# THE *5» .« ^ m, and observation, on the experience of a long series of years, as also on the observation and remarks they themselves have made on ancient and modern Churches !" A singular and sandy foundation. In the last we have the admission that Wesley was the father of Methodism, that the Methodist Societies were or- ganized into a Church, and so called first, A. D. 1784, just 68 years ago, and while Methodist Societies in England have never yet been organized into a Church or so called ! "We also learn an important fact, that the only reason the Methodist E. Church is Episcopal, rather than Republican, is, not because the word of God was consulted or cared for in the matter, but simply because it is claimed — not proven — that Mr. Wesley ^^ preferred'^ it ! ! I might quote extensively from Wesley's Works, to prove that he was the father of Methodism, did not all Methodists admit the fact and boast of it "? Isaac Taylor, in his work, " Wesley and Methodism," page 199, says, " Wesley anism is a scheme — it is the pro- duct of uninspired intelligence^ and therefore has its de- fects." * Methodist Discipline, page 7. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 57 Page 214. " But Wesleyanism is the ivork ofman^ * * it is open to the freest scrutiny. " Dr. Coke arrived in New York on the 3d of Nov. 1784, and on the 25th of December following, the General Con- ference assembled at Baltimore, at which time the Methodist E, Church was organized^ — Dr. Bangs' Original Church, page 26. " Methodism has*, from the beginning, been, in a most striking manner, the child of Providence. Nearly all its peculiar characteristics were adopted, without any previous design, on the part of the instruments by whose agency it was brought into organized existence, as circumstances seemed to require, and without expectation of their becoming elements in a permanent ecclesiastical constitution." — Dr. HiNKLE, in Platform of Methodism. This only claims that the Methodist E. Church came into existence by sheer accident. The Christian Church was organized by Jesus Christ — Methodism by accident — mere happen-so. Methodism, by J. H. Inskip, a work widely endorsed by the Methodist press. •' As a creature of Providence^ Method- ism, in her peculiar external organization, has adapted her- self to the exigences of the times, * * and hence though constantly changing^ yet, like the modifications through which the human system passes, in the various stages of its de- velopment, she has always maintained her identity entire." — Introduction. "It is but a little more than 100 years since the first Methodist society was formed by Mr. Wesley in Eng- land. The M. E. Church has not been in existence 10 years.''' —Page 53. "Finally, it may be said. Methodism in England and America was a special system. It originated in as dark 3^ 58 THE GREAT inON WHEEL. and unpropitious a period almost as ever known in the his- tory of Protestant Christianity. " To meet the emergency, which then existed, God raised up a company of great men — men who were great in intel- lectual endowment, moral excellence, and inventive genius. There was John Wesley, who has justly been designated the greatest of ecclesiastical legislators — Whitefield, the most ex- traordinary of pulpit orators — Charles Wesley, among the best of sacred poets — Coke, the leader of modern mission- aries — Asbury, the most laborious of Bishops — and Clark and Benson, one of the most learned, the other the best prac- tical commentator ever known. These men devised this POWERFUL instrumentality, WELL STYLED, ^'Christianity in earnest^ i. e. Methodism. Here the fact is distinctly asserted, that John Wesley, the Moses, and Charles Wesley, Coke, and Asbury, the Aarons of Methodist Israel, did devise the system of Methodism. It is then of men, and ^^came up out of the earth''' It is even by the best of Methodists acknowledged as an imperfect and defective system. Says Inskip, " a more wise or better arranged system of religious and moral enterprise, could not have been con- ceived. Of course, like all other human institutions it has ITS DEFECTS AND IMPERFECTIONS. PagC 65. We might proceed with our proofs, but let these suffice. Such is Methodism as it is presented to us by its warm friends and admirers — an imperfect^ defective^ human insti- tution, only a little over 100 years old — and not one of its apostles, ministers, or members presumed to call it a Church until 70 years ago ! Who then calls upon me to fall down and worship this great worldly image that Wesley set up, and acknowledge and regard and fellowship it as the Church of Christ, the ground and pillar of tlie truth 1 Who will pre- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 59 suine to call upon Christians to forsake the Church " set up '^ and "built" by Jesus Christ, a perfect pattern of which we find in his word, to support, instead, an " imperfect'' " de- fective^''' rickety " scheme," invented by one John Wesley, priest in one of the branches of the apostate Churches of Rome % Had the Church of Christ been destroyed, and the model lost, that God was compelled to raise up Wesley to originate a new scheme ? or had the Church of Christ proved inefficient and a failure, that it was necessary for the wisdom and " inventive genius " of Wesley to be called upon to save the world by devis-ing a new and unheard of scheme of church government "? Would not each position be blas- phemous'? And do not Methodist writers virtually plead this, when seeking an apology for the appearance of Method- ism, and thus exalt Wesley's system over Christ's system of church organization 1 They do, " in many