of the land knows no difference between men of different religious persuasions ; and it is highly important that public opinion should so far accord with the spirit of the law, as to exert its mighty energies against those who make mere external differences amount to the vital question of " church or no church." To insure peace and tranquillity in a religious community, the different denomina- tions must be liberal enough to acknowledge each other as brethren. To keep religion and its teachers in their proper places, I should think it very important that the people should understand the true nature of ecclesias- tical authority ; with whom it is lodged ; and how it is to be exercised. With- out entering into this subject, allow me to present a brief contrast of high and low-church principles. Low-churchmen maintain that ecclesiastical power is, according to the will of Christ, vested in the church. High-churchmen hold that it belongs to the clergy. Low-churchmen hold that it particularly appertains to the church, either collectively or by their representatives, to admit members into the christian society. High-churchmen hold that this is the sole prerogative of clergymen. In correspondence with this, low-churchmen are of opinion that expulsion from the society cannot take place without the act of the society. High- churchmen believe that excommunication is a part of clerical prerogative. The former teach tliat the sacraments are nothing more than very interest- ing methods of exhibiting truth and enforcing obligation ; while the latter maintain that the duly authorized clegyman, by administering the sacraments, confers grace. The fundamental principle of the one is, the sufficiency of the scriptures; the other denies this, and maintains that the church, ministry, and sacraments are integral parts of the plan of salvation. The low-churchman earnestly contends for the right of private judgment; his antagonist asserts that the church has authority to declare the sense of Bcriptuie, and determine what articles of faith it contains. This one does not believe that any particular form of church government is prescribed in the New Testament, but only general principles, the application of which is left to the discretion of the church. The other is fierce for the jus ditinum ; and stoutly maintains that the three orders are essential to the being of a church. At any rate, no bishop, no church. The low-churchman thinks that, in case of necessity, the people may call a brother to the ministry; and even in ordinary cases there ought to be a judg- ment of the people in favor of a candidate, before he is called to the pastoral office. But the high-churchman is convinced, that ordination is impossible, unless a bishop is present to communicate something which he has derived from the apostles, and winch no one but a bishop ever can possess. The low-churchman acknowledges as ministers of the gospel, all, who, with the consent (formally expressed) of any christian people, preach the true doc- trine of Christ, and all as fellow-christians, who so receive this doctrine as to repent and live holy lives. But with the high-churchman, no man is to be received as a minister who has not been episcopally ordained; and none are christians who are not united with the bishop. Now, in a country where religion is perfectly free, and is of course out of the reach of the law and the government, I would ask, which best accord with the genius of our institutions — low, or high-church principles.' Let the impartial decide. And if religion should prevail, so as generally to influence public opinion — and that it will I have no doubt — let rne ask, which principles of ecclesiastical polity will be most likely to operate in favor of American institutions, those which exalt, or those which restrain, the powers of the clergj' •' 342 NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. And, finally, may not the danger of the church becoming the paramount authority in the nation, and so superinducing all the unutterable evils of a corrupt religion, be best avoided by that system which fully recognizes that fundamental principle of religious liberty, tiie right of private judgment; which connnits the management of ecclesiastical concerns equally to laymen and clergymen, and renders it impossible that the people should be oppressed, unless they choose to oppress themselves? Again, I say, let an impartial public decide. In conclusion, I must be permitted in justice to myself to say, that I have never yet endeavored to perKsuade a human being to change his religious con- nexions. And, although I have, what appears to me, a just preference for a particular mode of worship, and form of church government, I have, in no case, represented this as essential to Christianity, or disowned brotherhood with those who, in matters of external observance, differ from the church to which I belong. And further : I have never engaged in controversy, except for the purpose of showing that differences of this kind ought to put no bar in the way of communion, and produce no breach of christian fellowship. 1 have, however, felt it to be a most sacred duty, both as a christian and a citizen, to do what I could to put down contrary opinions : as a christian, because these opinions appear to me to be opposed to the genius of Christianity — as a citizen, because I think them contrary to the spirit of our political institutions. And if I am to be represented in the public papers as illiberal, and uncharita- ble, because I endeavored to expose tlie claims and pretensions of those, who hold that they are the only christians in the world, inasmuch as they have bishops, priests, and deacons, acting as substitutes for Christ on earth — I must even bear it, as 1 may. NOTE E. TENDENCIES OF PRELACY ILLUSTRATED. That the tendencies of this system are just as powerful in the breasts of Americans when they come under its influences, as in those of Europeans, and that these tendencies are even now rampant, and only require opportunity fully to develope themselves, will be too evident from the following extract taken from " The Episcopal Recorder " for April, 1841 : " The Church Record. — This very able weekly jiaper, edited by Dr. Hawks, is one of the most acceptable additions to our table. We were pleased with the projection of it, and we have been equally pleased with the execution. But even so thorough and known a churchman as Dr. Hawks is not to be al- lowed to edit a paper unless he shall first obtain the imprimatur of the bishop of his diocese. Other papers around the Church Record, 'great and little,' have been making war with it for a few weeks past, for daring to exist, with- out first asking proper permission. There is something to our view extreme- ly ridiculous, in thus tacking every thing that is to be done in a church upon the skirts of the bishop. And something very absurd in supposing that in our age and in our land, respectable men are to submit to this weaving into a fringe to adorn the garments of another. The claim on the one side is just as little and undignified as the submission to it on the other. Dr. Hawks says, in reference to this claim, ' Clergymen thought they had as much right to publish a church magazine or paper as they had to publish a sermon or book without episcopal sanction. No one at the piesent day thinks of asking episcopal sanction, in the writing and publishing of a book on matters con- nected with the church.' He would perhaps be surprised to know, as a fact which we could tell him, that a bishop in our time has called upon a presby- ter who published a book without his previous consent, to remonstrate with him upon the official disrespect involved in such an act, with the assertion that 'no clergyman in his diocese had a right to publish a book without first gaining the consent of his bishop.' How can respectable persons around us feel any thing but disgust and contempt at these unwarrantable claims in soma of the officers of our church ! We wish it to be distinctly understood, NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. 343 that while in personal intercourse with our diocesan, we have for years met with no other than the most liberal and gentlemanly deportment, entitling him to, and securing to him, unilbrin personal and official respect, the idea of applying for episcopal sanction to our paper, as furnishing authority for its instructions, wo should consider extremely derogatory to our own character and riglits, and are sure would be regarded by him as a conception of authori- ty in him, both undue and inexpedient " Truly Alarmins:. — From the last C/nirchman, which has reached us, says "The Presbyterian," we cut the following paragraph: " VVliat can the orthodox members of the Greek church think of the ortho- doxy of our church, when they see its clergy, resident among them, freely intermingle religious services at prayer-meetings, ttc, with these 'half neolo- gical ' teachers from New England ? Of wliat use is it to talk of recognizing the * episcopal principle in our mission to the East, when our missionaries show most unequivocally that they do not regard it?" " A clergyman of the Church of England, says the Rev. Mr. Cheever, being on heathen ground, proposed attending a prayer-meeting held by the mission- aries of the American Board. He was threatened by another episcopal cler- gyman, though not of the Church of England, but of this country, and it would seem outrunning even his brother of the establishment in the compre- hensive energy and despotic consistency of high-church principles, that if he did dare attend the unhallowed conventicle, he should be complained of to the established authorities of his mollier church. Rather than make difficul- ty, the divinely-ordained servant of the establishment, induced by the incon- sistent spirit of liberality and lowliness, submissively repressed his yearnings after communion with his missionary praying brethren, and inasmuch as that was all that an establishment could there do to show its superiority, or to maintain the exclusive divine right and dignity of episcopal ordination, left the unanointed missionaries to pray alone ! Poor, forlorn, proscribed disciples ! Had it been a little earlier in the world's history, instead of quietly pursuing your holy work, with silent pity for the arrogant assumptions of your brethren, and the exhibition of a spirit so inconsistent with the business of the world's conversion, you would have expiated your offence perhaps within the walls of a prison! In the good providence of God, it is mainly through the existence of a church without an establishment in this country, that it has come to be possible for a society of christians not only to pray alone and unmolested any where, but even to be honored and revered of men, and sanctioned and glori- fied in the descent of the Divine Spirit, though entitled, and unsanctioned, either by the seal of pope or bishop, king or queen." " What could be supposed, as to the prospect of the world's evangelization, if the spirit of the gospel, instead of being that free, unshackled, benevolent, ethereal essence that it is, had been the narrow, proud, exclusive, dictatorial, persecuting, papistical spirit, that constitutes the essence of a prelatical, and, — in reference to the war it has waaed against all sects not within its own bosom. I had almost said — piratical establishment! To convert this world unto Christ, a religion is needed, not of forms and ceremonies, arrogant as- sumptions and titles, but a religion of humility, meekness, and love; a relig- ion that can, if need be, become all things to all men, and not a religion which, even on heathen ground, would rather part with the spirit of the gospel itself, than relinquish a solitary jot of its unhallowed, haughty, bigoted pre- tensions." On this subject our missionaries could tell many tales, which would not a little startle many unbelievers in the spirit and tendency of the system. in his recent letters on India, (Lond. 1840,) the Rev. William Buyers, mis- sionary at Benares, (p. 194.) thus speaks of Daniel Wilson, bishop of Calcutta : " His policy has given satisfaction to no party. A continual and imprudent intermeddling with things scarcely within his province, and undisguised at- tempts to extend in every way the power and prerogatives of liis office, and that sometimes in affairs too trifling and secular to be creditable to him, and a harsh and assuming carriage towards his clergy, especially missionaries, seem to have made him more or less obnoxious to all parties, whether clergy or lay- men." In reference to his representations as to the other missionaries, the au- 344 NOTES TO LECTURE XIII. thor says : ' But most certainly he had no ground to impeach the conduct and motives of all sects arid parties. When called upon, he explained away part of what he had said ; but, though challenged to the proof of his charges, noth- ing like an amende honornhle, nor an attempt to substantiate his statements, could be obtained. He seemed to think, that being a bishop possessing power to reprove and correct his own clergy publicly, conferred on him a right of li- belling others, without any one having a correspondent right to call him to ac- count. The Calcutta missionaries thought otherwise ; and the collision pro- duced by his unaccountable course occasioned much alienation of feeling." ( p. 196.) " It has been the misfortune of England that she never has had any but sectarian bishops,"' ( p. 197,) infusing into her a narrow sensitiveness and insulting jealousy of those who certainly differ from her in externals, but who have the most cordial love for all good men in her communion." " Dr. Wil- son with all his excellences has in one way or another greatly increased the spirit of sectarianism in India. Churchmen have been taught to regard dis- senters as radicals and bugbears." " Some of the chaplains have lately be- come quite enamored of the semi-popery of the Oxford tracts, and though formerly members of the Bible and other committees, have refused to sit on such, because there were dissenters on them. At stations where there was no attempt to form any dissenting church, some of them have delivered violent harangues about tithes, church rates, and the danger of dissent — things un- known in India." (p. 198. See the whole Letter on the India Church Estab- lishment.) Such are the awful consequences, threatening, even in our mis- sionary stations, discord, alienation and strife, among those who have been sent forth to proclaim the peace, union and charity of the gospel. See also Note F. NOTE F. As facts speak louder than words, so nothing could more palpably demon- strate the tendencies and yearnings of prelacy, than the character of its saints. Now there are no names more frequently introduced by modern high-church- men, or with greater reverence and honor, than those of King Charles and Archbishop Laud. They have both been canonized, and deemed worthy of all praise. (See on this Lecture, passim, " The Cathedral," "Lyra Apostolica," and the Oxford writers, passim.) Mr. Froude thus records his sentiments : " I have been reading Clarendon ; I am glad I know something of the Puritans, as it gives me a better right to hate Milton, and account for many things which most disgusted me in his, not in my sense of the word, poetry. Also, I adore King Charles and Bishop Lmid;" to which the whole party cheerfully respond, amen! "As to the reformers, 1 think worse and worse of them. Jewell was what yon would, in these days, call an irreverent dissenter. His defence of the Apology disgust- ed me more than almost any work I have read." False stntements have also been published by his defenders, in order to sus- tain his character. See the Lond. Chr. Obs. 1841, p. 1G3, &c., where will be found a very elaborate article on his history. Mr. Bristed, an episcopalian, in his " Thoughts on the Anglican and Amer- ican-Anglo Churches," (N. York, 1822,) thus speaks of Laud : (see pp. 124, 125 : see also p. 12G, &c. :) " And all these horrible mutilations and manglings of his fellow-men, by a bishop of the English protestant church establishment ! For what ? Because they were too honest, too conscientious, too intrepid, to subscribe to all his beggarly popish ceremonials and mummery ; as the estab- lished, formal substitute for the worship of that Jehovah, who is of purer eyes than to behold iniquity, and transgression, and sin." " Laud's own conduct was sufficient to ruin any church, however pure and apostolic in doc- trine and worship ; and to destroy a much better king than Charles; and to overthrow a much better government than England ever knew, prior to the revolution of ] 088. This semi-papist was continually urging Charles to the commission of illejral, arbitrary, cruel acts. Many Puritans were fined in the star-chamber, so excessively, as to sink them from affluence to beggary." NOTES TO LECTURE XHI. 345 " The present semi-popish Oxford system, began to advance in the reign of James I. and in the next reign, chiefly under tlie influence of Archbishop Laud, the leaven was widely spread, till church and state iell t'>gelher." Lond Chr. Obs. Oct. 1840, p. 588. Let episcopalians turn to tiie accounts given of Laud by the Rev. Benjamin Allen, rector of St. Paul's church, Philadelphia, in his first letter to Bishop Hobnrt. (Philad. 18-27, p 21, &c ) " In a recent number of the British Magazine," says the Lond. Evang. Mag. " a sonneteering Puseyite, gives the following character of their mighty cham- pion,— " Martyred f.ithcr, holiest man, Luud, our England's Cyprian." [British Magazine, Dec. 1840. " It seems strange that any person having the slightest knowledge of history, should venture to speak in such terms as these, of a man whose memory is infamous. It would be needless to enlarge on Laud s atrocious persecution of the Puritans, whom he delighted to torture and mutilate. But what will your readers tliink of the following notice in his own diary. (Nov. IG^^d,) of the pun- ishment inflicted on Leigliton, a Scotch divine, and i'ather of the celebrated archbishop : — ' Friday, JN'ov. IG, part of his sentence was executed upon him in this manner, in the new palace at Westminster, in term time. — 1. He was severely whipped before he was put in the pillory; 2. Being set in the pillory, he had one of his ears cut off"; 3. One side of his nose slit ; 4. Branded on one cheek with a red-hot iron, with the letters SS ; and on that day sevennight, his sores upon his back, ear, nose, and face, being not cured, he was whipped again at the pillory in Cheapside, and there had tlie remainder of his sentence executed upon iiim, by cutting otF the other ear, splitting the other side of the nose, and branding the cheek.' This, be it observed, is Laud's own testimony. What must have been the state of that man's heart, wiio could not only insti- gate the government to perpetrate such barbarities, but could record them minutely, and with evident satisfaction, in his own private diary ! Bonner himself was here ' out-heroded ' in refinement of cruelty. Leighton was released, after ten years' captivity, by the Long Parliament, having by that time lost his sight, his hearing, and tiie use of his limbs. See ' Lives of Emi- nent British Statesmen,' by Sir James Mackintosh, and John Forster, Esq. of the Inner Temple, vol. ii. (Earl of Strafford.) " The Oxford advocates of the via media, tell us, that ' the great archbish- op ' was profoundly learned in the ancient discipline and traditions of the church, and has left an example worthy of all imitation by his successors at Lambeth. Ye nonconformist divines, of every sect and denomination, see what you have to expect, s' ould the Reverend Dr. Pusey become the primate of all England ! Think of poor Leighton, and prepare to have the wholesome discipline of the ancient church administi-rcd for your benefit ! The poets of the British Magazine would then probably give vent to their exultation and phrenzy, in some such strains as the following : — ' Vilo scliismatir:s, impious men. Worthy of the lion's den ! Crop llieir ears, and slit tlieirnoses / As the hilly Luud propo-es : Then their clunks with iron brand, And let them in the pill'ry stand ! ' " Should any of your readers think that I am treating a grave subject with unbecoming levity, I beg to remind them of the following observiition of liie great Dr. Isaac Barrow : " Facetiousness is allowable, when it is the most proper instrument (;f exposing tilings apparently base and vile to due con- tempt. When to impugn them with downright reason, or to check them by serious discourse, would signity notliiniT ; then representing thein in a shape strangelv ugly to the fancy, and tiiereby raismg the derision at them, may efTectually discountenance them." '• The Earl of Strafli'ord was Laud's confidential friend and correspondent. It is quite curious to observe how the devout archbishop could unbend when 44 7tw tidiEi t6 LEcfuRii iiti. writing to his favorite ; nnd I should like 1o know how his disciples at Oxford will justify his shocking violation of the third commandment, in the following extracts from his h-ltcrs to Stratford : ' Now you are merry again. God hold it. And what.' Dr. Palmer acted like a king,' &c. ' As for Bishop How- land, you never heard of him. What! nor of Jeanes, his wife, neither? Good Lord, how ignorant you can be when you list !' ' Vou have a great deal of honor here for your proceeding.<. Go on, a God's name.' (The Straf- ford Papers, vol. i. pp. ]70 — 329) So much for Laud's holiness. ] suspect that the Tractarians will take some time to digest these precious fragments of their great apostle. But 1 have not quite done with him yet. As we are in- vestigating his claims to the title of ' holiest man,' I make no apolonfy for in- troducing the following sentences from Mr. Forster's volume, already referred to: — ' Lord Strafford,' he says, ' was a man of intrigue, and tiie mention of this is not to be avoided in such a view of the bearings of his conduct and character as it has been here attempted, for the first time, to convey ... .Fidel- ity to the marriage bed is not apt to be most prevalent where leisure and lux- ury must abound, &c. Lady Carlisle, one of his favorites,' &c. It appears, then, that Lord Straff .rd was jruilty of h.ibitual adultery ; and yet his friend, ' the great archbishop,' though in constant communication with him, never rebuked him for his sin ! On the contrary, he frequently addt-esses him in terms of vulgar flippancy, and sets him an e.vample of profane swearing, by a most irreverent use of God's holy name. And this is the man on whom the Oxford magi gaze with transport, as the brightest luminary of the Anglican church ! " On one occasion, Strafford thus writes to the apostolical pi-elate : ' I met with a very shrewd rebuke the other day; for, standinir to get a shot at a buck, I was so damnably bitten with midges, as my face is all mezzh^d over ever since.' In another letter, Mr. Forster observes, ' is language which it would be a great outrage of decency to quote. The archbishop appears to have rcl- ishr-d it exceedingly.' (Strafford Papers, vol. i. p. 1.55.; " I trust that enough lias been said to prove that the title bestowed on Laud by the poetical correspondent of the British Magazine is, to the last degree, preposterous. " In one respect, it is a happy circumstance that the Puseyites have fixed on ' the great archbishop ' as the object of their fond idolatry, as their guiile, their champion, and exemplar. This fact speaks volumes. It stamps the charact(?r of the whole sect, and shows their ignorance of true evangelical holiness. It proves al.so how unworthy they arc of our confidence. They studiously sup- press whatever would tell against their favorite authors; and. if they can give such a false character to Laud, who lived two centuries ago, we may expect that they will be equally dishonest in their account of the primitive fathers. It is my firm belief that their whole system will one day crumble to pieces. It has no foundation in truth, and its downfall is inevitable." LECTURE XIV. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION Upip.EASONABLE. The primiiive bishops, who were, both as it regards order of time and reseipblance in character, tlie successors of the apos- tles ia their ordinary ministerial character ; presumed not, as we have seen, to assume to themselves the title of apostles. No other official distinction was then allowed among the officers of the church, beyond that of bishop, presbyter, and deacon ; or the bishop, elder, and deacon, of the presbyterian church. Ihe terras priest, vicar, mediator, prelate, or successor of the apos- tles, were then unknown, and they were avoided, bec^Hse they: use would have been thought indecent.' Far different, however, is the case now. Now, it is not only thought " decent " to assume these titles, but they are clung to yvith all that tenacity, which is a sure indication of the groundless- ness of the claim by which they are asserted. « As the reigning prince in Madagascar must, in order to prove his right to the crown, trace up his descent to Ralambo, the father of the pres- ent race of princes f so to sit upon the throne of the christian ministry, the test of validity is novv made to depend upon the 1) See Hind's Rise and Progress " Now, kind reader, who do you of Ciirist. vol. ii. pp. 151, 152. suppose is the ecclesiastical cliirf, to 2) " ' Our Ecclesiastical Chief.' " whose marshalling and control the — The following sentence is from the episcopal clergy of Ohio are thus Western Episcopal Observer : ' It will subject ? To whose guidance, think be cheering to our ecclesiastical chief you, do they thus boastingly submit r to know that he has clergy who are Perhaps you might answer, Jesus not disposed to follow hfm afar off, Christ.' Verily, yon would be mista- but ready with the help of the Lord, ken. It is Bishop Mcllvaine." Bap. and according to their measure of Recorder. strength, to sustain him,' &.c. 3) Ellis's Madagascar, vol i. p.246. 348 THE THREE PRELATICAL CASTES. [lECT. XIV. correctness of the incumbent's genealogical succession from the apostles.' There nre, we are assured, three distinct castes of ministers, as separate in nnluie. offices, dignity, and gifts, as the castes of the Hindoos. These are prehites, presbyters, and deacons; the first the sacred caste, and the others the servile ; the first appointed to be the dignified re|)osilorIes of divine grace, the others to min- ister, and to be in subjection, to their wili.'^ " The plenitude of power which Is communicated to inferior ministers by parts," says Archbishop Potter,^ " according to their respective orders, is wholly and altogether lodged in the bishop." " Every bishop is supreme in his own diocese, and subject to none but Christ ; while every member must be subject to his bishop who presides over him with the plenitude of episcopal authority ;"* and as " having power to inflict punishment ON THOSE WHO REFUSE TO OBEY HiM."^ By hIs mystcrlous gifts, the other orders are made capableof communicating grace, and are empowered to preach and to baptize — so that without him, there could be no church, no ministers, no sacraments, and, therefore, no covenanted salvation. Now, every bishop in the world, as we are told, succeeds to Peter, or some other apostle, and has the same station and authority within his own diocese, which our Lord conferred upon Peter.** This power of the Lord Jesus Christ, " by which alone they are made governors of his 1) " I am thus emphatically taught," says the Rev. Mr. Pratt, (Old Paths, p. 128,) ' tliat the efficacy of tlie chris- tian minister's official acts, depends entirely on the commission which he holds from Christ, and not, as the lantruage and practice of multitudes would lead one to suppose, on his OWN PKRSONAL CHARACTER AND QUAL- IFICATIONS. MV UUTV, THKREFORE, is TO OBFY them that have the rule over me in the Lord ; and I no where read, that this duty is to be relaxed on account of the laults of the minister. He could scarcely omit the reading of the (ordinary .services, and at the stated seasons the dispensing of the means of grace ; and were he so neg- lifirent, his bishop would in all proha- hiliiij, adopt means either to have the abuse corrected, or the unfaithful pastor suspended from his sacred charge." This truly is passive obe- dience in spiritual tilings. The absurdity of this theory is thus ehown by Dr. Rice, (Evang. Mag. vol. X. p. 29.) " Let us suppose," /says he, " that after the lapse of twen- ty centuries, and a thousand changes in this country, the constitution of the United States should be preserved without corruption, and the people of that future age should elect a presi- dent according to tiie mode prescribed in that sacred instrument, could they not determine whether he were duly authorized to administer the affairs of the nation, without going back through every age, and ascertaining whether the ruler of tlie country had been duly elected, and the chief jus- tice, who administered the oath of office, duly appointed in every case.-* And does the president derive his authority from the chief justice, who officiates at his inauguration .^ " 2) See the Sum of the Episco- pal Controversy, William Jameson, (Jlasg. 17]:5, ed. 2nd, p. 3, and his Cyprianus Isotiirius, ch. i. where this is fully established. 3) On Ch. Gov. p. 206. 4) See ibid, pp. Ib2, 183. 5) Potter on Ch. Gov. p. 214. 6) See ibid, p. 183. LECT. XIV.] THIS THEORY THE SOUUCE OF ALL INTOLERANCE. 349 church,'" is derived to this peculiar class, in exclusion of all others, by an unbroken line of personal, lineal successors. All others who pretend to the authority of christian ministers or churches are, ijjso facto, rebels against God ; traitors against his law and government ; schismatics; heretics; totally separate from the church of Christ ; and beyond the pale of covenanted salva- tion. This fact, which is true of all protestant communions — lutherans, inethodists, and sectarians in general — is especially true, and in its weightiest sentence of guilt and misery, of pres- byterians.2 Such is the doctrine of the prelatical apostolical succession, which we have at some length considered. We have brought it to the test of scripture and of historical evidence, and found it to be teJ{:eI, and utterl)' groundless and absurd. And we have shown, also, that it stands convicted of a tendency to popery, and the extremest intolerance. It constitutes the very pivot on which has moved the whole apparatus of ecclesiastical tyranny — that ecclesiastical law by which every system of oppression has been supported — and by whose undoubted truth, the extrem- est exercise of the most baibarous and exterminating cruelty has not only been justified, but approved as merciful to man and glo- rifying to God. What were the sacrifice of a million lives, " If o'er it lay the way to lift the throne Of apostolic power, and fix the rock On which the eternal church was built?" 1) Ibid, p. 184. 2) Mr. Bristed, counsellor at law, and an episcopalian, in his " Thoughts on the Anglican and Anglo-American Churches," (N.York, ]822, pp. 416, 418,) thus speaks of this doctrine: " The doctrine of cxclusice church- manship ; that is to say, the assump- tion of all covenant claim to the mer- cy of God in Christ Jesus being confined to episcopalians, is strenu- ously avowed hy many writers, on both sides of the Atlantic. " This exclusive churchmanship, in sober christian verity, is a doctrine, which may possibly be enforced with tl)e gallows for its second, and the dungeon for its bottle-holder, as in papal Rome under the benignant auspices of Hildebrand, and as in England, under the sovereignty of tlie arbitrary Tudors, and the domin- ion of the execrable Stuarts. But in these United States, whose political institutions permit to all persons free access to the Bible ; and where no one is punished hy law for believing what God says in his own revealed word ; very i'liw theologians will be found with a gorge sufficiently capa- cious to swallow these dirtiest of all the dregs of popery." '• Peradven- ture, Stillingfleet and Leighton, not now to mention a thousand other dis- tinguished champions of the Anglican church, had examined this matter as conscientiously, and had brought ta bear upon the subject as much genu- ine piety, real talent, and stmnd learning, as have been mustered upon the same occasion, by any of the mod- ern cliampions of tills popish plea, and yet tliey shrunk with horror from the impious insolence of wMcovenant- ing, MTjchurching the numberless mil- lions of non-episcopalians, who have ever breathed upon earth " -'There are not, then, more than two hundred and fifty thousand churchmen in the United States ; and these quarter of a million of episcopa- lians are the only covenant people of God out of an American population exceeding ten millions I ! ' 350 PRELACY WITHERS Uf COJVIPASSJQN. [l.^??- Jf-^Y- There being but one church, and there being eoverjanted sol- vation only tlirough its ministrations, and their efficacy being de- pendent on this transmitted power of apostohc right, of course, whate^'cr opposes this must be from Satanic agency, and r^sist^enj, tljerefore, evea unto blood, that " this vast body- May bespread the world, uncliecked, and unopposed, Jjike God's own presence, every where displayed — An undivided empire, governing The universal mind of man." This principle once admitted into the heart — and it is the very soul of prelacy — one church, one apostolic succession, and but one way of covenanted salvation — and in proportion to the enthusiasm of him in whom it operates, will it lead to that " un- questioning devotion," which will pursue the interest Off the church at every hazard, and at every sacrifice. These feelings are well and truly represented by Mr. Milman io the character of his Angelo,' as given by Angelo himself. " A noble born Of Rome's patrician blood, rich, lettered, versed In the affnirs of men ; no monkish dreumrr Hearing Heaven's summons in ecstatic vision. God spake within this heart, but with the voice Of stern deliberate duty, and 1 rose, Resolved to sail the flood, to tread the fire — That's naught — to quench all natural compunction, To know nor riglit nor v\'rong, nor crime nor virtue. But as subservient to Rome's cause and Heaven's. I've school'd my hauglity soul to subtlest craft, I've strung my tender heart to bloodiest havoc. And stand prepar'd to wear the martyr's flames. Like nuptial robes; — far worse, to drag to the stake My friend, the brother of my soul — if thus I gear the hydra heads of heresy." That such is the necessary tendency of this doctrine, and that it is therefore unchristian, and in utter repugnance to the genius of republicanism, and of civil and religious liberty; must be admitted, on the evidence of its whole past history, wherever it was allowed free scope to divulge its inherent tendencies. That it is so regarded by any of its abettors, in this coun- try— and they are, we fear, not a few — we are far from as- serting. Rather do we believe, that, in giving it their counte- nance, tiiey know not what they do ; or that they hope, and believe, that it may be made to accommodate itself to the en- liffhienment, and liberalliy of our times. But founded as it ip, in alliance with the despotism of ages — drawing its very nutri- 1) In his Anne Boleyn. See Wks. vol. iii. p. 35. See the whole passage. i8«T. iiV.] THiS fldd^nmB unreasonable. 381 ment from the Hiatefnal bfeast of the ancient chilrch — living in her life, and therefore, naturally jealous of her character, and tender towards her abominations j — thus necessarily imbu- iiiir the whole soul with the spirit of subjection, and an inward reverence for the idea of linity, and of a governing and presi- ding head— and containing within it an aristocracy, already sur- rounded by all the claims of divine antiquity, and ancestral glory — ^vve cannot but regard it, with the late Dr* Rice, as in violent contrast to our republican institutions. ^ In presenting the giounds upon which we rested our claim to an unquestionable scripture authentication of this doctrine of apostolical succession, we dwelt upon the unreasonableness of the whole scheme.'' This consideration, which so evidently augments the force of our objection, from the acknowledged want of a positive and clear scriptural institution's not less strong when applied to the merits of the doctrine at large. We would therefore assign its unreasonableness, as a further ground for the rejection of this doctrine, in addition to those which have been already advanced.^ Without repeating what has been said under the former head, we W'ould offer some further remarks, to show that this doctrine is as traitorous to reason, as it is to civil and religious liberty. When we are gravely invited to embrace the offer of subjection to this supremacy, as the foundation for union, peace, and charity, we are reminded of a classic illustra- tion, thus poeticised by Dryden : " Methinks such terms of proffered peace you bring As once jEneas to the Italian king. Bv long possession, ail tills land is mine — You strangers come with your intruding line, To share my sceptre — which you svvare is thine. You plead, like him, an ancient pedigree, And claim a peaceful seat by fate's decree."* It is the sublime doctrine of our confession of faith — and ex- pressing, in brief summary, the very subsistence of all genuine liberty , — that " God alone, is Lord of the conscience, and hath left it free from the doctrines and commandments of men, which are, in any thing, contrary to his word, or beside it in mat- ters of faith or worship. So that to believe such doctrines, or to obey such commandments out of consciencCj is to betray 1^ The opposite character of bishop Tillotson, when he declared, pi'esbyterianism, we hope to establish "that it might well seem strange, if in future. any man should write a book to prove 2) See Discourse fourth, Arg. that an egg is not an elephant, and seventh. that a musket itali is not a pike." 3) To disprove such absurd 4) The Hind and Panther, Poet'l. claims as these, is a hardship some- Wks. vol. ii. p. 118. thing like that complained of by Arch- 352 THE PHOVINCE OF REASON. [lECT. XIV. true liberty of conscience ; and the requiring an implicit faith, and an absolute and blind obedience, is to destroy liberty of conscience, and reason also." Where God has not legislated, and thus finally decided for his church — as he has in all points of necessary doctrine — reason is intrusted with a discretionary liberty to exercise her powers. Her voice, tvithin her iirovince, is sanctioned by God, and no earthly authority has any other than an usurped power to inflict penalties, or impose restraints upon her.' Whatever is not enjoined as fundamental, and essential in the word of God, cannot be made so, without impious arrogance, by man. But that God has created " a policied society "^ of prelates, to w-hom all places of honor and profit, and the whole plenitude of authority, jurisdiction and gifts, with the sole power of perpet- uating these benefits, are given ; and that, too, not in the siiape of a trust, for which they may be held responsible, and called to account by the other orders, or by the laity, but in the character of a prerogative or supremacy, which may be exercised at pleas- ure, with only an ultimate subjection to Christ, the head ; — this prelalical hypothesis is, we say, without any solid foundation in tlie word of God. This fact, as we have already shown, is ad- mitted.^ It is expressly declared, that this claim is above the understanding of all, alike.^ But as the doctrine itself, from which such claims are deduced, is within the boundaries pre- scribed for the exercise of human sagacity and wisdom,* it is manifestly unreasonable and absurd. To say that God cannot perpetuate and preserve the church, but through this succession of prelates, is daring impiety. To say that he will not do so, is to assume the very point in debate, and to make void the word of God, where he has declared no such ihing. And to say that it 1) See Spirit. Desp. pp.122, 121. more meritorious in proportion to the 2) It is so called by Hooker and objections fell and silenced." Warburton. See Div. Leg. b. 2, 5. That this question regards rites § 4. and ceremonies, Mr. Palmer allows. 3) See Lect. iv. Now, that these come " within 4) See Oxf. Tr. vol i. p 20. In the compnss of human under.stand- his work on Tradition Unveiled, (pp. ing," is also affirmed by Archbishop 47, G3, and pp. 07, 75.) in exposure of Potter, (see on the Ch. p. 284,) and this new system. Professor Powell, of may, therefore, be judged of" by men Oriel College, Oxford, sayc : " And of common capacities." Their evi- applying these philosophical princi- dent absurdity is, tiierefore, a sulll- ples to theology, he learns that * an cient ground for their rejection, even intellectual, a reasonable religion, as it has been sufficient for the re- is a thing which nullifies itself.' Or- moval of other customs allowed to ihodo.vy, if exposed to tiie rude shock have been apostolical, (see ibid, 2.':;2.) cf argument and t!ie tests of evidence. This is the more evident, as this ■would fall. Rational investigation may be well supposed to come under leads lo socinianism and deism. To (p. 2i35) the " many things ordered silence inquiry is the proper way to by the first bishops, wliicli are not ex- christian belief. P'aith is a duty ; the pressly contained in scripture." LECT. XIV.] IT SUBSTITUTES THE MEANS FOR THE END. 353 is probable God would decree such an instrumentality, is to af- firm that to be probable, which is in itself most impossible and absurd. The single end of the christian ministry, is the end of the min- istry and priesthood of its divine Author — the salvation of souls, ' and not the offering of sacrifice" — or the infliction of punish- ment — or the imposition of hands — or the exaltation of a su- perior order — or the decreeing of rites and ceremonies, and vain pomps. But to make the essential qualification, efficiency, and validity of the christian ministry depend on the preservation of this succession, and not rather on inward and spiritual gifts ; so as that the prelatical manifestation of a bishop, is of more importance than the deepest piety — the most extensive knowl- edge, and the best gifts of oratory and persuasion — this, as we regard it, is the veriest superstition. This is to identify the forms of Christianity with Christianity itself — nay, rather to ex- alt them above it — and thus render the immutable and imper- ishable soul subordinate to the changing and perishable body. It is to invvrap that soul in the winding-sheet of death. How can it be probable that God should infallibly entail his greatest and best gifts to a succession of men, without any regard, in prospect, to their learning, honesty, virtue, or piety ; and to men who have been, in fact, many of them characterized by every quality most disgraceful and criminous ? ^ This is to appropriate Christ's commission and promises, as does the anti-christian papacy, to Peter and his representatives, '•' propagated by a principle of succession,"'' which inheres, and of right attaches to his body, the church. This is to refer all grace, and spiritual power, directly and immediately, to an or- der of men, who may not even believe in grace or spiritual ener- gy at all f and not rather to the dispensation of Him, who ever 1) Palmer on the Church, vol. ii. says, (vol. i. p. 48.) " Though there p. 461. be a great deal preached, in which you 2) Ibid. cannot recognize the voice of the Sa- 3) See Jackson's Wks. vol. i. p. viour, and though the sacraments be 302. administered by hands ichich seem im- 4) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 4G. pure enough to sully their sanctity, yet 5) "Why, then," asks Mr. we do venture to assert, that no man, Keble, " should it be incredible, tliat who keeps Clirist steadfastly in view, a minister of God, as such, may have as the minister of tlie true tabernacle, the same spirit especially abidintr in will ever fail to derive profit from a him as for all otlier parts of his office. sermon, and strength from a commun- So for the custody of the good depos- ion The ordained preacher it, the fundamentals of doctrine and is a messenger, a messenger from the practice, and yet be liable to error, God of the whole earth. His mental and HEREsv, and APOSTACV .' " Prim. capacity maybe weak, — that is noth- Trad. p. 105. ing. His speech may be contemptible, Mr. Melville, whose sermons have — that is nothing. His knowledge been republished in this country, may be circumscribed, we say not, — 45 354 PRELATIC AND SCRIPTURAL REASONING. [LECT. XIV. livetli as a prince upon his throne, and as head over all things, to his church and people. God's polity is to bestow all gifts, graces, promises, and ministrations, on his church and people — saying, " all are yours." Prelatical polity is to subordinate the church and people of God, to these sacerdotal functionaries, in whose grasp God has left the destinies of immortal spirits ; and whose motto is, " all things are ours." An uncontrolled right to interpret law, and to administer and enforce it, is "a right to enslave;" and this is the policy of ecclesiastics — " Be ye not the servants of men," (1 Cor. vii. 23,) and " call no men masters on earth," and " let no men have do- minion over your faith," and " stand fast in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made you free ; " this is the spirit and the voice of the good shepherd, the bishop of our souls. Give no ear to the traditions of men, whereby they would privily bring you again into bondage ; this is the exhortation which speaketh unto us from forth the oracles of God. Obey my statutes, volumes of ecclesias- tical laws, canons, injunctions, decrees, rites, orders, ceremonies, days, times, and seasons, and that on pain of spiritual censure ; — this is the voice, which, in the loud tone of threatening and ter- ror, calls upon us to " hear the church." "Be ye in subjection to the Father of spirits, and live. He that doeth my commandments and keepeth my sayings, he it is that loveth me ;" — this is the gospel of glad tidings. Obey the church, and submit to her laws, even when they are erroneous ;* and thus at Rome be a papist, in Saxony a lutheran, in Scot- that is nothing; but we say, that suppose the services of the church whatever the man^s qualifications, he stripped «ifflZZ cj/icaciy, then by acting should rest upon his office faith on the head of the ministry, they VVe lire certain, as upon a truth, are instructed and nourisiied ; tliough which, to deny, is to assault the foun- in the main the given lesson befalse- dations of Christianity, that the chief hood, and the proffered sustenance minister is so mindful of his office, little better than poison." that every man who listens in faith, " According to this scheme," says expecting a message from above, shall Mr. Bristed, (Thoughts, &c. p. 439,) be addressed through the mouth, aye, "of exclusive churchmanship, also, even through the mistahcs and errors if the Anglican and American-Anglo of the inferior Jf, whcreso- churches were to lapse into socinian- ever the minister is deficient and un- ism, they would still be true church- taught, so that his sermons exhibit a es ; and communion with a socinian wrong sijsteni of doctrine, yon v,'\\\ not bishop would be communion with allow that Christ's church may be Christ, and separation from a socin- profited Inj the ordinance of preaching, ian bishop would be separation from you clearly argue that the Redeemer Christ, although that same socinian has given up his office We bishop denies the divinity and the behold the true followers of Christ atonement of Christ, denies all that enabled to find food in pastures ichich is essential to, and characteristic of, seem barren, and water where the the stupendous plan of christian re- fountains are dry When ev- demption." erxj thing sceras against them, so that 1) See Dr. Pusey's Letter, p. 19. on a carnal calculation you would LECT. XIV.] THIS THEORY ENFORCES CONTRARIETIES. 355 land a presbyterian, and in England, a diocesan prelatist ; — this is the sure way of salvation by the church.' Woe unto them that teach for doctrines, the commandments of men ; — this is the divine anathema. He that will not, in all things, conform to the rights and ceremonies which the church (that is, her prelates) have authority to decree and impose ; he, therefore, that in Eng- land will not use the sign of the cross in baptism, wear surplices, kneel at an altar, observe times, and seasons, and days, and months, and commemorate dead men ; and he, who at Rome, will not use salt and spittle in baptism, chrism, extreme unction, — who will not use holy water, holy earth, holy knives to cut the sacramental bread, holy basins and ewers for the priest to wash in before the sacrament, and a hundred other ceremonies, let him be accursed ; — this is the anathema of the church.^ This whole theory we pronounce absurd, because it is contra- dictory to the whole word and providence of God. From the era of the creation to the coming of Christ, the church never was built on any men or order of men, but was founded on the living God, who is above all, over all, and independent of all. And the very fact that there is no agreement among its friends, either as to the origination of the chain, nor as to its successive links, nor as to the extent of power invested in it, nor as to any one thing about it, but its exclusion from covenanted salvation of all but themselves, this is of itself sufficient to expose its groundless- ness and absurdity as a doctrine which is of divine right, of the substance of the faith, and as essential to the existence of the church.^ This doctrine is unreasonable, further, because it is sustained by the most false and sophistical reasoning. Wherever the premises, in any degree touching the hierarchy, are to be laid down, we are then told that there must be a ministry in order to the being of a church — and a ministerial succession, in order to the perpetuation of that ministry — and connexion with this church as a necessary condition to salvation.* But when the conclusion is to be drawn, instead of inferring, as can only be 1) See Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. gent friends are so much divided p. 39. about it; and in order to account for 2) Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. p. it, recur to hypothesis so contradicto- 30. ry ; a presumption, too, let me add, 3) See Powell on Ap. Succ. pp. that their judgment would lead them 141, 242, where is given the argument soon to adopt the premises of their at length. adversaries, to which they sometimes See Campbell's Lectures on Eccl. approach very near, if their passions Hist. vol. i. lect. 7. " It is a shrewd would allow them to admit the con- presumption," says he, (Lect. on Ec. elusion." Hist. lect. vii. p. 138,) " that a system 4) See e. g. Oif. Tr. vol. i. pp. is ill founded, when its most intelli- 44, 45, 46. 356 SUSTAINED BY SOPHISTICAL ARGDMENT. [LECT. XIV. properly done from such premises, the essentiahty of a christian ministry to a christian commonwealth, we are gravely assured that it is thus demonstrated, that this succession can inhere only in a prelacy, which is no conclusion at all. When the rights of presbyters are to be overthrown, then are we told that all that is recorded in the New Testament about bishops, overseers, and so on, is to be understood exclusively of the second order of ministers ;' but when prelatic dignity is to be asserted, these same divine instructions — for the simple reason that there are no others — are to be understood as descriptive of prelates.^ When it is to be proved that Christ commissioned apostles as the first order in the christian ministry, then we are informed he empowered them to preach and to baptize.^ This was their duty and office. But when a second order is to be introduced, then are we taught, that in governing and ordaining, lies the suprem- acy of the prelatic function. When the third order of deacons is to be made out from the w^ord of God, then they are plainly found in the seventy disciples, who were sent forth to preach,* and, of course, to baptize ; and yet, when prelates are to be en- throned in the plenitude of their episcopal authority, neither presbyters (which the apostles of course were, when first com- missioned, otherwise the three orders fail) nor deacons have any right either to preach or to baptize,* but as permitted by their prelate f and the work and duty of baptizing is reduced to an in- ferior and lower ministry ! When presbyters are to be deposed, then is it demanded of us to show proof, strong from holy writ, and which even a prel- citist cannot gainsay or doubt, that they were authorized to or- dain.''— But when prelatic functions are in debate, then, that " it cannot be proved" — that "it is more probable'"* — that the early church thought sc — and that civil societies do so — are reasons abundantly sufficient to put to silence all objections, and thus to make that which is admitted to be doubtful, " fun- damental to Christianity ! "^ When the honor of this succession is involved in the decis- ion, then it is decreed that the Nicene church, the Romish, the Greek, and the Oriental, are all true and christian churches, and to be regarded as within the unity of the body of Christ'" — although it is plain, and manifest, and allowed — that they held 1) e. g. Bp. Onderdonk, in Wks. 6) Ibid, p. 230, and elsewhere, on Episcop. as quoted. 7) See Bp. Onderdonk in Wks. 2) e. g. Potter on Ch. Gov. p. on Episcopacy, as above, and Pot- 205, and elsewhere. ter, p. 109. 3) e. g. Potter, pp. 43, 46. 8) Potter, pp. 251, 253, &c. p. 109. 4) lb. p. 46, thrice, and pp. 102- 9) Potter, p. 249. 104, &c. 10) Palmer on tUe Ch. vol. i. 180, 5) Potter, p. 238, &.a. «fec. 202. LECT. XIV.] SUSTAINED BY SOPHISTICAL REASONING. 357 and enforced tenets, customs and ordinances which are contrary to God's word, and to all truth and righteousness ; and dangerous to salvation.' — And all this is to be believed, on the alone ground that these churches make the most worthless pretensions, to the most absurd claim of an apostolical descent, in a valid prelalical succession, for which they can give no reasonable proof. But when charity, and candor, and christian principles, and reason, demand a judgment in favor of the Christianity of the protestant churches, even of such as are acknowledged to be pure in doc- trine, and exemplary in practice, and which give abundant proof of the indwelling of the Holy Ghost ; they are all, forsooth, to be excommunicated, because they will not unite in consolidating a spiritual despotism, and usurpation ; which is founded upon the enslavement of the laity, the unrighteous subjugation of the cler- gy ; — and the daring elevation to more than imperial power of a lordly prelacy.- This judgment, to use the words of Bishop Hall, is demonstrative of " injurious uncharitableness, and presump- tion," " in shutting out those from the church of Christ, who can truly plead all these just claims for their undoubted interest in that holy society." " What a presumptuous violence is this ! What a proud uncharitableness ! " So speaks the sainted Bishop Hall, when allowed to utter his free thoughts. We stand with him on the same basis, whereby he justified the English church in her separation from the Romish, " her tyranny, under which were comprised her challenged ^n'mac//, (in her apostolical suc- cession ;) her impeccability ; her idolatry ; her heretical opinions, her flagitious practices and doctrines ; " — and spurning from us the re-affirmation, by the prelacy, of that doctrine of primacy, which is the source of all the rest — as equally contrary to the word of God now, as it was then ; — we say with this vene- rated writer, " wo be to them, by whom the offence of our divis- ion Cometh. We call heaven and earth to the witness of our in- nocence, and their injustice."^ Let it also be borne in mind, that there are in the English and American episcopal communions, parties who confessedly differ from each other in doctrinal views, and on points touching the very essence and fundamentals of the gospel.* Both parties agree in regarding the matters in 1) Palmer on Ch. vol. i. p. 459, tatio ad Frat. Commun. inter Eccl. and Anct. Christ, vol. i. pp. 391, 392, Evang. Canib. 1640. 349, et passim. 3) Wks. vol. viii. p. 52. 2) See this view urged by Bishop 4) Thus Mr. Colton, in his Rea- Hall, in his Peacemaker, Wks. vol. sons for preferin^ Episcopacy, p. 45, viii. p. 51, and Baxter's Treatise on &c. remarks, " liow different tliis Episcopacy, Lond. 1681, pt. ii. ch. xi. from the practice of a churcli which and Bishop Davenant, in his Adhor- has the same creed throughout 35S THEIR SELF-CONDEMNATION. [lECT. XIV. dispute, as doctrinal — and as fundamental — and each other, therefore, as fundamentally wrong. And yet neither party unchurch the other, or proceed to an actual separation. What palpable bigotry is it then, to unchurch others, for differ- ing from them on a point which one party of themselves, will allow not to be essential ; and which the other party cannot, with any reason, regard as of the same importance with those very points on which they internally differ from their own brethren. " Doth not the world know," says the venerated Howe, " that wherein we differ from them, we differ from the papists too ? And that, for the most part, wherein they differ from us, they seem to agree with them ? We acknowledge their strong, brave and prosperous opposition to popery ; but they have opposed it by the things wherein they agree with us. Their differences from us, are no more a fence against popery, than an enclosure of straws is against a flame of fire."^ As the unreasonableness of this Rabbinical doctrine ^ has been very fully and boldly exposed, by an eminent episcopal writer, we would beg leave to close what we deem it necessary to say on this point, by quoting from his work. " Let those who entertain this high-church intolerance, con- sider that in the actual application which they must make of it, the most serious danger imaginable is incurred, and the greatest possible violence is done to the dictates of good sense, and to the genuine impulses of christian love. It is no trivial offence, we may be sure, and no slight peril, to miscall God's work, and Satan's. This was, in substance, the very sin of the Pharisees, which our Lord branded with the mark of unpardonable blas- phemy. The bold bigotry that does not hesitate to assign mil- lions of Christ's humble disciples to perdition, makes the pillars of heaven tremble. Better had it been for the man who dares the land, in every man's, in every 1) See Rogers' Life of Howe, p. woman's, and in every child's hand." 367. Also, pp. 362, 358. And yet this same Mr. Colton, in this 2) See Ihe order of the rabbini- eame identical work, and in praise cal succession given in the Bib. Re- of this selfsame protestant episcopal pos. Oct. 1839, pp. 3-6. D'lsraeli, church declares, that even its prelates in his Genius of Judaism, (p. 79, 2nd knowino-ly allow diversities of doc- edit.) speaking of the uninterrupted trinal views in the clergy, even to the succession of the rabbins calls it, " an rejection of doctrines fundamental. artifice, or rather the marvellous im- " Is it not a lesson," he exclaims, in posture of a bold and obscure fiction, his self-constituted office of preceptor, one which admitted of no evidence, "Is it not instructive.'' Does it not and which allowed of no denial, whose prove that an exact agreement even airy nature eluded the grasp while it in the minor poiw<.s of a common creed, chained the eye, the legend of the and I may add in some of the car If the plenary authority to grant this grace and power by prelatical ordination is intrusted to the proper officers of the church, to be exercised for its benefit and at their discretion ; then it follows of course, that there is given to these officers, when deemed necessary for securing this object, the power of revoking and annulling the ordinations already infelicitously conferred. Being the source of all the authority thereby vested, they are of course competent to recall it, when in their judg- ment unworthily received. But if this is so — and on the prin- ciples of this doctrine of the apostolical succession, how can it be denied ? then truly is the boasted succession of the Anglican, yea, and of the Romish church, for ever blighted.* Let one or two illustrations suffice ; and first let us instance, in the memo- rable case of the Roman catholic see of Utrecht : — " All the 1) " In any other body politic, a man, by leaving it, loses all the powers he had by being of it ; and there's no reason why 't is not the same in an ecclesiastical society ; and consequent- ly all the church powers the protestant bishops could have, must be derived from the members of the new church they then joined themselves with." (Rights of the Christian Church, by an Episcopalian. Lon. 1707, p. 323.) 2) Again, (pp.324,352,) "If a bish- op, by leaving the Church of Rome, did not, by that act, lose all the episco- pal power he had when he was one of the governors of that church, especial- ly considering no commission can well be extended to authorize the opposing him who bestowed it, yet the popish bishops had as much power to deprive or degrade him as to ordain him ; since a sentence is valid, though not right, when done by competent authority ; and consequently the popish bishops, in the time of Queen Mary, or Queen Elizabeth, had as much right to un- make as they had to make a bishop in their father's or grandfather's time." " This, though no more were said, plainly shows that the hypothesis of ecclesiastical government belonging to such bishops only as derive their power by way of succession from catholic or apostolic predecessors, un- churches not only all the reformed who are without bishops, but all the episcopalians likewise." "In a word, nothing can be more senseless than this notion of an in- delible character, because all power, of what nature soever, conveyed by men, is a trust, and as such may be taken away, when the persons intrust- ed with it act contrary to the ends for which they were intrusted ; of which those who intrusted them must needs retain a right to judge ; and conse- quently priests and bishops may be reduced to the lay-state they were at first in." Mr. Dodwell argues, (see Rights of the Christian Church, p. 325,) " that the deprivation of the popish bishops was only of their temporalities; their sees, as to their spiritualities, be- ing before vacant ; the protestants owing them no duty, even in con- science, before deprivation." Now, " If those bishops were not bishops of the protestants before their deprivation, then they had no bishops, and consequently by his own princi- ples, no priests, no sacraments, no christian church ; and if they were not obliging in conscience before de- privation, it was because the people, judging them guilty of gross errors, had, by renouncing all communion with them, withdrawn their obedience from them, and deprived them of all LECT. XV.] PRELATISTS DEVOUR ONE ANOTHER. 367 bishops of this see/ have been regularly consecrated ; but because Dominic Varlet, who a hundred years ago consecrated the first bishop, was at that time under the censure of the pope, the whole see has ever since been declared schismatical, and each successive prelate has regularly received a renewed con- demnation from the sovereign pontiff.'' A similar example is recorded by Calvin, in the case of Eugenius and Amadeus. When by the decree of the council of Basil, Eugenius was de- posed, degraded, and pronounced guilty of schism, together with all the bishops and cardinals, who had united with him in opposing the council, Calvin says, the succession of the minis- try was at this time virtually broken, for, ' from the bosom of these heretics and rebels, have proceeded all the popes, cardi- nals, bishops, abbots, and priests, ever since.' "' As to the Anglican succession, the case is equally plain. Being, according to this doctrine, derived from the Romish church, and being on the principles of this doctrine absolutely withdrawn by that church, no such valid succession can exist, and the Anglican church is plainly upstart and schismatical. Dr. Milner, as we have seen,* urges that the Anglican bishops, by taking their commission from the king, renounced all title from Christ or his apostles. Dodwell applies the same argument to the Romish bishops who took out commissions from Henry VIII., and who, since there cannot be two originals of the same power, renounced all other and better title to their office/ And thus do prelatists, like the fabled serpent, devour one an- other. Further, as prelatical writers tell us that we cannot preach, unless authorized by prelates ; so do the Romanists teach that these prelates themselves cannot officiate, unless empowered to do so by the pope. " Particular bishops,"" say they, " who have only the care of their flocks committed to them, cannot send into the provinces of others ; therefore this ought to be the spiritual jurisdiction they had over 1) Letters on the Min. Rit. and thern ; which, contrary to the whole Lit. of Prot. Ep. Ch. by Mr. Jared drift and design of his book, proves Sparks, Bait. 1820, pp. 44, 45. that the bishop's power is derived 2) See the Pastoral Letter of from and dependent on the people ; Archbishop Marechal to the congrega- and what they could do thus them- tion of Norfolk, Virginia, 1819, 2d ed. selves by a tacit agreement, they appendix, p. 84. might authorize the Queen to do sol- 3) Institutes; Dedication to the emnly and formally ; or rather the King, p. 25. people having, by renouncing their 4) Doctr. of Ch. of Eng. concern- communion, deprived them of all the ing Independ. of Clergy, &c. p. 28. spiritual power and authority tliey 5) Limborch Body of Div. b. ?ii. could pretend to over them, the Queen chap. iii. p. 911. took from them all those legal rights and privileges the law had invested them with." 368 ALL PRETENCE TO THE SUCCESSION DESTROYED. [lECT. XV. done by an universal bishop, who has the charge of the whole church committed to him." Now this right the Romanists found both upon scripture and antiquity, and therefore, as An- glican prelates must allow, the mere plea of scripture and anti- quity, without solid proof, will not suffice for the establishment of these prelatical dogmas ; while the assumption of authority and power to give or withhold the ministerial commission, is fatal to both the Roman and the Anglican hierarchy, and may be as justifiably advanced by all other denominations as by either of these. ^ And thus does it appear that there is, on this basis, and when tested by these principles, no certain or valid succession in any extant church. Once more. If the English hierarchy possesses whatever divine 1) The following confessions taken from Mr. Dodwell, and the author of " The case of the Regale," will be considered as decisive : Mr. Dodwell says, (Doct. of the Ch. of Eng. Concern. Indep. of the Clergy, § 33,) " that in a revolution of ages, there is no succession in the world, but has some unjustifiable turn. Nor is there," says he, " any thing in the nature of ecclesiastical govern- ment, as it is a government of external bodies, managed by men of like in- firmities with those who are engaged with civil government, that can secure it against the like violences of am- bitious and unreasonable men, who would judge too partially in their own case. Such violences on the government may sometimes make a breach in the due succession, and af- fect the direct conveyances of that authority from God which is requisite to the giving a title to those spiritual benefits to souls, which are the great design of ecclesiastical communion." The author of " The case of the Regale," (p. 77, ed. 1st,) also allows " that it would be hard to find a bishop against whom some of these objections (relating to succession) do not lie ; for example, all the bishops of the refor- mation, as well in England as else- where, are struck off at one blow ; for they all derived from those who now account to be. and then to have been heretics. And the ordinations of the church of Rovie must go off too, especially since the council of Con- stimcr, that turned out all the popes that were then in tlie world, which were three anti-popes contending one with another. And they cannot say of any of their ordinations at this day, that they are not derived from some or other who were ' avians, semi- urians,' " &c. " Should we," says the author of "The Rights of the Christian Cnurch," (Lond. 1707, p. 350,) "allow an in- delible character, yet the papists make so many things necessary to the ob- taining of it, that 'tis next to impossi- ble they should have been always regularly performed amongst them. But not to insist on these things, which they more than others suppose necessary to the obtaining of an in- delible character, I say that in case of schism, where two pretend to the same see, the schismatic cannot be bishop of a see which was before filled witli another ; and if not of that he pretends to, much less of any other ; and if he were not a bisliop before, (the translation of bishops being a modern practice, and contrary to the ancient canons of the church,) he was never in possession of the indeli- ble character, and consequently was not capable of conveying it to another ; which, in the church of Rome, must be a bar to the apostolical succession, since there have been, as their own historian, Onuphius, proves, at least thirty schisms occasioned by several, no less, sometimes, than five or si.x, pretending to the popedom at once : and one of their schisms lasted more than fifty years, when one pope sat at Rome and the other at Avignon, thun- dering out all sorts of curses and cen- sure against each other." LECT. XV.] THE ANGLICAN SUCCESSION — A SECESSION. 369 authority and power she claims, by virtue of this succession of prelates, to whom God infallibly secured the fulfilment of his promises and the perpetual enjoyment of his presence ; — then must these same prerogatives as surely attach to every other body of men, who have the same assurance in boasting of this inherited apostolate ; and on this ground may this doctrine be made to en- stamp the impress of heaven upon dogmas the most contradictory and false, and upon practices the most puerile and superstitious. These prerogatives must, on this theory of right, belong and now reside in the churches of France, of Spain, and of Rome. Nay, throughout the world, there is scarcely, — not to say a nation, or people, — not even a city of any magnitude or consequence, in which the religion of Christ may be said to exist, that does not ascribe the first planting of its church, to one or other of the apostles, or to some of their immediate and intimate disciples ; so that the Russians, the Poles, the Prussians, the Greeks, the Abyssinians, the Orientals, pronounce themselves, in the spirit of all ancient nations, to be the descendants of the gods, and the genuine successors to apostolic dignity and power. i Either then, the English church holds to the same faith, sub- stantially, which is held by the Romish and all these other churches, or it holds to a faith essentially different from them. If the faith, to which the Anglican succession bears testimony, is different from that held by these churches, then must its suc- cession be also different. It is a new succession, for it testifies to a body of truth, differing from that to which the same suc- cession in the Romish and other churches previously attested. It is, therefore, a broken succession. It is not a succession, but a secession — and the Church of England is not a colony, but a revolutionary society. But if, on the other hand, its system of doctrine is not thus different, then are Anglican prelatists in a state of declared excommunication,^ and bound to acknowledge themselves, if not Romanists in fact — yet papists in reality. The mere claim of apostolical succession — apart from doc- trine— if pretensions as bold, and confident, aye, and as au- thenticated, as those of the English and Romish churches, are sufficient — will stamp the seal of catholicity on churches of every name and character. " The Arian churches which once predominated in the king- doms of the Ostrogoths, the Visigoths, the Burgundians, the Vandals, and the Lombards, were all episcopal churches, and 1) See Vidals Mosheim's Com- 2) See Bp. Hall's Wks. vol. viii. ment. vol. i. pp. 145, 146. See the p. 50, &c. li.st of these given by Fabricius, in his Lux. Evang. pp. 83, 93. 47 370 PRELATISTS MUTUALLY CONDEMN EACH OTHER. [lECT. XV. all had a fairer claim than that of England to the apostolical suc- cession, as being much nearer to the apostolical times. In the East, the Greek church, which is at variance on points of faith with all the western churches, has an equal claim to this suc- cession. The Nestorian, the Eutychian, the Jacobite churches, all heretical, all condemned by counsels, of which even protest- ant divines have generally spoken with respect, had an equal claim to the apostolical succession.'" These churches are all, therefore, equally supreme in power ; authoritative to interpret scripture ; to decree rites, ceremonies, and forms ; to hand down apostolical traditaments ; and to de- cide when, and how far, to exercise these vested rights, under the guidance of promises to be infallibly fulfilled ; whether it be in the way of legislative, judicial, or executive functions.^ That the church should be indefectible in England, and infalli- ble at Rome ; the eucharist a real and efficacious sacrifice in the one place, and a real presence of the body sacrificed in the other ; and that baptism should be regeneration in both ; these are accidental variations, or agreements, that do not affect the substance of the doctrine in question. The church of Rome, and all other corrupt and apostatical communions, and the Church of England, stand or fall together. Touch but the standing of one, and you pierce that spinal cord by which life and sensation are conveyed to every limb and member of the entire body. That these claims, then, may be verified, the character of the purest and best churches under heaven must be blasted and destroyed, while that of churches the most heretical must be honorably sustained.'' But it so happens, through that law of Providence, by which the partners in evil are sure to conspire against each other, that these several churches have turned king's evidence against each other, and have proclaimed to the world their mutual treachery and deceit. Forth steps the Greek church, and at the bar of Heaven impleads her Latin co-rival for her insolence and heresy, and excommunicates her from all participation in this succes- sion. Then rises the Latin church, in all her wrath, and hurls back her thunders, at the false foundations of this unsubmissive hierarchy.^ And when the churches of the reformation attempt- ed to steal fire from the Romish altar, wherewith to erect other and separate altars, with what withering anathemas did this Ro- 1) Edinb. Rev. April, 1839, p. 3) On the absurdity of rejecting 141. On the heretical character of the presbyterian ordination and admitting Greek and Oriental churches, see the the validity of popish, see Towgood's Lond. Chr. Obs. Feb. 1841, pp. 66, 67. Dissent Justified, pp. 82, 87, 179, 195. 2) See Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. 4) See Bp. Hall, vol. viii. p. 50, p. 30. and his references. LECT. XV.] THE ANGLICAN PRELACY IN GUEAT STRAITS. 371 mish hierarchy despoil them, and the English among the rest, of their ill-gotten booty.' Bossuet, and others, convict the English church of schism, heresy, and usurpation f of being, in short, in the self-same pre- dicament of that unfortunate presbyter, Ischryas, of whom it was decreed, in a council of prelates, that he " had assumed to himself an imaginary episcopacy," and, in punishment there- of, he was commanded, on the peril of ghostly censure, " to re- turn to that order of presbyters whereto he was ordained," — and from which, at the same time, they had just declared his departure to be merely " imaginary ! "^ Now we will venture to say, that, on strict succession principles, whatever answer is retorted upon these Romish judges, will retort back again upon these prelatists themselves ; and that in attempting to secure their own apostolic superstructure, they will be found, as has been said of these Romish architects, " building one assumption upon another assumption, piling one ecclesiastical Ossa upon an ecclesiastical Pelion ; placing (after the manner of the Hin- doo legend) their spiritual universe upon the horns of the bull, and the bull upon the back of the tortoise, and the tortoise it- self upon vacuity."'' Certain it is, that that great divine, — now in such goodly re- pute (is it not by some great mistake ?) at Oxford* — the Rev. Thomas Jackson, demonstrates on behalf of the English church, (as one of " us, the reformed churches "e) that the Rom- ish church is " the synagogue of satan," " antichrist," " a usurper in the chair of God's saints" — "an intruder into the church which had been holy and catholic before his intrusion," and guilty of " idolatry much worse than that of the heathen."'' Now the query to be resolved by these casuists is this: If this succession consists in the transmitted gifts of the Holy Spirit, 1) Ibid, p. 51. Rome, in a work addressed, too, to a 2) See Faber's Albigenses, p. 14, lady, the Countess of Newburgh ? and Palmer, vol. ii. p. 450, »&c.; Neal's How does he speak of that church ? Purit. vol. iv. p. 178. " It is to be observed," he says, " by 3) See Potter on Ch. Govt. pp. every one now-a-days, that the filth 262, 263. OF ■OUR church doth empty itself 4) Faber's Albigenses, p. 17. into the sink of rome." See p. 8. 5) So thinks Sishop Mcllvaine Again he says, " Leaving the also. wretches to the righteous judgment 6) See Works, vol. iii. pp. 888, of God." Bull's Vind. p. 124 b. 12, ch. xxi. Again, "But, alas, we may now 7) See Wks. vol. iii. pp. 882, 883, cry out, ' how is the faithful city be- and b. 12, ch. xix. come a h.\rlot.' " Ibid, p. 148, Cor. We might fill a volume with similar of Ch. of Rome, sentiments. How, for instance, does Again, " I verily believe they Bishop Bull, in his Vindication of tiie are in great danger that live Church of England, expose the errors in her communion." Ibid, p. 151. and corruptions of the Church ol 372 PIIELATISTS ENVIRONED WITH DIFFICULTIES. [LECT. XV. as an external efficacious source of episcopal grace and power, then how was this inheritance conveyed, when the church was itself Arian, and believed in no Holy Ghost, but denied Him ; and when it hiid fallen into idolatry, and rejected nearly the whole doctrines of Christianity ? A title to external office might, even under such difficulties, be easily conveyed ; but how inward and personal qualities, and that too in such circumstances, could be possibly transmitted, it is not easy to understand. And yet the belief of this is what is made to be " of the substance of the faith," and essential to covenanted mercy. If the prelatic order consists merely in its dignity and external functions, then it can communicate no internal grace or effica- cious pov/er. And if its virtue consists in this inward grace, then the absurdity and the impossibility of this pretension stares us in the face, for how could this spiritual and divine grace be trans- missible, and transmissible through a foul and graceless channel ?' If it is said, as it is, that the power of the Holy Ghost is as- suredly given by the imposition of prelatic hands, ^ then another absurdity arises ; for it is manifest that he, who by this manipula- tion " receives the Holy Ghost,'" has previously been made to declare that "he is truly called according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ ; " that is, that he has already received the Holy Ghost — for by this it is, that Christ now calls his servants unto his ministry. And thus is the recipient of prelatical ordination, at one and the same time, made to declare his belief that he has already received, and that he then receives the Holy Ghost, and a consequent call to the work of the ministry. But again. In the Oxford tracts,* it is correctly shown, that if the validity and the consequent benefits of the sacraments de- pend on the design of their administrator, there would be no con- fidence to any penitent that he had ever received them in truth. Now with tenfold strength we urge, that if the validity of the sa- craments depends on a regular unbroken line of successors to the 1) See this made good in Jack- will remember, supplies fult, war- Bon, vol. iii. pp. 876, 878, 880. rant for this interpretation, by 2) Tiiat ihe Holy Ghost is actu- directing the same phrase to be sol- ally and truly given, according to this einnly repeated at the consecration of doctrine, by the imposition of the every bishop. Remember, that thou hands of prelates, however notorious- stir up the grace of God which is ly infidel and immoral the recij)ient3 given thee by this imposition of may be, is distinctly taught. Thus, our hands." On Primitive Tradition, as to the former, Mr. Keble says, " St. ed. 4th, p. 43 ; see also Palmer on the Paul speaks of the Holy Ghost dwell- Ch. vol. iii. p. 431. ing in us, i. e. in himself and Timothy ; 3) See the Form for the Ordaining and how it had passed from him to of Priests. Timothy, by the imposition of his 4) Vol. i. p 36. hands. The Church of England, you LECT. XV.] PRELATISTS ENCOUNTER FURTHER DIFFICULTIES. 373 apostles, " whose authority to confer the gifts of the spirit is de- rived originally from the laying on of the hands of the apostles themselves ;"' — then it is most clearly impossible for any christian now, or ever after, to have any assurance that he has partaken, or that he can truly " partake, of the body and blood of Christ." And if a hope of covenanted mercy is necessary to christian faith, and peace, and joy, then since this hope, on these princi- ples, is imparted only by the true prelatical successors of the apostles ; and since no human being can be certain that his min- isters and their predecessors, up to the time of the apostles, were in every respect their true successors, and qualified to act in their name ; no human being can, in life or in death, cherish a well-grounded or comfortable hope of eternal life.** Another consequence of this doctrine, — by which the poisoned chalice prepared for the destruction of others, is shown to con- vey death to them by whom it was prepared — is, that by making the efficacy of all ordinances to depend on prelates, who by vir- tue of their lineal succession, are able to convey the necessary grace ;3 they most effectually becloud the certainty of any valid administration of them within their own bounds. For as in all ages, there have been multiplied cases of baptism where no such transmission of "episcopal grace" could take place ; so are we informed that" " half the existing hierarchy in America have had their baptism and education from dissent ; " which baptism is of necessity no baptism, so far as any prelatic efficacy or validity has been conferred upon it. But upon the validity of baptism, rests the validity of all subsequent orders, which must, of course, to be of any value, be grafted on a good tree, springing from a good root ; and hence it cannot by possibility be shown, on this theory, that there is a validly ordained minister in any existing hierarchy in the world. Thus are these " conspirators "^ against the privileges and rights of others — to use their own words — blown up by their own treasonable plot. That the christian ministry is of divine institution we believe, 1) See ibid. ordinances at the hands of the duly 2) " Let it be thy supreme authorized priesthood, is the in- CARE, O my soul " — snch is the Ian- dispensable condition of salva- fuawe which Bishop Hobart puts, in tion, except in cases of io-norawce, i«- is Companion to the Altar, into the vincible prejudice, impeii'ect reasoning, mouth of the communicant, — " to re- and mistaken judgment." ceive the blessed sacrament of the 3) See e. g. Potter on Ch. Govt, body and blood of the Saviour, only pp. 236, 230, &c. FROM the hands of those who de- 4) Quoted from an American rive their authority by regular trans- Episc. author, in British Critic, Oct. mission from Christ." " Where the 1839, p. 308. gospel is proclaimed, communion with 5) Mr. Newman, the church, by the participation of its 374 PRELACY UTTERLY REPUDIATED. [lECT. XV. and that ordinarily the right to enter upon it is avouched by ordination, we also believe ; — and that there ever has been and will be a succession of ministers, is also a part of our faith. — But that this ministry is dependent for its existence, on an order of prelates ; and that its efficacy flows through their consecration ; and that their power to bestow this all-important gift, is deter- mined by the fact of an unbroken lineal succession of such prelates ; — all this we regard as most perfectly visionary. We repudiate it as antichristian — as no part of Christ's ordinance,^ and as without any authority from Him, whose min- isters and ambassadors we are. Our ministry we have received through prelatists, but not of, by, or from, them. To them we attribute no other virtue than as conveyancers of a divine institu- tion, whose efficacy comes — and comes solely — from a divine power. SCRIPTURE EPISCOPACY is PRESBYTERY, and SCRIPTURE BISHOPS ARE PRESBYTERS. As presbyters we acknowledge and receive prelates, and the minis- try from them, as the custodiers of this sacred office ; but what- ever they claim more than this, cometh not from above — it is an usurpation — and is perfectly null and void, except as to its criminality. We do not regard existing prelates as antichris- tian — although prelacy, in all beyond presbytery, we must regard as one branch of sacerdotal and unchristian assumption — " the stairs and way to anti-christianity" by which it has as- cended, and may again ascend to power, — "rather than anti- christianity itself."' It is because they have thus preserved the substance of the ministry we recognize prelates at all. — As for this challenged superiority of prelatic jurisdiction, we know it not. — It is a nullity, contrary to the sense of the early English church — to the laws of England — to the testimony of most learned Romish divines — and to the judgment of the best writers and churches all the world over.* To rest the claims of any ministry to the respect, confidence, and honor of the people, or to a divine institution, on this doctrine of succession, as do high-church prelatists in and out of Rome, in England and in America ; is most assuredly to destroy their claims to any respect whatever, with an utter destruction. It is the opinion of Mr. Faber, certainly one of the most learned divines of the present English church, and a firm believer in three orders, and which opinion he sustains by incontrovertible arguments, that " it may perhaps endanger the whole system of apostolical successionj if 1) See Divine Right of the Min- ell. See Divine Right of the Minis- istry, p. 26, pt. ii. 1654. try, pt. ii. pp. 18, 22. 2) See this fully shown in Pow- LECT. XV.] PRELATIC BIGOTRY AND CRIMINALITY. 375 we rigidly insist upon the absolute necessity of a transmission through the medium of bishops (i. e. prelates) exclusively.'" "It is most evident," says Dr. Field, a writer of "the very highest authority" with these high-church theologues, " that, that wherein a bishop (prelate) excelleth a presbyter is not a distinct power, or order, but an eminency and dignity only, specially yielded to one above all the rest of the same rank, for order sake and to preserve the unity of the church."* To pronounce a sentence of excommunication upon presby- terians, and all other of the reformed churches, — which being reformed, are not therefore new, or novel churches, but the pre- existing and deformed churches made better — because they reject prelacy ; is, we must say, an outrageous violence done to reason, scripture, charity, and Christianity ; and "doth more ad- vance and honor antichrist, than it doth disparage or disgrace us."* Such a judgment is self-condemned. There are three species under the genus bishop. There is the scripture bishop, which is a presbyter. There is the primi- tive bishop, which is a presbyter acting as constant moderator or president. And there is the prelatic bishop, of the after age — the lordly claimant to the succession of apostolic jurisdiction, over the only bishops known to the word of God. Now we challenge the whole bench to show any sufScient authority for this third species in scripture, or in the first two centuries, — the diocesan, prelatical successor of apostles, occupying his order a§ peculiar, supreme, and by divine right.^ 1) Faber's Albigenses, pp. 553-^ demand, if the church of Christ Be 562. (as they affirm) but one, and that those 2) Field of the Church, lib. iii. who refuse communion with it, cut cap. 39. themselves off from it, whether the 3) Div. Right of Min. p. 30. Romish bishops were at the time of 4) See on this threefold distinc- the reformation bishops or not .'' If tion, and the whole subject, the Altare they were, the protestants, by separat- Damascenum, Davidia Calderwood, ing from them, and by setting up a Lugd. 1708, p. 83, &c. communion in opposition to them, be- 5) " If 1 were worthy to advise came schismatics, and thereby cut some people," says the author of themselves off from this one church ; "The Rights of the Chris. Church," since two opposite communions, (Lond. 1707, ed. 3d, pp. 316, 317, &c.) as the clergy on all sides hold, " I would desire them not to act like cannot be both ministers of the the executioners of the three children, same church ; and if one is a member in venturing to burn themselves, that of the true church, the other cannot they might be sure to throw others far be so too ; and a false church is no enough into the fire ; and that they church, at least of Christ ; and conse- would no more attack the dissenters quently the protestant bishops cannot on such principles as unchurch all be governors in the church of Christ, who departed from Rome, those who because ecclesiastical headship sup- have as well as those who have not poses a union with the body, and they bishops. In order to prove this the who break that union must destroy consequence of their principles, I here any headship, power, or authority they 376 PRELATIC JUDGMENT NOT DECISIVE. [lECT. XV. We must, however, plead against false testimony ; or the dog- matic interpretation of the testimony given, in a prelatic sense ; — or the ex parte decision of these intolerant hierarchs, sitting in conclave, with closed doors, the laity and the clergy being disal- lowed to speak ; — as not the voice of the church ; as most insuffi- cient authority ; and as nothing more nor less than the judg- ment of the usurper upon his own claims. But of this, more again. had before over the body, or any part of it, since by their schism they cease to belong to the body." " On the contrary, if the Romish church, at any time before the refor- mation, ceased to be a true church, they ceased to have a right to those privileges belonging to it, of which the receiving and conveying spiritual power or government is on all sides allowed to be one ; and consequently, they were incapable of bestowing any on the protestant bishops." In an article on the apostolical succession, in the London Christian Observer, (for 1838, App. p. 820,) it is said, " But in repreiiending the popish abuse of the doctrine of apos- tolical succession, we would ever keep in mind its sober and scriptural in- terpretation ; for never can we ques- tion that our Divine Lord has always had a church, and that our portion of it is of apostolical lineage. But the Romanists' view of the doctrine is su- perstitious and unwarranted by Holy Writ ; and when espoused by any professed member of the Church of England, it is also as suicidal as IT IS UNSCRIPTURAL." LECTURE XVI. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION CONTRARY TO THE MORE APPROVED AND CHARITABLE JUDGMENT OF THE ENGLISH AND AMERICAN CHURCHES. Having dwelt upon the unreasonableness of this prelatic doc- trine of apostolical succession, we are prepared to show that it has been rejected in whole or in part, by many of the best di- vines of the English church ; and that it is not, in the judgment of a large portion of it, to be regarded as the established doctrine of that church. We are indeed told by Mr. Vagan, in a statement authenti- cated by Dr. Hook, that " one of the falsehoods propagated in these days is, that the reformers did not hold the divine right of episcopacy, (prelacy,) but that this doctrine was subsequently introduced.'" In support of this bold assertion, he alleges that in a certain conference with Romanists, a certain Dean Horn " observed that the apostles' authority is derived upon after ages, and conveyed to the bishops, their successors."