respects the best most efficient form of church government known in the world. A. more wise or better arranged system of religious and moral enterprise, could not have been conceived." — Inskip. " The design of Providence in raising up the preachers called Methodists, their missions was not to form any new sect [but they did ! !] ; but to reform the continent, particularly the Church — and to spread scriptural holiness over these lands." — Inskip. Here it is boldly asserted that Providence raised up Me- thodists to reform the Church — the Church of Christ, of course — it having become corrupt and a failure — and how reform it but to remodel it after the counsel of their own inventive genius? If Wesley did this, did he not assume and use powers and authority the apostle attributes to Anti- christ — thinking to change times, laws, and ordinances ? That the defects of the apostolic Church organization, and its failure to accomplish the end purposed by it, it boldly pleads 60 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. as an apology for Methodism. Hear Isaac Taylor: -'No man was more devoutly observant of the authority of holy Scripture than Wesley ; but his understanding was as prac- tical in its tendencies as his piety was sincere. He perfectly felt^ whether or not he defined that conviction in words, that an apostolic Church — although right to a pin — which did not subserve its main 2yurpose — the spread of the gospel and the con- version of the ungodly must be regarded as an absurdity, and a hindrance to truth. What is the chaff to the wheat ? — " What are wholesome and scriptural usages and orders, which leave Christianity to die away within an inclosure ?'* Again : "It [Methodism] originated in as dark and unpropitious- a period, almost, as ever known in the history of Protestaut Christianity. Immorality, heresy, and spiritual death had gained a spiritual ascendancy when it was instituted. To meet the emergency which then existed, God raised up a company of great men, &c. ; these men devised this poiverfal instrumentality ^^^ i. e. Methodism. — Inskip^ pp. 54, 55. What is more clearly taught here than that the Christian Church had become effete and powerless for good — that the gates of hell had prevailed over it — that it was illy devised and unfit to meet the wants of the world, and having signally failed, when all was lost, and there was no eye to pity or arm to bring salvation, help was laid upon one John Wesley, priest of one of the daughters of the scarlet woman ! ! Beautiful system — Satan casting out Satan. Rome persecuting and opposing herself! ! I say here the fact is clearly intimated, that Wesley regarded the apostolic Church organization as inefficient and useless, and consequently rejected it as "a^i absurdity, and a hindrance to the truth leaving Christianity to die away. What an epitaph for frail man to write upon the work of Christ and his Apos- REPUBEICANIS:^ BACKWARDS. 61 ties ! ! He then mapped out of his own brain a religious scheme — Church system — to supersede it to accomplish what that could not — thus assuming more than Christly prero- gatives, since he rejected the authority and work of Christ, and set up a human organization to be the rival and antago- nist of Christ's Church ! Methodism, then, seems to have been originated a rival of, and designed to supplant the apos- tolic pattern of Church organization, and its workings from its birth until the present, are all directly and palpably to this end ! How then can a follower of Christ encourage it, or enlist under its rival banners 1 Are not such the follow- ers of men 1 Even Methodists so regard themselves — the followers of John Wesley ! Methodist Societies are called by Methodist writers, very properly, " Mr. Wesley's Socie- ties," and " Methodist Societies," not Churches of Christ. He would not have turned any of the nobility away if fhey had sought admission into his classes!'*' — InsJcip. " The fact, that few of the higher classes joined Mr. Wes- ley's societies,''' 6^c. — Inskip. "The policy of John Wesley, and his felloio-lahorers and sons in the gospel." — Inskip. " You are the elder brother of the American Methodists ; I am, under God, the father cf the whole family T — John Wes. ley, in letter to Ashury. Here W^esley claims a divine right to create and rule Methodists, under God ; i. e.,jure divino. " Our design is to show, that it is our duty as ministers of Christ, and the successors of the apostles and of John Wesley," &c. — Inskip. Methodist ministers the successors of the apostles and John Wesley ! ! " The first regular conference was held in Philadelphia, June, 1773. From the record of their proceedings, it ap- 62 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. pears there were in connection at that time ten ministers and 1600 members. At this conference the authority of Mr. Wesley, and the doctrine and discipline of the Methodists, were formally recognized and adopted." — Inskip. And this recognition has never been revolved ! What is this but a human society, and what were these preachers but the servants and followers of a man, when they formally acknowledged Wesley's authority, and pledged themselves to obey his book of laws, (the Discipline,) in both faith and practice ? . A Christian Church acknowledges the autho rity of Christ alone, and the doctrine and discipline of the New Testament. Hence Methodists are very properly denominated, by their writers, '■' the followers of Mr. Wesley.'''' "And such has been the course almost uniformly pursued by the followers of Wesley!