* He then men- tions the authority of Bishop Hutton, as the only other ground of evidence, on which to convict the true friends of the church, and of the cause of Christ, of the heinous charge of falsehood. Now as we have been obliged, " in all conscience," and as we believe, " in all charity," with no hatred or malice towards any individuals, to speak strongly in reprehension of this theo- retic doctrine, as being in its necessary tendency in all time to come, and in its actual developements in all time past, evil and greatly evil — we would gladly incur the wrath of such zealots for the " sacred order," if we could be instrumental in wiping off from one of the stars, which shone in the bright banner of the 1) Hook's Call to (dis) Union, 2) Ibid, p. 107. p. 106, Am. Ed. 48 378 WE REPROBATE PRELACY NOT EPISCOPACY. [l.ECT. XVI. reformation, this foul and dishonoring stain. We would, in this way, hope to give further evidence, that our purpose, in this cause, is defensive, and not offensive — that our opposition is to prelacy, and not to episcopacy — to that popish figment whose absence could in naught deteriorate the character or claims of the protestant episcopal church, but whose presence must iden- tify her with Romanism, even as the soul gives unity to the changed elements of the body ; and which must thus gather around her all the odium of intolerance in principle, if not in practice. This doctrine, then, we believe and declare to be sep- arable from episcopacy, as even its abettors allow. Should we fail in giving proof sufficient to establish the truth of what is here called a falsehood, then we can only regret, that in very deed, such an aspersion should fairly be accredited to a church, towards which, so far as she permits, we would ever reciprocate the most fraternal regard. The editors of the London Christian Observer, the periodi- cal of the evangelical portion of the English episcopal church, in a review of a recent work, by a trained soldier of the Oxford band,^ thus present the argument, and in a way which may be more satisfactory than were the same language employed by an excommunicated alien from the chosen commonwealth. " Amongst the first and most momentous in its consequences, of Mr. Gladstone's deflections from the truth, is the assumption of what is styled apostolical succession, as absolutely, and un- der all possible circumstances, necessary to the validity of the ministerial commission. We do not derogate from the impor- tance of the regular transmision of the sacerdotal commission ; but in what paragraph of the New Testament — in what au- thenticated document among the ' remains of the apostles, — and most assuredly we may add, in what article or homily of the Church of England, is it enjoined, asserted, or intimated, that no man, under any possible circumstances, can lawfully ad- minister the christian sacraments, and exercise the christian min- istry, unless in the order of a lineal episcopal succession from some one of the apostles, to the individual who conferred his commission upon him ? With regard to our own church, its most distinct and pertinent announcement is contained in the Twenty-third Article, which simply declares that those persons are to be judged as lawfully called to the ministry, who have been chosen and sent by men who have public authority given unto them in the congregation, to call and send ministers into the Lord's vineyard. The purport of this declaration, Bishop Burnet describes as follows, under the head of this Article : — 1) Mr. Gladstone's State in its Relations to tlie Church. LECT. XVI.] BISHOP BURNEt's SENSE OF THE ARTICLES. 379 " The definition here given of those that are lawfully called and sent, is put in very general words, far from that magisterial stiffness in which some (the Nonjurors, fee.,) have taken upon them to dictate in this matter. The article does not resolve this into any particular constitution, but leaves the matter xjpen and at large for such accidents as had happened, and such as might still happen. Those who drew it had the state of the several churches before their eyes that had been differently reformed ; and although their own had been less forced out of the beaten path than any other, yet they knew that all things among them- selves had not gone according to those rules that ought to be sacred in regular times ; necessity has no law, and is a law un- to itself." " That which is simply necessary as a means to preserve the order and union of the body of christians, and to maintain the reverence due to holy things, is, that no man enter upon any part of the holy ministry, without he be chosen and called to it by such as have an authority so to do ; that, I say, is fixed by the article ; but men are left more at liberty as to their thoughts concerning the subject of his lawful authority." " That which we believe to be lawful autliority is, that rule which the body of the pastors, or bishops and clergy of a church, shall settle, being met in a body under the due respect to the powers that God shall set over them ; rules thus made being in nothing, contrary to the word of God, and duly executed by the particular persons to whom that care belongs, are certainly the lawful authority." "The bishop touches more directly upon the case of the for- eign protestant churches, as follows : — " If a company of christians find the public worship where they live, to be so defiled, that they cannot, with a good con- science, join in it ; and if they do not know of any place to which they can conveniently go, where they may worship God purely, and in a regular way ; if, I say, such a body finding some that have been ordained, though to the lower function, should submit itself entirely to their conduct, or, finding none of those, should, by a common consent, desire some of their own number to min- ister to them in holy things ; and should, upon that beginning, grow up to a regulated constitution ; though we are very sure, that this is quite out of all rule, and could not be done without a very great sin, unless the necessity were great and apparent ; yet if the necessity is real, and not feigned, this is not con- demned or annulled by the article ; for when this grows to a constitution, and when it was begun by the consent of a body who are supposed to have an authority in such an extraordina- 380 CONDEMNED BY THE CHRISTIAN OBSERVER. [lECT. XVI. ry case ; whatever some hotter spirits have thought of this since that time, yet we are very sure, that not only those who penned the articles, but the body of the church for above half an age after, did, notwithstanding those irregularities, acknowledge the for- eign churches so constituted, to be true churches, as to all the essentials of a church, though they had been at first irregularly formed, and continued still to be in an imperfect state. And therefore the general words in which this part of the article is framed, seem to have been designed on purpose not to exclude them." " We do not say that this statement of Bishop Burnet's, or any other hypothesis, is free from difficulties ; but the most incredi- ble of all the contending opinions is, that there is not a church, a sacrament, or a christian, in any nation, except as connected with episcopal ordination and government, demonstrably trans- mitted in uninterrupted succession from the apostles. Indepen- dently of other insuperable difficulties, and monstrous CONSEQUENCES, involvcd in the popish (i. e. the high-churchy view of the apostolical succession, — such as the uncertainty and profound obscurity which envelope some of the links of the chain of transmission, and the foul impurities, both doctrinal and practical, which exhibit many others in disgraceful prominence, together with the absolute expulsion of the greatly larger pro- portion of protestant Europe out of the pale of christian broth- erhood, there is one so portentous, that nothing short of the most irrefragable scriptural demonstration, could sustain a theo- ry which implies it ; we mean the insuperable difficulty inter- posed in the way of reforming or remodelling a corrupt church. If, as Mr. Gladstone states, in language to us scarcely intelligi- ble, the church, as embodied in its rulers, is ' an inheritance not merely of antiquity, but also of inspiration,' how is it to be brought back to purity when it has diverged from it ? It is this very doctrine of alleged infallibility in connexion with ec- clesiastical lineage, that renders the church of Rome impervi- ous to reformation. It may be said, and truly, that the provi- dence of God is pledged for the security of his church, and that from its corrupt ranks he can, and will raise up holy men, who shall trim the lamp when it becomes dim, and supply oil when it seemed almost expiring ; and thankful we are to say, that, at the period of the reformation, he did so in our ow^n land, by inclining the hearts of Cranmer, and Latimer, and Ridley, and other bishops and pastors of the church, to perform the work of reformation. But even in England, the great majority of the popish bishops were hostile to amendment ; so that, had not other influences interposed, the reformation could not have 1) See this decl.irfKl on p. 380, by this work. LECT. XVI.] THE SENSE OF THE ARTICLES AND CANONS. 381 been accomplished. In France, Italy, Spain, and most other parts of the Continent, it was absolutely prevented ; and in Germany and Switzerland, it was effected only by rudely snap- ping the chain of episcopal succession. God, we know, can, and will protect his church ; but before we can presume on an immediate interposition from above, to prevent the consequences of human ignorance and depravity, we must be assured that the theory which would require an interference out of the ordinary course of his providence, is of divine institution, and that no other remedy is capable of meeting the exigency of the case. We would not treat lightly the evils of deranging a well-arranged ecclesiastical system ; and we rejoice that, in our own country, the reformation was effected under the enlightened and prudent superintendence of the rulers of the church. We are merely exposing a theory which is not only destitute of all SCRIPTURAL BASIS, BUT IS IN REALITY PREGNANT WITH CON- SEQ,UENCES THAT FALL NOTHING SHORT OF THE WORST ABUSES OF PAPAL DESPOTISM. The rights and privileges of the priest- hood, when justly exercised, are to be held in reverence ; but the line of succession in the church was designed to be a bond of order, not an instrument of tyranny and corruption ; and if, in escaping from the accumulated mass of human depravity, the foreign reformers wrenched the chain, and fastened it afresh into the rock of scriptural truth, we have no more doubt of its firmness, than we have of the Queen of England's right to the throne, and of her judges to administer the laws, because of disruptions during the heptarchy, or the wars of the Roses, or when James was expelled from his kingdom." Such is the language and testimony of this able and widely extended organ of the evangelical " members of the established church " in England. The eighteenth of the Thirty -nine Articles, pronounces those accursed who presume to " say that every man shall be saved by the sect or law which he professeth ; since there is salvation only through Christ.'" Now if the name of Christ is the only way of salvation — and if salvation through him, can be obtained without the pale, and beyond the gift of prelatic successionists, — are not they here pronounced accursed, who presume to say that covenanted salvation can be obtained only by the sect of the hereditary successionists ; and who profess to believe this to be the one and only way, or medium of salvation ? The fifty-fifth canon clearly recognizes the membership of other churches. It is as follows : 1) See Blunt on the 39 Art. pp. 121, 124. Eng. Ed. 082 UNDENIABLE DOCTRINE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. [lECT. XVI. " Ye shall pray for Christ's holy catholic church ; that is, for the whole congregation of christian people dispersed through- out the whole world, and especially for the churches of England, Scotland, and Ireland, &c."' To these evidences may be added the thirtieth canon, of 1603, which says, " The abuse of a thing doth not take away the law- ful use of it. Nay, so far was it from the purpose of the Church of England to forsake and reject the churches of Italy, France, Spain, Germany, or any such like churches, in all things which they held and practised, that as the apology of the Church of England confesseth, it doth with reverence retain those ceremonies which do neither endanger the church of God nor offend the minds of men," &£c. Dr. Holland, king's professor of divinity at Oxford, says " that to affirm the office of bishop to be different from that of presby- ter, and superior to it, (and therefore essential to a church,) is most false ; contrary to scripture, to the fathers, to the doctrines of the Church of England, and to the schoolmen themselves.'"' It has been already seen,^ that the book of orders up to the year 1662, appropriated to presbyters, and to them peculiarly, the only commission given by Christ for a christian ministry at all ; — and also the promises of Christ's perpetual presence, which are now supposed to secure all apostolic power. This book further enjoined that presbyters, with the bishop, " shall LAY THEIR HANDS SEVERALLY UpOH the head OF EVERY ONE that receiveth the order of priesthood." And hence it is most evident that the Church of England, up to the year 1662, did most solemnly attest her belief that presbyters were the proper successors of the apostles, and that there could be no valid ordination without a presbytery, and apart from presbyters ; bishops having no peculiar power of ordination, nor any right to ordain alone. It is also remarkable, as a further illustration of this truth, that anciently, rectors, Sic. were (though presbyters) actually denominated prelates.* Besides, by the constitution of the English church, archdea- cons, deans, &c. in their peculiars, " to the great blemish of our reformed church," as Bishop Gibson thinks,* " exercise episco- pal jurisdiction of all kinds, independent from the bishops." And yet these are not prelates, but only presbyters. 1) That our interpretation of this 3) See Lect. vi. p. 13.'5. canon is correct, see declared by a 4) See Johnson's Clergyman's correspondent, and also by the edi- Vade Mecuin, vol. i. pp. 183, 212, tors of the London Christian Obs. for edit. 4th, in Powell, p. 14.S. 1838, p. 819. 5) Codex Juris. Eccl. Anglic, p 2) Dwight's Theol. vol. v. p. 22 in Foster's Exam, of p. 10. 10. LECT. XVI.] UNDENIABLE DOCTRINE OF THE ENGLISH CHURCH. 383 Chancellors, also, of whom Dr. Ridley says/ they " are equal or nearly equal in time, to bishops themselves ; yea, chancellors are so necessary officers to bishops, that every bishop must of necessity have a chancellor" — and who, " as he is the oculus episcopi, ought to have an eye unto all parts of the diocese, and hath immediately under the ordinary, jurisdiction in all matters ecclesiastical within the same " — this chancellor may be nothing more than a layman.* As to the words in the ordinal, which are quoted as demon- strative proof of a claim of divine right. Professor Wigglesvvorth observes, that " the words in the ordinal are too slender a foun- dation to build upon in the present case ; especially if it be re- membered who were the compilers of that book, and what rea- son we have to conclude that they were of the judgment that PRIESTS and bishops are by God's law one and the same." Sober remarks^ that the Church of England, and its whole epis- copate, must trace up the original of its present constitutional ex- istence to the regal supremacy, as exercised by her majesty's progenitors, the kings and queens of England — commencing with the infamous Henry VIII. And that a divine right is out of the question, is made demonstratively plain by Sir Michael Foster, Kt., in his Examination of Bp. Gibson's Codex Juris.'* Cran- mer took out a license to make a metropolitan visitation," and a commission, also, during the king's pleasure, for conferring ORDERS and the exercise of all other parts of archi-episcopal ju- risdiction, in the name of the king.® So also did Bonner take out his commission "to ordain within the diocese of Lon- don SUCH as he should judge avorthy of holy orders," &;c. That there is not an iota in the creed, or in the articles of this church, which fairly holds forth this odious and intolerant doc- trine, is expressly admitted by the Oxford tractators themselves, who regard the formularies, as on this account, incomplete ; and who devoutly long for an opportunity of reforming the cliurch anew, and of branding with a fitting anathema, " this new heresy, which denies the holy catholic church (that is, the exclusive claims of the prelacy ) the heresy of Hoadly and others like him ; "^ and we may therefore safely rank the abettors of this extra-ecclesia 1) Ridley's View, &c. ed. 1G02, 7) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. p. 300. " The p. 1-56. name of Bishop Hoadly will probably 2) 37 Henry viii. 17, in Foster's be as long remembered as any on the Exam. p. 3d. list of British worthies ; and will nev- 3) See in Dr. Chauncy's Appeal er be mentioned without veneration to the Public Answered, Boston, of the strength of his abilities, the lib- 17(W, p. 8. erality of his sentiments, ami his en- 4) Eccl. Angl. ed. 3d, 173t) re- lightened zeal for civil liberty." Bp. print, pp. 13-24, and p. 43. White on the Case of the Episcop.al 5) P. 24. Churches, 1762, p. 20. G) Ibid, p. 23. 3S4 ENGLISH REFORMERS CONDEMNED THIS DOCTRINE. [lECT. XVI. doctrine, under the third class of religious sects found in these sectarian days, as it is defined by these same tractators ; viz. " those who hold more than the truth."' The reformers, almost to a man, delivered sentiments most flatly contradictory to such an antichristian usurpation. Wickliffe " boldly declared that prelates were not to be found in the Bible at all.* This, also, is asserted by the united voice of the framers of the articles, the book of orders and govern- ment of the Church of England, in the *' Divine Institution of Bishops and Priests." "Priests or bishops," say they, "had this office, power, and authority, committed unto them by Christ and his apostles."^ This was in 1537 or 1538. Cranmer affirms that bishops and priests were both one of- fice.* Up to the time of Charles the II. there was no differ- ence, whatever, as has been stated, in the words by which bishops and presbyters were consecrated. " A considerable number of ministers were, in the reigns of Edward VI., and Queen Elizabeth, employed in the English establishment, who had only received presbyterian ordination in Holland, or at Geneva. Knox, the Scotch reformer; Whitting- ham, dean of Durham ; the learned Wright, of Cambridge ; Morrison, a Scotch divine ; and Travers, chaplain to secretary Cecil, and lecturer to the Temple, are among the names which first occur to us. ' All the churches professing the gospel,' writes Travers to Lord Treasurer Burleigh, * receive, likewise, to the exercise of the ministry among them, all such as have been lawfully called before, in any of the churches of our con- fession. And in the Church of England — the same hath been always observed unto this day J* " " We know, also, that several of the foreign reformers were invited to England by Edward. Peter Matyr had the di- vinity chair given him at Oxford. Bucer had the same at Cambridge ; while Ochinus and Fagius had canonries in Eng- lish cathedrals. ' The reformers,' says Neal, ' admitted the ordination of foreign churches by mere presbyters, till towards the middle of this reign, (Elizabeth,) when their validity began to be disputed and denied,'' "^ By several acts of parliament the ordinations of such as were 1) See ibid, p. 265. glican church, one plain testimony 2) Vaughan's Life of, vol. ii. p. from Cranmer and his colleagues, by 309. whom those instruments were con- 3) Burnet's Hist, of Ref. Coll. of structed, ia worth all that could be Rec. B. iii. Add. No. 5. collected from the writings of all the 4) " Who knows not," asks Bp. non-jurors of 1688, and of those their Mcllvaine, (Oxf. Div. p. 448,) " that contemporaries, whom our Oxford di- in the question, what is the doctrine vines are so fond of quoting? " of the articles and homilies of the An- 5) " Union,'' by Harris, p. 151 . LECT. XVI.] THE PRACTICE OF THE EARLY ENGLISH CHURCH. 385 ordained by presbyters only, are ratified.' Thus, also, in the I3th of Plizabeth, cap. 12, it is enacted, " that every person under the degree of bishop, who doth, or shall pretend to be a priest, or minister of God's holy word and sacrament, by reason of any other form of institution, consecration, or ordering, (or- daining,) than the form set forth by parliament, shall de- clare HIS ASSENT and SUBSCRIBE the ARTICLES," and on these conditions retain his orders and benefice. So also in 12th Caroli. cap. 17. By these acts, hundreds of ministers, who had no more than presbyterian ordination, or ordination by pres- byters alone, without the presence of any bishop, were confirmed, in their livings, as true ministers of the Church of England. " No bishop in Scotland, during my stay in ihat kingdom," says Bishop Burnet, " ever did so much as desire any of the presbyterians to be re-ordained."* That this was the judgment of the Church of England, as late as the year 1609, will incontrovertibly appear from the unexceptionable testimony of Dr. Bernard, the friend and biographer of Archbishop Usher, as given in his collection of that reverend prelate's views, in his work entitled, " The Judgment of the late Arch- bishop of Armagh."^ "In a word," says he, "if the ordination of presbyters in such places where bishops cannot be had, were not valid, the late bishops of Scotland had a hard task to maintain themselves to be bishops, who were not priests, for their ordination was no other. And for this, a passage in the history of Scotland, wrote by the archbishop of St. Andrews, is observable, viz : that when the Scots bishops were to be con- secrated by the bishops of London, Ely and Bath, here, at London house, ann. 1609 ; — hesaith, a question was moved by Dr. Andrews, bishop of Ely, touching the consecration of the Scottish bishops, who, as he said, must be fiist oidained pres- byters, as having received no ordination from a bishop. The archbishop of Canterbury, Dr. Bancroft, who was by, main- tained, that thereof there was no necessity, seeing where bishops could not be had, the ordination given by presbyters must be esteemed lawful, otherwise that it might be doubted if there were any lawful vocation in most of the reformeil churches. This, applauded to by the other bishops, Ely acquiesced, and at the day, and in the place appointed, tlie three Scottish bish- ops were consecrated by the aforesaid three English bishops." Baxter, in his Five Disputations of Church Government, says, that " the English prelates maintained that protestant churches 1) See quoted in Powell, p. 77. testimony of Bishop Cosins, and Arch- 2) See Powell on Ap Succ. p. bishop Grindal. 14, where may be seen the similar 3) Loud. 1G57, pp. 134, 135. 49 336 THE PRACTICE OF THE EARLY ENGLISH CHURCH. [lECT. XVI. that had no bishops, were true churches, and their ministers true ministers, and so of their administrations. This was so common with them, that I do not think a dissenting vote can be found, from the first reformation, till about the preparation for the Spanish match, or a little before." He then gives a long list of authors in proof.' A catena jpatrum of the English fathers and divines, who have opposed the exclusive form of this doctrine, — wiiich we denominate prelacy, — though they believed in episcopacy, more or less firmly, as a fact, but not as of fundamental importance, or of exclusive divine right; might easily be made out, and not 1) Lond. 1G59, ch. v. page 178. This subject is thus presented by the Rev. J. Cumining, of the Scottish Church, Covent Garden, in his Apol- ogy for the Church of Scotland, (Lond. 1{537, pp. 14, 15.) " In earlier times, the two churches recognized each other by ostensible acts. Such was the respect for Scot- tish orders among the bishops and re- formers of the English Church at the reformation, and for a century after- wards, that nothing was more com- mon than for a minister of the Scot- tish, or other reformed churches, to receive a license from the bishop of the diocese to exercise all the duties of a presbyter, under the superinten- dence of the ordinary. Strype re- marks, in his Annals, ' that the ordi- nation of foreign reformed churches was made valid, and those who had no other orders were made of like ca- pacity with others to enjoy any place of ministry in England. Whitting- ham, dean of Durham, was objected to by Sandys, archbishop of York, wliose orders were from the church of Rome, but a commission, consisting of sev- eral dignitaries, decided that his or- ders were good, and stated by the mouth of their president, ' They could not in conscience agree to de- prive him, or allow of the popish mass- ing priests in our ministry, and to dis- allow of ministf'rs made in a reformed church.' " Bancroft, archbp. of Can- terbury, consecrated presbyters, or- dained according to the forms of pres- bytery, to the offices of bishops, when James I. introduced an order of dio- cesan bishops into Scotland, and Bur- net st.ites, thnt presbyterial orders were almost universally recognized. To this day, there is nothing in the rubric or articles of the Church of England, to prevent a bishop from giving his license to a presbyterial clergyman to preach in the pulpits of his diocese." " A striking illustration of the views entertained of presbyterial orders in the reign of James I. is found in the following fact : A Dr. DeLaune was presented to a living in the diocese of Norwich. The bishop (Overal) natu- rally asked him where he obtained his orders ; he replied, from tiie pres- bytery of Leyden. The bishop re- fused to re-ordain, in these words : ' Re-ordination we must not admit, no more tiian re-baptization ; but in case you find it doubtful whether you be a priest capable to receive a bene- fice among us or no, I will do the same office for yoa, if you desire it, that I should do for one that doubts of his baptism, according to the rule in the Book of Common Prayer, ' If thou hejst not already,' &c. ; yet, for my own part, if you will venture the orders that you have, 1 will give you institution.'" Birch's Life of Tillot- son, p. 184. That this doctrine of high-church prelacy received its first currency in modern times, from the sermon of Dr. Bancroft, in 1589, is evident from the fact, that the only contrary evi- dence offered by Mr. Soames, is the assumed position of Archbishop Whit- gift, (Elizab. Rel. Hist. p. 381.) But as we have shown already, and will again, Whitgift stands upon the very opposite doctrine. See Neal, vol. i. p. 434, and Price's Hist. Nonconf. vol. i. p. 377. LECT. XVI.] THE TESTIMONY OF THE REV. J. E. RIDDLE. 387 like that delusive catalogue framed by the Oxford writers, and which is altogether beside the purpose.' It may not, however, be out of place to add here a few more of the many testimonies, against this uncharitable doctrine, from some of the most eminent divines of the Englisii church, with which our reading has supplied us.^ The Rev. J. E. Riddle, the author of several approved works, in his recent and valuable Compend of Ecclesiastical Chronology, thus speaks of the English church.'' " Well may we recognize our happiness in being members of a christian community, which teaches from the Bible, and not from tradition, — which proclaims apostolical truth, instead of boasting of apostolical succession, — which builds upon the sure word of God, instead of appealing to the forgeries and impostures of human fraud, or to the speculations of human imbecility and error, — and which is bound, by its own fundamental principles, to maintain the language of courtesy and respect, aiid to hold out the right hand of christian fellow- ship, towards all other churches in which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments are duly administered." So, also, in his large work on "Christian Antiquities,"^ in his " Plea for Episcopacy, Charity and Peace, "^ this author remarks, " We may reasonably believe that episcopacy is a divine institu- tion ; but we have no right to contend that it is the only system to which that honor is attached."^ Again, he says, — " Among the questions which may well be left open, — being such as will always receive different answers from different inquirers, — is this, — Did they (the apostles) in any way sanc- tion the doctrines commonly connected with the theory of apos- tolic succession ?'" He goes on to give many reasons w'hy they probably did not f and then adds — " Whatever may become of apostolic succession as a theory or institute, it is impossible at ALL events, to prove the fact of such succession, or to TRACE IT DOWN THE STREAM of TIME. In ihis case the fact 1) Of the forty-three extracts 395, 397, 419, 433. See facts in Prot. given in the Tracts for the Times, No. Dissent. Catech. pp. 27,29; Bishop 74, as testimonies to the doctrine of Hall's Wks. vol. viii. pp. 50,51,53- the apostolical succession, tliere are 57 ; Bishop Davenant, as there refer- not more than a dozen who do red to, and in Coleman, Christ. An- really testify to any thing like the tiq; Jewell in Powell, p. 79; Brit. Ref. doctrine of the Tracts on that sub- vol. vii. pp. 217- 226, and pp 26-33. ject. 3) Eccles. Chron. Lond. 1:40, 2) See many of them given in pref. p. 9. fu'l in Dr. Miller on the Ministry, p. 4) Lond. 1S39, pp. 82P. 139, &c. Powell on Ap. Succ. § vii. ; 5) lb d, p. 55, Pref. Presb. Def. pp. 38-40 ; Neal's Pari- 6) Ibid, p. 65. tan . v. 1. iii. pp. 284, 237, 352, 366, 7) Ibid, p. 70. 372, and vol. i. pp. 217, 230, 261, 271 , 8) Ibid, pp, 70, 71 , 72 388 TESTIMONY OF LONDON CIIKTSTIAN OBSERVER. [lECT. XVI. seems to involve the doctrine; and if the fact be hopelessly obscure, the doctrine is irrecoverably lost." We will now present an extract from the Essays on the Church, by a Layman, which have attracted great notice, and are quoted wiih approbation, in the London Christian Observer.' " If our readers have as carefully perused and weighed these passages as their importance deserves, they will not be slow in coming to the author's conclusion, that, the ' via media ^ then, of the Church of England, is not the via media of the Oxford tracts. The first is a wise and just moderation, holding firm to essen- tials ; offering no compromise to the enemies of Christ ; decided to have 'no peace with Rome;' and yet, at the same time that it maintains its own views of church government, distinctly and meekly offering the right hand of fellowship to all other churches 'holding the head,' without requiring them to take the same identical view of those questions of church government, on which the scriptures allow a degree of obscurity to rest." "They talk of' the old standard divinity of the church ;' but when we come to name the authors, they can think of none but Laud, and Heylin, and Leslie, and Bull ! Now we deny that these have the least title to be considered our ' old standard divines.' We want the works of those who founded and built up our church; but they offer us those only who tried their utmost, and partly succeeded in pulling it down!" The London Christian Observer thus speaks -.^ — "Now our readers know the extreme displeasure of the Ox- ford iract divines at there being nothing about the 'apostolical succession' in our articles; and that the validiiy of the orders of foreign protestants has ever been acknowledged by our church, and in the writings of her divines; a few Laudites only excepted. But here we have presented to us a sermon of Cranmer's, with this ambiguous expression, 'apostolical succes- sion,' on its very front. Again, the Oxford tract divines mourn bitterly that there is nothing about 'the altar,' or 'the blessed sacrament of the altar' — that incorrigibly popish phrase — in our prayer book; that the alleged 'altar' is studiously called by our reformers, a 'table,' and the alleged 'sacrifice,' a 'supper.' ' For it cannot be denied, that the Church of England did acknowledge the validity of presbyterian ordination; nay, that presbyters were for many years even allowed to minister within its pale, and to enjoy its preferments; nor did any one of our primates, from Cranmer to Hovvley, Laud only excepted, ever 1) Oct. 1838, p. 650. 2) Nov. 1838, pp. 221, 820, 822, 826. LECT. XVI.] DIFFERENT PARTIES IN THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND. 389 dispute the claim of the protestant churches to be accounted portions of Christ's visible kingdom.' ' If any of our readers will refer to Bishop Burnet's ' Vindication of the ordinations of the Ciiurch of England,' in which it is demonstrated that all the essentials of ordination, according to the practice of the primi- tive and Greek churches, are still retained in our church ; in answer to a paper written by one of the church of Rome to prove the nullity of our orders, and given to a person of qual- ity ; they will see the exceeding injury which the Oxford-tract extravagant doctrine upon apostolical succession (which is not the true Anglican or scriptural doctrine, but the Romish) is likely to do to our apostolical church, and to the reformation in gen- eral ; indeed, we may say to our common Christianity.' We sincerely believe that upon the non-spiritual principles assumed by the objector, the orders of the Church of England would be invalid.'" Tlie same work for February, of this year,^ says : " The prom- inent opinions which divide our church may be classed under three heads." " There was first, the school of the reformers. This comprised the Cranmers, Ridleys, Latimers, Hoopers, Jewells, and Hook- ers, of the days of Edward VI. and Queen Elizabeth. The divines of this school regarded the word of God as the sole authoritative rule of faith and practice ; they considered Rome to be antichrist ; and though persuaded that episcopacy is of divine institution, and zealously attached to it, both upon prin- ciple and by experience, they yet cordially embraced the lutheran and reformed churches as sisterly communions. Their tenets were clearly set forth in the Thirty-nine Articles, and more largely unfolded in the Homilies; and that which gave special life and efficacy to them, was that fundamental doctrine of grace which Rome repudiated, justification by faith, with which, after the example of St. Paul and St. James, they connected all other scriptural doctrines, with their blessed fruits in the heart and life." " Towards the close of the reign of Elizabeth, and in the beginning of that of James I., there sprang up a new school, widely differing from that of the reformers, and the tenets of which at length acquired the coherence of a system ; and under the influence of Archbishop Laud, in the reign of Charles II., became widely prevalent. At the restoration they were resus- citated by the surviving divines of Laud's school ; and they were, for the most part, embraced by the non-jurors." 1) 1841, p. 76. 390 TESTIMONY OF HON. B. NOEL AND STILLINGFLEET. [LECT. XVI. The Hon. and Rev. Baptist Noel, in his Tract on the Unity of the Church, makes this supposition:' "Another christian, bearing in his hfe and character all the marks of a child of God, wishes to determine whether he should join the episcopalian section of the church of Christ, or the presbyterian. He, too, examined scripture, weighed the evidence on both sides, con- versed with upright and intelligent men in both communions, and prayed to be directed right. After much deliberation, he became convinced that diocesan episcopacy has no sanction in the word of God, and that the orders and discipline of the presbyterian body are most conformed to the usages of the church in the New Testament ; that presbyterian orders are of divine appointment, and that it was the will of Christ that he should be so ordained. With that opinion he became a pres- byterian minister. Am I now to separate from his society ? How has he sinned ? He was obliged to follow what seemed to him the will of Christ, His conclusions were supported by the decisions of several of the protestant churches. The Lutheran, Swiss, French, Dutch, and Scotch churches, the church of the Vaudois, and a large and pious section of the American church were all on his side. While, in favor of episcopacy, besides the church of Rome, the mother of harlots and abominations of the earth, drunken with the blood of the saints and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus ; and the eastern churches, which are nearly as corrupt, he found only the Church of England, and three or four small sections of the church of Christ else- where, who had retained diocesan episcopacy. Under these cir- cumstances am I to separate from him? Not to have examined the scripture doctrine would have been sin. Not to have fol- lowed the conviction of duty, to which the examinations would have led him, would have been sin. In fidelity to Christ, he was obliged to act as he did ; and if I separate from him, I do it only because he did his duty." Sillllngfleet^ (we mean of course the dean — not the bishop) largely proves, that it was the judgment of the most eminent divines of the reformation that the form of church government depends on the wisdom of the magistrate, and that the form of the church is mutable. He attributes this opinion to Cranmer and other divines in the time of Edward VI., to Whit- gift, Bishop Bridges, Dr. Loe, Mr. Hooker, King James, Dr. Sutcliffe, Mr. Hales, and Mr. Chiillngworth.^ He, Dr. Stil- lingfleet, says, " I doubt not to make it evident, that the main 12. 1) Lond. 1838, 25th ed. pp. 11, 2) Iren. pt. ii.ch. viii. 3) Iren. pt. iii ch. vii. LECT. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF DR. WILLET, AND BISHOP FOWLER. 391 ground for settling episcopal government in this nation, was not accounted any pretence of divine right, but the convenience of that form of church government, to the state and condition of this church, at the time of the reformation."* Dr. WiJiet, in arguing with Bellarmine, expressly denies the necessity for this asserted succession, which the cardinal makes necessary. 2 " First, a local, personal, and lineal succession, is not now needful, as before, under the law ; the true worship is not now tied to person or place, as our Saviour showeth, John iv. 21, ' God will be worshipped, neither in this mountain nor in Jeru- salem ; ' and by the same reason, neither at Rome, &,c. Sec- ondly, yet a succession of doctrine and faithful pastors we grant, and the church was never without ; such as the prophet speaketh of, Esai. lix. 21. First, if you will credit St. Hier- ome, he saith, olim idem erat presbyter et episcopus : In the beginning a bishop and a priest were all one, and before that schisms entered into the church, communi preshyterum consilio ecclesicE guhernahantur, the churches were governed in com- mon by the whole presbytery, &c., which sentence of his is allowed in your own canons: (Decret. parti, dist. 95, cap. 5.) If it be thus, that this distinction of bishops and priests was not brought in in the apostle's time, but afterward, then can no such ordination be showed from the apostle's time." "Thirdly, we say, that a succession of persons in the same place, without a succession of doctrine which they cannot show, is nothing worth. A succession of the apostolic faith and doc- trine proveth a continuance of pastors and teachers, and not contrariwise."^ Let us now hear the sentiments of a few Anglican prelates. Bishop Fowler thus speaks:'* "And we can reply, that besides England, Scotland, and Ireland, in which protestancy is the na- tional religion ; and in the two former of which, the number of papists is very inconsiderable ; and besides Denmark, Norway, Sweden, and the United Provinces, in all which it is also the national religion : and besides Germany, Switzerland, Hungary, Transylvania, in which are abundance of proiestant churches, 1) Burnet, in his History of his aged with so much learning and skill, own Times, anno. 16G1, says, "to tliat none of either side ever under- avoid the imputation that boolc took to answer it." So speaks Bishop brought on him, he went into the hu- White in his Case of the Efiisc. mors of a high sort of people beyond Churches, 17c2, p. 25 of this work, what became him, perhaps beyond his 2) Syn. Pap. p. 165, and also on own sense of things. Tlie book, how- pp. 81,b2. ever, was. it seems, easier RETRACTED 3) See Note A. than REFtTED, for though offensive 4) Notes of the Ch. p. 123. to many of both parlies, it was man- 892 BISHOPS HALL, PHILPOT, BRADFORD, AND ANDREWS. [lECT. XVI. (as there were lately in the kingdom of France, too, and it will never be forgot by what methods they have been extirpated ;) besides all those countries, 1 say, the protestants have also their churches in the new world, no less without the mixture of here- tics ; and these consist of other kind of believers than those the Romanists boast of in that quarter." Bishop Hall thus speaks' of the reformed churches : " These sisters have learned to differ, and yet to love and reverence each other ; and in these caseSj to enjoy their own forms without prescription of necessity or censure." The martyr bishop, Philpot,'^ " thus answereth to the argument of succession : that it is no infallible note of the church ; for there may be a succession of bishops where there is no church, as at Antioch, and Jerusalem: but if you put to succession of bish- ops, succession of doctrine withal!, as it was in Augustine's time, when he used this argument against the Donatists, it is a good proofs." " The ministrie of God's word, and ministers be an essentiall point ; but to translate this, saith he, to the outward glorious succession of bishops, is a plain subtiltie." Bradford thus wrote in his reply to Lady Vane :^ " But be it so, that Peter hath as much given to him as they do affirm, who yet will grant that Peter had a patrimony for his heirs ? He hath left (say the papists) to his successors the self-same right which he received. O Lord God ! then must his successor be a Satan, for he received that title of Christ himself. I would glad have the papists show me one place of succession mentioned in the scriptures. I am sure that when Paul purposely painteth out the whole ministration of the church, he neither rnaketh one head, nor any inheritable primacy, and yet he is altogether in commendation of unity. After he hath made mention of one God the Father, of one Christ, of one Spirit, of one body of the church, of one faith, and of one baptism ; then he describeth the mean and manner how unity is to be kept, namely, because unto EVERY PASTOR is grace givcn after the measure wherewith Christ hath endued them. Where, I pray you, is now any title to ful- ness of power ? " Bishop Andrews says,* "Though episcopal government be of divine institution, yet it is not so absolutely necessary as that there can be no church, nor sacraments, nor salvation, without it. He is blind, that sees not many churches flourishing without it ; 1) Wks. vol. ix. p. 432. page 138, and British Ref. page 102. 2) Willet Syn. Pap. p. 83. 4) See in Bristed's Thoughts, p. 3) Fath. of the Engl. Ch. vol. vi. 440. LECT. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF HOADLY, SHERLOCK, AND BURNET. 393 and he must have a heart as hard as iron, that will deny them salvalion." Bishop Hoadly has fully vindicated his rejection of this doc- trine of uninterrupted succession, as "a trifle and a nicety " — the "dreams and inventions of men who have made that neces- sary which they cannot prove to be at all, and which our blessed Lord in his account of the matters upon which salvation is to de- pend, never once mentions" — in his answer to the representa- tions of the committee of the Lower House, &z,c.' " But," says Bishop Sherlock, in his Examination into Bel- larmine's Notes of the Church, " as for what he says that succes- sion of doctrine without succession of office, is a poor plea ; I must needs tell him that I think it is a much better plea than suc- cession of office without succession of doctrine. For I am sure that it is not a safe communion where there is not a succession of apostolical doctrine ; but whether the want of a succession of bishops will in all cases unchurch, will admit of a greater dispute. I am sure a true faith in Christ, with a true gospel conversation, will save men ; and some learned Romanists^ defend that old de- finition of the church, that it is coitus fidelium, the company of the faithful, and will not admit bishops or pastors into the definition of a church."^ Thus also he says :" " Now I must confess, these notes, as he well observes, are common to all christian churclies, and were in- tended to be so ; and if this does not answer his design, we can- not help it. The protestant churches do not desire to confine the notes of the church to their own private communions, but are very glad if all the churches in the world be as true churches as themselves." Bishop Burnet, in a passage which the London Christian Ob- server says should be written in letters of gold, says, "Thus far* I have complied with your desires of answering the paper you sent me, in as short and clear terms as I could. But I must add that this ransacking of records about a succession of orders, though ir adds much to the lustre and beauty of the church, yet is not a thing incumbent on every body to look much into, nor indeed, possible for any to be satisfied about ; for a great many ages all those instruments are lost ; so that how ordina- tions were made in the primitive church, we cannot certainly know ; it is a piece of history, and very hard to be perfectly 1) See Hoadly 's Wks. fol. vol. 3) Notes of tlie Church Exam- ii. pp. 485, 486. See Bishop White's ined and Refuted, pp. 54, 55. Opinion of Hoadly, above. 4) Ibid, p. 4. 2) Johan Laiin. epist. vol. viii. 5) Lond. Chr. Obs. 1838, p. 827. epist. 13, Nicol Gatinaeo. 50 394 THE TESTIMONY OF BISHOP BURNET. [lECT. XVI. known. Therefore it cannot be a fit study for any, much less for one that has not much leisure. The condition of christians were very hard, if private persons must certainly know how all ministers have been ordained since the apostles' days ; for if we will raise scruples in this matter, it is impossible to satisfy them unless tlie authentic registers of all the ages of the church could be showed, which is impossible ; for though we were satisfied that all the priests of this age were duly ordained, yet if we be not as sure that all who ordained them had orders rightly given them, and so upward till the days of the apostles, the doubt will still remain." " Therefore, the pursuing of nice scruples about this, cannot be a thing indispensably necessary ; otherwise all people must be perplexed with endless disquiet and doubtings. But the true touchstone of a church must be the purity of her doctrine, and the conformity of her faith with that which Christ and his apos- tles taught. In this the scriptures are clear and plain to every one that ivill read and consider them sincerely and ivithout pre- judice; which that you may do, and by these may be led and guided into all truth, shall be my constant prayer to God for you." The following testimony, given by Bishop Burnet, when sev- enty years old, and addressing the world, through the press, on an occasion, as he felt, of the greatest solemnity, is peculiarly impressive. It is contained in his Description of a Low-Church- man.' " The raising the authority and power of sacred func- tions, beyond what is founded on clear warrants in scripture, is, they think, the readiest way to give the world such a jeal- ousy of them, and such an aversion to them, as may make them lose the authority that they ought to have, while they pretend to that they have not. " They dare not unchurch all the bodies of the protestants be- yond the seas ; nor deny to our dissenters, at home, the federal rights common to all christians, or leave them to uncovenanted mercy. They do not annul their baptisms, or think they ought to be baptized again, in a more regular manner, before they can be accounted christians. They know of no power in a priest to pardon sin, other than the declaring the gospel pardon, upon the conditions upon luhich it is ojfered. They knoiv of no sacrifice in the eucharist, other than the commemorating that on the cross, with the oblation of the jjrayers, praises and almsgiving, prescribed in the office. They are far from con- demning private judgment in matters of religion; this strikes 1) Past. Care, pref. p. 44, Lond. 182] , 14th ed. ; Ld. Chr. Obs. Sep. 1840, p. 554. LECT. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF BISHOPS WARBURTON AND KNOX. 395 at the root of the whole reformation, ichich could never have been compassed, if private men have not a right of judging for themselves ; on the contrary, they think every man is bound to judge for himself, which, indeed, he ought to do, in the fear of God, and with all humility, and caution. They look on all these notions as steps toioard popery, though they do not con- clude that all those ivho have made them, designed that, by so doing." Bishop Warburton, in his Sermon on Church Communion, makes the following remarks : — " My purpose, in this discourse, was only to expose the vain opinion of inherent sanctity, or su- periority, or exclusive privilege, in one church above another, merely because founded by a Paul, a Peter, an Andrew, or a James, or merely because administered by an hierarchy, by an equal ministry, or a moderate episcopacy ; because such opin- ions have produced, and do still produce, that wretched spirit, which here, on the authority of God's word, I have endeavored to discredit, and ventured to condemn, confiding in the oracles of eternal truth, that he that is not against us is for us," (the sermon was preached upon Mark ix. 39, or Luke xi. 49, 50,) *' and will be treated by our heavenly Father, not as a rebel, but a subject ; and, therefore, should be now considered by us, as he will then be by Him, who is the common judge of us both." When the Rev. Robert Blair desired to labor in Ulster, the Viscount of Clanniboy, " his patron did," says he, " on my re- quest, inform Bishop Knox, how opposite I was to episcopacy, and their liturgy, and had the influence to procure my admission on easy and honorable terms ; yet, lest his lordship had not been plain enough, I declared ray opinion fully to the bishop, at our first meeting, and found him yielding, beyond my expectation. He told me that he was well informed of my piety, and, therefore, would impose no conditions upon me inconsistent with my prin- ciples ; only that he behooved to ordain me, else neither of us durst be answerable to the law. I answered him, that his sole ordination did utterly contradict my principles. But he replied both wittily and submissively, ' Whatever you account of episco- pacy, yet I know you account a presbytery to have divine war- rant ; will you not receive ordination from Mr. Cunningham, and the adjacent brethren, and let me come in among them, in no other relation than a presbyter?' This, I could not refuse; and so the matter was performed."* The famous Livingston, who also labored in Ireland at this 1) See Life of Blair, p. 52. 396 TESTIMONY OF BISHOP KNOX AND OF VVHITGIFT. [lECT. XVI. time, gives a similar account of this bishop.' " About August, 1630, 1 got letters from the Viscount Clannlboy, to come to Ireland, in reference to a call to Killinchie, whither I went, and got an unanimous call from the parish ; and, because it was needful that I should be ordained to the ministry, and the bishop of Down, in whose diocese Killinchie was, being a cor- rupt humorous man, and would require some engagement, there- fore, my Lord Clanniboy sent some with me, and wrote to Mr. Andrew Knox, bishop of Rapho, who, when I came, and had delivered the letters from my Lord Clanniboy, and from the Earl of Wigtoun, and some others, that I had for that purpose brought out of Scotland, told me he knew my errand ; that I came to him because 1 had scruples against episcopacy and ceremonies, according as Mr. Josiah Welsh, and some others, had done before ; and that he thought his old age was prolong- ed for little other purpose, but to do such office : that if I scrupled to call him My Lord, he cared not much for it ; all that he virould desire of me, because they got there but few sermons, that I would preach at Ramallen the first Sabbath, and that I would send for Mr. Cunningham, and two or three other neighboring ministers to be present, who, after sermon, should give me imposition of hands ; but, although they per- formed the work, he behooved to be present ; and although he durst not answer it to the state, he gave me the book of ordi- nation, and desired, that any thing I scrupled at, I should draw a line over It on the margin, and that Mr. Cunningham should not read it : but I found that it had been so marked by some others before, that I needed not mark any thing. So the Lord was pleased to carry that business far beyond any thing that I had thought, or almost ever desired." Let us now hear the opinion of a few archbishops. In his Defence of the Answer to the Admonition, ^ Archbish- op Whitgift says :^ *' Wherefore the controversie is not whether many of the things mentioned by the platformers, were fitly used in the apostles' times, or may now be well used in some places, yea, or be conveniently used in sundry reformed church- es at this day. For none of these branches are denyed, neither do we take upon us to (as we are slandered) either to blame or condemne other churches for such orders as they have received most fit for their estate." 1) Life of Rev. John Livinofston, 3) See pref. to the reader, and see Glasgow, 1754, p. 13. ^ also p. 174, where he shows that the 2) Fol. Lend. 1574. My copy is diversity of our times from the apos- that of Leigh Richmond, with his au- lies requires a diverse kind of govern- tograph. ment, and of ordering of ministers. LECT. XVI.] ARCHBISHOPS WHITGIFT AND TILLOTSON. 397 " But to let this pass and come to the purpose : this replie of T. C. (which is of some accounted so notahle a piece of work) consisteih of two false principles and rotten pillars : where- of the one is, that wee must of necessitie have the same kind of government that was in the apostles' tyme, and is expressed in the scriptures, and no other : the other is, that we maj^ not, in any wise, or in any consideration, reteyne in the church any thing that hath bin abused under the pope : if these two first be weake, yea rotten, (as I have proved them to be in this my Defence,) then must the building of necessitie fall." " The offices in the church whereby this government is wrought, be not namely and particularlie expressed in the scrip- tures, but in some points leit to the discretion and libertie of the church, to be disposed according to the state of the tymes, places, and persons, as I have further declared in my Answer and Defense following." "Archbishop Tillotson once made a remark respecting a more than semi-papist book, by one of his party, w-hich is worth the recollection of some who are perplexed by the Oxford tracts, feeling convinced that their conclusions are ' palpably false ' and ' absurd,' and yet not being always able to sustain their sophistry. ' Such has been the height,' says his friend and former pupil, Beardmore, *of our Altitudinarian divines, as that they have not stuck to challenge the reformed churches be- yond the seas, as being no church for want of episcopal govern- ment ; as particularly that learned person, Mr. Dodwell, in his book about schism, and his other book. One Priesthood, one Altar ; about which I remember having some discourse with our late archbishop, about ten years ago. He told me that Mr. Dodwell brought his book to himself to peruse, before he put it into the press, and desired him to give his judgment of it ; that he freely told him his dislike of it ; that though it was writ with such accuracy and close dependence of one proposition upon another, as that it seemed to be little else but demonstration : so that, saith he, ' I can hardly tell where it is you break the chain ; yet I am sure it is broken somewhere ; for such and such particu- lars are so palpably false, that I wonder you do not feel the ab- surdity, they are so gross, and grate so much upon the inward sense.' And I remember also he said, Mr. Dodwell had run into one extreme, as much as Mr. Baxter had done into the other.'" Archbishop Bramhall, in his Vindication of the Church of Eng- land,^ thus speaks : " But because I esteem them churches not 1) Lond. Chr. Obs. 1839, p. 80. 2) Disc. iii. See Oxf. Tr. vol. iii. p. 138. 398 TESTIMONY OF ARCHBISHOP BRAMHALL. [LECT. XVI. completely formed, do I, therefore, exclude them from all hopes of salvation ? or esteem them aliens and strangers from the com- monwealth of Israel ? or account them formal schismatics ? No such thing. " It is not at all material, whether episcopacy and priesthood be two distinct orders, or distinct degrees of the same orders, the one subordinate to the other ; whether episcopal ordination do introduce a new character, or extend the old." " Those that unchurch either all, or most of the protestant churches, and maintain the Roman church and not theirs to be true, do call us to a moderate jealousie of them." " His assumption is wanting, which should be this ; but a considerable party of episcopal di- vines in England do unchurch all or most of the protestant churches, and maintain the Roman church to be a true church, and these to be no true churches. 1 can assent to neither of his propositions, nor to any part of them, as true sub modo, as they are alleged by him." " Episcopal divines do not deny those churches to be true churches, wherein salvation may be had. We advise them, as it is our duty, to be circumspect for themselves, and not to put it to more question, whether they have ordination or not, or desert the general practice of the universal church for nothing, when they may clear it if they please. Their case is not the same with those who labor under invincible necessity. What mine own sense is of it, I have declared many years since to the world in print ; and in the same way received thanks, and a public ac- knowledgment of my moderation, from a French divine. And yet more particularly in my reply to the Bishop of Chalcedon,' episcopal divines will readily subscribe to the determination of the learned bishop of Winchester, in his answer to the second epistle of Molineus. Nevertheless, if our form (of episcopacy) be of divine right, it doth not follow from thence, that there is no salvation without it, or that a church cannot consist without it. He is blind who does not see churches consisting without it ; he is hard-hearted who denieth them salvation. We are none of these hard-hearted persons — we put a great difference between these things. There may be something absent in the exterior regiment, which is of divine right, and yet salvation to be had." " This mistake proceedeth from not distinguishing between the true nature and essence of a church, which we do readily grant them, and the integrity or perfection of a church, which we can- not grant them, without swerving from the judgment of the catholic church." 1) Pres. p. 144, and cap. i. p. 164. LECT. XVI.] THE TESTIMONY OF ARCHBISHOP WAKE. ^99 The following is the language of Archbishop Wake in a letter to Le Clerc, as given by Mr. Bristed.^ "Ecclesias reformatas, etsi in aliquibus a nostra Anglicana dlssentientes libenter amplec- tor. Optarem equidem regimen episcopale bene temperatum, et ab omni injusta dominatione sejunctum, quale apud nos obtinet, et, si quid ego in his rebus sapiam, ab ipso apostolorum a3Vo in ecclesia receptum fuerit, et ab iis omnibus retentum fuisset ; nee despero quin aliquando restitutum, si non ipse videam, at posteri videbunt. Interim absit, ut ego tam ferrei pectoris sim, ut ob ejus defectum, (sic mihl absque omni invidia appellare liceat) aliquas earum a communione nostra abscindendas cre- dam ; aut cum quibusdam furiosis inter nos scriptorlbus, eas nulla vera ac valida sacramenta habere, adeoque vix christianos esse pronuntiem. (Jnionem arctiorem inter omnes reformalos procurare quovis pretio vellem." In one of his sermons this archbishop expressly says, " For us, whom it hath pleased God, by delivering us from the errors and superstitions of the church of Rome, to unite to- gether in the common name of protestant reformed christians, were we but as heartily to labor after peace, as we are all of us very highly exhorted to it ; I cannot see why we, who are so happily joined together in a common profession of the same faith, at least, I am sure, in all the necessary points of it, and I hope, amidst all our lesser differences, in a common love and charity to one another, should not also be united in the same common worship of God too." " This makes the difference between those errors for which we separate from the church of Rome, and those controversies which sometimes arise among protestants themselves. The for- mer are in matters of the greatest consequence, such as tend di- rectly to overthrow the integrity of faith and the purity of our worship; and, therefore, such as are in their own nature de- structive of the very essentials of Christianity. Whereas, our dif- ferences do not at all concern the foundations either of faith or worship, and are, therefore, such in which good men, if they be otherwise diligent and sincere in their inquiry, may differ with- out any prejudice to themselves, or any just reflection upon the truth of their common profession." '•' Indeed, the main object of this admirable sermon is, to ex- pose the essential characteristic of a false and antichristian irre- ligion ; namely, the desire of unchurching and excommunicating those who differ from its professors in points not fundamental, as 1) Thoughts, &c. pp. 427, 429. 400 THE TESTIMONY OF ARCHBISHOP TISHER. [lECT. XVI. church order and government, rites, ceremonies, and all the ex- terior of public worship." Archbishop Usher says," " I think that churches that have no bishops, are defective in their government : yet for justifying my communion with them, which I do love and honor as true members of the church universal, I do profess, if I were in Holland, I should receive the blessed sacrament at the hands of the Dutch, with the like affection as I should from the hands of the French ministers, were I at Charenton." " To this," says Mr. Stuart,'' " in some measure, may be attributed the respect in which Usher was held by dissenters : and possibly for this, amongst other reasons, he is said, by his contemporary, the Rev. John Livingston, in a spirit indicative both of prejudice and can- dor, to be not only a learned, but a godly man, although a bishop."^ From the Life of Archbishop Usher, by Dr. Nicholas Ber- nard," it appears that such was the extent to which he carried his liberal views, that his enemies " scandalized him to King James, under the title of Puritan, of purpose to prevent any further promotion of him." These misrepresentations " induc- ed him, at the request of his friends, to declare his judgment as to the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England, which was," says Dr. Bernard, " to all good men's satisfaction."^ In closing his view of the Archbishop's character. Dr. Ber- nard, who was long his intimate and familiar friend, says,** " He was not so severe as to disown the ministry of other reform- ed churches, but declared he did love and honor them, as true members of the church universal, and was ready both for the ministers of Holland and France, to testify his communion with them." In Archbishop's Usher's Letter on the Observation of the Lord's day, in exposing the ignorance and mistakes of Dr. Heylin,^ he denies that " the book of the ordination of bish- ops" can be " admitted into the creed," " because," says Dr. Bernard, " they are either for the most part to be reckoned among the agenda rather than the credenda." In this same collection Dr. Bernard publishes a letter, written by Archbishop Usher, not long before his death, and committed to Dr. Bernard for publication,* " containing his judgment of the ordination of the ministers in France and Holland." This letter 1) Lettei-to Dr. Bernard in Bax- 5) Ibid, p. 51. ttr's Life, p. 2nc,. C) Ibid, p. 104. 2) Hist. Mem. of the City of Ar- 7) See tlie judgment of the late mngh, Newry, 1819, p. 38.5. Archbisliop of Armagh and Primate 3) Life of Mr. John Livingston, of Ireland, &c. by Dr. Bernard, Lond. p. IC. 1657, p. 110. 4) Lond. 1C56, p. 50. 8) See ibid, p. 123. LECT. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF ARCHBISHOP USHER. 401 was written expressly to refute an allegation that he " regarded the ministry of these churches as null, and looked on them as laymen." " I have," says Archbishop Usher, " ever declared my opinion to be, that episcopus ct presbyter gradu tnntiim diffcrunt, non ordine, and, consequently, that in places where bishops cannot be had, the ordination by presbyters standeth valid," &c. He then shows his belief of the necessity of bish- ops, but adds, " yet, for the testifying of my communion with these churches, (which I do love and honor as true members of the church universal,) I do profess that, with like affection, 1 should receive the blessed sacrament at the hands of the Dutch ministers, if I were in Holland, as I should do at the hands of the French ministers, if I were in Charenton."' Dr. Bernard testifies that he knew this ever to have been his opinion.^ That it was his opinion, he repeats again and again.^ But further, Dr. Bernard has published, as given to him for that purpose, Archbishop Usher's " Reduction of Episcopacie unto the form of Synodical Government, received in the An- cient Church."^ In this it is shown, that the ancient form of church government was by the council of presbyters, over whom there was a president, superintendent, or bishop. But these presbyters ruled in common, so as that without them the bishop, or president, could do nothing. Dr. Usher proposed that in each parish the rector, or incumbent pastor, together with the church-wardens, and sides-men, may, every week, take notice of such as live scandalously, he, that the number of suffragans, answering to the ancient chorepiscopoi, should be increased, who might call together, every month, all the pas- tors within the precinct, and, according to the major part of their voices, conclude all matters. In like manner he proposed that there should be a diocesan synod held every year, and a provincial synod every third year, constituted in like manner, and making its determinations in the same way. In signing his name to this plan, he declares that he believes it to be accor- dant to the word of God, " and that the suffragans, mentioned in the second proposition, may lawfully use the power, both of jurisdiction and ordination, according to the word of God, and the practice of the ancient church." Now that this scheme is substantially presbyterian, is at once apparent. Indeed, it is headed in the publication, " Episcopal and Presbyterial Government enjoined." It was agreeable to the Puritans generally. It overthrows the supremacy of prelates, 1) Ibid. pp. ]-J6, 127. 4) Printed Lond. IGoG. Proposed 2) Jbid, p. 1'27. in the year 1C41. 3) See ibid, p. 151. 51 402 TESTIMONY OF ARCHBISHOP USHER. [LECT. XVI. and if, as is most credibly believed, the ancient chorepiscopoi were presbyters, then it as certainly denies to prelates the exclu- sive power of ordination, and attributes that right to presbyters. Dr. Bernard further assures us, that in the judgment of Dr. Usiier, all that can be deduced from the promises of our Sa- viour (as in Matt, xxviii) is, that Christ thus engaged to be with " the whole body of the ministry collectively, then, as it were, in their (the apostles) loins, who should succeed in preaching and baptism," and not to prelates : and that all that is inferri- ble from the teaching of scripture (as in Heb. vi. 2,) is, "that it was a principle of the catechism taught to christians at their first reception, that there was to be a successive oidinaiion, or setting apart of persons, for the ministry, for an authoritative preaching of faith and repentance, and administration of the sacraments ;" which would assuredly give no countenance to the doctrine, that this ministry was to be divided into distinct castes, and the power of ordination, as essential to the being of a church, be limited to the order of prelates.' In further illustration of these liberal views of Archbishop Usher, we would quote what is related by the Rev. Robert Blair, a very eminent presbyterian minister, who, during his primacy, labored for some time in Ulster. Being invited in the year 1627 to visit Dr. Usher, at his own residence, "I com- plied," says Mr. Blair,'^ " with the primate's invitation, and found him very afi'able, and ready to impart his mind. He desired to know what was my judgment concerning the nature of justify- ing and saving faith. 1 told him in general." . . . . " From ihis he passed on to try my mind concerning ceremonies ; wherein we were not so far from agreeing as 1 feared : for when I had freely opened my grievances, he admitted, that all these things ought to have been removed, bui the constitution and laws of the place and time would not permit that to be done. He added, that he was afraid our strong disaffection to these would mar our ministry; that he had himself been importuned to stretch forth his hand against us; and that though he would not for the world do that, he feared instruments might be found who would do it; and he added, that it would break his heart, if our suc- cessful ministry in the north were interrupted. Our conference ending, he dismissed me very kindly, though I gave him no high titles ; and when trouble came upon us, he proved our very good friend, as will appear in the sequel." Mr. Blair having been silenced by the bishop of Down, he proceeded to London, where he obtained an order for redress 1) See Certain Discourses hy the 2) Life of, Edinb. 1754, p. 64. late Axclibishop of Armagh, Lund. 1657, pp: 121, 162, 184. LECT. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF USHER, AND BISHOP WHITE. 403 from ihe king, addressed to Strafford, who was for some time absent. " At last," says Mr Blair,i " that magnificent lord hav- ing come over to the lieutenancy of Ireland, 1 went to Dublin, and presented his majesty's letter to him. adding, that I hoped for a ready compliance with it. But the haughty man did alto- gether slight that order, telling me, that he had his majesty's mind in his own breast. He reviled the church of Scotland, and upbraided me, bidding me come to my right wits, and then I should be regarded. Which was all the answer 1 could get from him. Witii this intelligence I went to Archbishop Usher, which was so disagreeable to him, that it drew tears from his eyes; but he could not help us." Baxter, in his Five Disputations on Church Governnjent,^ in illustration of his argument that moderate episcopalians, such as Bishop Hall and Archbishop Usher, would agree to his plan of government, alludes to the scheme of Usher. He says he read it in manuscript, and offered even to go further than he had, for the sake of accommodation. After stating to the bishop his terms, he asked him if they would be acceptable. "They are sufficient," said he, " and moderate men would accept them, but others will not, as I have tried, for many of them are offended with me for propounding such terms." " And thus," adds Baxter, " this reverend bishop and I were agreed in a quarter of an hour, the truth of which I solemnly profess, and I leave this on record to posterity, as a testimony against the dividers and contenders of this age, that it was not long of men of the temper and princi- ples of this reverend archbishop and myself, that the episcopal party and their dissenting brethren in England were not speedily and heartily agreed, for we actually did it Let this testimony live, that posterity may know whom to blame for our calamities; they all extol peace when they reject and destroy it."3 To these testimonies may be added that of Bishop White. It is well known that in the year 1782, when it was doubtful whether an American episcopate could be either procured or introduced. Bishop White published a considerable treatise, in which he insisted, that for the time being, and until an episco- pate could be conveniently obtained, the churches in this coun- try should organize themselves into one body. Tiiat the laity as well as the clergy should have a share in the government, and 1) Life, p. 80 thousand ejected ministers desired 2; Lond. 1659, p. 345, in Library confirmation of their ordination by the of the Rev. Shepard K. Kollock. synods fr«m such bishops as owned 3) Baxter, in his True and Only it, — from Bishop Usher at least,— Way of Concord, Lond. Ifi80, pt. iii. of others 1 am uncertain." p. 8d, also suya, that some of the two 404 TESTIMONY OF BISHOP WHITE. [lECT. XVI. form distinct associations ; that the clergy and laity together should elect a permanent president over each convention, whose duties ouglit not materially to interfere with their employments as parochial clergymen ; and that their superintendence should therefore be confined to small districts. This superintendent, with other clergymen appointed by the body, was to exercise spiritual powers, as those of ordination and discipline over the clergy. In short, this proposed organization of Bishop White was in all essential features, presbyterian ; embracing even a recom- mendation of its superior representative judicatories to be com- posed of lay and clerical delegates, chosen by the inferior bodies, and vesting in these lay and clerical representatives, the power not only of electing, but also of depriving, " the superior order of clergy." And in the contemplation of a continued impracticability in obtaining the episcopate, Bishop White suggested that when " afterwards obtained, any supposed imperfections (and therefore no actual invalidity or nonentity, as he believed) of the intermediate opcDinations might, if it were judged proper, (Bishop White evidently not regarding such a procedure as at all necessary, although such ordinations were certainly nothing more than presbyterian,) be supplied WITHOUT acknowledg- ing THEIR NULLITY by a Conditional ordination, resembling that of conditional baptism in the liturgy." This organization of the American episcopal churches, and these principles upon which it was based. Bishop White proved at large, to be consistent with the principles, opinions, and reason- ings, of the constitution, and of standard and eminent divines of the Church of England. And the perfect consistency of these principles and viev^'s with scripture and the doctrine of the Church of England, Bishop White continued to maintain until the very close of his life, although they were much opposed by many of his brethren. In his episcopal charges of 1807 and 1834, he intro- duced similar doctrines, as also in a letter to Bishop Hobart under date December 1830. In this letter he puts to shame the illiberal and sectarian views of that prelate' by the following magnanimous declaration : " In agreement with the sentiments expressed in that pamphlet, I am still of opinion that, in an exigency in which a duly authorized ministry cannot be obtained, the paramount duty of preaching the gospel and of worshipping God on the TERMS of the CHRISTIAN COVENANT," (so that there may be 1) Bishop Hobart "had early church of his native land. He advo- imbibed the Laudean doctrines; and cated, with great zeal and ability, the spent his life in attempting to spread system set forth in the Oxf. Tracts." them throughout the infant episcopal Lend. Christ. Obs. Oct. 1840, p. 589. LETC. XVI.] TESTIMONY OF BISHOP WHITE. 405 covenanted mercy even where there are no prelates,) " should go on in the best manner which circumstances permit. In re- gard to the episcopacy,! think that it should be sustained as the government of the church from the time of the apostles, but WITHOUT CRIMINATING the MINISTRY of OTHER CHURCHES, (!!!) as is the case with the Church of England." Thus does this father of the episcopal church in America renounce for him- self, for his church, and for the Church of England, the illib- eral, unchristian, untenable, and suicidal claims, which are set forth in the prelatic doctrine of apostolical succession. By ac- knowledging us as churches, recognizing our ministry, extending to us God's covenanted gifts, and persisting nobly against the growing pride of hierarchical assumption, he thus gives to the clergy of that church an example, by following which, they may maintain the unity of the spirit in the bonds of peace, with all their christian brethren. Let his venerable name enshrine his spirit, and these his sentiments, in the heart of that denomi- nation, of which he was a foundation-stone. > Time was, when, to use the language of Bishop White's biog- rapher " very lax (that is, very liberal) notions on the subject of episcopacy were adopted" in the southern states, and particularly in South Carolina,^ inasmuch that it was thought there was no necessity to resort to foreign bishops to obtain the succession, BUT WE MIGHT APPOINT AND ORDAIN THEM FOR OURSELVES. "^ May these sentiments, which would naturally lead to brotherly communion among different denominations, never give place to that system of high-church, and exclusive pretensions, which is now re-enkindling the slumbering ashes of long-buried feuds and jealousies among us ! 1) See, for authorities, Dr. Wil- permission to the member of another son's Mem. of Bishop White, pp. denomination to officiate at the fune- 80-87. ral of one of his flock in the church- 2) Pp. 93, 94. yard of an episcopal church. See his 3) Dr Wilson's Mem. of Bishop letter, in Dr. Wilson's Life, p. 398. White, p. 94. "It is most strange, See, also. Note B., where Bishop that this same bishop adopted as a White's views are further illustrated, principle of conduct, never to give ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE SIXTEENTH. NOTE A. ADniTIONAL TESTIMONIES. Some, or many of these testimonies, may be given by tiie R.ev. Dr. Miller in his Worii on the Ministry. Jf so, as I iiave not for some lime consulted that work, which is not at present at hand, the testimony will be stronger, as having presented itself equally to both inquirers. Tlie sentiments of the eminent 13ishop Davknant^wIH be found fully given in two treatises of his — first," De Pace inter Evangelicos I'rocuranda Johanni Duraeo banc suam commentationem." — Second, his " Adhortatio ad frater- nain comniunionem inter Evancjelicas ecclesias restauraadurn. in eo funda- ta. quod non dissenliant in ujlo fundamentali calholicae fidei arliculo." (Can- tabrigisB, 1640 ; in the Old South Church Lib.) On page 17, he says, " Controversi;is quce reformatorum ecclesias jamdiu exercuerunt et defatigarunl, non esse ejusmodi, ut sive quis ad horuin sive illo- rum sententiam accedat, a Christo et fundamentali fide discedere el in hanre- sin fundamento contrariam incidere judicetur, triAM MANicnTrBus hisce, non tarn ecclesiarum quam scholarum dissidiis, commnnionem fraternain inter protestantium ecclesias universas iniri et custodiri posse fateamur." " Jam singulorum tandem ilia charitas sit qum permittit Christianas erdesias nulla jnsta causa prohibita, fraternitati.s dextras mutuo abnegare, et ab ineun- da unione perpetuo abhorrere." (p. 22.) " PorrO; nullus dubito qujn Ecelesiae Saxonicae HelveticfE aliajque quae .«ive hisce sive illis adslipulanlur, agnoscant se ex fraternam communionem cum hac nostra Anglicana, Scotica, Hibernica, aliis que apud esteros relbrmatis ecclesiis habere ac retinere velle. Cekte ad nos quod attinet, quamvis non illis sufFragemur in omnibus controversae theologia; apicibus, fuatres TAMEN IN CHRISTO AGNOSCIAIUS, AC FRATERNAM ET SAC ROSANCTUM NOS habere CUM ILLlS COMMUNIONEM PROTESTAM UR." (Do. p. 2-1.) Cliapter iii. of his Adhortatio is " de UNico person ali fundamento iccleslae Medialore Dei et hoininnm Christo Jesu," &c. " Hinc appareat, ecclesiis particularibus quae retinent cum lioc fundamento saluliftram conjunctionein alias ecclesias nee posie nee debere renunciare fraternam communionem." " Vcrum enimvero siquia ecclesia, alteram quam Christo inajdificatam non audet negare, audet tamen tanquam membruin pntridiun abscindtre, et a fra- terna sua communione abjicere, est hoc in upsum Christum contumeliosum, et in fratres non modo nostros sed Christi injuriosum," p. 58. (See also passim ) Bishop Meade, (of Virjrinia,) in his Sermon at the Consecration of Bishop Elliott, (Washington, 1841, appendix, ch. ix. p. 93.) says : " Let me now show in some particular instances how by tradition they wish to support some high views, not to be found in the scriptures or book of coni- mnn prayer. We have seen how the church expresses her decided convic- tion that the episcopal form of government is scripuual and apostolic, of course worthy of all to be received, and yet not undertaking to exclude from the covenant those who have not that torm. The Oxford writers in like manner make occasional concessions and exceptions, wliich seem to accord NOTES TO LECTURE SIXTEENTH. 407 with Ihis moderstion of the church ; but for the most part, in a manner which tlieir readers cannot reconcile, hold a very different language. " They magnify the sacerdotal office beyond all bounds. We quote from the Essays on the Church, 7th edition, 408lh page, the following : ' But as a re- cent and well-rounded specimen of these avowedly high-church doctrines, it may be as well to give the following passage from the last publication of thij school, the new volumes of Mr. Froude's Remains, recently given to the world under the deliberate sanction of Messrs. Newman and Keble. " The reformed Church of England has given birlh to two martyrs, an archbishop and akintr, (Arclibishop Laud and Charles I.) and both these bles- sed saints died for episcopacy. But was it for a form, or a point of discipline, that they resisted thus unto death .' Surely not. When they contended for episco|)acy as one of the essentials of religion ; they no more regarded it as an external and a form, than they regarded Christ's death upon tlie cross as an external and a form. Their belief on this subject seems to be contained in the following prop- ositions : '• 1st. That before Jesus Christ left the world he breathed the Holy Spirit into the apostles, jjiving them the power of transmitting this precious gill to others by prayer and the imposition of hands ; that the apostles did so trans- mit it to others ; and lliey again to others; and that in this way it has been preserved in the world to the present day. '• I2d. Th:it liie gift thus transmitted empowers its possessors, 1st, to admit into, and exclude from, the myst(>rious communion called in scripture the kingdom of heaven, any one whom they judge deserving of it; and this, with the assurance that all whom they admit or exclude on earth and exter- nally, are admitted or excluded in heaven and spiritually, in the sight of God and holv angels; tiiat it empowers them to bless and intercede for, those who are within his kingdom, in a sense in which no other man can bless or inter- cede. 2d. To make the eucharistic bread and wine the body and t)lood of Christ in the sense in wiiicli our Lord made them so. 3d. To enable dele- gates to periorm this great miracle by ordaining them with imposition of hands. '• According to this view of the subject, to di.spense with episcopal ordina- tion is to be regarded not as a breach of order merely, or a deviation from apostolical precedent, hut as a surrender of the christian priesthood, a rejec- tion of all the powers which Christ instituted episcopacv to perpetuate ; and the attempt to institute any other form of ordination for it, or to seek com- munion with Clirist, through any non-episcopal association, is to be re- garded not as schism merely, but as an iiii/iossiiiilit!/." '• In iNos. 51 and 52 of the Tracts we have these strong expressions : " Christ never appointed two ways to heaven ; nor did he build a church to save some, and make another institution to save other men. There is no other name given under heaven among men whereby we can be saved, but the name of Jesns, and that is no otherwise given under heaven than in the church." '• 1 repeat it, the eucharist administered without apostolical eommission, may to |)inu3 minds he a very edifying ceremony, but it is not th;it l)lessed thing which our Saviour graeiously meant it to be: it is not verily and in- deed, taking and receiving the bodv and blood of him our incarnate Lord." — Tract 52. " In Tract No. 24, 8tli page : " Whatever be our private differences with the Roman catholics, we may join witli them in condemning socinians, baptists, independents, quakers, and the like. But G<>d forbid tiiat we should ally ourselves with tlie offspring of heresy and schism, in our contest with any branches of the holy church, which maintain the foundation, whatever may be their incidental corruptions." The ever-memorable Hales, of Eaton, in his tract of Schism, holds this lan- guage : " And besides all this n)ischief, (of episcopal ambition,) it is founded in a vice contrary to all christian humility, without which no man shall see his S.iviour : lor tliey do hut abuse themselves and otiiers. that would per- suade >is taat bishops, by Christ's institution, have any superi rity ovfi other men further than of rcverciice ; or that any bishop is suixirior to another, fui» 408 NOTES TO LECTURE SIXTEENTH. ther than positive order agreed upon amongst christians hath prescribed. For we have believed him who hath told us, " That in Jesus Christ there is neither high nor low ; and that in giving honor, every man should be ready to prefer another befoie himself;" (Rom. xii. 10;) which saying cut off all claim most certainly to superiority by title of Christianity, except men can think that these things were spoken only to poor and private men. Nature and re- ligion agree in this, that neither of them hath a hand in this heraldry of secun- dc7n, S7/b et supra : all this comes from composition, and agreement of men among themselves. Wherefore this abuse of Christianity to make it lacquey to ambition, is a vice for which I have no extraordinary name of ignominy, and an ordinary I will not give it, lest you should take so transcendent a vice to be but trivial." Dr. Samuel Halifax, (the same we believe who is so well known as the bish- op of Winchester,) in his " Three Sermons, occasioned by an attempt to Abol- ish Subscription to the XXXIX Articles," and preached before the university of Cambridge, (Cambridge, 1772, third ed. p. 5, 6,) speaking of those who dissent from motives of conscience from the established worship, he character- izes them as " differing from us in points of discipline rather than of doctrine." He adds, " If for reasons of prudenck and to secure the existence of the national church, we think ourselves justified from the clearest principles of the LAW of NATIONS, in cxcludiog them," «fec. Dr. Clagetl, also an eminent episcopalian, thus speaks : (Notes of the Ch. pp. 184 and 193:) " But then we expect that the Church of England, the Luther- ans, and the Calviiiists, should be heard too, when to the papists charging them with soine differences, they make the same answer, that they have all the same faith, especially since, when they come to prove the truth of what they say, they will show that the matters wherein thev differ do not break the unitv of the catholic faith." See also Paley's Sermon on a Distinction of Orders in the Church, in Wks. vol. vi. p. 91, &c. and p. 93. "If we concede to other churches the christian legality of their constitution, so long as christian worship and instruction are competently provided for, we may be allowed to maintain the advantage of our own, upon principles which all parties acknowledge — considerations of public utility." In his Discourse on " The Conformity of the Church of England to Apos- tolic Precept and Pattern" (London, 1834, page 22,) the Rev. flartwell Home thus speaks: " Once more, while you are devoutly grateful, that you are members of a church whose moderation and liberality toward christians of other communions are commended by all, except the enemies of all religion : endeavor to imbibe the social, generous, fervent, sympathizing spirit, which breathes in every page of her liturgy ; and while, in the exercise of your inalienable right of j)iivate judgment, you deliberately prefer her communion, show to all wlio profess conscientiously to differ from you, the more excellent way of active christian charity, by imputing to them no sinister motives for their dissent; by uniting with them in every act of holy and christi;in benevo- lence, in which you can cordially cooperate ; and by praying for their spirit- ual welfare, that they all ' may hold the faith in unity of spirit, in the bond of peace and righteousness of life.' " Bishop Heber says, (Serm. in Engl. p. 24G,) " 1 am no ways concerned to deny that, as in cases of extreme public danger, every citizen is a soldier ; so situations may be conceived, (thouirh I am not aware that any such have oc- curred since the first preaching of tiie gosiiel,) in which any christian may be autiiorized and called upon to act as a minister of religion. Far less would I refuse to acknowledge that many of these self-constituted ministers, whose number I deplore, have shown a zeal in the service of our Lord and theirs, which may well call forth our admiration, and our godly jealousy." Mr Tnplady, in his Church cif England Vindicated, says, " Nor does it fol- low that the Church of England, in believing for herself the necessity of episcopal ordination, does thereby unchurch those of the reformed churches abroad, which have no bishops, any more than that those churches unchurch us for retaining our excellent and primitive mode of ecclesiastical govern- ment." NOTES TO LECTURE XVI. 409 So also Mr. Gisborne in his Duties of Men says, " it is now admitted by the generality of protcstants, that no command was delivered, either by Christ, or by his apostles, assigning to the christian church any specific, un- alterable form of government ; but, that while various offices, suited to the situation and exigencies of the new converts, were instituted at the begin- ning, some of which, as that of deaconesses, have long fallen into disuse, christians were left at liberty to adopt in future times such modes of eccle- siastical administration and discipline, as they should deem most eligible, in the circumstances under which they should find themselves placed." Similar is the judgment of Milner, in his Church History, (chap, i, art. 11, vol. i, p. 141, Eng. ed. see also p. 445.) " In vain, I think, will almost any modern church whatever set up a claim to exact resemblance. Usher's model of reduced episcopacy seems to come the nearest to the plan of the primi- tive churches. It has been an error common to all parties, to treat these lesser matters, as if they were jure divino, or like the laws of the Medes and Persians, unalterable. Could it, however, conveniently be done, it may perhaps be true that a reduced episcopacy, in which the dioceses are of small extent, as those in the primitive church undoubtedly were, and in which the president, residing in the metropolis, exercises a superintendency over ten or twelve presbyters of the same city and neighborhood, would bid the fairest to promote order, peace, and harmony." Sir Matthew Hale, in his " Judgment of the Nature of True Religion, and the Causes of its Corruption " in enumerating the mischiefs resulting from scholastics, says, " But if we observe many persons in the world, we shall find some so highly devoted to this or that particular form of government, as if all the weight of the christian religion lay in it : though the wise and sober sort of conformists know and profess this, yet there be some rash people that will presently unchurch all the reformed churches beyond the seas which are not under episcopal government: that if they see a man, otherwise of orthodox principles, of a pious and religious life, yet if scrupling some points of ecclesi- astical government, though peaceable, they will esteem him little better than a heathen or publican, a schismatic, heretic, and what not : on the other side, if they see a man of great fervor in asserting the ecclesiastical government, observant of external ceremonies, though otherwise of a loose and dissolute life, yet they will be ready to applaud him with the style of a son of the church, and upon that account overlook the miscarriages of his life, as if the essence and life of christian religion lay in the baro asserting of the best form of eccle- siastical government." " Come to the reformed episcopal clergy : as to the pope's supremacy they disclaim it ; but if you acknowledge not episcopal government, if you swear not canonical obedience to your ordinary, if you submit not to the liturgy, and ceremonies, and vestments, and music, used in the church, you are at best a schismatic." To these testimonies, it may be interesting to add that of Lord Bacon, (in Price's Hist, of Prot. Nonconf. vol. i. p. 443, in Wks. vol. vii. p. 48;) " Then," says he, that is, in the early part of Elizabeth's reign, " were they content mildly to acknowledge many imperfections in the church ; as tares come up amongst the corn, which yet, accordino to the wisdom taught by the Saviour, were not with strife to be pulled up, lest it might spoil and supplant the good corn, but to grow on together till the harvest. After, they grew to a more absolute defence and maintenance of all the orders of the church, and stifily to hold that nothing was to be innovated ; partly because it needed not, partly because it would make a breach upon the rest. Hence, exasperated through contentions, they are fallen to a direct condemnation of the contrary part, as of a sect Yea, and some indiscreet persons have been bold in open preaching to use dishonorable and derogatory speech and censure of the churches abroad ; and that so far. as some of our men, as I have heard, ordain- ed in foreign parts, have been pronounced to be no lawful ministers." See this also fully shown by the author of " The Rights of the Christian Church," himself a member of it, and when defending it against the non-jurors. (Lond. 1707, ed. third, pp. 337 — 343.) Our position is reluctantly but fully admitted by Dr. How, in his Vindica- 52 410 NOTES TO LECTURE XVI. tion. (p. 48G.) '• The episcopal church, it is true, no where sajs, in so many words, that episcopal imposition of hands is necessary to outward ordination ; or, which is the same thing, that the visible church cannot exist without epis- copacy. She has not thought it necessary or proper formally to make such a declaration ; but that this is the fair and inevitable conclusion from her stan- dards, would seem scarcely to admit of a reasonable doubt." That such a conclusion is not either inevitable or fair, we shall find to be the opinion of perhaps as capable commentators upon the standards of the Angli- can church as Dr. How himself See Mason's Vindication of the Ordination of the Reformed Churches. See also Dr. Scott on Notes of the Church, pp. 199, 201. NOTE B. THE SENTIMENTS OF THE LATE BISHOP WHITE, CONTINUED. Hating, after great research, succeeded in procuring a copy of " The Case of the Episcopal Churches in the United States considered," published by Bishop White, in Philadelphia, in the year 1762, (printed by David C. Clay- pole,) I will annex some little account of it, so far as it bears upon the ob- jects in hand. The motto on the title-page is itself significant of the spirit of the whole pamphlet. It is as follows : " To make new articles of faith and doctrine, no man thinketh it lawful; new laws of government, what commonwealth or church is there which maketh not at one time or other." — Hooker. Not less plain is the