^' — Inak'ip^ p. 39. Et cum mul. al. " The whole body of Methodists knowing this, and ac- knowledging Mr. Wesley as their spiritual/a^-^er and founder, would receive from him what they could not with any jus- tice or projjrieiy from any one else." — Dr. Bunfs Orig. Ch. p. 99. "As Mr. Wesley, under God, was the founder of the Methodist Societies, and the expounder of Methodist theo- logy, so w^as he the originator of much that is peculiar to the ecclesiastical polity of all the different branches of the great Methodist body in all parts of the world." — Gorre's His. Meth., p. 217, the latest Methodist historian. Notice, Mr. Wesley, it is claimed, instituted two forms of church government, one in England and one in America. But the crow^ning presumption of Methodists is, after hav- ing freely admitted that Charles and John Wesley originated and devised the whole Methodist s^^eme, they impiously REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 63 claim that they did it by inspiration^ or at least by diciue right and authority. Wesley himself has set his people an example, '■'■God then thrust the77i out to raise a holy people." — Wesley. See Dis- cipline, p. 3. " We believe that God's design in raising up the preachers called Methodists." — The four Bishops. See Discipline, p. 5. " Methodism," says Inskip, " is a creature of Providence.''^ What does he mean by Providence — chance ? If, not he means of divine origin. "They were guided by the admonitions of Providence." — Inskip, page 52. Were these admonitions of the spirit! Then it vi^as inspiration / Mr. Inskip exphiins this providence of God on another page, as under the immediate .direction of the Spirit. Then the Methodist Discipline is as much in- spired as the New Testament, and the acts of Methodist preachers as the acts of the apostles ! But it is insisted upon that the Wesleys and their apos- tles were in some way inspired, and acted under divine war- rant. "To meet the emergency which then existed, God raised up a company of men," &c. — Inskip, p. 54. " When it pleased God to raise up Wesley, only about two or three incidental forms of aggressive action were to be found in the Protestant Churches. He was providentially [i. e., under the immediate direction of the Spirit, is the impression made by Methodist writers] led to introduce an arrangement," &c, — Inskip, p. 169. I have, in the last five letters, candidly, and as inofFen sively as possible, laid before you my reasons for refusing to regard and fellowship your " religious scheme " as the Church of Christ. I have shown that his Church was organ- ized in his day, and has stood unchanged and indestructible until the present, and will continue the same, unreformed, 64 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. until the end of time ; \vhilc the Church of which you are a partial head, came into being only 68 years ago, and no or- ganization like it ever existed before ! I have shown what every Christian believes, that the Church of Christ is of divine origin ; Christ its author, its head, and its law-giver ; while I have proved, from your own words, as well as those of Wesley and your writers, no one denying, but all boasting, that John Wesley was your spiritual father and founder, and your Methodism a human scheme of man's device and inven- tion — a man-made institution — as much so as that of Odd Fellowship or Masonry — an imperfect and defective organ ization. How can a Christian man dare to fellowship it as a scriptural body, much less prefer it to the Church as organ- ized by our blessed Saviour'? It is a rival of Christ's fold, and those who enter it leave Christ to follow men — become the followers of Wesley and the servants of the General Con- ference. Methodism is a sect, not of the Apostolic Church, but of the Roman Apostacy ; having the Church of Eng- land for its mother, and the w^oman in scarlet for its grand- mother. If it is necessary for a Church to have valid ordinances and ordinations, in what light must we regard the baptisms and ordinations of Methodist ministers 1 They have one and all received their ordinations and authority from Rome — mysti- cal Babylon, the " Man of Sin " and son of perdition, through the Church of England ! ! Methodism, from its own testi- mony, belongs to the family of mystical Babylon, a grand- daughter, and can the Churches of Christ, with any degree of right and propriety, recognize, by receiving, the acts of mystical Babylon as Christian or scriptural. Baptists have refused to receive her baptisms for 1400 years, and have suf fered cruel martyrdoms on account of it, and shall we, their descendants baselv betrav those blood-sealed and life- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 65 attested principles for fear, not of prisons and death, but the impious scoffs and derision of those who oppose them ? Shall we noM , without either a stake or a prison in view, re- pudiate the principles and practices of our martyred ancestors, by recognizing the man-called, (for it is evident that God never called any man to preach Methodism^) man-made preachers of your human societies, by inviting them into our pulpits, and thus virtually saying to the world, "These are Christ's ministers, hear ye them, when they are only Mr. Wesley's preachers ?" You cannot expect the reflecting and consistent of my brethren to act thus. In my next, I will show how Methodis.t societies were made churches, and that Methodist Episcopaaj was surrepti- tiously introduced^ and, understood in a prehitical sense, or as equal to the episcopacy of the Church of England, is both spurious and invalid, and if not, its assumptions are indeed ridiculois and contemptible. LETTER VI Methodism an accident — The first chapter of the Discipline reviewed — Its statements at variance with facts — Methodists ivho trust to it are deceived — Mr. Wesley was opposed to Episcopacy — Did not believe in three orders. Dear Sir : — Having proved in my last, by Methodist writers, that your system of Methodism is purely of human invention ; I might also have added, an accidental institution. We quote from " Cliurch Polity," by Rev. A. Stevens, pub- lished by your Book-Concern : " The Methodist economy was not a contrived system. It was the result of jyrovidential circumstances.'