announcement made in the Preface. " Nothing is fur- ther li-om his wishes than the reviving of such controversies as have been found destructive of good neighborhood and the christian temper He has, for this reason, avoided the discussion of subjects on which episcopalians differ from their fellow-christians." In the first chapter, the relation in which the episcopal churches in this country stood to the English church, as constituting a part of the diocese of London, is shown. It is then remarked: " All former jurisdiction over the churches being thus withdrawn, and the chain which held them together broken, it would seem that their future continuance can be provided for only by VOLUNTARY associations for union and good government." (p. 18.) In chapter ii. he illustrates the rights of the laity. " The power of electing a superior order of ministers, ought to be in the clergy and laity together." (p. 10.) '' Deprivation of the superior order of clergy, should also be in the church at large." (p. 10.) In consequence of the difficulty of providing for the support of the superior order of cler.cry, " of consequence the duty assigned to that order ought not materially to inTerfere with their employments in the station of parochial clergy ; the superintendent of each will, therefore, be con- fined to a small district, a favorite idea with all moderate episcopalians." (p. 11.) The author then proceeds to offer a sketch of a frame of government. In refuting the objection to the anti-republican character of episcopacy, he remarks that "in the early ages of the church, it was customary to debate and determine in a general concourse of all christians in the same city ; among WHOM the bishop WAS NO MORE THAN PRESIDENT." (p. 18 ) In reference to carrying the plan into immediate execution, he says: " This is founded on the presumption that the worship of God and the refor- mation of I he people, are the principal objects of ecclesiastical discipline ; if so, to relinquish them from a scrupulous adherence to episcopacy, is sacri- ficing THE substance TO THE CEREMONY." (p. 19.) "Are the acknowledged ordinances of Christ's holy religion to be suspended for years . . . out of delicacy to a disputed point, and that relating only to EXTER- NALS .'" " If the episcopal succession should be afterwards obtained, any supposed imperfections of the intermediate ordinations might, if it were judged proper, be supplied, without acknowledging their nullity, by a conditional ordination, resembling that of conditional baptism in the liturgy. NOTES TO LECTURE XVI. 411 The above was an expedient proposed by Archbishop Tillotson, Bishops Pa- trick, StiUingfleet and others, at the revolution, and had been actually practised in Ireland, by Archbishop Bramhall." (pp. 1!), 20.) In proceeding to chapter v. he again speaks of the episcopal succession, as " a point of external order," (p. 20.) and goes on fully to substantiate the posi- tion that his proposed " departure from episcopacy in the present instance, would be warranted by her doctrines, by her practice, and by the principles on which episcopal government is asserted." (p. 20.) He shows from the language of the articles and canons, that the Church of England does not consider the episco|)al succession as much binding as bap- tism and the Lord's supper, (p. 21.) He shows that, in the practice of the Church of England, foreign divines, presbyterially ordained, were not subject to re-ordination, and quotes Burnet, who, in his History of His Own Times, anno 1061, says, that this was the case until the act of uniformity passed soon after the restoration." After laying down, as he says, " concisely, but as is believed impartially," the doctrine of apostolical succession, he asks, (p. 24,) " Can anv reasonable RULE of construction MAKE THIS AMOUNT TO MORE THAN ANCIENT AND APOS- TOLIC PRACTICE .'' That the apostles emploj'ed any particular form, affords a presumption of its being the best, all circumstances at that time considered ; but to make it unalterably binding, it must be shown enjoined in positive pre- cept." He then quotes, with approbation. Bishop Hoadly, who denies " the divine appointment of the three orders." (p. 24.) Again he says, (p. 26 :) " It cannot be denied that some writers of the Church of England, apply very strong expressions to episcopacy, calling it a divine appointment, the ordinance of Christ, and the law of God, and pro- nounce it to be of divine right. Yet in reason, they ought to be understood only as asserting it to be binding wherever it can be conveniently had." " Much more must they think so, who venerate and prefer that form as the most ancient and eligible, but without any idea of divine right in the case. THIS THE AUTHOR BELIEVES TO BE THE SEiNTlMENT OF THE GREAT BODY OF EPISCOPALIANS IN AMERICA ; in which respect, they have in their favor unquestionably the sense of the Church of England, and, as he believes, the opinions of her most distinguished prelates for piety, virtue and abilities." (p. 28.) " The churches in each small district should associate together. In every such district there should be elected a general convention, consisting of a con- venient number (the minister to be one) from the vestry or congregation of each church." " They should select a clergyman their permanent president; who, in conjunction with other clergymen, to be also appointed by the body, may exercise such powers as are purely spiritual, particularly that of ad- mitting to the ministry,' &c. (p. 12.) "The assemblies in the three lar- ger districts may consist of a convenient number of members, sent from each of the smaller districts severally, within their bounds, equally composed of clergy and laity, and voted for by those orders promiscuously, the presiding clergyman to be always one ; and these bodies to meet once in every year." (Ibid.) "The continental representative body may consist of a convenient number from each of the larger districts, formed equally of clergy and laity, and among the clergy, formed equally of presiding ministers and others; to meet statedly, once in three years." " The use of this and the preceding rep- resentative bodies, is to make such regulations and receive appeals in such matters only as shall be judged necessary for their continuing one religious communion." (p. 13.) " It is presumed," he remarks on p. 14, " the episcopalians generally are attached to that characteristic of their communion which prescribes a settled form of prayer." (p. 14.) In chapter iv. he comes to speak of the episcopal succession, and after showing that this could not then be obtained from England, he remarks, " Now, on the one hand to depart from espiscopacy. would be giving up a leading characteristic of the communion, which, however indifferently consid- ered, as to divine appointment, might be productive of all the evils gener- ally attending evils of this sort." He therefore proposes " to include in the 412 NOTES TO LECTURE XVI. proposed frame of government, a general approbation of episcopacy, and a declaration of an intention to procure the succession as soon as convenient- ly may be ; but in the mean time to carry the plan into effect, without wait- ING FOR THE SUCCESSION." (p. 17.) Once more, in his episcopal charge delivered in the year 1834, (The Past and the Future, IS34, p. 14, 15,) he declares that, while bound to sustain the integ- rity of their system, " there is not perceived the necessity of carrying it to the extreme of denouncing all conununions destitute of the episcopacy, as depart- ing from the essentials of the christian faith, and as aliens from the covenants of promise." This medium, he asserts to be the positicm advocated by the articles and ordinal of the Church of England, and then adds, " if there should be any among us who make larger conclusions from the same premises, it is matter of private opinion, and not to be obtroded as the determination of the CHURCH. ' The Rev. Benjamin Allen of St. Paul's, Philadelphia, in his Letter to Bishop Ilobart, (Philadelphia, 1827, p. 7,) asks, " Are not your sentiments concerning otiier denominations — giving them over to the uncovenanted mercies of God — altogether contrary to those of Bishop White .'' declared by him to be coun- ter to the formularies of the Church of England, and contrary to those of the reformers. Were they not condemned by the house of bishops in the reign of Queen Anne, as strange conceits ? Are they not precisely those, as to matters of church, held by the Jacobites or friends of the Pretender, and again by the tories .' (See Burnet, Warner's Eccl. Hist., &c.) Are they not sentiments directly opposed to the whole of the policy of the whole of the life of the pre- siding bishop.'" " You" (Bishop Hobart) " are opposed (in your doctrines and views of polity) to the views of the Church of England, of the protestant episcopal church in America, of the senior bishop of that church, of the reformers, of the noble army of martyrs, of the primitive church, of the glorious company of tiie apos- tles, of the word of the Most High God ; and this I mean to prove by fair ref- erence to your writings and doings during the whole of your ecclesiastical ca- reer." (P. 29.) " Where is the concord in sentiment between these gentlemen," (Bishop White and Dr. Onderdonk,) asks the episcopal author of" Review of the An- swer to the Remonstrance sent to the Bishops of the Protestant Episcopal Church." (Philadelphia, 1827. in the Loganian Library, No. 2235.) "The former, during a life which has been fruitful in incident ; which has witnessed every form of popular prejudice ; which has passed through scenes of civil revolution ; has not during the whole lapse of his fourscore years, outraged the feelings of other denominations to so great an extent, as the latter has done by a solitary act — an act, the index of his career. Let any one read the ex- pression of sentiments by Bishop White, whether in the pamphlets of '83, or the chronicle of the episcopal church, published in 1820, and compare these with the ultra opinions of the Doctor. Behold the former surrounded in his study by the representatives of every christian communion, guiding the sacra- mental host to the godlike work of dispensing the Bible to each cottage in the land ; then read what the latter says about such a union. Is the former to descend from this moral elevation .' Are these bonds to be riven by views not recognized by the Church of England, the pretestant episcopal church of Amer- ica, or the inspired volume .' Is the bishop to say to those with whom he walked in brotherly agreement fourscore years ; over whose general institu- tions he has presided in harmony, &c., ' I have learned that you have no part in the gospel covenant.'" While just on the verge of the Jordan of death, is he to shake bands and part with those with whom he has reached that verge in concord .' Is he to tell them, 'You are no portion of the flock of the Lord .' You will find mercy, doubtless ; but there is no covenanted mercy for you ? ' Will Bishop White do this.? never." (the author's capitals, p. 11 and 12.) See, also, Bishop White's Lectures on the Catechism, Philadelphia, 1813, Dissert, x. p. 425, 426. LECTURE XVII. THE PRELATICAL DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION SCHISMATICAL IN ITS TENDENCIES AND RESULTS. The only passage in the Bible in which the term schism is employed in an abstract sense, is 1 Cor. xi. 14-27. It evi- dently imports here such a derangement of the harmony and brotherhood of a church, as would be found in the human body, were the different members selfishly to confine their functions to their own exclusive benefit. Schism, therefore, exists when the members of an)"- particular church, or when any particular churches, are found alienated from other members or churches, and not co-operating with them in the harmonious advancement of the common interests and welfare of the whole body. The term has come to signify an actual separation or division in a church or denomination of christians ; and is currently ap- plied by prelatists, who assume that they exclusively constitute this church, to all other denominations of christians not in sub- jection to their ecclesiastical dominion.' 1) The Rev. Thomas H. Vail, palians ; who, until of recent years, in his recently published volume, were in fact, and in the literal and "The Comprehensive Church, "(Hart- correct sense of the term, dissenters; ford, 1841, p. 54,) in introducing the who assumed the attitude of promul- term dissenter as descriptive of other gators of a denominational system, denominations, takes occasion to ad- hardly as yet known ; and who were vise us that this is " a title of familiar uniformly regarded and spoken of as and appropriate use, and which we wish dissenters. Of this, we shall have occa- to be understood we employ most respect- sion to produce evidence. Meantime fully." Now, truly a man cannot be we remark, that all those ecclesiastical respectful in affirming that to be ap- establishments being overthrown, the propriate, which is so only to the lips prelacy, in attempting to perpetuate O- high-church or Romish bigotry; such terms, brands itself as " the sec- and who uses words in a sense in tarian," and not " the comprehensive which they have 710 7fteaHino-, or if any, church," uuless this term indeed is ft wrong one; since, in New England, to be understood in a prelatic sense, where the author lives, the term dis- as including all who can embrace senter was long " familiar and ap- prelacy ! ! PROPRIATE," as applicable to episco- 414 SCHISM AS DESCRIBED BY THE FATHEKS. [lECT. XVII. It is wonderful with what fearfulness and terror this term has become associated ; so that the very mention of it calls up the images of death and perdition, excommunication and anathema. It has been observed by that very learned and judicious divine, as Stillingfleet calls him, the Rev. Mr. Hales of Eaton,' that " her- esy and schism, as they are commonly used, are two theological scarecrows, with which they who use to uphold a party in relig- ion, use to fright away such as are making inquiry into it, are ready to relinquish and oppose it, if it appear either erroneous or suspicious. For as Plutarch reports of a painter, who having unskilfully painted a cock, chased away all other cocks, that so the imperfection of his art might not appear by comparison with nature. So men, willing for ends to admit of no fancy but their own, endeavor to hinder an inquiry into it, by way of compar- ison of somewhat with it, peradventure truer, that so the defor- mity of their own miglit not appear."* "The schismatic," says Cyprian,^ "can have no longer God for his father, who has not the church for his mother, but is out of the number of the faithful ; and though he should die for the faith, yet should he never be saved." So, also, Irenaeus'' teaches that schism " is such a rending and dividing of the great and glorious body of Christ as equals the guilt of schismatics to that of apostates from the faith, who crucify to themselves afresh the Lord of glory, and put him to an open shame."* Nor have modern prelatists been behindhand in holding forth, to the terror of all uninformed consciences, the most frightful representations upon this subject. Schism is thus defined, by Dodwell:^ " It will follow, that disunion from the bishop was a disunion from Christ and the 1) Tract of Schism, 1642, in hen. been sometimes himself abused by this p. lOS. This rare tract has recently fallacy, and known many other poor been republished among the " Tracts souls seduced by it, not only from for the People." their own church and religion, but to 2) The flippancy with which this popery by it." term has been bandied about by arro- 3) De Unit, in Slater's Original gant ecclesiastics, in all ages, is illus- Draught, &c. p. 355, Lond. 1717, 2d trated by the fact that Firmilian, ed., and in Schism, p. 241, &c. bishop of Cappadocia, (A. D. 255,) 4) Ibid, Iren. 1. iv. cap. 53 and speaks of Stephen of Rome as a 62, in ibid. See also Adv. Haer. iii. schismatic, and as having withdrawn 24, p. 223. See also Augustine in from the unity of the church, because Palmer on the Ch. vol. i. p. 54. he allowed llie validity of heretical 5) See, on these views of the baptism; while Stephen, in returning Fathers, Owen's Works, vol. xix. p. the compliment, branded his oppo- 111, &c. nents as perverters of the truth and 6) See in Oxford Tracts, vol. iii. traitors to ecclesiastical unity. Chil- p. 159. lingworth acknowledges that " he had LECT. XVII.] SCHISM AS DESCRIBED BY PRELATISTS. 415 Father, and from all the invisible, heavenly priesthood, and sac- rifice and intercession. It will follow, that disunion from any- one ordinary, must consequently be a disunion from the whole catholic church ; seeing it is impossible for any to continue a member of Christ's mystical body, who is disunited from the mystical head of it. It will follow, that visible disunion from the external sacraments of the bishop, is in the consequence a disunion from the bishop, and from the whole catholic church in communion with him, who ought to ratify each other's cen- sures under pain of schism if they do not." Bishop Beveridge thus speaks:^ "As for schism, they cer- tainly hazard their salvation at a strange rate, who separate themselves from such a church as ours is, wherein the apostol- ical succession, the root of all christian communion, hath been so entirely preserved, and the word and sacraments are so eflec- tually administered ; and all to go into such assemblies and meetings, as can have no pretence to the great promise in my text." " It is but a small part," says Dr. Hammond, " of the char- acter of schism, that it is contrary to faith, contrary to charity, and to all the advantages which belong to a member of the church — the benefits of prayer and sacraments; that it is as bad as heresy, and that there never was any heresy in the church which was not founded in it ; and that it is constantly forced, in its own defence, to conclude in some heresy or other: each of these particulars, and all of them taken together, are but a small part of the character which the ancient fathers of the church give us of the sin of schism. "2 The reader may see similar exhibitions of the character of schism, by Archbishop Sharp and several others, as given in Daubeny's Guide to the Church. ^ So also the famous Mr. Scott, in his Christian Life -.^ " Yet it is a plain case, that if it rejects episcopacy and separates from the communion of it, it thereby wholly divides itself from the catholic church." " If all this," says Mr. Leslie, in concluding his arguments for episcopacy ,4 " if all this make but a doubt (it is strange that it should, at least that it should not) in the mind of any consid- ering persons ; then can they not with security communicate with any of our dissenters, because, if he that eateth and doubt- eth is damned, (Rom. xiv, 13,) much more he that shall do so 1) Oxf. Tr. vol. iii. p. 151. 4) Letter on, in Scholar Armed, 2) Vol. i. p. 60, 62. vol. i. p. 86. 3) Pt. ii. ch. vii. p. 153. 416 SCHISM AS DESCRIBED BY PRELA.TISTS. [lECT. XVII. in religious matters, wherein chiefly this rule must stand, that ' whatsoever is not of faith is sin.' " " We hold you to be schismatics, utterly denying that you have either ministry or ordinances.'" " The ordinances of the gospel administered by unauthorized men, are in themselves void, and no divine promise is annexed to their reception.'"^ " We not only consider them," (i. e. the methodists,) says Dr. Bowden, " as non-episcopal, but also as the most wan- ton schismatics that have ever disgraced the christian church."^ " To separate one's self," says the Rev. Mr. Pratt,'' " from that society which is the body of Christ, and which continues steadfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, betrays a spirit which the faithful christian shudders to contemplate ; and on which, even they who have yielded obedience to it, will scarcely dare to look. It is the spirit of pride, and discord, and rebellion: even the self-same spirit that appeared in the arch- apostate, and gave origin to dissension and division in the king- dom of God : the self-same spirit of emulation and strife and division which the apostle declares to be the mark of the carnal mind : the self-same spirit which gave rise to heresies and kin- dled the fires of persecution in former ages; and which still so wofully distracts the kingdom of peace here upon earth." Bishop Skinner,^ in his Vindication, says : " The dangerous and deadly thing called schism is a cutting off, or separating, from that ecclesiastical body, of which Christ is the head, and therefore incurs a deprivation of that nourishment and strength, which he affords to all his faithful members." According to Saravia, they " are not true and lawful minis- ters," who "are not made ministers of the church by their bishop, nor by his dimissories, nor by any other, according to 1) Dr. Hows Vind. of Prot. Ep. "The common outcry," says Mat- Ch. ]N. York, 1816, p. 30. thew Henry, (Of Schism, Lond. 1717, 2) Ibid, p. 75. p. 29,) " is, that it is the setting up of 3) Works on Episco. vol. i. p. 220. altar against altar, which is not so, for See ScAisw also used in reference to all at the most it is but altar by altar ; the reformed churches, by the Rev. T. and though I have often read of one Hartwell Home, in his Discourse on body, and one spirit, and one hope, "The Conformity of the Church of and one Lord, and one faith, and one England to apostolic precept and pat- baptism, and one God and Father, tern." Lond. 1834, p. 28. yet I could never find a word in all " Heresy and schism have their the New Testament of one altar, ex- day. Nothing is permanent but truth. cept Jesus Christ,— the altar that Nothing will endure to tlie end of the sanctifies every gift, in whom we all world but the apostolic church." Dr. centre." How's Vind. of the Prot. Ep. Ch. pp. 4) Old Paths, p. 91 ; and see also 29, 30. See also how schism is de- pp. 94, 96. scribed by Bishop Home in the Schol- 5) P. 440. ar Armed, vol. ii. p. 275. LECT. XVI.] THE ANGLICAN CHURCH SCHISMATICAL. 417 the order of the English church." Those who have not, in any diocese, where there is a bishop, taken such institution and induction, "are come in by intrusion and usurpation of cure of souls," and " by the ecclesiastical laws they are excommuni- cants and schismatics."' " We may, therefore, conclude," says Mr. Palmer,* " that voluntary separation from the church of Christ is a sin against our brethren, against ourselves, against God ; a sin which, unless repented of, is eternally destructive to the soul. The heinous nature of this offence is incapable of exaggeration, because no human imagination, and no human tongue, can adequately de- scribe its enormity. "3 It is very unfortunate for these prelatic judges, that in thus anathematizing and cutting off from Christ, all non-prelatic com- munions, they could not agree in their fulminating decrees. As it is, by their evident contrariety, they have turned against each other, those weapons by which it was designed to carry destruc- tion to the ranks of their opponents, and are thus, by a just judgment of Heaven, made to overthrow themselves. The Church of England lies under this imputation as much as we do. Thus the Romish divine, who answered Dr. Sher- lock, speaks of " Lutheranism, or Cranmerism," and " the pal- pableness of their schism."'' Thus also Bishop Van Mildert affirms, in his Boyle Lectures: " The Romish writers, indeed, charge them, not only with her- esy and schism, but with other errors of the most abominable kind." Certain it is, that in 1554, the two houses of parliament did 1) Saravia's Priesthood, ed. Oxf. who, in the polished phraseology of 1840, pp. 20, 21. the day, were denominated ' dissen- 2) On the Ch. vol. i. p. 54. ters .-' ' What could they possibly 3) Bishop Beveridge most un- urge in extenuation of their conduct? equivocally identifies separation from He might be told by some, they were the Church cf England with e.\clu- hereditary dissenters, or dissenters be- sion from the catholic church." Wks. cause their fathers dissented. But vol. ii. pp. lOG, 147, 148, 165, and 217. would that at the last day be received " A correspondent of the Globe, as an excuse for their sin ? Would who attended divine service at St. the plea of the adulterer excuse him Margaret's Church, Westminster, on that lie had committed that crime be- Sunday week, gives an extract of the cause his father had done so before ? sermon. The preacher said, the or of the murderer, because his father Church of England derived its au- had committed murder .'' He feared thority lineally and directly from the (! ! !) very much that the schismatic apostles, and as such administered its dissenter would share in the same just sacraments, and therefore any depart- punishment that would be awarded ure, any separation from it, was schis- against the murderer and the adul- matic. He then demanded, what terer." must be the ultimate doom of all those 4) Notes of the Ch. p. 57. persons — schismatics, certainly, — 5) Boyle Lect. vol. i. p. 28G. 53 418 THE ROMISH CHURCH SCHISMATICAL. [lECT. XVI. publicly declare that the nation " had been guilty of a most hor- rible defection and schism from the apostolic see.'" The grounds of the Roman catholic objections to the minis- terial orders of the Church of England, are given by Dr. Milner in his End of Controversy.^ He charges it with " having renounced Christ's commission given to his apostles." '•' Hence it clearly appears that there is, and can be, no APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION OF MINISTRY IN THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH, MORE THAN IN ANY OTHER CONGREGATIONS OR SO- CIETIES OF PROTESTANTS." Oh, Dr. Miluer, how cruel art thou to thy dear sister England ! As the Romish thus denounces as schismatical the English church, so has the English ever been found most prompt and ready to meet all such demands against her, by the most liberal payment in kind. Archbishop Bramhall,'* as we learn from Jeremy Taylor, "in a full discourse, proves the church of Rome, not only to be guilty of schism, by making it necessary to depart from them ; but they did actuate the schisms, and themselves made the first separation in the great point of the pope's supremacy, which was the palladium for which they principally contended. He made it appear that the popes of Rome were usurpers of the rights of kings and bishops ; that they brought in new doctrines in every age ; that they imposed their own devices upon Christendom as articles of faith ; that they prevaricated the doctrines of the apostles ; that the Church of England only returned to her primitive purity ; that she joined with Christ and his apostles ; that she agreed in all the sentiments of the primitive church." Leslie, in his Letter on Episcopacy, in defence of the English church, thus speaks of the Romish church : " By setting up the claim of universality, the church of Rome has thereby commenced that grand schism against all the bishops of the earth . . . but while he would thrust other churches from him, he thrusts himself from the Catholic church."'' 1) Bnrnet's Ref. vol. ii. p. 454 ; See also Origin of the Prayer Book, Fox, vol. iii. p no ; Price's Prot. Non- pp. 72, 78, 148, 150. conf. vol. i. p. 105. See Bishop Doane's Further Post- That the Romish church charges script to his Brief Examination, Bur- schism on the English church, see de- lington, 1841. clared in Oxf. Tracts, vol. iii. p. 142; See this charge also fully establish- Burnet, Hist, of the Ref. reply to San- cd against the Romish Ch. in Palmer ders' Work; Faber's Albigenses, p. on the Ch. vol. i. p. 454, &c.Fpp. 465, 14 ; Palmer, vol. ii. p. 450, &c.; Neal's 469, 472, 47S, and in Perceval's Rom. Puritans, vol. iv. p. 178. Schism. See Palmer, vol. ii. p. 538, by Rom. That the Roman catholic church, 2) Letter xxix. in these United States, is schismatic, 3) See Works, vol. vi. p. 439. is proved by Mr. Odenheimer, in his 4) Leslie's Letter on Episcopacy, Origin of the Prayer Book. Pliilad. in Scholar Armed, vol. i. p. 56. 1841, pp. 81, 106, and Note M. p. 148 ; LECT. XVI.] THE ROMANISTS SCHISMATICAL. 419 " And herein of all others" says Archbishop Uslier,! " do our Romanists most fearfully offend ; as being the authors of the and also by Mr. Coleman in his edition of Faber on Romanism. See also " The charge of Novelty, Heresy and Schism against the Ch. of Rome substantiated," by the Rev. 1'homas Lathbury, in his " State of Popery and Jesuitism in England." Lond. 12mo. " Episcopacy vs. Papacy. — A dis- pute has for some time been going on, (says the Boston Ciirislian Watch- man, for Jan. 15, 1841,) between the learned doctors of the church of Rome and of the English Episcopal Church, respecting the apostolical jurisdiction and succession of the episcopacy in the British churches. A distinguished writer of the church of Rome has lately undertaken to show that the ordinations of the Church of England are not valid. Dr. Wiseman, on the other hand, a distinguished scholar of the Romish church, in some stric- tures on the Oxford Tracts, has imder- taken to show that, admitting the va- lidity of the ordinations of the Church of England, her bishops have still no just claim to apostolic jurisdiction, and that the obligation still lies on the laity to be in communion with the Roman and not the English hier- archy. '• These strictures have lately been replied to by Rev. Mr. Palmer, of Ox- ford College, in which he attempts to show them on their own premises, ' that their hierarchy [in England and by consequence in this country,] is alto- gether destitute of apostolical succes- sion and jurisdiction; that the works of their ministry are altogether un- profitable ; that all who communicate with them are involved in schism ; and that the lawful and apostolical adminis- tration of the sacraments, and of all oth- er parts of the sacred ministry, can only be found amongst the legitimate and catholic hierarchy of these realms ; the only representatives and spiritual descendants of that episcopacy which has flourished among us for seventeen centuries; the only successors of An- selm and Grosteste, of Edmund and Theodore, of Patrick and Augustine, and of the Holy Apostles.' '• Such are the worldly and un- profitable disputes in which men spend their lives, who profess to be the only successors and representatives of the apostles of Christ ! We devoutly thank the gracious Head of the Church that the plea about apostolical succes- sion is utterly disregarded as a figment and fable of popery by all denomina- tions in this country, except the Rom- ish priests and a few high-church episcopalians. Among us, those and those only are acknowledged as suc- cessors of Christ and the apostles, who manifest their spirit." " On supposition that the church of Rome is a church of Christ," says Dr. Owen, fWks. vol. xix. pp. 139, 140,) " it will appear to be the most schis- matical church in the world. I say on supposition that it is a church, and that there is such a thing as a schis- matical church, (as, perhaps, a church may, froin its intestine differences, be so not unfitly denominated,) that is the state and condition thereof. The pope is the head of their church, seve- ral nations of Europe are members of it. Have we not seen that head tak- ing his flesh in his teeth, tearing his body and his limbs to pieces .' Plave some of them thought on any thing else but ' Arise, Peter, kill and eat,' all their days .'' Have we not seen this goodly head in disputes about Peter's patrimony, and his own jurisdiction, wage war, fight and shed blood, — the blood of his own members ? Must we believe armies raised, and battles fought, towns fired, all in pure love, and perfect church order ? not to men- tion their old ' ultare contra altare,' anti-popes, anti-councils. Look all over their church, on their potentates, bishops, friars, there is no end of their variances. What do the chiefest, choicest pillars, eldest sons, and I know not what, of iheir church, at this day ? Do they not kill, destroy and ruin each other, as they are able .-' Let them not say these are the divis- ions of the nations that are in their church, not of the church ; for all these nations, on their hypothesis, are members of that one church. And that church, which hath no means to prevent its members from designed, resolved on and continued murdering one of another, nor can remove them from its society, shall never have me in its communion, as being bloodily schisinatical." 1) Sermonbef the King, in Juno, 1624, Lond. 1CS7, 4to. 4thed. p. 7. 420 THE ROMISH CHURCH SCHISMATICAL. [lECT. XVI. most cruel schism, that ever hath been seen in the church of God. Those infamous schisms of the Novatians and Donatists were but petty rents, in comparison of this huge rupture, which hath pulled asunder east and west, north and south ; and grown to such a head at home, that in our western parts (where this faction was so prevalent) it hath for divers ages past been esteemed catholic. In the 17th of the Revelation we have a woman described unto us, sitting upon seven mountains, and upon many waters. The woman is there expounded to be that great city which reigneth over the kings of the earth. The seven mountains upon which that city sat, needed not to be expounded : every child knew what was meant thereby. The waters are interpreted peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues ; which is that very universality and Catholicism, that the Romanists are wont so much to brag of. For, this woman is the particular church of Rome, the city-church ; which they call the mother-church, the Holy Ghost styleth the mother of harlots, and abominations of the earth. Those peoples, and multitudes, and nations, and tongues, are such as this proud city reigneth over : the catholic Roman church, they are commonly called by themselves ; but by the Holy Ghost, the beast upon which the woman sitteth." " This woman is the head of the faction, and the very mother of this schism, the beast, that is to say, they that suffer them- selves to be thus ridden by her, are her abettors and supporters in it." This is not all. This exterminating fire is not only directed by the Roman and the Anglican prelacy against each other ;* it is also kept up by one portion of the English army against the opposite ; as it is also by the different companies which, in multi- 1) It is somewhat amusing to see have above essayed to describe; and with what pertinacity our Roman a curious sort of thing it is, and catholic neighbors reject all commu- we are invited to allow ourselves to *ion with their Anglican brethren, be gulled into the medley. This really in the title of catholic. " We are is quite condescending in our breth- proud," says the Roman Catholic ren, who, feeling some little qualms Miscellany of Charleston, (for March as to the vahdity of their title, prefer G, 1841, art. Catholic,) " of being Ro- being admitted as tenants in common man catholics, and we say that there with us, to denying that we have any is no claim to catholic where there is right, but asserting that the whole a separation from Rome." "Itisdis- estate rests in themselves." "We courteous to attempt to give it," i. e. cannot but feel grateful for the gene- catholic, " to our opponents." "Il," rosity of the writers. But we will the Romish church, " had been, time none of it. If we can have no bet- out of mind, in possession of the title ter claim than this to the name, we catholic. We care not why it was are done with it." given ; the possession, and the ex- Poor prelatists ! we are heartily sor- clusive possession, were notorious." ry for you. To have deserted your " But now it seems there is to be one willing friends, and to have your ad- holy catholic and apostolic church vances rejected in such scorn as this, formed into such a patch work as we is hard indeed ! LECT. XVI.] THE ANGLICAN PARTIES ALL SCIIISMATICAL. 421 form variety compose the Roman host. The non-juring clergy- men at the revolution raised this same clamor against the Church of England,' as having separated from the catholic apostolic church, and as having, therefore, no authentic ministry ; while, on the other hand, this more liberal branch of the English church maintained towards their non-juring brethren, a front of most de- termined hauteur and cold neglect. " Sancroft and others were still considered by their advocates as bishops of their respective sees, and Tillotson and his asso- ciates reprobated by them as schismatics." The non-jurors and high-churchmen usurped to themselves exclusively, the honorable title of Church of England men. 2 The two " Defences of the Deprived Bishops, (the non-jurors)^ which contain the reasons of their separating, and which they are not a little proud of, upon all occasions referring to them, make the present Church of England guilty of the greatest heresy, as striking at what is fundamental in the highest degree, as being fundamental to other fundamentals, the succession of bishops, without which the church cannot subsist. And on this head tragical declamations are made of the great danger the church is in ; for which there could not be the least ground, were the pres- ent possessors of the sees supposed to be true bishops, and con- sequently capable of continuing the succession. So that should the deprived bishops die without consecrating others, the non- jurors would, by these principles, be as far from owning the pres- ent church as state." So speaks that very able and learned work, " The Rights of the Christian Church Asserted, "< which was written " to justify the established church, and to confute those notions by which such as call themselves the true Church of England, attempt to prove the present church guilty of schism."* " These great apostles of unity," says Dr. Mitchell,® " who for a hundred and sixteen years have been deafening us with the ' unceasing cry,' schism, schism, join us, ' or be ruined for ever,' have themselves gone over to one part of the schismatics ; and so here is one rent sewed up." Nor is there any abatement of that loving concord with which different portions of this church have thus regarded each other. On the contrary, it is found at present to actuate the bosoms of the Oxford sect, or the high-church prelatists, and those who differ from them, with all the strength of a burning passion. 1) Bishop White, in the Case of 3) Rights of the Christian Ch. the Episcopal Churches, 1782, p. 10. p. 329. 2) See "The True Character of 4) See ed. 3d, Lond. 1717, p.416. a Churchman, showing the false pre- 5) See preface, p. 58. tences to that name," in Scott'a Col- G) Presb. Letters, p. 349. lection of Tracts, vol. ix. p. 477. 422 THE OXFORD DIVINES AND SECT SCHISMATICS. [lECT. XVI. The upholders of this prelatic system are denominated by the London Christian Observer " the sect of the tractitians " — " the Laudean school " — " so baleful to the church of Christ and to the souls of men.'" They are denied to be, in truth, members of the Anglican church. Of Mr. Newman and Dr. Pusey it is said : " We ask Professor Pusey how, as a conscientious man, he retains any office in a church which requires him to subscribe to all the Tliirty-Nine Articles, and to acknowledge as scriptu- ral the doctrines set forth in the Homilies? Will any one of the writers, or approvers of the Oxford tracts, venture to say that he does not really believe all the doctrines of the Articles and Homilies of our church ? "^ " The chief schism," says a correspondent of the London Christian Observer,^ " which is now rending our own church, arises from the efforts of some who are going ' beyond the exact prescriptions (or even the intimations) of divine truth,' very much after the fashion of Luther himself respecting consub- stantiation ; but the remark applies generally ; for there is a strong tendency both in individuals and churches to set up unprescribed 'terms of communion;' just as some among us are ejecting the foreign protestant churches, even the Lutheran itself, from covenanted mercy, by reason of their alleged loss of apostolical succession." 1) See for Jan. 1841, p. 10, et 19,) and "the high-church party." passim. Ibid, p. 5. 2) See ibid, for 1836, p. 791. On the tendency of this system to 3) Feb. 1841, p. 93. socinianism, see Bishop Mcllvaine's "The Tractarian Sect," Lond. Oxford Divinity, pp. 85, 208, 239. Chr. Obs. March, 1841, p. 160. The That they contradict the standard Lond. Chr. Obs. (for 1837, p. 840,) of the English church, is also clearly speaks of these divines as " the Ox- shown. See pp. 222, 230. ford schismatists," and for the very He calls on these divines to " go reason of their exclusiveness, «S:.c. and learn the alphabet of the gospel ! See pp. 172, and 550. Spell the name of Jesus ! " (p. S^47.) A writer in the Episcopal Recorder " Oh, calumniated churches ! that one thus speaks of Dr. Pusey, (quoted in of thine own children and pastors Lond. Chr. Obs Nov. 1840, p. 679,) should teach such doctrine for thine ! " " With consummate puerility he con- p. 250. siders figurative language as if it He represents the doctrines of the were literal, and mere images and Oxford divinity as fundamentally shadows as if they were realities and different from those which he defends, substantial entities or beings. With and involving the very foundation of this explanation, hear him speak for a sinner's hope towards God. (p. 505.) himself, pervert scripture, and advo- " A vital difference upon grand pri- cate pernicious heresies." mary questions, involving all that was Of Mr. Newman's doctrine on Jus- so nobly contended for by the martyrs tification, the London Christian Ob- of the reformation, and all that is pre- server affirms, (March, 1841, p. 170,) cious to the sinner in the gospel of " it is a fearful, a despair-engendering Christ." pp. 507, 508, 522, 537. and a soul-destroying doctrine." See also Note A. Professor Powell styles them " the traditionists," (Tradition Unveiled, p. LECT. XVI.] THE EVANGELICAL PARTY ALSO SCHISMATICS. 423 The London Christian Observer, for January 1839/ in speak- ing of the Oxford monument to be erected to the memory of Cranmer, Ridley, and Latimer, urges as a reason for some mon- umental building, in preference to a church, that the pulpit of a church might be made to proclaim opinions in direct contra- riety to those of these reformers ; " especially in a diocese, the ecclesiastical ruler of which — melancholy to relate — has for several years been countenancing the doctrines and actions of the most insidious and dangerous body of men that ever obtruded itself within the precincts of the English church." Nor are these divines, on the other hand, at all reluctant in returning these complimentary manifestations of the unity of the Anglican church. Take an example from an editorial address, in the last number of the The Church of England Quarterly Re- view, which contains the following passage :* " The doctrine that regeneration uniformly takes place in baptism is so clearly taught by the Church of England, and involved in its general procedure, that we hesitate not to say, that the only honorable course, which can be pursued by those who hold the contrary opinion, is to abstain from agitating her communion by their preaching, which they must do, if only commonly honest and consistent, — and to cease, also, to eat her bread, and to fill those pulpits which can only be conscien- tiously occupied by her sincere and cordial members. " The doctrine of the total depravity of human nature is another instance of the perversion of scripture, and of contrari- ety to the sentiments of the Church of England, chargeable upon some of the clergy called evangelical ; but it is, unhappily, too consistent with the Calvinistic notions of election and regen- eration." Thus quietly are the the whole evangelical party discarded as unsound members P Dr. Hook thus speaks of the evangelical or low-church party in the episcopal church :'' " I am opposed to the opinions main- tained by those who call themselves low-churchmen, on this ground : I beheve it to be only on account of their being bad logicians, that they are not sociniansJ' 1) P. 64. 5) " We heed little," say the edi- 2) The Belfast Christian Patriot, tors of the Observer, " what Dr. vol. ii. No. 95. Hook, — who, when he had a ])urpose 3) It is explicitly declared by to serve, assailed his meek and holy these Oxford tractitians, that there diocesan. Bishop Rider, in print, in can be no real alteration in what they an undutiful and overbearing, not to avouch to be the doctrines of the say contemptuous, manner, — may church without a schism. (London think either of good churchmanship Quart. Rev. Ap. 1839, p. 313.) or sound divinity ; but with regard to 4) Lond. Chr. Obs. 1839, p. 234. his assertions, we reply, first, that we 424 THE EVANGELICAL PARTY ALSO SCHISMATICS. [lECT. XVI. " Those professed members of the establishment," says Crabbe,' "who affect the title of evangelical, and wish to palm upon the church the peculiarities of the calvinistic doctrine, and to ingraft their own modes and forms into its discipline, are schismatics.^'^ The London Christian Observer complained of the Oxford tractators for applying unseemly names to dissenters. In vol- ume fourth of the Tracts,^ these writers justify themselves by showing that they applied these epithets to parties within the church and not to those without. " Another remarkable exhi- bition of the same science is your asserting that one of the tracts called the dissenters ' a mob of tiptops, gapes and yawns,' (pp. 172, 174, 177, 185, 186.) Five times you say or imply it. Now it so happens that the tract in question has nothing to do with dissenters; but with persons who wish alterations in the liturgy on insufficient grounds, a circumstance which in itself excludes dissenters." " Yawn is a farmer whose sons go to the church school ; and he himself ' scarcely ever,' as he boasts, ' misses a Sunday,' coming into the service ' about the end of the first lesson.' Ned Gape, too, is a church-goer, though a late one. In what sense then, Mr. Editor, do you assert that when Richard Nelson, in the end of the story, says that he ' cannot stand by and see the noble old prayer book pulled to pieces, just to humor a mob of Tiptops, Gapes and Yawns,' that the writer calls dissenters by these titles ? " In a book entitled " The Oxford Tracts, the Public Press and the Evangelical Party," by G. Percival, it is said : " The evan- gelical party in the church are only restrained, from the acci- dent of their position, from the destructive power of rationahstic and socinian principles ; the spirit is already there, only its full developement is restrained" While these parties in the English church thus denounce each other ; the prelatical or high-church party, as certainly cut themselves off from the communion of all other churches on earth. For, from the Roman catholic church they are most peremptorily — in common with all other sects — excommunica- ted. So also are they regarded by the Greek and other Ori- ental churches, as a schismatical, and withered branch of the know not of any body of persons who Anglican communion ; and, secondly, call themselves by the nickname of that his accusation falls upon the 'low-churchmen,' though we do of Church of England." some who mounted on Romanist stilts, 1) English Synonymes, p. 480. are pleased so to denominate all true 2) Eng. ed. Pref. p. 31. reformation-principle members of the LECT. XVII.] THE PRELATIC CHURCH SELF-CONDEMNED. 425 true church. Nor are they satisfied with tliis exclusion from the greatest portion of the church cathohc. They voluntarily pronounce a sentence of excision upon themselves, from nine tenths of the protestant world ; and thus with infatuated folly, while making pretensions to be the only and true catholic CHUKCH, reduce that universal church to the liniiis and dimen- sions of their own comparatively feeble denomination.' To crown this climax, it will be our object to show, before closing this discussion, that prelatists, both of the Roman and the Anglican school, have been, and are still, justly charged with schism, by all non-prelatical churches; — not for the same reason indeed, but upon the ground of their unchristian preten- sions, and that intolerant and anathematizing conduct, by which they attempt to establish a supremacy over the church of God. Most certain it is, from this review, that the definition ordina- rily given of schism, needs to be itself defined, since its au- thors apply it most appropriately, as they think, to things which, by all ordinary rules of judgment, would appear to be opposites. In order therefore to see our way clear through this mist, and to escape from this sinking bog, into which we have been plunged, by attempting to trace out the course of our prelatical legisla- tors, we must endeavor to ascertain what, after all, is to be un- derstood by schism. And, as it is on all hands acknowledged to be a violation of that unity which is characteristic of the christian church, — and its opposite ; by understanding in what this unity consists, we shall at once arrive at a true knowledge of the nature of schism. Though on this subject we shall again speak, it will be neces- 1) " These remarks are meant to Christ throughout the world. The apply, not to the Church of England, first is, that there cannot be a church, but to a party — we are sorry to say, nor any scriptural sacraments, unless the dominant party — in that church. holy orders have descended through A party, whose doings implicate her an uninterrupted line of bishops from character, if they do not involve her the days of the apostles. This prin- destiny. ciple excludes the continental church- " There are three Church of Eng- es, the church of Scotland, the British land Reviews at the present time ; — and Irish dissenters, as well as all the one of them is Pustyite, another serai- American churches, except the epis- Puscyite, but all anti-evangelical. The copalians and Moravians. But even fountains of theological literature, the these are excluded by the second episcopal bench, and a vast majority princi[)le, which makes the validity of of the dignified and beneficed clergy, the clerical functions depend on a are tainted with a spirit which differs civil establishment and the consequent from popery less than the blossom sanction of the magistrate. This schis- does from the seed." matical tendency has been exhibit- " They have withdrawn their coun- ed in the most offensive forms, at a time tenance from all dissenters, great and when all other churches are longing small, and given prominence to two and laboring for union among them- great principles, by which they have selves." Belfast Chr. Patriot. cut themselves off" from the church of 54 426 THE NATURE OF CHRISTIAN UNION. [LECT. XVII. sary to make some remarks. — Now as there is but one supreme and spiritual head of the church, so is there but one universal body of which Christ is thus head ; and this body is composed of all who shall be gathered together in Him, from amid the trackless wastes and ages of time, and who, together, shall compose the family in heaven. By the unity of the church, we understand, therefore, that, as there is but one God and Sa- viour, so ALL who believe and obey the gospel are equally adopted into the family of heaven ; equally enjoy all the prom- ised blessings of salvation, are equally entitled to the free use of all the means of grace, — are baptized into one faith ;' and are called, justified, and sanctified, through the same plan of re- deeming love and mercy.* The unity of the christian church, — as we shall clearly show in our lectures on the nature of a true apostolical succession,' is not to be looked for in any uniformity in rites, ceremonies, or ecclesiastical customs ; — nor in any identity as to church forms, polity or order ; — nor in any sub- jection to one earthly head, or one ecclesiastical polity." But the unity of the church consists essentially in the unity of the faith whereby all its members equally hold the same di- vine truths ; and in the unity of the spirit, or that oneness, which subsists between Christ its head, and all its members, and whereby the same spirit dwells in all, and works in all the same christian graces.^ There is a very important distinction to be made between union and unity.** The one may very clearly exist where the 1) See the Author's Eccl. Catech. In our humble judgment, this is not of the Presb. Ch. a truth, and has always been practi- 2) 24, p. 15, ed. 2d. cally denied by christians of every 3) See Lect. xx. and xxi. age, and is the seminal principle and 4) Eccl. Catech. pp. ]I5, 16. basis of the papacy and of all spiritual 5) Author'.*! Eccl. Cat. p. 16, tyranny and oppression, and to be ed. 2d. utterly rejected by every spiritual free- G) This is not, however, the opin- man. No wonder that from this ax- ion of the Rev. Thomas H. Vail, as ioniatic assumption our author came his opinions are developed in his to describe as comprehensioe, the self- " Comprehensive Church, or Chris- enclosed boundaries of the limited tian Unity and Ecclesiastical Union," prelacy; and to regard as universal (Hartford, 1841.) He sets out with those peculiarities which are eschev/- the declaration that "the writer is ed, as without scriptural support, by a convinced that christian union can large and growing mass of protestant NEVER be effected (and of course never Christendom. If unity is a necessary yet has existed,) except upon some mark of the true church, then were plan of ECCLESIASTICAL UNITY." (ch. the apostolic churches no true church- i. p. 25.) " It is EVIDENTLY a scriptu- es of Christ, for they were divided ral truth, that the church must be one among themselves ; nor has there ever body, BOTH IN UESPECT OF ITS EX- existed such a church from their time TERNAL UNITY, AND OF ITS INTERNAL UUtll the presCUt. unity; and this trutii has been ac- "The Church of England," says knowledged by christians of every Dr. Hawks, " and the protestant epis- name, and in every age, the present copal church in the United States, are as well as the past. " (p. 27.) now both in " the unity of the catholic LECT. XVII.] UNITY AND UNION DISTINGCISHED. 427 Other is wanting. There may be unity in sentiment, in doctrine, and in feehng, where there is no union in any organized denomi- national government, under the same rules and the same laws. As it regards the christian church, — where there is concurrence in the same essential and fundamental doctrines which are cha- racteristic of that mystical body, — there, is christian unity, the unity of the spirit. But those principles of doctrine and or- der which were made necessary to be believed, in order to a full communion with the church of Christ, for the first three centu- ries, may be firmly held and retained, where there are separate organizations under independent rulers, and under ecclesiastical laws differing from each other on many points, not regarded as within the limits of articles which are fundamental. There may, in this case, be christian unity where there is no ecclesiastical union. These various churches may all be members of the one christian family ; may all recognize the one head or parent of that family; may all receive their being from Him, and be united together by the ties, as it were, of a blood relationship; and this, too, although, like the brethren of too many human families, they have become a divided household, and alienated from each other in spirit, and in many of their views. " Union is preserved," says Dr. Hawks in his Constitution of the Episcopal Church, " by means of subordination to the same ecclesiastical law, and a common ecclesiastical ruler ; unity by an adherence to the same common faith of the gospel." On no other ground than this, can any church in existence, for one moment substantiate a claim to the character and being of a church of Christ. For if union (as thus defined) is neces- sary to the perpetuation of the christian church, then, as there is church," though " under different without any universal monarch in systems of polity. either case," or identity of laws, offi- " All communion of churches,' cers or government. (See ibid, p. 15.) says Dr. Owen, (VVks. vol. XX. p. 291,) "When the fathers speak of the "as such, consists in the communion church, they mean not any particular of faith and love, in the administra- church, but the wiiole body or church tion of the same sacraments, and com- of christians, though divided into mon advice in things of common con- many nations or churches." (Ibid, p. cernment. All these may be observed, 18.) "The unity of the clmrch was when,for sundry reasons, the members then understood, not as being united of them cannot have local presential under one supreme bishop or church, communion in some ordinances with but in the concord and good agree- each church distinctly." ment of the several churclies among " There may be unity even where themselves, and in the unity of the there are differences and separation, common faith." (Ibid, p. 19. See also just as there are laws of war wherein pp. 174, 183.) all agree. (See Leslie's Short Method " on unity in saving or damning with the Romanists, Edinb. 1835, p. principles and practices, in love and 13.) "As all nations upon the earth charity, for which chiefly we sliall be are one kingdom to God, so all chris- judged at the last day." (Ibid, p. 180.) tian churches are one church to Christ, 428 PRELATIC EXCLUSIVENESS OF SCHISM. [LECT. XVII. no such union to be found, so is there no church extant. Chris- tendom is avowedly disparted, by its various lines of circumscribed denominational boundaries. Now it matters not how this disu- nion came about, since that it now exists cannot be denied. For whether the ancient sects went out from the church, or the church ejected them — whether the Greek church threw off the Latin, or the Latin separated from the Greek, and thenceforward usurped the sole supremacy — whether tiie English church was excommunicated and cut off by the Romish, or the Romish ab- jured by the English — whether the reformed churches were necessitated to separate and become independent organizations by the tyrannical, antichrisiian, and schismatical conduct of Rome, or were violently thrust out by her as poUutors of the sanctuary — none can deny the fact that all these churches are actually in existence, and that, too, under independent ecclesiastical or- ganizations. And, therefore, there is either no church on earth, Romish, Greek, Anglican, or any other, — which God forbid ; or, on the other hand, union is not necessary to christian unity; nor is diversity of rules, orders and forms, in matters not essen- tial to the very being of a church, any hindrance to such unity in all that is fundamental. In this country, prior to the organization of the episcopal church in 1789, the churches in each state considered themselves as an integral part of the church of Christ, while, as Dr. Hawks affirms, "perfectly independent in their government of any and every branch of the church in Christendom." And this is one of the rights still retained by the several dioceses under the con- stitution. The fact, therefore, that presbyterians live in a different house, and order their domestic economy in a form different from their neighbors, who dwell in the Romish or in the Episcopal quarter of the heavenly city, and who have, as they believe, more or less materially altered the heavenly discipline ; this does not prove that we are not still fellow-citizens with them in this spiritual Je- rusalem, and partakers with them of all its benefits and blessings. In order, therefore, to make out a case against us, it must be shown, as has been largely proved, that prelacy is of divine right, and of absolute essentiality to the very being of the church ; or otherwise, that we have apostatized from the fundamental doc- trines upon which the church is founded. And as the former is impossible, and the latter will not be pretended, therefore is our attempted exclusion from the rank of a true church of Christ, essentially the crime of schism. It is amazing, with what assurance the most preposterous doctrines, on this subject, have been boldly put forth. Unity — LECT. XVII.] WHEREIN TRUE UNITY CONSISTS. 429 the unity of the catholic church — has heen harped upon until many are, verily, ready to believe that a body, however really divided, that will only asseverate its unity — is thereby possess- ed of a true and sure mark of the church of Christ. Just as if unity may not belong to a body of rebels, as well as to an army of loyal subjects, or as if, to use the words of Dr. Clag- gett,' " the harlot cannot be one as well as the spouse." Unity can only, then, be any mark, whatever, of the true church, when it is such a unity as is made obligatory upon her by the scriptures, that is, unity in the faith, unity in THE SPIRIT OF CHRISTIAN LOVE, CHARITY AND CONCORD. Unity of association, that is, external union, can only be a duty, when the terms required for such communion are scriptural, ne- cessary and proper : and to judge, therefore, of the sufficiency of any plea for 'unity, we must first ascertain what are the prin- ciples upon which the profession of such union is based. For, so far is mere union from being a sure mark of the true church, that our Saviour contrasts the church to the kingdom of Satan, in that while it may be externally divided, and yet be really united ; the synagogue of Satan is not divided against itself, but remains confederated together by the unholy bonds of a self- aggrandizing alliance." The unity of the church depends upon the maintenance of that truth as it is in Jesus, which unites to Him, the living head ; and of that love, charity and concord, by which all its churches are bound together, as confederated members of the same heavenly commonwealth. Dr. Barrow, in his learned Discourse on the Unity of the Church, reduces it to the following heads, which are all includ- ed under those we have now summarily presented.^ Unity of the church implies, he says, first, consent in faith and opinion concerning all principal matters of doctrine* — secondly, it im- plies union in the bands of charity and good-wilP — thirdly, spiritual cognation and alliance, all being regenerated by the same incorruptible seed^ — fourthly, incorporation into the mys- tical body of Christ, and participation in the same benefits' — fifthly, union in peaceable concord and confederacy, so that they are bound to live together in good correspondence.^ The concurrence of the pastors of the church, especially in doctrine, in peace, and friendly intercourse, and for the preservation of truth and charity. 9 Such a unity in discipline as is required by 1) Notes of the Ch. p. 169. 6; Ibid. 2) See Matth. xii. and ibid p. 180. 7) Ibid. 3) See Wks. fol. vol. i. 8) Ibid, p. 765. 4) Ibid, pp 762, 763. 9) Ibid, p. 767. 5) Ibid, p. 764. 430 THE TRUE NATURE OF UNITY DESCRIBED. [lECT. XVII. the indispensable sanctions, and institutions, of their sovereign.* Tliey are bound to all the same sacraments — and " to uphold that sort of order, government and ministry, in all its substantial parts, which God did appoint in the church." " In lesser mat- ters of ceremony or discipline, instituted by human prudence, churches may differ, and it is expedient they should do so,'^ &ic. This is all which this great writer considered to be scripturally included under the unity of the church of Christ.* Similar are the views given of the unity of the church, by other divines of high authority, as by Stillingfleet^ — by Archbishop Potter* — by Bishop Seabury^ — by Dr. Jackson'' — by Dr. Claggetl'' — by the Oxford divines themselves^ — by the Rev. Mr. Hinds^ — by Bishop Pearson'" — by Archbishop Usher" — by Bingham"^ — by Dr. Rice'^ — by Dr. McCrie'* — and by others, were it neces- sary to enlarge. 1) Ibid, p. 768. 2) His eighth head refers to con- formity in great matters of prudential discipline, though not instituted by God, which he only proves by authori- ty of the council of Nice. 3) Iren. pp. 121. 122, 108, 120. 4) On Ch. Govt. pp. 12, 13, 28, 29, Am. ed. 5) See Sermon on Christian Uni- ty, which he refers to the unity of its head — of its faith — of its baptism — of its heavenly guardian, God — of its hope. 6) See Wks. fol. vol. iii. pp. 875, 877. 7) In Notes of the Ch. Exam. p. 190. 8) Oxf. Tr. vol. i. pp. 240, 259. 9) Hind's Rise and Progress of Christianity, vol. ii. p. 39, &c., and p. 92, &c. 10) " Christian unity," says Bishop Pearson, " has principal relation to the unity of faith." On the Creed, p. 17. II j So also Archbishop Usher, in his discourse on this subject delivered before his Majesty, |>laces the unity of the church principally on the unity of the faith professed therein, and the unity of the Spirit. Lond. 1087, pp. 10,11. 12) Bingham, in his very full and learned Dissertation on the Ancient Doctrine of the Unity of the Church, first treats of that unity which was reirarded as " fundamental to the very beinc of a church, being absolutely necessary and essential ; (Antiq. b. xvi. ch. i. vol. vi. p. 10 ; ) and this he describes as, first, the unity of faith and obedience to the laws of Christ ; and, secondly, the unity of love and charity. He then proceeds to dis- course upon " otiier sorts of unity necessary to the well-being of the church," (Lect. iii. p. 10,) among which he reckons " the necessary use of baptism } secondly, unity of worship ; thirdly, unity of subjection of piesbyters and people to their bish- op ; fourthly, unity of submission to the discipline of the church." 13) "The unity of the church," according to the Essays on the Church in Dr. Rice's Magazine, (Evang. and liit. Mag. vol. ix. p. 130,) consists, 1st, in its one head, namely, the Lord Jesus Christ ; 2d, in its profession of one faith, or its holding every where the same great system of doctrine ; 3d, in that it every where, in all its branches, celebrates the same sacra- ments as badges of the same profes- sion, and signs of the same system of saving truth." " It ought, however, to be understood, that this unity does not consist in the mere form or mode of administration, but in the use of the same elements to represent the same spiritual truths." 4th, in that common hope which is cherished by the whole body of believers ; 5th, in the same mind or spirit ; 6th, in their common participation of the influences of the same ever-blessed and divine Spirit. 14) Such, also, are the outlines of this unity, as given by Dr. McCrie, in his Discourses on the Unity of the LECT. XVII.] THE SCKIPTXJRAL MEANING OF SCHISM. 431 From this exhibition of the true nature of that scriptural unity which is descriptive of the various portions of the one, holy catholic, and apostolic church ; the character of schism which is the violation of this unity, will be as clearly perceived. For, as unity consists in the harmonious relation of all the members of this universal body to one another, and to Christ as their one, common and equal Lord and Master ; so is schism to be found, in its measure, in whatever has a tendency to disturb such harmony with one another, or to destroy, or prevent such union with their divine head. Whatever, then, would alienate christian brethren, — whatever would excite envy, jealousy or hatred ; — whatever would needlessly restrain christian liberty ; — what- ever would require conscientious nonconformity or separation ; — whatever would mar the purity of the truth ; — or isolate one portion of the church from others — this is of the nature of schism. The term, in its original import, signifies a rent, division, or separation. It is used in a figurative or secondary sense, six times in the New Testament ; thrice in the Gospel of St. John, in reference to the differences among the Jews respecting Christ, and thrice in the Epistle to the Corinthians, as applicable to the divisions, which had arisen among the members of that church.* In only one passage in our vernacular translation is the word rendered " schism,"^ being in these other passages translated by the word " division."'* Now as it regards the cases to which the word is applied in the gospels, there was first a difference and contrariety of Church, (Edin. 1621, p. 17, tStc.) This essay, for which Sir Calling Eardley unity consists, 1st, in her having one Smith offered a prize of one hundred head and Lord; 2d, in the unity of pounds sterling, which was adjudged the faith ; 'Sd, in fellowship in the to this. same worship of which baptism is the On the true idea of, see Owen's solemn badge ; 4th, in respect of ex- Wks. vol. xix. p. 160, et preced. ternal government and discipline, " as See also Knapps Theology, vol. i. far as is expressly enjoined in scrip- p. 484. ture, or may be deduced by native " God," says Stillingfleet, (Irenic. inference from the general rules and pp. 121, 122,) " will one day convince particular examples recorded in it ; " men that the union of the churclj lies 5th, in the bond of mutual charity more in the unity of faith and affec- and peace. tion than in uniformity of doubtful Such, also, are the views presented rites and ceremonies." by Dr. Harris, in his Union, or the 1) "So there vi^as a division." Divided Church made One, Am. ed. John vii. 43, xi. 16, and x. 19. IJoston, 1838, ch. ii. 2) 1 Cor. i. 10, xi. 18, and xii. 25. See also tlie Unity of the Church, 3) 1 Cor. xii. 25. by the Rev. Baptist Noel, 27lh cd. 4) On its scriptural meaning, see Lond. 1838. full in Dr. Owen's Treatise on, in See also Schism as opposed to the Wks. vol. xix. p. 123, &c.; and on the Unity of the Ciiurch, by Dr. Hoppus, case of the Corinthian church, ibid, Lond. 1839, 2d ed. This is a prize p. 125, &,c. 432 THE SCRIPTURAL MEANING OF SCHISM. [lECT. XVII. opinion ; and secondly, an alienation of feeling, leading the one party to violence, while the other were required conscientiously to maintain their views. As it regards the case of the Corinthian church, we find that parties, attached to different teachers, had arisen in that church. These were led to cherish variant opinions in some matters, and cold, and disaffected feelings towards one another. The consequences were gross violations of decency and order in the observance of divine worship — contentions respecting their ministers — and unbrotherly and unciiristian scenes among themselves. It is for these things they are rebuked by the apostle, for their adoption of party names, and the un- charitable insinuation, that others did not love the Saviour as much as they — for their perversion and abuse of the instituted means of grace — for their obstinate continuance in these evil courses — and their unholy contentions about them. This is what the apostle denominates schism. You will also observe, as a fact most important in this inqui- ry, that all these evils were found to exist in the one church of Corinth, and while it still remained denominationally one church. It was an internal mischief which had superinduced such un- happy and lamentable consequences. Neither have we any in- timation whatever, that any actual separation into distinct socie- ties had taken place at Corinth. All that we read of, was the existence, in this christian society, of factious dissensions. "From the entire testimony of scripture respecting this subject, we conclude," says the author of the late elaborate treatise up- on this subject,! " that the schisms condemned, were such differ- ences of opinion, and of feeling, among the members of one particular church, on matters connected with their common in- terest as professed christians, as produced heartburnings, alien- ations, contentions, party-spirit, and other uncharitable tempers, and unseemly conduct."^ "The scripture examples of schism, exhibit it as little different from variance, strife, faction, or even heresy, in the original meaning of this term."^ Schism, then, 1) Schism as opposed to the Unity church by the term schism. See of the Church, by Dr. Hoppus, p. Owen's Wks. vol. xix. p. 127. 592, Lond. ed. 1839, see part ii. ch. i. Of this schism in the Corinthian where these views will be found en- ciiurcli, in the days of Clemens Ro- larged upon. manus, see a full account in Dr. 2) Schism, p. 227. Owen's Wks. vol. xix p. 127. 3) a.i^n7i;, a sect or choice, see " Leaving the scriptures," says he, Acts XXVI. 5 : see ibid, p. 232. " the next instance of schism to which Even in the time of Clemens Ro- our attention is turned, is connected manus, this original and scriptural with this same Corinthian church, as meaning of the term was retained, it is given in the epistle of Clemens since he everywhere in his epistle Romanus." " And that whicli he calls denominates the dift'erenccs in that schism (Owen's Wks. vol. xx. p. 211.) 1,KCT. XVII.] THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF SCHISM. 433 as described in the word of God, though sinful, is far from being necessarily damnable ; — though most reprehensible, it is not necessarily exclusive of the divine favor; — though destructive to the prosperity, peace, and harmony of the church, yet not absolutely to its character as a church. Schism, therefore, is an offence against the unity of the church, arising from a slate of mind at variance with the humility and charity of the gospel. It is an offence, consequently, which can only be committed by those who are within the church, whether we consider it in ref- erence to a particular congregation, or to different congregations, or denominations ; and therefore, to affirm of any individual, of any congregation, or of any denomination, that they are schis- matics, is to declare that while still related to the visible church of Christ, and connected with it, they are yet chargeable with unchristian conduct.' As the unity of the church does not and cannot be supposed to mean the union of the whole church in one body, under one government or sovereign authority,* — so it is plain that the mere fact that any denomination of christians is not found thus subject to the same ecclesiastical government with some other, does not fairly implicate it in a charge of schism, or exclude it from the pale of Christ's true church. Separation, then, does not certainly imply schism. There may be disunion where there are preserved the essentials of christian unity. The doctrine that the catholic church is one body, only began to prevail in the third century.* In the beginning it was in thatchurch. he calls also strife, con- are still catholics, that is, incorporated tention, sedition, Uimult ; and it may menil)ers of the visible church. And be observed concerning th;it schism, if we are not thus members, then most as all the ancients call it, that the assuredly we are not schismatics. Let church continued its state and out- prelatists, therefore, choose for us ward communion. There is no men- whatever portion they, in their wis- tion of any that separated from it, that dom, may see fit ; we trust, however, constituted anew church." they will not sacrifice all claim to the 1) It is ridiculous to argue, as attribute of wisdom, in assigning us prelatists do, that even were we schis- such a contradictory and paradoxical matical, we were on that account no situation as that, like limbo, its real longer a part of the catholic church. portion never can be discovered. See For if we are schismatics, we must this shown to have been the sense of belong to that body in which we are the ancients in Bingham, Antiq.b. xvi. schismatics ; since it is only as mem- § 17. bers of the one body we could possi- 2) See twelve arguments in proof bly be chargeable with schism. But of this, with answers to Objections in this body is the catholic church, and Barrow's Disc. Wks. vol. i. pp. 7G9, therefore as long as we are schisniat- 7o0. ics, we are an integral part of that 3) See Riddle's Eccl. Chronol. bodj', and cannot be cut off from it, Lond. 1840, p. 33. otherwise we must cease to be schis- " Previously to the third century," mat.ics in a body to which we do not says the Rev. Mr. Riddle, " a real, liv- belong. If, then, we are schismatics, ing unity, a.nd a well regulated hlierty,^ we have this comfort left us, that we characterized the early constitution of 55 434 THE PRIMITIVE DOCTRmE OF SCHISM. [LECT. XVII. not SO. Then, all the churches were ecclesiastically indepen- dent, separate, and distinct, and united only by the bonds of mutual charity, and the acknowledgment of one common faith. The violation of this charity — the breach of this holy alliance and concord — was what was then understood by schism. And if Dr. Barrow is competent to decide, the fathers also,' " in their set treatises, and in their incidental discourses about the unity of the church, (which was de facto, which should be de jure in the church,) do make it to consist only in those unions of faith, charity, peace, which we have described, not in this political union." In support of this opinion, he presents quotations, in addition to others already adduced by him, from Tertullian, Epiphanius, Constantine the Great, Gregory the Great, Clemens Alexaiidri- nus, Jerome, &c.^ the church. But liberty was after- wards sacrificed to unity ; and this unity itself degenerated into a merely external, forced and dead union, which became subservient to the purposes of oppression, and to the growth of the hierarchy." The results which followed from this doctrine of the unity of the catho- lic church, are exhibited by Euthe- rius, Bishop of Tyana, A. D. 431, in the preface to his work against here- sies. " Its subject," says Clarke, (Sue. of Sacred Lit. vol. ii. p. 194.) " is the woful effects of ecclesiastical dis- turbances and persecutions; and it shows how much earlier the spirit of the inquisition existed in the catho- lic church than the institution it- self." " Eutherius complains of the vio- lent methods the ecclesiastics of those days resorted to, that those who differ- ed might be brought back to the unity of the church ; that they used civil power to produce religious uniformity ; and persecution was to enlighten or reduce a dark or refiactory mind. ' It is said tliat henceforth they will do things hitherto unventured on ; that they will no longer underhand and occasionally accuse the simple of here- sy ; but that, possessing the supreme power, they will madly rage and im- periously command ; will prescribe laws, force to their opinions, demand instant obedience, condemn and pun- ish the study oi' true holiness ; that they will revile some and banish others ; involve one in accusations, and despoil another of his credit ; browbeat this, and by vaunting per- suade that; — I say nothing of bonds, prisons, fines, disgrace, stripes, piteous sights of slaughter, almost incredible, though seen : and this tragedy is acted by priests ! (Oh, impious daring ! oh, intolerable judgment !) with whom the commencement of public worship and teaching is that most delightful address, ' Peace be with you all.' Without judgment comes condemna- tion ; without accusation, sentence ; audacity is esteemed courage ; cruelty is named zeal ; fraud is regarded as wisdom. What tragic strain of wail- ing is sufficiently mournful ! the lam- entations of Jeremiah are too weak for the multitude and magnitude of these evils. But from their fruits ye shall know them ; and the fruits of these present laborers are to scatter, not to assemble ; to persecute, not to bring back ; to cast down, not to raise up ; to wound, not to heal ; to hate the wanderers, not to seek the wan- derers.' Thus does Eutherius de- scribe the ancient methods of christian persecution in those days." See also King's Primitive Christ, pp. 1(J2, 181. 1) Works, vol. i.p. 770. 2) See ibid. Hence will be apparent, how con- trary to all truth is ihe definition given of schism by |)relatists, that "it is a direct violation of the order and gov- ernment established in the church, (that is, the one visible church of the prelacy,) and a consequent separation LECT. XVII.] LATER DOCTRINE OF SCHISM AND ITS CONSEQUENCES. 435 It is, however, undoubtedly true, that the established ecclesi- astical idea of schism, as most frequently presented by the later fathers, is separation from the worship and communion of some particular church or churches, and from their ecclesiastical gov- ernment and control. Thus Augustine defines schism to be " a recent separation in a church on account of some difference of opinion."' It thus became an ecclesiastical sin committed against church order and auihority — against the pride, pomp, and rule of the governors of the church — and against their assumed supremacy and exclusive jurisdiction — and not against the love, truth, and charity of the gospel. « The result of this progressive change of opinion, was the consolidated spiritual monarchy and despotism of the Romish hierarchy. But as such a union is neither possible, nor proper, nor accord- ant to scripture and primitive Christianity, so is it certain that separate organization in an ecclesiastical capacity cannot, of itself, establish against any church or denomination the charge of schism. Otherwise the apostolic and primitive church- es were all schismatical,^ and, along with them, every church that from it." (Daubeny's Guide to the Ch. vol. i. p. 45.) Dauben}' distinctly refers the charge of schism to the rejection of commun- ion with " a church established by public authority." Guide to the Ch. vol. i. p. 47. "It is maintained by Dr. Barrow," (in Powell on Ap. Sue. p 300,) "on the supremacy of tlie pope, that the an- cients did assert to each bishop a free, absolute, independent authority, sub- jected to none, directed by none, ac- countable to none, in the administra- tion of affairs properly concerning his church." Suppos. v. § v. p. 220, 4to. edit. 1G80. Cyprian maintains it as Dr. Barrow there shows ; and see Vitringa de Syn. vet lib. iii. cap. xvii. p. 857, &c.; Mosheim de Reb. ante Constant, p. 152; and Burnet's Ref. vol. ii. anno 1559. See Note B. 1) See in Schism, p. 232; where see also Zonaria's similar Definition. 2) See illustrated in ibid, p. 235. 3) That there were in apostolical times, separate and distinct churches in the same provinces, appears mani- fest. Gal. i. 22 ; Acts ix. 31 ; Gal. i. 2 ; Acts xvi.; Phil. i. 1 ; Acts xiv. 22. Grotius in his Annot. on 1 Tim. v. 17, affirms that in primitive times there were many churches in each of the cities, and that each of these churches had its own president or bishop, and that Alexandria was peculiar in hav- ing but one. See the same largely proved in his work de Imperio, pp. 355, 356, 357. Grotius was of opinion, that old churches were formed in imitation of the synagogues, and that one city had divers churches and bishops as well as divers synagogues. And Dr. Ham- mond thought that Rome, Anlioch, and other cities, had two cliurches and bishops, one of Jews and another of Gentiles ; and that Peter and Paul had two churches at Rome. The churches of Constantinople, Antioch, and Alexandria, and many other places, also had two churches at once by their divisions, and none so long as Rome. See Baxter's True and Only Way of Concord, Lond. 1680, part iii. p. 95. There is evidence to prove, that bishops were ordained in villages, in the outskirts of cities, and often two in the same city ; and of course all bishops were supreme in their own districts, and independent of every other, while yet the unity of the church remained. See Corbet on the Ch. pp. 105, 107. That there were either separate churches for the Hebrew christians, or a toleration in tliem of the observance of the Jewish rites and ceremonies, would appear also from 436 THIS DOCTRINE DESTROYS ALL EXISTING CHURCHES. [lECT. XVII. is now found existing upon earth. For the Romish, the Greek, the Oriental, the AngHcan, churches are all separate in their ecclesiastical government, and hence they would all be inevit- ably excluded by this rule from the character of the true churches of Christ. It will avail nothing to say, as does the Romish church, that havino^ cast out schismatics and heretics, she is united wiih herself. For even were this true, which is most contrary to truth, as it regards either the Roman or the Anglican communions, in the bosom of which there are innumerable schisms — yet were this a fact, it is just as true of all other communions, which are also united with themselves. Nor will it sustain this exclusive as- sumption, for these churches, or either of them, to appropriate to themselves, the title and the privileges of the catholic church ; for it were just as easy for any other denomination, which desired to imitate their presumptive arrogance, to make a similar claim, and thus all the sects in Christendom might, each in turn, become the catholic church. As there may then be schism where there is true doctrine and a true church ;^ so may there be great professed union, where there is neither true faith nor true charity, and where there is therefore real schism. But this, surely, is not the unity Christ enjoins, which is unity of faith, love and charity ; and this all churches, which hold to what is essential, possess. The church of Christ is one, only in Christ, only by the appoint- ment and determination of Christ, and only as governed and directed by Him. It is therefore necessarily and essentially one body, nor can men by any self-constructed lines or barriers divide the fact that the Jewish christians con- Ch. Ex. p. 154,) "upon the whole tinued in the observance of their pe- earth, that did profess tiiis true faith, culiar rites until after the time of that alone might be called the catholic Hadrian, when one part of them sepa- church, because that alone had that rated from the rest, and threw off the catholic faith which did properly make cereinonial law, which the others re- and constitute the true church." tained. See Vidals Mosheim, vol. ii. TertuUian says, (Ayton, p. 585, pp. 193, 201. Tert. de Poescript. Hreret cap. x.v.) When almost all the bishops were "And so TertuUian speaks to the become arian, the people who adhered same purpose, when he gives an ac- unto the orthodox faith, sot up their count of the church's unity, as con- private conventicles in opposition unto sisting — 'In her adhering to that them, as for instance at Constantino- doctrine which was first preached by pie, Antioch, Alexandria, and other the apostles, who, having first deliver- places. And who will say tliese were ed it in Judea, and planted churches schismatics, or out of tlie pale of the there, went abroad and delivered the true cburcli, though beyond the line same to other nations, and settled of apostolical succession. churches in cities, from whence other I) See Dr. Scott in Notes of the churches have the same doctrine Ch. Ex. p. 203. propagated to them, which are there- " If there were but one particular fore called apostolical churches, as the church, " says Dr. Payne, (Notes of offspring of those which were found- LECT. XVII.] SCHISM DOES NOT DESTROY A CHURCH. 437 THE CHURCH, though they may mark out the limits of their own branch of the church.^ Let us pursue ihis idea a hltle further. Schism, as has been shown, means division, or that which rends asunder a body pre- viously united. But if that which is essential to the nature of the body is still retained by each party, tlien of course, neither ceases to retain the characteristic quaHties of that body. But if one part is thrown oft' by the other, because it has ceased to possess the qualities necessary to the homogeneity of the body, and to its sound and healthy condition ; then will that portion lose, while the other retains, the character of the body. And in this case, the whole fault of such a division will be justly imputable to the cor- rupted member. But we may further suppose the body of the church to be di- vided on questions, which do not affect the essential being of the church, but only its well-being. Now in this case there must be criminality in one or both of the parties so dividing, but neither will cease to be true churches, since both retain what is of funda- mental importance. That only can destroy the being of a church which separates it from Christ, and from the life-giving influences of his Holy Spirit ; and this nothing short of apostacy from the truth can do. The apostle certainly addresses the church at Corinth as a church of God, in the very epistle in which he so severely rebukes its members for their schisms. He still regards them as a true church, and as one church — as one body and as one family. And although some of the members were in un- natural rebellion against the others, and were alienated in views and feelings from the rest, so that they could not act or worship together 5 yet did they not, on that account, cease to be one body, though divided, or one family, though disunited. The severance of the bonds of amity had not broken the inseparable bonds of spiritual consanguinity. They did not cease to be children of the same parents, and brethren and sisters of the same domestic circle, though now driven asunder by the force of ed by them. Therefore, so many and 467; see Augustine in ibid, p. 293 ; so great churches are all that one Spiritual Despotism, p. ]63, «&c. ; prime and apostolical church from Hind's Rise and Progress of Christ, whence all others come. And thus vol. ii. p. 165. they are all prime and apostoiical in " There has been a time," says Dr. regard to their unity, as long as there Claggett, (Notes of the Ch. p. 178,) is that communication of that title of " when it was so far from being a note brotherhood and common work of of the catholic church to be united to peace and hospitality.' " the pope, that it was impossible so to 1) See Sherlock in Notes of the be without separation from the catho- Ch. pp. 32, 33, 34. lie church." See also Oxf. Tr. vol. i. pp. 360, See Cyprian and others, quoted in 368 ; Chillingworth's Wka. vol. i. pp. Potter on Ch. Govt. pp. 166, 167, 182 108, 109 ; Schism, pp. 277, 278, 292, and 183. 338 THE TRUE DOCTRINE ASSERTED. [lECT. XVII. party strife and internal discord. Guilty they no doubt were for being thus at variance. Guilty were they who first wandered from the jDath of obedience to the parental law ; and they, too, who associated with the disobedient brethren, in this contume- lious defiance of the law of the christian family. But neverthe- less, they were still children, and they are called upon by the aposlle to return to the exercise of the filial and fraternal spirit. And just so is it at this moment with all the members of the great christian household. They have most evidently fallen out by the way, and are not found walking together in love and am- ity. And most surely there is a heavy responsibility resting upon them, who by their neglect of the divine law and charter of the church, or by the wanton assumption of undue authority over their brethren in the Lord, have led to the present alienations of the various members of the christian family. But still, wherever there is a church which is found holding to the head, even Christ, and to the truth as it is in Him; — there, is a true member of the CHURCH CATHOLIC, WHICH IS MADE UP OF ALL THE PARTIC- ULAR CHURCHES IN WHATEVER PART OF THE WORLD THET ARE FOUND. Schism, then, is not separation, noris that church schismatical that is independent in its organization and ecclesiastical regi- men of some other, which is vain and arbitrary enough to claim jurisdiction over it. Separation may, in many cases, be duty, and the source, not of schism, but of greater unity. Union may, in such cases, be sinful, and the fountain whence the most bitter waters of schism may be found to flow. There is noth- ing in the word of God which makes such consolidated union necessary to christian unity, or which identifies such separate and independent organization with schism. The very contrary is there established. For, while the apostolic churches formed no actual secessions, they were yet schismatical ; and while in- dependent of one another, they dwelt together in the unity of the spirit, and the bonds of peace : and thus, as schism may be found where there is union in external form and polity, so may unity co-exist with separation and independence. ADDITIONAL NOTES TO LECTURE SEVENTEENTH. NOTE A. THE NECESSARY TENDENCY OF PRELACY TO UNITY BOTH OF SPIRIT AND OF ECCLESIASTICAL ASSOCIATION. As tliis adaptation of prelacy to secure union, in contrast with the undenied differences ainonor other denominations, is now the theme of daily exultation, — as it has been diirino; its entire schism-making course — we feel called upon to give here a few additional illustrations of this tendency. And first, we will present a portion of a recent letter, published by Bishop Mclivaine, together with the introductory remarks of the editor of the Epis- copal Recorder. Bishop Mclivaine and the Churchman. — Our readers may be grieved, with ourselves, to see and know the necessity for such communications as the fol- lowing from Bishop Mclivaine. We are sorry to have our paper occupied with evidences of such a slate of things in our church as are given in these letters. The unholy and violent course which has been pursued by tiie Churchman, and we are bound to say sanclioned, because unrestrained and uncontradicted, by Bishop Onderdonk, has given pain and distress to many minds who are deeply concerned for the peace and welfare of tlie episcopal church. We do not feel at liberty to refuse Bishop Mclvaino the opportunity of self-defence in our columns, after he has been so unjustly assailed. But we feel called upon to do no more in connexion with these discussions than to express our solemn conviction of the destructive and guilty character and ten- dency of the course which has called for such a defence. The church will see, when ruptured and riven by the violence of this party, her peace destroy- ed, her truth overshadowed, her integrity broken, what has been the purpose of these movements on tlieir part. To us it will be then, as it is now, an abiding comfort that we labored for peace and truth, and the responsibility of the result may rest, where it belongs, on an ultra ■party, who, by a bold and arbitrary course of denunciation, of tlie men and the truth of God, have thrown a peaceful body into convulsions and schism. Bishop Mclivaine to the Editor of the Churchman : I ask no other answer to your charge of " almost heresy," tiian that those who read what you have written, will also read what I have written. But why, then, am I so pained and mortified .