^ — p. 83. " The arrangements and regulations thus accidentally, or rather providentially, provided, gradually grew permanent, and formed the government of the sect." "Thus societies, classes, chapels, lay preachers, itinerants, conferences, minutes, or the discipline, successively and pro- videntially [i. e., accidentally] entered into the system of Methodism. At the head of this system stood Wesley, gladly acknowledged by the increasing thousands of his fol- lowers as the founder and rightful director of the whole." —p. 85. Dr. Stevens frankly owns that Methodism came into being in parts, and by accident — and that it all belonged to (66) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 67 Wesley, who was the rightful director and dictator of it according to his own sovereign pleasure. How can you ask Christians to recognize, regard, and fel- lowship it as a Church of Christ, when it was neither organ- ized nor set up by Christ ? Since writing my last, I have seen the last number of the North British Review, containing a review of Mr. Taylor's late and last work, entitled " Wesley and Methodism." Mr. Taylor's work is spoken of in terms of the highest commend- ation. The reviewer, on every point, most fully asserts and corroborates the position I have taken with regard to the worldly character of the Methodist organization — and it is of itself sufficient to show the light in which it is viewed by historians, reviewers, and indeed by every reflecting mind. " The plans and arrangements of Wesley were, in their general character, quite warrantable and competent, and as he did not profess to proclaim or impose them as a part of the scripturally determined constitution of the Church, they ought to be judged of as human expedients^ just by their fit- ness to promote, temporarily or permanently, the interests of true religion." " Human wisdom is incompetent to devise permanent arrangements adapted to all times and circumstances. Divine wisdom alone is adequate to, and we enjoy the guidance of divine wisdom in this matter, only, in so far as the constitu- tion and arrangements of the Church or Christian Society have been determined^in Scripture, and in so far as we have rightly understood aitd applied the indications given us in these, of the way in which the Christian religion is to be pro- moted." " Wesley did not profess to be organizing a Church upon a scriptural basis. Hk Institute [Methodism] was the product of his own wisdom and sagacity, and must be subject to the 68 THE GREAT IROK WHEEL. lluL'tuations and instability of all merely human things " — North British Revieio. " It is certain that Wesley originally did not wish or ir- tend his Institute to be a distinct Church, but merely a sup- plement or appendage to the Church of England. * * * The people who joined him he wished to remain still mem- bers of the established Church, to attend upon her worship, and to receive sealing ordinances in her communion. He did not intend to form a distinct or separate Church, and in point of fact did not do so." — Taylor. " Wesley does not appear to have ever investigated the question, What is the scriptural organization of the Church? with the view and for the purpose of bringing the conclu- sions he might be led to form upon this subject, to bear upon the regulations of his Institute." — Taylor. " In treating of Wesleyan Methodism, ' as a hierarchy or scheme of spiritual government,' Mr. Taylor brings out some very important views in regard to the fundamental principle of organization, which vests the whole real control of the society in the ministers, and excludes the Church and people from any recognized or effective influence in the management of its affairs. We quite agree with him in thinking that such a constituted arrangement is utterly indefensible in theory, and that though somewhat modified in practice, it must oper- ate injuriously upon the permanent influence of the body." — North British Review. In addition to the above testimony, my eye has just fallen upon the following from the pen of th5 editor of one of your Conference papers, the Memphis Methodist Advocate. " The archetype of Methodism is the character of its found- er. He [Wesley] was a man of but one aim, and to this every thought and effort converged." " How blessed is Methodism, to have originated (humanly KEPUBLICANISM BACK^VARDS. 