-' Is it because such treatment and such opposition from you were unexpected .'' Alas, Dr. Seabury, 1 have known you too lonsr and too well, not to know just how such truth, even what, in my view, is no other tlian " the glorious gospel of the blessed God," "would be relished by you. I knew you would utterly despise, detest, and ridicule it, just as you have done. And I have no idea that you have ex- pressed all you feel with regard to it. Your hatred of such truth is, I have no doubt, even much greater than you have expressed. I say it feelingly and solemnly, for I know the awfulness of such a state of mind. And if 1 suppo- sed you would deny it, were it not that I suppose you wish to be considered as 440 N0TE3 TO LECTURE XVII. in that state of mind, I would not thus lay it to your charge. But as long as 1 tlius understand the views and tastes which you avow, let me tell you seri- ously. ni)t in the spirit of severity, that until there shall be reason to suppose that God has wrought a great, and wiiat 1 should call a very blessed change, in your views and tastes and sympathies; when I shall publish any thing dis- tinctive concerning the great matters of tiie gospel, especially, as to tcliat a poor sinner must do to be saved, I shall feel much more confident that I speak " the truth as it is in Jesus," if 1 find you loathing it, as you do my charge, than if I siiall find you praising it. You recently published in your paper of November 7lh, a most abusive and abominable attack upon me, headed, " Oxfonl Tracts, Charity E.vemplified." You charged me with having refused to receive a person as a candidate for orders, " because he had declined joining a teetotal society, and attending ser- vices where the liturgy was dishonored." When I requested you to state tiie grounds on which you published such statemt-nts, (which, by the way, had not one least approach to truth,) you declined printing my letter and answering its request for your grounds of charge, " out of respect " (you wrote rne) " to my office, and regard to the honor of the church, and because you did not want to be brought into such conflict with your superior," as you foresaw would be the consequence. My dear sir, if your respect to my office, and to your " supe- rior," and to the honor of the church, be so great, how great then must be your hatred of the truth contained in my cliarge, when it so masters that respect and so casts it behind your back, and makes you treat your " superior " as you have done in the article now under consideration ! But let us ask again, why docs your treatment so pain and mortify me .' I answer, because of the painful consideration thai the Churchman is so widely regarded as representing the clergy of the diocese of New York, and especially because it is "the official organ of the Bishop of New York," and is under his avowed " general direction and supervision," and therefore, where it calls my charge " almost heretical," it is the Bishop of New York whom the Bishop of Ohio must consider as thus speaking; and when it ridicules the writing of the Bishop of Ohio as "mere romance," "not even founded on fact," Vind as the work of a writer " incompetent," and as containing "a perversion of historical truth," it is not merely Dr. Seabury who is responsible, but it is his endorser, and patron and director and supervisor, his protector in these things ; it is the Bishop of New York ; who is just so much the more responsible for these ex- pressions and charges, as his influence in giving them weight is greater; and so will he be held by the church as well as by myself. But here I must say, that I would not have spoken in this letter touching the responsibility under which 1 hold the Bishop of New York for the conduct of the Churchman towards me, were it not that I have faithfully and respect- fully and kindly tried in vain by a private correspondence to obtain froin that bishop some satisfaction, at least some expression of regret for the abominable attack upon my official proceedings, in the case of the candidate above referred to. My first letter, he answered by declining to be considered as responsible, in the way 1 held him to be, for such things in the Churchman ; while not a word has lie said, to indicate that, in the article complained of, he does not en- tirely concur. My second letter is, to this day, unanswered, though it was written nearly two months ago. However you may have meant it, when you placed me in company with Whitfield, Wesley, Kcwton, Scott, and Simeon, I by no means decline the honor. However I may diflfer from any of them in sonje things, I love and honor the whole group, and especially Newton, Scott, and Simeon, as noble " soldiers of Jesus Christ," and God forbid that 1 should not feel honored by such ridicule as places me at their side. Then, as to the charge, which you so much reprobate as " almost heretical," I trust the considerate reader will not accuse me of egotism, in introducing the following extract from a letter lately received from my honored friend, the Rev. G. S. t'aber ; especially as his authority has been so much spoken of lately in recommendation of his work on Election, and as you, sir, have said, in your notice of my book, that " P'aber would not thus have conducted the argument." Thus he writes : " I ought before to have acknowledged your kind remembrance of me, in the shape of your very excellent, and unliappily NOTES TO LECTURE XVII, 441 very seasonable Charge on the vitally important subject of justification. In this present day of rebuke, wlien the Oxford tractarians are doing ail tliat lies in their power to propagate the popish view of justificiition, which among protestants (as you remark, Charge, p. 153) seems to have been first advanced by Jjauterwaid, your Cliarge is specialhj seasonable, and you will quite under- stand wljy 1 say unhappily seasonable. You have, however, faithfully done your duty, and 1 in an inferior grade of the priesthood, though to a greater typogruphicai extent, have endeavored to do mine. Among other popish fan- cies, the tract school now maintain sacramental justification." So much for the difference of opinion between you and Mr. Faber; you calling that '■^almost heretical," which he calls very excellent, seasonable and faithful. Whose opinion I prefer, perhaps, you will be able to decide. Your charge against me of perverting- historical truth, and of hnving made the " mar- vellous " assertion that Bishop Bull inoculated so many of the best divines of the English and American churches, down to Dehon and Hobart, with the views of Socinianism, will be noticed in another letter. Meanwhile, I am yours, truly. C. P. McIlvaine. Gambicr, March 6, 1641. Again, the Editors of the Recorder thus speak: — " Trial of Principles. — We have been often struck with the trial which is given to avowed principles when they come in collision with cherished tempers. The late course of the New York Churchman has given illustrations of this, to which the serious attention of the Church should be directed. We have long ceased to descend into any personal controversy with that paper, and are quite unmoved by any of its frequent assaults upon ourselves. But we would call attention to the violent attacks it has of late made upon the characters of some of our bishops, as strange developements indeed of a course which af- fects peculiar reverence for the episcopal office and dignity. Its assaults up- on the reputation of Bishop McCoskry, and of Bishop McIlvaine, and partic- ularly its late attacks upon the latter, have outraged all decency among gen- tlemen, as much as all courtesy among christians. Will the church sustain these assaults ? Yet this paper is certified to be conducted under the immediate supervision and entire approbation of the bishop of New York. Does he au- thorize and endorse these outrages upon the characters of the bishops of the church.'' We feel bound, upon such an occasion, to break our uniform si- lence in regard to that paper, and to enter our solemn protest against a course of insult which is found only there, and which is most contradictory to the high pretensions which are there made to principle upon this subject. We feel under no obligation to defend Bishop McIlvaine in this or any contingen- cy. He can defend himself Nor do we believe, that "a falcon towering in his pride of height," will " by a mousing owl, be hawked at and killed." But we feel bound, as ministers and editors, to protest against this unparelleled course of violence, on the part of those who assert their claim to a better character and higher perceptions of truth than others. Is it so, that this pro- fessed reverence for the episcopal office among the class who sustain the Churchman, is all pretence ? Is tliat an universal fact, which we heard years since from the mouth of a venerable bishop, " that it is easier to govern ten low-churchtnen, than one high-churchman.' " Whether it be so as a rule or not, it is undoubted that no paper of any class, even from the Romanists, which comes to our office, is so uniformly marked by an evident carnal temper and the want of all regard for private and official character, as the New York Churchman, — while none makes such pretensions to be a standard, to which, upon church principles, others should be conformed. Is this abusive spirit to be allowed .■* Does Bishop Onderdonk mean to justify, shelter, and reward it? We protest against it, personally and officially ; and while we discuss principles, and are willing they should be discussed with entire liberty, we cliallenge the production of an abusive or disrespectful expression personally applied, and still more to ])ersons in authority in the church, in all the columns of the pa- per conducted by ourselves. For the dogmas of the Churchman we feel no concern. But let the church look to the spirit and temper with which it is conducted, while it bears upon its face the solemn testimony of the bishop of New York, " it has, as it richly deserves, my full and undiminished confidence." 56 442 NOTES TO LECTURE IVII. " I ncpil not li'll you, my dear sir," says the author of ' Loiters to a Frinnd concerning the New Theoloo-y of Oxford,' in the Episcopul Recorder for May y, 1~40, " tliat tlu'se writings have proved firebrands in the cliiircli. Where id the pence, imanirnity, and cordial cn-operation of wliich we boasted two years ago? We were then a compact, united body, animated by one spirit, nioviii;; onward in a career of prosperity. Hut jjow is it now f" One ciiurcU periodical arrayed against another, one ciergyman looking with suspicion up- on iiis brother ; nay, our very bisliops tempted to mutual distrust; and all be- cause a few divines in a foreign university have changed the liabit of reclusea for that of agitators, and persuaded many to believe that we have been all along ignorant of the true doctrines of our clmrch, and that great benefit is to be dcriveti from substiluliug for tlie creed, articles and iiomilies, some as yet undefined and intangible test of orthodoxy ! " (See for March, 1841.) '• I do and will uKmrn, and shall continue to mourn," says the Rev. Benja- min Allen, in his Letter to Bishop Hoi)art, (Philad., 1827, p. 8,) '* youR un- soundness AS A CHURCHMAN," (liis Capitals.) Again : " your doctrines and views of polity are unsound and unscriptural," ifcc. " Are you to propose a plan to cut up the canons and the Psalter, and claim the utmost veneration for our lit- urgy— to introduce Jacobite notions of church government, and claim to be no schismatic .' " (p. 3L) See further the Second Letter to Bishop Hobart, by this same writer, also published at Philadelphia, 1827, page 70, and Letter Third in the Ciirislian Warrior. How beautifully — as a poetic vision in contrast with the sad realities of life — d(jes the following quotation from a recent picture of the prelacy, relieve the horrors of such existing facts. " When the English Church," says the author of " The Church of England and the Church in America Compared," (New York, 1811, p 2G,) " we say, shall find time and inclination to note the prinii- tive ecclesiastical polity of the church in America, and the unquestionable blessing that has attended its peaceful exercise; (he church character it has given to all her institutions ; the growing union of individual efforts in her favor; the advancing harjiony of doctrinal views among her mkmbers; the comparative greatness of her missionary results; how unitku she has stood in the midst of surrounding divisions; how PEACEFUL in the n\idst of dissensions; how ORTHODOX in the midst of heresies; how tranquil in the midst of fanatical excitement ; how energetic in spite of her feebleness ; how concentrated in spite of dispersion ; how faithful, finally, amid nil her early trials, and now at last how solidly prospering and how surely advancing." What an admirable commentary, also, does this state of things form upon the infallible text of Mr. Daubeny's homily on schism. " Certain it is, that union among christians is to be found onl}' within the walls of the church. Upon leaving those walls, that union is exchanged for endless division," and so on, and so on. (Guide to the Ch., vol. i. p. 206, disc, x.) " Such," says Mr. Staunton, " are the natural results of schism; having no conservative principles, its faith, however j)ure at first, invakiabi.y delerii'ratea and proceeds, step by step, along the descent of error, till it finally settles in the depths of avowed heresy." (Dictionary of the Church, p. 418.) We shall have occasion to recur to this subject' when we come to illustrate theefficac}' of high-churchism in producing sects. NOTE B. THE NATURE OF SCHISM. We will here add some additional authorities. Schism, as thus described in scripture, and as referring to one particular church or comniuiiioii. implies, says Dr. Owen, these thrte things: (Works, vol. XX. p. 240.) •' 1. Want of that mutual lr)ve, condescension, and forbear- ance, which are required in all the members of the same church, with the moral evils of whisperings, back-bitings, and evil surmises, that ensue thereon. " 2. All undue adherence unto some church offices above others, causing disputes and janglings. NOTES TO LECTURE IVII. 443 " 3. Disorder in the attendance unto the duties of church assemblies, and tha worship of God performed in them. This is the only notion of schism, that is exemplified in tlie scripture, the only evil that is condemned under that name." Jn order, then, that any person may fall into this guilt of schism, " it is re- quired," says Dr. Owen, (Works, vol xi.ic. p. 133,) " 1. That they be members of, or belong to, some one chnrcli, which is so by the institution anJ appointment of Jesus Christ And we shall see that there is more required hereunto than the bare being a believer or a christian. " iJ. That they either raise, or entertain, and persist in causeless differences with others of that church more or less, to the interruption of that exercise of love in all the fruits of it, which ought to be amongst them ; and the disturb- ance of the due performance of the duties required of the church, in the wor- ship of God. As Clement, in the foremcntioned epistle, /Aovwo/ to-Ti ai'tK^n Ksu ^)tXa."rxi TTigi fjt.)\ at.vy.KOVTwv tii iranypt^t.v . " 3. That these differences be occasioned by, and do belong to, some things in a remoter or nearer distance appertaining to the worship of God : their ditfer- ences on a civil account are elsewhere mentioned and reproved, 1 Epist.,chap. 6, for therein, also, there was from the then state of things, an «TT«,wa, verse 7. " Unless men can prove," says Dr. Owen, (Works, vol. xix. p. 161 ,) " that we have not the Spirit of God, that we do not savingly believe in Jesus Christ, that we do not sincerely love all the saints, his whole body, and every member of it, they cannot disprove our interest in the catholic church." " We do and shall abide by this principle," says Dr. Owen, in his Answer to Dr. Slillingfleet, on the Unreasonableness of Separation, (Works, vol. xx. p. 253,) " that communion in faith and love, with the administration of the same sacraments, is sufficient to preserve all christians from the guilt of schism, although they cannot communicate together in some rites and rules of worship and order." " In this case, I ask," says Dr. Owen, (Works, vol. xix. p. 245,) " whether it be schism, or no, for any number of men to reform themselves, by reducing the practice of worship to its original institution, though they may be the mmor part lying within the parochial precinct ; or for any of them to join themselves with others, for that end and purpose, not living within those precincts .' I shall boldly say this schism is commanded by the Holy Ghost, (I Tim. vi. 5 ; 2Tim. iii. 5 ; Hos. iv. 15)." " After these things," says Dr. Owen, (Wks. vol. xix, pp. 243, 249,) " The motion of schism began to be managed variously, according unto the interest of them who seemed to have the most advantage in the application of it, unto those who dissented from them. It were an endless thing to express the rise and declare the progress of these apprehensions. But alter many loose and declamatory discourses about it, they are generally issued in two heads. The first is, that any kind of dissent from the pope and church of Rome is schism, all the schism that is or can be in the world. The other is, that a causeless separation from a true cliurch, is schism, and this only is so. But whereas, in this pretended definition, there is no mention of any of its internal causes, nor of its formal reason, but a bare description of it by an outward efl^ect, it serves only for a weapon, in every man's hand ; to perpetuate digladiations about it. For every church esteems itself true, and every one that separates himself — esteems himself to have just cause so to do. " In the following times, especially after the rise and prevalency of the Arian heresy, it was ordinary for those of the orthodox persuasion, to forsake the communion of those churches wherein Arian bisiiops did preside, and to gath- er themselves into separate meetings, or conventicles for divine worship, for which they were accused of schism, and in sundry places, punished accord- ingly; yea, some of them unto the loss of their lives. Yet, I suppose there are none now who judged them to have been schismatics." " But after that, churches began to depart from this original constitution, by the ways and means before declared ; every alteration produced a new suppo- sition of churcli-unity and peace, whereto every church of a new constitution laid claim; new sorts of schism were also coined and framed." According to Matthew Henry, in his very rare " Incjuiry into the Nature of Schism," the word denotes in the New Testament, (Lond. 1717, pp. 8,10,13, 444 NOTES TO LECTURE XVII, 14, 15,) " a division in apprehension ; so — and as embracing all particular churches, be they more or less pure.^ Thus do we enlarge the boundaries of the visible church, so as to include the whole world, and all the various denominations who profess the true 1) Conf. of F. ch. XXV. § 2. 2) Ibid, § 4. LECT. XVIII,] IN CONTRAST WITH PRELATISTS. 453 religion. It is beyond this entire and comprehensive body, — AND NOT BEYOND THt; PALE OF OUR OWN DENOMINATION, WC profess to say, there is no ordinary possibility of salvation. Now there is a very plain and yet a most important distinction to be here observed, and upon which hinges the decision of this question. There may be a separation in the visible church, and a separation from it. In the one case the separating; body still re- mains within the pale of the visible church ; while, in the other, it is excluded from it. There may be a separation by one por- tion of the visible church, from some doctrines, practices, or pol- ity, of other portions of it ; while yet, in all other respects, and in the maintenance of a spirit of lo\ e and charity, there is union and communion with those same bodies. Or where the differ- ences are regarded as essential, there may be a withholdment of any visible communion by those who yet acknowledge one another as parts of the external, or visible church. It is thus with the presbyterian denomination. It regards itself but as one component member of the great body of the visible or cath- olic church. It is separated from other members of this christian confederacy, by certain peculiar views of christian doctrine and polity. But this separation is only wuthin, and not from the visible church ; for in this church it expressly includes all professing christians throughout the world. With " all saints that are united to Jesus Christ their head, by his spirit and by faith," our church teaches its members that they are to "have communion in each other's gifts and graces, in love.'" On our principles, then, there is no difficulty whatever in un- derstanding how there may be a separation of the numerous bodies professing the true faith, in some things, while yet they are all within, and none of them without, the pale of the visi- ble church. Separation from the visible church — which ex- cludes from any ordinary, but not necessarily from any cove- nanted salvation — is, on our princijiles, a separation from all denominations whatever, which profess the true faith ; and not a separation from the presbyterian denomination in particular. But, on the other hand, on prelatic principles, both Romish and Anglican, the prelacy being supposed to be the catholic visi- ble church, and prelacy, therefore, being essential to the very existence of that church, separation from the prelacy is a separ- ation not within, but from this visible church. It is exclusion from all possibility of covenanted mercy. And thus are we, and all other branches of the church, who are guilty of the inexpia- 1) Conf. of F. ch. xxvi. § 1. 454 THE CATHOLIC LIBERALITY OF PRESBYTERIANS, [lECT. XVIII. ble offence of a difference of views as it regards the order of pre- lates, forever cut off" from the only covenunted channel of the divine mercy. Thanks be to God, who has enabled us to read his blessed word differently, and thus to embrace, in the arms of charity, all who in every church and in every place, call upon the name of the Lord Jesus, both theirs and ours. Is it not, then, demonstrably plain, that while we are free from the charge of originating any new articles of faith, or of imposing, as necessary to salvation, any rites, or ceremonies, not enjoined in the word of God ; we are not only justified from the imputation of a narrow and bigoted exclusiveness, but are eminently distin- guished for our enlarged and comprehensive charity ? It is a libel upon our real principles, and not a true represen- tation of the case, to allege that we have stood forth in rebellion against the church catholic, in the obstinate vanity of our own sectarian views. We, as presbyterians, have never claimed the right of enforcing our individual opinions — no, nor even our united counsels, as of divine right, upon the conscience of any man. We have, on the contrary, appealed from all human judgment to that which is divine ; from the word of men to the word of God ; from the councils of fathers, to those of inspired apostles ; and from tlie authority of any earthly head of the church, whether he be a fallen and corrupt prince, or an equally fallible and corrupt pope, to the supremacy of ouk one AND ONLY lord AND MASTER. We havc thus givcu our public judgment, as expressed in all our confessions, synods and councils, against such usurpation as utterly subversive of the kingdom, and the authority of Christ. We have, therefore, reclaimed our ancient rights; — our original, and inalienable and heaven-granted privileges, upon the very ground of that written charter by which they were originally bestowed. Neither did we, in dissevering our connexion with the Eng- lish church, as we did in our fathers in England ; or in again lifting the standard of presbyterianism, which had been long trodden in the dust, by the tyranny of a foreign ecclesiastical power, as did our fathers in Scotland ; neither, 1 say, did we in either of these cases, separate from the catholic or universal church, or separate that church from us. All that is truly cath- olic we still receive and venerate. Her ancient creeds we still adopt and profess as our faith ; and in her steps do we delight to walk as far as she followed Christ. In that holy, catholic, and apostolic church, as instituted by Christ, we trust with an entire faith ; nor would we exclude from our communion one genuine son or daughter of this heavenly family. We would rather rejoice to extend to them, as brethren and sisters, all the privileges of our common household. LECT. XVIII.] IN CONTRAST WITH PRELATIC BIGOTRY. 455 Neither is there any thing in the true principles of that prim- itive church, or in her heavenly record, or in her earliest creeds, for hundreds of years together, that will in any wise warrant the unnatural separation of prelatists from their non-prelaiic brethren; or their foul denial of our common spiritual nature ; or their unjustifiable attempts to wrest from us any portion in the inheritance of our heavenly Father. If the English church was justifiable from the charge of schism, in separating from the Romish, in becoming independent, and in re-modelling her forms, order, doctrine, and discipline, be- cause, in the judgment of some of her ministers and some of her people, the principles of the reformation were accordant to the word of God, and sanctioned by its authority, although anathematized at Rome; — then with what consistency can these sectaries, these dissenters from an established faith, these schis- matics, as they also were and are reputed, turn round upon us and brand us with names, which are to them so odious ; and that, too, for doing what they have done, and upon the very principles by which they profess to have been guided ?' 1) " It could never be pretended for a moment, that a church which de- rives its succession of bishops through any other church is, therefore, subject to it."' Rev. H Gary on" the Apos- tolical Succession intheCh. ofEng." p 6. This argument is admirably put in an old work by Vincent Alsop, (The Mischief, of Impositions, 1680, 4to. Ded. p. 12, in Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. p. 92.) " If Rome be a ' trve ' church ; if she holds all the essential points of Christianity ; if salvation may be attained in that communion ; why was there such a stir about reforming of accidents, when the es- sentials were secured .' Why such a contest about a little easier way, when the other was passable .' Why all this ado about a purer church, when the other is confessed a ' true ' church? These things will follow, in a lump, from those concessions ; 1. That a person, or party, may sepa- rate from some ' true ' church, which holds all the essential points of the christian faith, without the imputation of being a schismatic. 2. That a person, or party, may separate from some church where salvation is at- tainable, without peril of the guilt of schism. 3. That the only reason, that yet appears, to justify the Church of England's departure from Rome is, that it is lawful, in some cases, to withdraw from the commutiion of a ' true ' church, wherein all the essen- tial points of faith are owned, and wherein salvation may be attained ; for the sake of greater purity of wor- ship,greater clearness of doctrine, and greuUr security of salvation. Is it, then, lawful for England to separate from Italy for greater purity.' it may be lawful for others to separate Irom Ennland for greater purity .'' It is readily acknowledged, that the impu- rity of the Roman synagogue is much more, inconceivably more, than that of the Church of England ; and, therefore, there was not so great cause to leave the latter as the former, upon that account; but, in aspiring after conformity to the institutions of Christ, we are not to consider so much what is behind, as what is be- fore ; not so much, what we have left, as what we have yet to reach ; not so much the terminus a quo, — from what state of impurity we have emerged, as the terminus ad quern, — to what state of purity we would ar- rive. For, if it be true, that there is such a state of purity to be obtained, and such a state of impurity to be avoided, as will justify our forsaking of this for that, and such a measure of both these as will not; it must be exactly stated, what is the lowest de- gree of corruption that will, and, what is the highest, that will not, war- rant a separation ! " 456 THE ANGLICAN CHURCH SEPARATED FROM US. [lECT. XVIII. "The reformation," says Mr. F. W. Faber, " was not schis- matical. We did not separate from Rome, but Rome separated from us." And how does he reach this conclusion ? " They," say he, " denied us church communion. We never denied it to them."' Now, in like manner say we,' — The organization of our churches was not schismatical. We did not separate from the Church of England, but she separated from us. And why ? They denied us church communion. We deny it not to them. We remained catholic and apostolic, requiring only what Christ instituted and taught. They, dissatisfied with that common ground, and unwilling to abandon powers derived from tradition and not from scripture, have selfishly excluded from the chris- tian community all who dwell beyond their holy precincts. But nevertheless, we never have separated from the universal church, nor from them as a portion of that church. We are still raem- 1) Tr. No. 151 of the Prot. Ep. Tr. Soc. p. 3. 2) " We hold," says Rutherford, (Peaceable Plea for Paul's Presbytery, pp. 122, 123,) " that Rome made the separation from the reformed church- es, and not we from them, as the rot- ten wall maketh the schism in the house, when the house standeth still, and the rotten wall falleth. '' Because we left not Christianity in Rome, but the leprosy of popery growing upon Christianity, seeing we kept the apostolic faitli, and did posi- tively separate from the pookes, blybes, and ulcers of christian Rome. " We did not separate from the western churches, either collectively, or representatively gathered in a gen- eral council. " We departed not from a national, provincial, or parishional church, or pastors that we had before, nor from the material temples and churches, e.xcept that some not very considera- ble hirelings and idol-pastors would not go before us. " And because the succession of fundamental truths from genera- tions to generations is as necessary as the perpetual existence of the true catholic church, while the covenant with night and day, and the ordinan- ces of Heaven shall continue, (Jer. xxxi. 37.) therefore there were a succession of professors and members of the catholic church, that did ever hold these fundamentals, which we to this day hold against Rome ; sup- pose histories cannot clear the partic- ular persons by name. " We have not separated from Rome's baptism and ordination of pastors according to the substance of the act, nor from the letter of the twelve articles of the creed and con- tents of the Old and New Testament, as they stand with relation to the mind and intent of the Holy Ghost, how- beit we have left the false interpreta- tions of the lords of poor people's faith and consciences." Is it retorted that the Romish church was always the Romish church .-" We ask, " who, what, where is the church of Rome .' (Bait. Lit. & Rel. Mag. Ap. 1840, p. 147) Whatis that, of whose unity we speak .'' Do you mean all the faithful ? Or only all the ecclesiastics .' Or only the priests ? Or only the prelates .'' Or only the cardinals and the pope.' Or only the pope .' If any one will examine the great Latin work of the celebrat- ed Petir de Marca, entitled the ' Con- cord of the Empire and the Priesthood,' he will see reason enough to be satis- fied, that the very body, which boasts of its unity, is itself not only incapa- ble of establishing its personal identi- ty, by any rules of judgment estab- lished and admitted by itself; but that in truth, taking its own principles as the guide of our judgment, we cannot avoid concluding it entirely out of existence ! " LECT. XVIII.] PRELACY CONDEMNED, OR PRESBYTERY SUSTAINED. 457 bers of the one, catholic, and apostolic church, and glory in its heaven-bought privileges. But further. The Church of England is not, we are equally- assured, and as we think on good grounds, chargeable with schism, in her separation from the church of Rome, because " of its original independence on the see of Rome.'" Now if the power of the church of Rome was illegal and usurped, because contrary to the original and chartered freedom of the churches of Christ ; just as certainly is the asserted authority of the Church of England, by which she requires conformity to her impositions, illegal, and an usurpation upon the just rights of conscience and of private judgment; and to resist and spurn from us such as- sumed authority, is therefore no more schism in presbyterians, than it is in prelatists. For even were it proved, as it never has been, and we believe never can be, that the most ancient form of British Christianity was prelatic, and not rather, as we think, pres- byterian, yet still, if the charter of the church is not prelatic, but on the contrary, gives commission to but one order of teach- ing ministers, then, as Tertullian teaches, "nobody can prescribe against the truth, neither space of times, nor the patronage of persons, nor the privilege of countries, since our Lord calls himself the Truth, not custom."" And besides, if a disputed claim to original independence, is a warrantable reason, for throwing off allegiance to the despo- tism of Rome ; then is it an equally sufficient plea, for our re- jection of the equally unjustifiable claims of the prelatic hierar- chy. For, tracing our descent, as the presbyterian church in this country does, through that of Scotland, which we are clear- ly entitled to do ; then it is a fact that we never did belong to the Church of England. Over us she never did have any rightful jurisdiction. And while she struggled hard to forge up- on us the shackles of her service-books, her doctrines, and her forms, yet never has she been able to subdue the indomitable spirit of Scottish freedom, which chose poverty and death, rath- er than abandon the liberty wherewith Christ had made her free. We are descended from that churrh which wrested, even from a despotic crown, the reluctant charter of her independent establishment ; — from which all prelatists in Scotland, are dis- senters and separatists; — and against us, therefore, it is most preposterous absurdity, in this country, and by an unestab- LisHED prelacy, to raisc the cry of schism and dissent. 3 1) Jones' Essay on the Church Scotland, in A Hind Let Loose, &c. Wks. vol. iv. p. 466. by Alexander Shiels. Glasgow, 1797, 2) Lib. de Velaud. Virg. cap. i. p. 835. See e. g. pref. p. 10, and pp. 3) See this charge plentifully 269,280,309. laid to the account of prelatists in This author fully vindicates the 58 458 PRESBYTERY NEVER IN LEGAL BONDAGE TO PRELACY. [LECT. XVIII. Tracing our spiritual lineage directly to the church of Scotland, through emigrants from that country, and her ecclesiastical colo- ny, the North of Ireland, we may say to the English church, as did the Jews to Christ, " we were never in bondage to any man.'"'' Many a century did our forefathers resist the aggres- sions of Rome, and cling to the simpler forms of her primitive presbyterianism. And when the spirit of reform re-animated her oppressed, and down-trodden children, she plainly saw that popery and prelacy were essentially united, and that to be de- livered wholly from the trammelling corruptions of the one,^ she must tear from her every remnant of a spiritual hierarchy. church of Scotland " for refusing to acknowledge a corrupt ministry," where " the question of hearing cu- rates is cleared." See particularly on page '25S, &c. '• Finally, for union's sake, and to avoid schism in the body, we must withdraw from them." p. 309, &c. See this charge also fully retorted on them, as it regards Scotland, in Henderson's Review and Considera- tion, Ef'inb. 1706, p. 55. " Besides," says Dr. Mitcl'.ell, (Presb. Letters, p. 2d9,) " the episcopacy of Scotland, unlike the religion of the primitive church, was established bj^ the most unpardonable treachery and perfidy, which were followed up by downright force ; and it was thus established on the ruins of a form of ciiristianity, which had been, for a considerable time, in legal and quiet possession of the place it held in the country ; and finally, it was supported by fine and imprisonment, confiscation of goods, hanging, burning, and such like ar- guments, not quite so christian as they are potent." Dr. Mitchell, in his Letters to Bp. Skinner, further says, (p. 25,) " and Bishop Skinner is, ' by the grace of God,' primate of a church, which is a schismatic of schismatics ; for it sepa- rated from us after we had separated from Rome." 1) Dr. Campbell, of Armagh, in his Vindication of the presbyterians of Ireland, in answer to the attack of the Bishop of Cloyne, (Lond. 1787, pp. 65 -67,) after giving a historical re- view of that people, remarks : " From this account you will observe, my Lord, that the establishment of the presbyterians in Ireland was of a pe- culiar kind ; that they were not dis- senters from your church, more than you were dissenters ; that they made no rent or breach in your church, of which they were never members, ex- cept by a comprehension, which should ever be desirable to liberal minds. And I apprehend it will be very difficult for you to point out, on just principles of policy in this king- dom, what the reasons of state are, that should exalt the episcopal church so very high, and depress the presby- terian church so very low. For it may be observed. 1st. Tliat they were not so originally. The presbyterians in Ulster, by an encouragement of gov- ernment, were on a fair and equal foot- ing, as we have seen, so far as the dif- ference of their church discipline per- mitted. " 2. That, in establishing their church, they had peculiar privileges ; that these privileges they never forfeit- ed to the state, but that they were torn from them by those men, who over- turned the constitution. " 3. That, from the nature of their first establishment, they have not only a right to a toleration, in conrmon with other good subjects, but have a claim on the state for support and protection ; and that this claim is strengthened by the manner, in which they lost the privileges and emolu- ments of their church. " 4. Tliat they were invited here to strengthen the hands of government, and to support the constitution ; and that, for this end, the whole body of presbyterians was firmly united ; but that the established church was not thus united, many of its members be- ing violent in their opposition to King William, and to the Hanover succes- sion ; of which a thousand proofs might be adduced, besides those al- ready oflfered." LECT. XVIII.] OUR SCOTTISH AND PURITAN ANCESTRY. 459 Her spirit we have received by inheritance. It has descended to us from our sires. It was breathed into us by mothers who were worthy of those noble women, who crowded around the representative of a despotic monarch, and wrung from him a hearing of the wrongs of their persecuted Zion.' With it our minds are imbued, and to its preservation we are eternally PLEDGED.* Look we again to our brethren, the Puritans and noncon- formists of England. With all their faults — their errors and their short-comings — we love, honor, and revere them. To claim descent from them we should not be ashamed ; and to stand or fall with their justification, in allowing themselves to be driven out from the English church, rather than pollute their conscien- ces, by a base conformity to the impositions of men, we are not reluctant. On either hand we are sustained by proof strong as holy writ. As the mountains are round about Jerusalem, so are the decisions of God's holy word round about us, to protect and defend us against these aspersions of men. It is further urged, as an argumentum ad invidiam, against us, that we countenance and support the ancient schismatics, who were held in reprobation by the early church. This argu- ment, which Dr. Stillingfleet brought forward in his work " On the Unreasonableness of Separation," has been stereotyped by all succeeding publishers of prelatical treatises. But the argument is unsound. It is worse. It is subversive of the very cause it is brought to sustain. It is not true when applied to us. It is true when applied to its avouchers. And, fiist, this argument is not true when applied to presby- terian and other orthodox denominations. This appears, first, from the fact that the church, that is, the doctrines and princi- ples of the church, from which these ancient schismatics separ- 1) See McCrie's Life of Knox. their communion, which was likewise 2) The author cannot but express too much, and too industriously dis- his surprise, that the descendants of coursed at home." the Huguenots should be so generally He rejoices, however, in knowing found embosomed in the prelacy, that some worthy descendants of this when it was against them it first man- noble ancestry, are not willing, for ifested its intolerant and haughty the sake of nny prelatic honors or assumptions. Lord Clarendon in- distinction, or from any other motive, forms us, that " Lord Scudamore, the to brand their forefathers, who gave last ordinary ambassador at Paris, not property and life in exchange foi only declined going to Charenton, Calvinism in doctrine and presbyteri- (the protestant church,) but furnished anism in polity, as schismatics, or his own chapel with wax candles on aliens from all hopes of covenanted the communion table, &c. And, be- mercy; or to excommunicate from sides, was careful to publish, upon all the church catholic, those who abide occasions by himself, and those who by their sentiments, and who glorj had the nearest relation to him, that also in their connexion with them, the Church of England looked not upon and many of them in their descent the Huguenots of France, as a part of from them. 460 THE ANCIENT SCHISMATICS — WHAT? [lECT. XVIII. ated, was not the same with that church from which we are declared to be schismatics. Our rejection of the ecclesiastical control of the Anglican prelacy, is not, therefore, as theirs was, a separation from the communion of the church catholic. It is a withdrawment from external communion with a body, which usurps the exclusive title of the catholic church, in those par- ticulars only in which, as we believe, it has separated from Christ. This will be evident, in the second place, if we con- sider the occasion, motives, and ends of these ancient schisms. It will thus be found, by a recurrence to their history,' that they arose from the disappointed ambition of men who desired to impose their peculiar views, on certain matters, upon all others, as terms of communion ; and who, being opposed and thwarted in these designs, left the communion of all other churches; — erected churches of their own ; and excommunicated all beside. So was it with the Novatians, the Donatists, with Tertullian, and many others. Now, the fundamental principle upon which we base our repu- diation of prelatical dictation and control, is just the reverse of this. For the chief reason we assign, is their unwarrantable assumption of the very power claimed by these ancient schismat- ics, of imposing upon the church terms and conditions of com- munion which are not sanctioned by God's holy word. This will be still further evinced, when we attend more par- ticularly, and in the third place, to the nature of these ancient schisms. Now, their authors so separated from all other churches as to deny to them the character of true churches; or any efficient and valid ministrations ; or any possibility of sal- vation. We, on the contrary, do not deny the church state of other denominations : we do not reject, but recognize, their min- istry and sacraments ; and rejoice in extending the possibility of salvation to all throughout the world, who profess the true re- ligion.2 It is, therefore, most contrary to fact and to honorable argu- ment, to accuse us of a participation in the same criminality with these ancient schismatics, when we are found to differ from them in every thing essential, and to stand opposed to that funda- mental principle which constituted the gravamen of their schism. 1) See particularized in Dr. Ow- sive ordination of bishops, which en's Wks, vol. XX. pp. 296, 298-303, having, as they tliought, (unduly and vol. xix. p. 194, &c. enough,) failed in one or two instan- 2) " And that wliich was the ani- ces, it became the destruction of a mating principle of the tumult of the church state, not only in tlie churches Donatists," says Dr. Owen; (Wks. where such mistakes had happened, vol. XX. p. 244,) " was a supposition, as they surmised, but unto all the that the continuation of the true churches in tlie world, that would church state depended on the Bucces- not hold communion with them." LECT. XVIII.] FOREFATHERS NOT SEPARATISTS, BUT SEPARATED. 461 While, therefore, we acknowledge the claims of the prelacy to be churches and ministers of Christ, — while we hesitate not to unite with them in communion and in worship, and only sep- arate from them in those things which we must believe to be unsu[)ported by God's word, or to be in themselves inexpedient, or injurious — with what face can the charge of schism, as alleged against these ancient schismatics, be made against us i But in the fourth place, it is to be observed, that schism, ac- cording to the definition, universally approved by Romish and other prelatical writers, implies necessarily a voluntary or cause- less separation from the catholic church. Now the separation of these ancient schismatics was voluntary, and in many cases, though not in all, without sufficient cause. It was also a separ- ation from the catholic visible church, and not from any particu- lar denomination. And, therefore, were they justly concluded, according to this definition, to be chargeable with the guilt of schism. But as it regards ourselves, we utterly deny that the separation of our forefathers from the Romish or Anglican churches, was voluntary or causeless. On the contrary, it was made neces- sary by the plain requisitions of God's word, which forbade their communion with unscriptural dogmas, and unchristian rites. And being thus withheld from all submission to such enactments, while yet these churches obstinately persisted in imposing them, on pain of anathemas and civil penalties, they were driven out by bell, book, and candle, and thus separated from the bosom of their ancestral homes. We further deny that they separated from the communion of the catholic church. From this church, considered as in- visible, no power on earth, or in hell, can ever separate one soul which has become truly united to it. From that church considered as visible, nothing else can separate but apostacy from the faith of Christ, or disobedience to some insti- tution of Christ. But in neither of these senses did our fathers separate from the catholic church. On the contrary, it was for their maintenance of these very doctrines and institutions, in their purity and their entireness, they were driven out by the ghostly rule of the governors of the church. That from which they separated — that to which they steadfastly refused submission — was the superadded dogmas and self-imposed rites and ceremo- nies which Christ never instituted ; and to enforce which he never gave authority to the rulers of the church. To these, therefore, our fathers neither were, nor could be, subject. Com- pliance with them and belief of them, would, on the contrary, have been traitorous infidelity to the head of the church. 