69 speaking) from such cOii author. She never need to fear for her safety or prosperity, while she wears the mantle of such a prophet.'' I would say, How more blessed to have origi- nated with Jesus Christ, and how much less to fear did she wear the mantle of such a prophet ! ! In view of the mass of authority I have produced, showing that Methodism is of man — a worldly scheme — a human expedient — a man-devised society — am I not warranted in saying, without laying myself open to the charge of illiberal- ity or bigotry, that for the organization of Methodism as a scriptural Church I have no more CJwistian fellowship or regard than for that of Masonry or Odd Fellowship 1 Am I not sustained in calling upon you to withdraw your claims to be considered and called a Church of Christ, and take upon you the name your founder gave you, and wished you to be called — a Society — religious, if you please — a " Religious Society 1" Would not this act do much to soften the pre- judices and opposition which your arrogant- and unscriptural Church pretensions have awakened in the minds of consider- ate Christians 1 I now leave the fortuitous origin of Methodism, and devote this letter to the examination of the fictitious charac- ter of the first chapter of your Discipline, which you and your fellow- bishops have endorsed and sent out to the world. It is admitted by all that the published histories and docu- ments of a community are open to examination, and subject to the freest ci'iticism. Between the first chapter of your Discipline and the facts furnished in your published histo- ries, and the writings of Mr. Wesley, I can but decide there is a very great discrepancy — one, if continued longer with- out a satisfactory explanation, must be looked upon as a culpable and designed misrepresentation to mislead the peo- ple. I give the chapter at length. 70 THE GREAT IRON AVIIEEL. " The preachers and members of our society iix general, being convinced that there was a great deficiency of vital religion in the Church of England in America, and being in many places destitute of the Christian sacraments, as seve- ral of the clergy had forsaken their churches, requested the late Rev. John Wesley to take such measures, in his wisdom and prudence, as would afford them suitable relief in their distress. " In conseq^uence of this, our venerable friend, who, under God, had been the father of the great revival of religion now extending over the earth, by the means of the Methodists, determined to ordain ministers for -America ; and for this purpose, in the year 1784, sent over three regularly ordained clergy ; but preferring the Episcopal mode of Church Gov- ernment to any other, (1) he solemnly set apart, by the imposition of his hands and prayer, one of them, viz., Tho- mas Coke, Doctor of Civil Law, late of Jesus College, in the University of Oxford, and a Presbyter of the Church of England, for the Episcopal office ; (2) and having delivered to him letters of Episcopal orders, (8) commissioned and directed him to set apart Francis Ashury, then general as- sistant of the Methodist Society in America, for the same Episcopal office ; (4) he, the said Francis Ashury, being first ordained deacon and elder. In consequence of which the said Francis Asbury was solemnly set apart for the said Ej)iscopal office (5) by prayer, and the imposition of the hands of the said Thomas Coke, other regularly ordained ministers assisting in the sacred ceremony. At which time the General Conference, held at Baltimore, did unanimously receive the said Thomas Coke and Francis Asbury, as their Bishops, being fully satisfied of the validitj of their E2nsco- jpal ordination.''^ (6) Dis. ch. 1. Now, as the present Episcopal form of government of the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 71 Methodist E. Church is not made to rest upon the word of God — nor even expediency — but the alleged authority and appointment of John Wesley, its venerable "father and founder," I would suppose it would be considered a matter of the first importance to Methodists to know whether, in- deed and in truth, Mr. Wesley did '•'• iirefer the Episcopal form of government," and ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal Bishop — a minister of the third order, and if he did com- mission and direct Coke to ordain Mr. Asbury for the same office — if the General Conference did unanimously receive Coke and Asbury as their bishops — and also, if Messrs. Coke and Asbury were fully satisfied with their Episcopal ORDINATIONS. It may be asked by some of your brethren, What does it matter whether these things were so or not, and why should it concern me to enquire ? I answer. Episcopal Methodism is one of the existing sects which stands claimant to the title and regard of a Church of Christ. It calls upon me, and the denomination of which I am a member, to fellow- ship it — to receive it as a gospel Church at the Lord's Sup- per, and its ministers into our pulpits as our religious teach- ers — and it calls upon my relatives and friends, and the world, for whose well and right doing it is my pleasure and ray duty to watch and labor, to enter its societies, and obey its rules, and support its laws and practices ; and I cannot grant its requests, nor can Baptists accede to its arrogant demands, nor can I advise my friends or the world to enter its folds. But does the matter stop here? No. I am held up before the world, as are my brethren and Cliurch, for pub- lic reproach — made a hissing and a scorn by its thousands of circuit riders — the travelling police of Methodism — before their congregations in every city, village and hamlet, from one end of the land to the other. Baptists are pronounced 72 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. sectarian bigots, illiberal and uncharitable; and all the bit- terest and most violent prejudices of the world arrayed against us, because we cannot conscientiously so regard and fellowship "Mr. Wesley's scheme" and its ministers. Is it not, then, proper and right that I should give my reason, and the reasons which I understand govern my brethren in their course 1 But more than this — It becomes me, and every other faithful friend and servant of Jesus Christ, to aid in bringing about the answer to his prayer, that his followers might all be one — that the world might believe on his name. Many, very