462 ANCIENT SCHISMATICS AND PRELATISTS IDENTIFIED. [lECT. XVIII. Were we, even now, in ecclesiastical subjection to the Rom- ish church, or to a church modelled on these prelatic principles, then would our protestation aj^ainst their errors and unscriptural practices be as imperative as it was in former days; and our sep- aration from them as conscientiously required. And not only would we be bound to withdraw from these churches, but as Dr. Owen strongly but truly affirms, " from all of them in the whole world, one after another, should they all consent unto the same thing, and impose it in the same manner ; if there be any truth in that maxim, ' It is better to obey God than man.' "^ But, when we consider the case of this prelatic church, do we not find a very striking analogy between its principles and con- duct, and tiiose of these ancient schismatics, to whom they liken us. Like them, the Anglican church has separated from the Rom- ish church, and has utterly disavowed all connexion, intercourse, or communion, with the reformed churches. Like them, are they found condemning all other churches, disowning their ministry, rejecting their sacraments, and denying to them the possibility of covenanted mercy. And as those ancient schisms 1) Dr. Rice informs Bishop Ra- venscroil, (Evang. and Lit. Mag. vol. ix. pp. 492, 493, 494,) that" he had no hesitation nor t-cruple to receive tiie communion from episcopal hands;* until he plainly enough understood that episcopal hands would not re- ceive of him ; that is, tiiat episcopa- lians separated themselves from all other denominations, denying their church-membership, their ordination, and the validity of all their adminis- trations." " According to the old bad Latin proverb, novas rex novas UxA And the reviewer, after much serious deliberation, determined no longer to receive the communion from episco- pal hands, because, in his judgment, episcopal practice in this case is schis- matical. It is an effectual rending of the body of Christ. It is a separation of christians from one another, on ac- count of matters, which, so far from being essential to the being of the church, have never, in any age, con- duced to its purity. The spirit of llie episcopal church in this daj', would have been regarded as schismalical by the fathers and reformers of the Church of England. For they did * Epi.icopal hands here are the hands of a bishop. t It ia about as good, however, as the bisli- op's " Fast est ab hoste docore." acknowledge the foreign protestants, as branches of the church of Christ; and they did not, by the nineteenth ar- ticle, mean to exclude them from the body of God's covenanted people." " Chiefly, then, on account of the mere matter of orders, episcopalians cut off from the church of God, and all its covenanted mercies, and all its precious hopes, this great body of protestants. They separate them- selves from this communion of saints, and cast them off from christian fel- lowship. If this is not schismalical conduct, we do not know what schism is. After coming to this conclusion, we could not any longer receive the communion from ' episcopal hands.' " '• And now, as ministers of the Lord Jesus, we solemnly warn and exhort Bishop R., and all who think with him, to consider, whether the charge, which, often in bitter terms, they bring against non-episcopalians, and the denunciations, which they fear not to utter against them, may not return on their own souls in another day, when the great head of the church will make it appear before the universe, how little value he places on matters merely external, and how highly he values that love, which is the fulfilling of the law." LECT. XVIII,] ANCIENT SCHISMATICS AND PRELATISTS IDENTIFIED. 463 in Alexandria, Antioch, Constantinople, Rome, and other pla- ces,' arose chiefly from tiie pride, ambition and despotism of the prelates,* so have the entire divisions, distractions, and schisms of modern times, resulted from the unyielding tyranny of pre- lates, in the imposition of their orders, rites, and ceremonies, as necessary terms of communion. And do we not find these modern prelates re-affirming the very principles, which were anciently condemned as inhuman and contrary to brotherly love ?' Do they not, many of them, avow false doctrines and errors ? Do they not, as they did, exalt themselves and their church to an exclusive preeminence ? Do they not, as they also did, enjoin as necessary what Christ never so required ? And if, like those ancient schismatics, modern prelates deny covenanted mercy, and the sacraments, and a ministry, to all who will not submit to their interpretation of the Bible, and thus identify themselves with them ; how are they to escape from a hke con- demnation, or from involving themselves in their immorality ? The rebuke given by Archbishop Usher to the Roman- ists is no less applicable to these prelatists : " And yet," says he,'' " this proud dame and her daughters, the particular church of Rome, I mean, and that which they call the catholic Roman (or 1) Owen, p. 302. 2) See Baxter's True and Only Way of Concord, Lond. 1680, pt. ii. ch. V. p. 200, and pt. iii. ch. i. p. 5, &c. where instances are named. Bp. Davenant, in his epistle to Durseus, gives it as •' the first and great obstn- cle, which hud as yet prevented the union of the churches of the reforma- tion, " est usurpatum uniusin alteram dominium ac tyrannicje cujusilam potestatis exercitum." Cantab. 1G40, p. G. " But here lay the original of the differences," says Dr. Owen, (Wks. vol. XX. p. 2!)4,) and " schisms which fell out in the third, fourth, and lifth centuries ; that having all in some measure departed from the original institution, rule and order of evan- gelical churches, in sundiy things, and cast themselves into new forms and orders, their differences and quarrels related unto them, and could have had no such occasion, had they kept themselves unto their primitive constitution." 3) Owen, p. 299, vol. xx. and p. 303. " This claim of theirs to be the only true catholic church, so as to deny the validity of our ordinances, is, says Dr. Owen, (Wks. vol. xix. p. 196.) "1. Cruel and sanguinary; condemning millions to hell, that in- vocate and call on the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, believing all things that are written in the Old and New Testaments, for no other cause in the world, but because they are not con- vinced that it is I heir duty to give up reason, faith, soul, and all to them, and at their disposal. '•2. It is false, that the union of the catholic church in the notion now under consideration, consists in sub- jection to any officer or officers ; or that it lialh any peculiar form, consti- tuting one churcii in relation to them, or in joint participation of the same individual ordinances whatever, by all the members of it ; or that any such oneness is at all possible ; or any unity whatever, but that of the faith which by it is believed, and of the truth professed. 3. It is most ridiculous, that they are this catholic church, or that their communion is comprehensive of it in its latitude. He must be blind, uncliaritable, a judge of what he cannot see or know, who can once entertain a thought of any such thing." 4) Serm. bef. his Majesty, Lond. 1687, 4th edit. pp. 8, 9. 464 PRELACY, NOT PRESBYTERY, GUILTY OF SCHISM. [LECT. XVIII. the faction rather that prevaileth in them both) have in these lat- ter ages confined the whole church of Christ within themselves, and excluded all others that were under the Roman obedience, as aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise. The Donatists were cried out against by our forefathers, for shutting up the church within the parts of the south; and rejecting all others that held not correspon- dency with that patch of theirs : and could they think well then of them that should conclude the church within the western parts of the world, and exclude all other christians from the body of Christ, that held by the same root there that they did ? It is a strange thing to me, that wise men should make such large discourses of the catholic church, and bring so many tes- timonies to prove the universality of it ; and not discern, that while by this means tliey think they have gotten a great victory, they have in very truth overthrown themselves : for when it cometh to the point, instead of the catholic church which con- sisteth of the communion of all nations, they obtrude their own piece unto us ; circumscribing the church of Christ within the precincts of the Romish jurisdiction, and leaving all the world beside to the power of Satan ; for with them it is a resolved case, that to every creature it is altogether of necessity to salvation, to be subject to the Roman bishop." " What must then become of the poor Muscovites and Gre- cians (to say nothing of the reformed churches) in Europe ? What of the Egyptian and Ethiopian churches in Africa ? What of the great companies of christians scattered over all Asia, even from Constantinople unto the East Indies, which have and still do endure more afflictions and pressures for the name of Christ, than they have ever done, that would be accounted the only friends of Christ? Must these, because they are not the pope's subjects, be therefore denied to be Christ's subjects ? " So speaks this truly great and eminent man, and in thus vindi- cating the Church of England, and rebuking Rome, he equally vindicates the presbyterian church and condemns the conduct of the prelacy. Our reply, therefore, to the question, are we schismatics ? — is, that we are not ; and sufficient grounds for this opinion have, we trust, been given. To the second question — are the up- holders of this doctrine of prelatical succession schismatical ? — our reply is, that they are ; and our reasons for this conclusion, will be advanced in our next lecture. LECTURE XIX. THE PRELATIC DOCTRINE OF APOSTOLICAL SUCCESSION SCHISMATICAL. Having laid down the true doctrine of schism, as described in the word of God, and liaving vindicated the presbyterian church from its imputation, we now proceed to show that this doctrine of prelatic apostolical succession is schismatical in its character and tendency. Let it, however, be first observed, that a body may be justly chargeable with the guilt of schism, while yet it retains the name, the form, the ordinances, and all the external marks and tokens of a visible church of Christ. This is most evident from the fact that the Jewish church, while yet retaining its antiquity, its unity, its succession, its priesthood, with the oracles and ordinances of God, is nevertheless proved by the apostle Paul in his Epistle to the Romans, to have been broken off from the true church, and thus excommunicated by God, because of unbelief. While the Jewish was actually boasting that it was the only true and catholic church of God, it had become apostate and therefore excommunicate. And, in like manner, is it possible that this charge may, in a measure, lie against the prelacy, even while it proclaims to the world, in a spirit of equal intolerance and lofty pretension, the same ex- clusive claims to be the true, and only, church of God. But further, it is not less clear, from holy scripture, that this guilt of schism may attach itself not merely to the apostolic and visible church of Corinth, but also to the church of Rome, upon whose succession the entire claims of the Anglican prelacy must necessarily rest. In the Epistle of Paul, addressed to that church in its first and purest form, he solenmly warns it, by the example of the Jewish church, to beware, lest, by a similar apostacy firom the feith, and a like arrogant assumption of supre- 59 466 HOW FAR THE PRELACY IS SCHISMATICAL. [LECT. XIX. macy, it also should be cut off. (Rom. ii. 22.) "Behold," says the apostle, " the goodness and severity of God ; on them who fell severity, but towards thee goodness, if thou continue in his goodness, — otherwise thou also shalt be cut off." Similar also, are the forewarnings delivered by divine authority to the seven apostolic churches of Asia, as emblematic of all others in every age and country. (Rev. chapters 2nd and 3rd.) It is, therefore, most clear and indubitable, that the mere fact of its existence in a visible and organized church state, having all the external marks of a church, does not by any means prevent the application to the prelacy of this charge of schism. We proceed to state, that this crime of schism, although necessarily sinful, in all its forms, is not in every degree of heinousness, exclusive of God's promises, or sufficient to cut off the guilty church from the communion and privileges of Christ's body. This certainly was not the case with the Corinthian church, although it is most assuredly condemned for its schisraat- ical procedure. Nor was it otherwise when at a later period, Clemens Romanus addressed his epistle to this same church, and rebuked them for the continuance among them, of this same unhappy and destructive spirit. In alleging, then, against the prelatical communion the certain charge of schism, we are far from designing thereby, to implicate it in such a degree of criminality as to imply open apostacy, or the loss of the true character and privileges of a church of Christ. We do not deny the being — the esse — the form — even of the Roman catholic, as a church of Christ; although we certainly deny it to be — bene esse — or in a state of well- being. We do not question the church standing, character, and privileges of the Anglican communion ; and much less is it our desire to throw any doubt over the character, as a true church of Jesus Christ of the Protestant Episcopal Church in these United States of America. We do not sit in judgment upon the character or claims, the merits or demerits, of these churches of Christ. We do not determine the nature and amount of that criminality under which they severally lie, in pretending to a spiritual supremacy over other denominations. But since we are condemned as sectarians and schismatics ; since we are held forth as justly excluded from the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church ; we plead not guilty to the libel. We repel the injustice of the offensive imputation. We repudiate the pharisaic intolerance and illiberality of those, who in this age, and in this country, create, foster, and re-animate feuds, ani- mosities, alienations, and strifes, among those who should be found dwelling together as brethren in the Lord, and as heirs together to the same divine inheritance. LECT. XIX.] PRELATISTS SCHISMATICAL BY THEIR OWN SHOWING. 467 We are, therefore, compelled to show, that whatever schism may be justly chargeable upon our isolation, and inharmonious estrangement from one another, is to be laid to the account of prelacy and not of presbytery ; — of the Roman and Anglican communions, and not of the presbyterian church. But as to the degree of that criminality, in which these churches are involved, we leave all judgment with Him to whom, as the Head of the church, it has been wisely and graciously com- mitted. Do prelatists demand the subjection of all other churches, to their ecclesiastical sway ? — they thereby violate the unity of that catholic liberty, with which Christ has made his churches free. Do they declare that to be necessary, which was not made necessary by the teaching of the apostles, or by the most ancient creeds ? — then do they violate the unity of catholic faith. Do they refuse to receive, and associate with us, as christian ministers, and as christian men, except upon terms not prescribed or authorized by God's word ? — then do they violate the spirit of catholic communion. So that theirs is not the catholic, but only the Anglican or the Roman communion. In further establishing this charge against the prelatic doctrine of apostolical succession, we will first show that it follows from their own definitions of schism. " Schism, then," says Stilhngfleet,' " as it imports a separation from communion with a church society, is not a thing intrinsically and formally evil in itself, but it is capable of the differences of good and evil, according to the grounds, reasons, ends and cir- cumstances, inducing to such a separation. The withdrawment from society is but the materiality of schism ; the formality of it must be fetched from the grounds on which that is built." This same writer, after quoting the opinion of the Reverend Mr. Hales, says :^ " And so that learned and rational author there fully proves, that those who require unlawful and unnecessary conditions of communion, must take the imputation of schism upon them- selves, by making separation from them just and necessary." " Where any church retaining purity of doctrine, doth require the owning of, and conforming to, any unlawful or suspected practice, men may lawfully deny conformity to, and communion with, that church in such things, without incurring the guilt of schism." " That the pope's usurpation mainly lies in imposing things upon men's consciences as necessary, which are doubtful or un- 1) Iren. p. 108. 2) Irenicum, pp. 108, 116, 117, 118, 119, 124. 468 PRELATICAL DEFINITIONS OF SCHISM. [LECT. XIX. lawful, and, wherever the same thing is done, there is an usurp- ation of the same nature, though not in so high a degree ; and it may be as lawful to withdraw communion from one as well as the other." " So that let men turn and wander which way they will, by the same arguments that any will prove separation from the church of Rome lawful, because she required unlawful things, as conditions of her communion, it will be proved lawful, not to conform to any suspected or unlawful practices required by any church governors upon the same terms ; if the thing so required be, after a serious and sober inquiry, judged unwarrantable by a man's own conscience." " Unless others proceed to eject and cast them wholly out of communion on that account, in which case their separation is necessary, and their schism unavoidable." So, also. Bishop Hoadly, in his reasons for conformity to the Church of England,' says: " If your separation from the Church of England be not necessary, you acknowledge it to be schismatical. If it be, we acknowledge it not to be schismat- ical." So, also, speaks the Rev. Mr. Hales, " as learned and judi- cious a divine as our nation hath bred," as Stillingfleet thought,'^ in his tract on schism, which, according to the same eminent divine, exhibits such " wisdom, judgment and moderation."^ " Schism, I say, upon the very sound of the word, imports divis- ion: division is not, but where communion is or ought to be." " Yet the great benefit of communion, notwithstanding, in regard of divers distempers men are subject to, dissension and disunion are often necessary ; for when either false or uncertain conclusions are obtruded for truth, and acts either unlawful or ministering just scruple are required of us to be performed ; in those cases, consent were conspiracy, and open contestation is not faction or schism, but due christian animosity." " First : there is a schism in which only one party is the schismatic : for where cause of schism is necessary, there, not he that separates, but he that occasions the separation, is the schismatic." " Second : there is a schism in which both parts are the schis- matics ; for where the occasion of separation is unnecessary, neither side can be excused from the guilt of schism." 1) See Wks fol vol. i. p. 297. of " Golden Remaias." The very 2) Iren. p. 120. highest character is given of him by 3) Ibid, p. 121. The cognomen of Clarendon, (see Life, vol. i. pp. 27, ' ever-tnemorable ' ie given to Hales 28,) and by Bishop Gibson. See pref. by immemorial and universal usage, to hia Golden Remains. and hia pieces are known by the title LECT. XIX.] THE EVER-MEMOKABLE HALES ON SCHISM. 469 " You shall find that all schisms have crept into the church by one of these three ways; either upon matter of fact, or mat- ter of opinion, or point of ambition. For the first, 1 call that matter of fact when something is required to be done by us which we either know, or strongly suspect, to be unlawful. So the first notable schism of which we read in the church contained in it matter of fact ; for it being upon error taken for necessary that an Easter must be kept, and upon worse than error, if I may so speak, (for it was no less than a point of Judaism forced upon the church,) upon worse than error, I say, thought further neces- sary, that the ground for the time of our keeping that feast must be the rule left by Moses to the Jews, there arose a stout ques- tion,— whether we were to celebrate with the Jews, on the fourteenth moon, or the Sunday following? " Again : " Come we now to consider a little of the second sort of schism, arising upon occasion of variety of opinion. It hath been the common disease of christians, from the beginning, not to content themselves with that measure of faith which God and the scriptures have expressly afforded us ; but out of a vain desire to know more than is revealed, they have attempted to discuss things of which we can have no light, neither from rea- son, nor revelation : neither have they rested here, but upon pretence of church-authority, which is none, or tradition, which for the most part is but figment, they have peremptorily con- cluded, and confidently imposed upon others, a necessity of entertaining conclusions of that nature ; and to strengthen them- selves have broken out into divisions and factions, opposing man to man, synod to synod, till the peace of the church vanished, without all possibility of recall. Hence arose those ancient and many separations amongst christians, occasioned by Arian- ism, Eutychianism, Nestorianism, Photinianism, Sabellianism, and many more, both ancient and in our time ; all which, indeed, are but names of schism, howsoever, in the common language of the fathers, they weie called heresies." "The third thing I noted for matter of schism was ambition ; I mean episcopal ambition showing itself, especially in two heads : one concerning plurality of bishops in the same see ; another, the superiority of bishops in divers sees. Aristotle tells us, that necessity causeth but small faults, but avarice and ambition were the mothers of great crimes. Episcopal ambition hath made this true ; for no occasion hath produced more frequent, more continuing, more sanguinary schisms than this hath done. The sees of Alexander, of Constantinople, of Antioch, and above all, of Rome, do abundantly show thus much ; and our ecclesi- astical stories witness no less, of which the greatest part con- 470 PRELATISTS SELF-CONDEMNED AS SCHISMATICS. [lECT. XIX. sists in the factionating and tumultuating of great and potent bishops. Socrates, apologizing for himself, that professing to write an ecclesiastical story, he did oftentimes interlace the actions of secular princes, and other civil businesses, tells us that he did thus to refresh his readers, who otherwise were in dan- ger to be cloyed by reading so much of the acts of unquiet and unruly bishops." <' But that other head of episcopal ambition, concerning su- premacy of bishops in divers sees, one claiming superiority over another, as it hath been, from time to time, a great trespasser against the church's peace, so it is now the final ruin of it ; the east and the west, through the fury of the two prime bishops, being irremediably separated without all hope of reconcilement." Such are the sentiments of Mr. Hales. Again: " Schism," says Mr. Jones,^ "is the sin of making a division in the church, and separating ourselves from it." Of course, the sin lies at the door of them by whom that division is made necessary ; for as it is absurd to say the majority must necessarily be right, when the standard of right is not the wis- dom of man, but the sure teaching of God, the separated party may not be the separating body ; and the whole guilt may attach itself to the many and not to the few. Once more : " Who," asks Bishop Hobart, in his " Church Catechism,"^ "are schismatics? " They are schismatics who, in any thing essential, depart from the ministry, sacraments, and worship established in the church, or who create division in the church." Now, it is an indisputable fact, that the portion of the Eng- lish church, which came to be distinguished by the name of Puritans, was originally composed of the members and minis- ters of that church; — that their object and design was, not its injury, but its more complete and perfect reformation, according to the desires of its earliest and best fathers ; — that they strongly repudiated this charge of schism ; and that they had no antici- pation of any actual separation, until they were required either to belie their own consciences, or to leave the bosom of their beloved church.^ 1) The Churchman's Catec. Wks. See the Address of the Essex Minis- vol. ii. p. 427. ters in Price's Hist, of Prot. Nonconf. 2) P. 44. vol. i. p. 330. See also ibid, pp. 322, 3) See Hanbury's Hooker, vol. i. 206. In the first directory, drawn up p. 393; Pierce's Vind. of Dissent. by Cartwright, the Puritans protest Calamy's Defence of Nonconf vol. against " the calumny of schism." iii. p. 198, I.i0nd. 1705, 205 ; Trough- Price's Nonconf. vol. i. p. 3G7. The ton's Apology for Nonconf. p. 107 ; charge deprecated by Cartwright and Baxter's Five Disputations on Ch. Iiis fellow prisoners in 1592. Price's Gov. Arg. 3, Disp. i. p. 37, &c. Nonconf. vol. i. p. 395; and by Bar- LECT. XIX.] PRELATISTS — NOT THE PURITANS — SCHISMATICS. 471 Their withdrawment from the communion of the Church of England, was forced upon the Puritans, by the prelatic, or rather the royal party, who acted under the influence of the crown, in opposition to the more enlightened policy of some of the wisest members of the hierarchy. This party required the be- lief of what were regarded great and serious errors. That whole system of doctrine and practice, which was developed by Archbishop Laud, and which is noio maintained by the Oxford divines and other high-churchmen, we cannot but consider, as did our nonconforming fathers, as essentially popish. This system, we must, with them, believe to be unscriptural, and con- sequently, unwarrantable and dangerous. To enforce, therefore, the belief of such tenets, was to make resistance a duty, and compliance a sin. And the Church of England, in sternly in- sisting upon entire conformity to her views, was eminently schis- row, Greenwood and Perry, in 1593. See ibid, pp. 419, 423. So also in the Millenary petition, presented by the Puritans to James I. See ibid, p. 451. So again under the despotic reign of Bancroft, ib. p. 504, 508. See Johnson's strong disavowal of the appropriate- ness of this charge in his letter to Bp. Sandys. Price's Hist of Prot. Nori- conf. vol. i. p. 273. Sampson and the early Puritans charged the prelacy with schism in enforcing as necessary what could not be shown to be arti- cles of faith, and yet allowing no lib- erty of nonconformity, or separate worship. See Soames' Eliz. Rel. Hist, p. 53 ; Price's Hist. Nonconf. vol. i. p. 181. See the nonconformists de,- fended against the charge of schism, in Owen's Wks. vol. xix. pp. 5G9- 616. . See also Dr. Owen's full An- swer to Stillingfleet on the unreason- ableness of separation. Wks. vol. xx. p. 279. See this subject also fully treated in Plain Deahng Defended, &c. Lond. 1716, and Lay Nonconf. Justified, &c. by Mr. Grove, Lond. 1717, Gth edit. "A conference be- tween E. and D. or a member of the Church of England and a Dissenter &c." Lond. 1718. See Matthew Hen- ry's Sermon, " The Christian Religion not a Sect, and yet that it is every where spoken against." Wks. Lond. 1830, p. 314. Baxter wrote a treatise, entitled A Search for the English Schismatic, (4to. 1681,) of which he gives himself the following account, (Life, pt iii. pp. 188, 189, in Life by Orme, p. 636.) " Because the accusa- tion of schism is it that maketh all the noise against the nonconformists in the mouths of their persecutors, I wrote a few sheets called A Search for the English Schismatic, compar- ing the principles and practices of both parties, and leaving it to the reader to judge who is the schismat- ic ; showing that the prelatists have, in their canons, ipso facto excommu- nicated all the nobility, gentry, cler- gy, and people, who do but affirm, tliat there is any thing sinful in their liturgy, ceremonies, or church-gov- ernment, even the lowest officer. Their laws cast us out of the minis- try into gaols, and then they call us schismatics, for not coming to their churches ; yea, though we come to them constantly, as 1 have done, if we will not give over preaching our- selves, wiien the parishes I lived in had, one fifty thousand, the other twenty thousand souls in it, more than could come within the church doors. This book, also, and my Prog- nostication, and what I valued most, my True and Only Way of Universal Concord, were railed at, but never answered, that 1 know of." See this subject, as it regards the reformed churches, fully discussed by Voetius, in his Desperata Causa Papatus. Amst. 1635, Libri Tertii. § 111, p. 693, &c. '•■ Scisma est, cum in fide consontientos alii aliis hominibus vel exclusis ritibus ita sunt addicti, ut animis et studiis propterea dissideant et factiones ineant." p. 698. 472 PRELACY THE PARENT OF ALL SECTS. [lECT. XIX. matical, and the just cause of that division, and of all the evils which ensued.' And inasmuch as these same unscriptural doctrines and prac- 1) The sentiments of Mr. Isaac Taylor have been already given in Lect xiii. 307. " I think it (dissent) is an evil, which we have in a great measure brought upon ourselves by past pertinacity and remissness," says the Rev. G. Hodson, M. A. Archdea- con of Stafford. Lord Bacon prophesied to his sov- ereign, James VI. that the first violent attempts that should be made to estab- lish uniformity would prove fatal to unity, and rend the church in pieces, a prediction signally fulfilled in the reign of that prince's grandson. That all the sects in England are traceable to the prelacy, so that she was " the mother of them all," may be seen af- firmed in the Dissuasive from the Errors of the Time, by the Rev Rob- ert Bay he, Lond. 4to. 1645, p. 7, where he says, " all of them were bred and born under the wings of no other dame than episcopacy." See also pp. 10,12 " Not chargeable on the dissenters, but undoubtedly on the church " See proved in Towgood's Dissent Justified, Lond. 1811, ed. 12th, pp. 23-27,79-83,124,160-165. " But who, at present," asks the authors of The Plea for Presbytery, (Glasgow, 1840, pp. 128, 121),) "are the sectaries ? Does the designation apply to all who refuse to yield an implicit obedience to the decisions of an act of Parliament .■" Can a lay legislature pronounce an infallible judgment upon a question of schism ? If so, what is orthodox in Edinburgh must be heretical in London. You speak of the ' endless ramifications of dissent,' as ' the scandal of protest- antism,' but you would have express- ed yourself more correctly had you said that they are the repi-uuch of the Church of England. She has created separation to a greater extent, and in more varied forms, than any other protestant church in Christendom. Hiid it not been for the immense ad- vantages which an establishment confers, she might long since have been swallowed up by the very evil she has generated. By her despotic constitution and her unwarrantable ceremonies, she has driven from her pale thousands and tens of thousands, of the most pious and enlightened of British protestants. When the act of uniformity was passed, it was not without weighty reasons, that, in a single day, two thousand of the most learned and godly ministers that ever adorned a christian church, resigned their livings, and retired from her communion. She has never exhibit- ed any symptom of contrition for that foul violation of the rights of con- science ; and, until she assume the attitude of repentance and reform, the reasons for dissent must remain obvi- ous and unanswerable. Let the people be permitted to elect their pastors, let the ancient government of the church by presbyteries and synods be restored ; and let faithful men, met in her ecclesiastical assem- blies, be allowed to cut off with an unsparing hand, whatever is amiss in her constitution and her ceremonies, and then she will have made an ef- fectual movement for the suppression of dissent. You may, perliaps, tell me that presbyterianism in Scotland is split up into many sections, but I can reply, that secession there is neither so rampant nor so varied as in Enirland. Had the Scottish church adhered closely to her own formula- ries, dissent would have been almost unknown i . North Britain. In as far as principle is concerned, the great mass of the Scottish people are per- fectly agreed in doctrine, government, and worship. And now that the Scottish establishment is exhibiting the spirit of the olden time, and faith- fully recurring to her ancient stand- ards, I rejoice to see that those who seceded from her in her period of de- fection, are again lifting up their hands to bless her, and returning to the bosom of their venerable parent." Among the illustrations of schism given by Matthew Henry, in his Brief Inq. into the nature of Schism (Lond. 1717, p. 17,) is '• concluding hardly as to the spiritual slate and condition of those that differ from us, excluding tliein out of the church, and from salvation, because they are not just of our mind in every punc- tilio." Witness that notion, which LECT. XIX.] PEELATIC EXCLUSIVENESS IS SCHISM. 473 tices, are now pertinaciously advanced, and are also held forth as the just and necessary inferences from this elemental truth — the apostolical succession; we are hence led to the conclusion that this doctrine is schismatical, and its upholders justly charge- ahle with the guilt of schism. Besides, this doctrine, and these, its associated errors, are, by their abettors, enrolled among the articles of faith. They are declared to be "of the substance of the faith," and therefore, essential as terms of communion with the church of Christ. On the contrary, in unison with a large portion of the Church of England, and its most judicious divines, we believe that such doctrines never can be proved from scripture, and that they may not be held as terms of christian communion, and therefore that to enforce them as such, is schism.^ Still further, the advocates of this system anathematize and exclude from ail covenanted mercy, those who cannot conscien- tiously receive their unscriptural and unsubstantiated dogmas as true, and much less as fundamentally necessary. Now, that this conduct is most plain and palpable schism, we will prove out of their own writers. " None of us," says Bishop Bull, in his Vindication of the Church of England,* " do affirm that our church is the only true church ; for that would be a schismatical assertion, like that of the Donatists of old, and the papists now- a-days, and the hii^hest breach of charity, in damning all the christian world besides ourselves." Such, also, is the opinion of Dr. Field, in his work on the excludes out of the church, and con- sequently out of heaven, all those^ (how orthodox and serious soever they are otherwise,) who are not in prelatical comniunion ; if no diocesan bishops, then no ministers, no sacra- ments, no church, no salvation, which is certainly the most schis- matical notion that ever was broached in the christian world." 1) See Lects. ii. iii. ants and the apostles ; and all our proceedings are to take their RISE there, whence all order and divine authority rise. FOR CUSTOM WITHOUT TRUTH IS ONLY ANTIQUATED ERROR. Therefore, forsaking error, let us follow the truth, knowing that, as in Esdras's opinion, truth is victorious, so it is written, ' truth remains and prevails for ever,' it lives and reigns through endless ages. Neither is there with truth any distinction or respect of persons, but only that which is just it ratifies ; neither is there in the jurisdiction of truth any iniquity but the strength, and dominion, and the majesty and power, of all generations. Blessed be the God of truth ! This truth Christ shows in the gospel, saying, ' I am the Truth.' Therefore, if we be in Christ and Christ in us ; if we remain in the truth, and the truth abide in us, let us hold those things which are of the truth." Firmilian writes, that at Rome, they did not observe the same day of Easter, nor many other customs which were practised at Jerusalem ; and so, in most provinces, many rites were varied according to the diversities of names and places.'' Gregory Nazianzen is also very explicit,** in his oration in 1) Suicer. Thes. ibid. further in Div. Right of Min. pt. ii. 2) See synopsis of his sentiments p. 100. in Blair's Waldcnses, vol. i. p. 7.5. 7) Apud Cj'prian, Ep. 75, § 5, r?") Theopliil. ad Autolycum, lib. in Kinor, pt. ii. p. oq.o. ii. p. 123, in Palmer, vol. i. p. 14. 8) Aihanasii Opera, vol. ii. App. 4) Ep. to Smyrnians. edit. Paris, 1G27, Orat. in Athan. 5) Adv. Hceres. lib. iv. c. 44. Thus Gregory Nazianzen says, To jutJ" 6) Ep. 74, in Powell, p. 179. See yap o/ucyvai/Aov, ic-ju cjucBfioviS, &c. 68 639 TRUE DOCTRINE — THE TRUE SUCCESSION. [LECT. XXI. praise of Atlianaslus. Speaking of his election as bishop of Al- exandria to the cliair of St. Mark the evangelist, who is sup- posed to have founded that church, he says, that Athanasius was " not less the successor of St. Mark's piety than he was of his preeminence. For if," says he, " you consider Athanasius only as one in the nunnber of the bishops of Alexandria, he was the most remote from St. Mark ; but if you regard his piety, you find him the very next to him. This succession of piety ought to be esteemed THE TRUE SUCCESSION. For he who maintains the same doctrine of faith is partner in the same chair; but he who defends a contrary doctrine, ought, though in the chair of St. Mark, to be esteemed an adversary to it." " This man, indeed, may have a nominal succession, but the other has the very thing itself, THE SUCCESSION IN DEED AND IN TRUTH. Neither is he who usurps the chair by violent means, to be esteemed in the succession ; but he who is pressed into the office ; not he who violates all law in his election, but he who is elected in a manner consistent with the laws of the case ; not he who holds doctrines opposed to what St. Mark taught, but he who is indued with the SAME FAITH as St. Mark. Except, indeed, you intend to maintain such a SUCCESSION as that of sickness succeeding to health; light succeeding to darkness ; a stoi-m to a calm ; and madness suc- ceeding to soundness of mind. ^^ The following testimony from Augustine is very decisive. " As if," says he,^ " antiquity, or ancient custom should carry it against the truth. Thus murderers, adulterers, and all wicked men may defend their crimes; for they are ancient practices, and began at the beginning of the world. Though from hence they ought rather to understand their error; because that which is reprehensible and filthy, is thereby proved to have been ill be- gun, Uc. : nor can it be made honest and unreprovable by hav- ing been done long ago." " But this is a part of the devil's craft and subtilty," as he ex- cellently observes in the same place, " who, as he invented those false worships, and sprinkled some juggling tricks to draw men into them, so he took such course, that in process of time, the " The one is of the same judgment ceeding Peter." Cathedree successio with truth, and sits on the same nihil successionis piceter nomen ha- throne, the other is of an opposing bet, sed idem sentiendi successio ver- judgment, and sils on a rival throne; itatein inquit. Gregor. Nazianz. in the one has the name, the other has Math. 23, in Tumet. Op. torn. iv. p. the reality of succession." St. Am- 217. brose also observes : " He who has not 1) Qsest. ex. Vet. et Novo Tes. the failh ot Peter, inherits nothing ii. 114, in Notes of the Ch. from Peter, and vainly boasts of sue- LECT. XXI.] THIS THE DOCTRINE OF THE FATHERS. 639 fallacy was commended, and the filthy invention was excused by helu^ derived fiom antiquity ; for by long custom that began not to seem filthy, which was so in itself. The irrational vul- gar began to worship demons, or dead men, who appeared to them as if they had been gods ; which worship being drawn down into custom of long continuance, thinks thereby to be de- fended, as if it were the truth of reason. Whereas, the reason of truth is not from custom, (which is from antiquity,) but from God; who is proved to be God, not by long continuance, (or antiquity,) but by eternity." St. Ambrose says, " They have not the inheritance, and are not the successors of Peter, who have not Peter's faith." And again : " If any church rejects the faiih, it cannot possess the foundation of apostolic doctrine. It must be, therefore, deserted. Thy Peter is Christ."' " The church is called one," says Jerome, '•' because of the unity of the faith. "^ But it is unnecessary to enlarge. It has been shown by Du Pin and others, that by that rock on which our Saviour was to build his church/s " Jerome, Augustine, Theodoret, Bede, Pau- linus, Rabanus, Anselm, Lombard, Innocent 111., &c, understand it to mean our Lord himself; and that the majority interpret it of Me true faith. This, according to Natalis Alexander, is the doctrine of Hilary, Gregory, Nyssene Ambrose, Hilary the dea- con, Chrysostom, Augustine, Cyril of Alexandria, Juvenalis, Leo, Petrus Chrysologus, Theodoret, Eucherius, Felix HI., Gregory 1) De Penitentia, lib. i. cap. vi. corpus est Christruno'^spiritio vivifi- 2) in Luc. lib. ii. cap. ix. cala, unila tide una, et sanctificata." 3) Jerome in Ps. 24, II. Hugo de Victoire de Sacrum, lib. ii. See also Newman on Roman- ""^Anciently," sajs Knapp, (Theol. ism, pp. 205, 266. So also Cassan- vol. ii. p. 489,) nxboxm^ was sy- der, a learned Romish divine, holds nonymous with cgjid'o^oi, and jiiks this langv.age : " For there is to be catkulira was the same as fides orlho- considered, as to the chuch, the head cloxa, which was the faith held in op- and the body. From the head, there position to heretics; because it wag is no departure hut by doctrine disa- supposed tliat the Irue faith, which greeable to Christ, tlie head. From accords witii the will of Christ and the body, there is no departure by the fipostles, must be the universal diversity of rites and opinions, but fiith of all christians, and be found in only by the defect of charity." See all tlie churches established by the in Conder's View of all Religions, apostles. Hence ecdesm catliolica is p. 9. tii.'it qvm ha bet fidcvi sive veritatem Jerome, as quoted in Dr. Barrow, ca'DEX. 561 Chris lian Observer, the London, quo- ted, xxviii. xix, d, 14, 16, 61, 101, 112, 21 d, 257, 258. 2(51 . 265, 2H8. 279, 2dO, 251 , 2s3, 2lt2, 345, 37c, 38t, 422, 479. Chnsostom, quoted, 102, 237, 239, 247,251,301, 304,499. Church. The, Independent of the Civil Government, quoted. 62. Church, the, destroyed bv prelacy, 145; what, 161,171,229.543. Church, the indefectible, as prelatists teach, 77. Church, The, in England and America Compared, quoted, 325 Church and state, prelatic views on. 32S. 329. Church, the English, parties in, 3S9, and Lect. ivii. 442, 475, 479. Church, several meanings of the word, 456-45-5, 4f»9. Church, not the clergy, 499, 500. Churchman.The, quoted, sxi, 105, 106. Civil magistrate, has plenary power, as prelatists teach, in ecclesiastical matters. 315, 317. Clageett.Dr. quoted, S7, 197,408,429, 437, 475, 496, 549. Clark. Rev. Dr. of Philadelphia, quot- ed, 7,5,95. ]25.271,2?5. Claude, of Turin, quoted, 05. Clement of Alexandria, 102, 499, 5^5, 536. 542. Colliers Eccl. History, quoted, 520. Coleman's Christian Antiquities, quot- ed. 233. 2-53. Coleman. Rev. John, quoted, 474. Colton. Rev. Mr. quoted, 357. Commission of Christ to the Apos- tles, 142, 144. Conder, Protestant Nonconformity, quoted, 54 ; his View. inc. 507, 539. Confession of Fciith, quoted, 9, 10, 37, 38. 491, &c. Congregatioualists. See Indepen- dents. Controversy, demanded of us, 8, 9, 15, 16 ; importance of this, In- trod. sect. iii. and iv. ; the cause of all denominations at state, 14, 17 ; how long it must continue. 19. Cooke, Dr. quoted, xxv, 52, 103, 143. Cooke, Rev. Dr. of Ireland, quoted, 532 Corbet on the Church, quoted, 435, 513. Cos. Mr. A. Cleveland, quoted, 324. Cox. Dr. Chaplain to Queen Eliza- beth, quoted. 54. Crabbes English Synonymes. quoted, 4^4. Cramp's Text-Book of Popery, quot- ed, xiii. 71 Cranmer. quoted, 155, 905, 218. Croft, Herbert. Bishop of Hereford, quoted, 100, 101, 103, 136, 143. 150, 159, 500. Cumber, Dr. quoted, 193. Cummings's Apology for the Ch. of Scotland. 386, 451. Cyprian, quoted. 14.103,168,192,301, 302, 414, 506. 536. Cyril, of Jerusalem, quoted, 45, 82. Cyril, of Alexjmdria, quoted, 61, 536. D. Daubeny's Guide to the Church, quot- ed, XX, 49, 327, 329, 435, 442. Davenant. Bishop, quoted. 69, 148. 149, 165, 175, 245, 262, 326, 353, 406, 463, 502. Dehon, Bishop. 264. Delahogue, quoted, 512. Dechard. quoted, 101. Dick's Theology, quoted. 444. DIsraeU. Genius of Judaism, quoted, 355. Divine Right of the Ministrv. quoted, 156, 190", 239, 374, 375, 490, 497, 554. Doane, Bishop, quoted, 247, 243, 250, 262; his great prudence Eind mis- take, 285, 322, 324. Doctrine, true, the all-essential mark of a true church, 532 — 5. Doctrine of the Succession. See Question. Dodwell. quoted, 91. 105, 149, 175, 252, 366, 367. 3G5. 414, 451. Dodsworth on Romanism and Dissent, quoted,54, ?3, 91, 191,216. Dryden, quoted, 37. 3-51 Dudley, Hon. Judge, design of his Lecture, xxiv. Dupin, quoted, 512. Dutch Reformed churches, bigotry of prelacy towards, 23. Dwight, Dr., quoted, 352. Eclectic Review, the. quoted. 362, 479. Edorar's Variations of Popery, quoted, 199, 5U7. Edinburgh Review, quoted, 5, 121, 175, 1S7. 307, 373. Edinburffh 'Witness, quoted, 479. Edwards. Dr.. quoted. 1:36. 305. Eleutherius, quoted, 103. EUiss Hist, of Madagascar, quoted, ■M7. Elys Call to Hear the Ch. Exam., 553. English Reformation, a relation of, &a:. quoted, 213. England, Bishop, of Charleston, quo- ted, 6, 56. Ephesus, Council of, 13, 506, 520. 562 INDEX. Epiphanius, quoted, 190, 192. Episcopacy, distinct altogether from the question of hijjh-churchism, 6, 7 ; we make no attack on episcopacy as such, Intro. § i. G, GO ; only a rite, 59 ; not in scripture, this admitted, 73 ; this distinction granted, 7. Episcopal church in this country, nov- elty of, 507, 506, 509. Episcopal Tract Society, now identi- fied with Oxford divinity, 285, 500. Episcopal Recorder, the, quoted, 128, 249, 2G9, 282, 286, 422, 439, 441, 442. Episcopius, hi.? views on this doctrine, quoted, 53, 225. Escott, Rev. T., bigotry of, 3. Espenceus, quoted, 251. Essays on tlie Church, quoted, 270. Essays on Romanism, quoted, 80. Es.-iential truths all in the Bible, 48 ; what, .50. Eusebius, quoted, 79, 188, 236, 499. Eutherius, Bishop of Tyana, quoted, 434. Evangelical episcopalians. See Low- church. Evangelical Magazine, Lond. quoted, 345. Exeter, Bp. of, quoted, xxii. Extent of this doctrine, 4, 111, 285, 2:6, and the whole context, 425 ; avowed in Charleston, 447, 448. F. Faber's Vallenses and Albigenses, quo- ted, 43, 65, 122, 146, 205, 371, 375, 418, 507, quoted, 269, 485. Faber, Rev. F. VV., quoted, 456. Fabricius, quoted, 106. Fathers, our, the memory of, 20, 21. Fathers, the, not authoritative, 35, 46, 47, 76,