many, who in their hearts are his warm and ardent friends, I most charitably believe, are this day found in the fold Mr. Wesley set up a few years ago, and they are en- listed under his banner, advocating with a blind and mis- guided zeal, the Episcopal form of government, honestly be- lieving, because they see it so stated in the Discipline, that Mr. Wesley considered it scriptural, and therefore organized his Churches accordingly. If this is all false, I shall unde- ceive these Christians, and save them from the advocacy of a known, palpable, and unscriptural error before the world — and have thrown down one of the barriers that divide professing Christians. Will not this be something, and ought not my honest, though humble efforts, to correct the errors of Methodists, command and secure their warmest attachment 1 I have been attempting to correct the errors they advocate for several years past, and while I have se- cured the friendship and warmest Christian regards of hun- dreds, yet the masses, through the influence of their press and spiritual rulers, have been taught to look upon me as their enemy. Why should it be so 1 Do they hate the truth? That I have told them the truth, I appeal to your- self. I lay all my positions before you — I ask you not to REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 73 reply, unless to correct me. If I am correct, your silence will be sufficient, and it will be understood by all, since that " silence gives consent" is an universal proverb and principle. 1. Mr. Wesley did not consider the Episcopal Form OF Government Scriptural, if he did prefer it. We understand by Episcopacy, thi-ee separate and distinct orders in the ministry, and that of bishops as the third or- der, possessing a divine right to overrule all. Now, Mr. Wesley did not believe that the Scriptures warranted three orders of ministers, but believed as Baptists and Presby- terians, that bishops, elders, or presbyters, were of the same order. In his Works, vol. vii. p. 311, he says, " Lord King's account of the Primitive Church convinced me, many years age, that bishops and presbyters are the same order, and consequently have the same right to ordain." This is a full and frank confession, and if his convictions are correct, the claims of a Methodist or Episcopal bishop are unscriptural and most arrogant! Did Mr. Wesley ordain an Episcopal bishop, with this conviction ? See also his Notes on the Gospel, written at the close of his life : Acts i. 20. And his " hishopric,^'^ he renders apostleski}). In Phillippians i. 1. In his notes on bishops, he says, " The word bishops here includes all the presbyters at Phil- lippi, as well as the ruling presbyters ; the names bishop and presbyter, or elder, being promiscuously used in the first ages ! ! Did Mr. Wesley, in the face of this, solemnly ordain Mr. Coke an Episcopal bishop, an order of ministry he believed neither found m, nor warranted by, God's word ? *' But that it (Episcopacy) is prescribed in scripture, I do not believe. This opinion, which I once zealously espoused,^,^ I have been ashamed of ever since I read Bishop Stilling- 4r 74 TUE GRKAT IRuX WHEEL. fleet's ' Jrcnlcon.' 1 think he has unanswerably proved that 'neither Ciirist nor his apostles prescribe any particular form of Church government ; and tJiat the plea of divine right for diocesan JCpiscopaaj ^vas never heard of in the primiiice Church.'' ''^ — Wesley's Works^\o\.l. Who would suppose, then, while Wesley was in his senses, that he would lay his hands on Dr. Coke, and in the name of the Holy Trinity make a diocesan bishop of him ? If Wesley ordained Coke a bishop, he used the service of the Church of England. He must then have put this ques- tion to him : " Are you persuaded that you are truly called to this ministration, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ?" And Coke answered, " I am so persuaded." And yet Mr. W^esley firmly believed at the same time that the office of a diocesan bishop was not itself according to the will of Christ ! If I were a Methodist, and especially were I in your place, I never would insist upon so unreason- able and preposterous a thing as that Wesley ordained Coke a bishop, or designed for a diocesan bishop to be counten- anced by Methodists. He said he shuddered when he heard that Coke had assumed the name ! He said he had rather be called a knave than a bishop, as you are called, and require your people to call you. II. Did Mr. Wesley ordain or leave sucu an order IN HIS society in England ? Not a vestige of it — nor are Methodists in England Epis- copal but Wesleyan Methodists, i. e., they carry out Mr. W.'s views of government. Did Mr. Wesley, then, ordain a bishop, and prefer Episcopacy ? LETTER VII. The first Chapter of the Discipline wholly untrue — Methodists are deceived who believe it — Methodist History and John Wesley against it — John Wesley did not believe an Epis- copal bishop a Scriptural Order in the Ministry — He him- self would prefer to be called a knave, rascal^ or scoundrel than bishop — The direct testimony of Bishop) Bascom, D. D. Dear Sir : — Having shown in my last that Mr. Wesley frankly admitted that he did not believe that the Scriptures warranted three orders of ministers, or that such a minister as an Episcopal bishop was known in Paul's day, or among the primitive churches for centuries after Christ, how in the name of reason or consistency can Methodists — could the writers of the first chapter of the Discipline say, that Mr. Wesley preferred an Episcopal Government. That he considered it without a scriptural warrant, we have seen above, and that he considered the powers claimed by prelatical bishops as positively anti-scriptural, we have seen from his Notes on the New Testament. Is there a Methodist in America who believes that Mr. Wesley was capable of preferring an unscriptural and anti-scrip)tural form of church government for his people, to a scriptural one ? Can a Methodist believe that Mr. Wesley ever appointed the 76 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. oflicc for the ordination of a bishop found in the Discipline, in which this is the iirst question, " Are you persuaded that you are trubj called to this ministration^ accokdino to teA WILL OF OUR Loud Jesus Christ'?" Did Mr. Wesley de- mand an affirmative answer to this question from Dr. Coke when he ordained him 1 Could he believe that Dr. Coke could have been called to the office of a prelatical bishop according to the will and mind of Jesus Christ, when Mr. Wesley had declared that it was his firm conviction that Christ never liad a " will" or wish for such an officer in his Church % We not only have no proof in all his works, that he pre- ferred the Episcopal government, except his remaining a member of the Church of England, and save this fact, unless he appointed the Episcopacy for Methodism in America, we have the fullest evidence that he had strong objections to the third order of bishops. When Mr. Wesley learned that Mr. Asbury and Coke had established an Episcopal form of government in the United States, he addressed Mr. A. the following very pointed letter (See Wesley'^s Works^ vol. vii. page 187, Letter to Asbury) : " London, Sept. 20th, 1788. "There is, indeed, a wide diflerence between the relation wherein you stand to the Americans, and the relation wherein I stand to all the Methodists. You are the elder brother of the American Methodists ; I am, under God, the father of the whole family . (Will Methodists deny that John Wesley was their father, and are they not then his children and fol- lowers?) Therefore, 1 naturally care for you all, in a man- ner no other person can do. Therefore, I, in a measure, provide for you all ; for the supplies which Dr. Coke pro- vides for you, he could not provide were it not for me — REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 77 were it not, that I not only permit him to collect, but ilso support him in so doing. "But in one point, my dear brother, I am a little afraid the Doctor and you differ from me. I study to be Utile., you study to be great ; I creep., you strut along. I found a school^ you a college. Nay, and call it after your own names ! O, beware ! Do not seek to be something ! Let me be nothing, and Christ be all in all. " One instance of this, of your greatness, has given me great concern. How can you, how dare you suffer yourself to be called a bishop ? I shudder, I start at the very thought. Men may call me ii knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content; but they shall never, by my consent, call me a bishop ! For my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put a full end to this ! Let the Presbyterians do what they please, but let the Methodists know their calling better. " Thus, my dear Franky, I have told you all that is in my heart, and let this, v/hen I am no more seen, bear wit- ness how sincerely I am your affectionate " Friend and brother, " John Wesley." Can a friend to Wesley believe that he preferred the Episcopal form of government, and yet looked upon its chief order, which makes it Episcopal, in such a light 1 Can any Methodist, who does not regard Mr. Wesley as a double- dealer, believe that he ordained Mr. Coke an Episcopal bishop, and directed him to ordain Mr. Asbury, and because they allowed themselves to be so called, chastise them in such language as the above; language which, in these days of equality, a Christian man would scorn to use or receive 1 With the above letter, together with Mr. Wesley's express conviction that an Episcopal bishop was an unscriptural 78 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. order or ofl'icc, and the first chapter of the Discipline before me, what am I, and what must every Methodist who is in the least susceptible of the force of truth, compelled to con- clude ? Am I not justifiable in deciding that the first chap- ter of the discipli/ie is a tissue of falsehoods, or Mr. Wesley was a moral knave and a hypocrite 1 This imperiously de- mands a notice at your hands. You, sir, have endorsed this chapter with your own " sign manual," and sent it forth as an item of the faith of half a million of Methodists. Mr. Wesley was not the author of the chapter — it matters not who else was; you, sir, have endorsed it, and it becomes you to substantiate it, when its statements are challenged, unless you regard it as indefensible. But there is still another declaration which I also pro- nounce false, upon the authority of the standard histories of the society. It is the last clause of the chapter. ^^At which time the General Conference held at Baltimore, did unan- imously receive the said T. Coke and Francis Asbury as their bishops, being fully satisfied with the validity of their Episcopal ordination." Now so far as this being true, every line of it, as it is on my sheet, is according to the authorities before me, and one of them your own distinguished associate, Bishop Bascom, utterly untrue. The General Conference did not at that time, (i. e. the year they were ordained and sent over, or the year the Meth- odist Episcopal church was organized) receive Messrs. Coke and Asbury as bishops ; they did not admit the title until 1787 — three years after ! Nor did the Conference at first, or three years after, apply the title of hiJtops to them, either unanimously or at all. They assumed the title in 1787, and inserted it in the minutes without the consent of Con- ference — and at th^ next meeting begged it might stand. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 79 Here is the history of the surreptitious introduction and origin of Methodist bishops. (See Musgrave, page 43.) "In the course of this ^ear," (1787, or three years after the organization of tHfe Methodist Episcopal Church,) Mr. Asbury reprinted the General Minutes ; but in a different form from what they were before. The title of this pamph- let was as follows : " 'A form of Discipline for the Ministers, Preachers and Members of the Methodist Episcopal Church in America,' &c. "In this discipline, there were thirty-one sections, and sixty-three questions, with answers to them all. "The third question in the second section, and the answer, read thus : " 'Q. Is there any other business to be done in Conference?' " 'A. The electing and ordaining of bishops, ciders, and deacons.' " This was the first time that our superintendents ever gave themselves the title of bishops in the minutes. They CHANGED THE TITLE THEMSELVES WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE Conference ; and at the next Conference they asked the preachers if the word UsUop might stand in the minutes ; seeing that it was a Scripture name, and the meaning of the word hishop^ was the same with that of superintendent."[! ! ! | " Some of the preachers," continues Mr. Lee, " opposed the alteration, and wished to retain the former title ; but a majority of the preachers agreed to let the word bishop re- main ; and in the annual minutes for the next year, the first question is, 'Who are the bishops of our church for the United Stated f— Zee's ''Short History^' i^c, page 127. With this history before me, I do not hesitate to say with McCaine, Jennings, and others, that Methodist Episcopacy was introduced surreptitiously^ by unlawful and dishonorable means. so TH E GREAT IRON. WHEEL. Nor was " Conference fully satisfied" with Coke and As- bury's " Episcopal ordination," if the other preachers were as dissatisfied with it as was Coke himself, who had his from the hands of the " father" and " found(?lr" himself — and Mr, C. was of the decided impression that they desired a reordina- tion, or at least were willing to submit to it, from the hands of Episcopal bishops! What will Methodists think when they learn that this Bishop Coke addressed a humiliating letter to Bishop White of the Protestant Episcopal Church, request- ing, I may say, begging, for valid Episcopal ordination at his hands!! He says in that letter, "He, (Mr. Wesley) did indeed solemnly invest me, so far as he had the right so to do, with Episcojxd authority, but did not intend, I think, that our entire separation should take place. * * Our ordained ministers will not, ought not, to give up their right of admin- istering the sacraments, I don't think the generality of them, perhaps 7ionc of them, would refuse to submit to a rebrdination, if other hindrances (a classical education) were removed out of the way!!"* This letter, which Mr. Asbury very pro- perly asked Bishop White to " burn" unless he complied with his requests, is given, with one from Mr. White, in " History and Mystery of Methodism," pp. 24-27. Bishop White refused his request, and eight years after. Dr. Coke applied to the Bishop of London, requesting him to ordain a given number of preachers to travel through the connection in England, for the purpose of administering the sacraments agreeably to the usages of the Established Church. — Why should Dr. Coke request Episcopal ordination of Bishop White, if he was satisfied 1 Why did he say that perhaps all the other preachers would be reordained, if he would waive their ignorance ? Why did Dr. Coke eight years after, • Drew's Life of Coke, page 288, quoted from McCaine by Mu?grave. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 81 seek ordination for a number of his preachers from the Bishop of London, if he was satisfied that he himself was possessed of Episcopal powers 1 ! Why did he not ordain them himself, since, if a bishop, he had equal authority with the Bishop of London? These facts speak too plainly — Mr. Coke knew and felt he was not a bishop, but he so coveted the honor, that he gave himself the name by fraudulently assuming the title, and at the next Conference begged that it might remain, urging that a superintendent and bishop were one and the same ! Why did he not claim the title upon the ground that Mr. Wesley had ordained iiim a BISHOP 1 He knew that Mr. W. did not, and had not the power to, ordain him an Episcopal bishop. IV. Mr. Wesley's Letter to his Societies in America IS evidence against the truth of this Chapter. He says : " I have appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury to be joint superintendents over our brethren in America." The word bishop is not once mentioned. V. Mr. Coke's certificate of ordination is also evi- dence. It reads : " I have this day set apart as a superintendent^ by the imposition of my hands and prayer," &c. Not one word about bishop. Einaliy : Neither Mr. Coke's letter nor the letter Mr. W. wrote, by him, to the brethren in America, mention that Mr. Wesley instructed or empowered Dr. Coke to ordain Mr. Asbury an Episcopal bishop, but Mr. Wesley distinctly says in the quotation I have given, that he himself had appointed Messrs. "Coke and Asbury jom^ superintendents. The points which we have shown to be contrary to facts are : L That Mr. Wesley preferred the episcopacy- -h*» dzd not believe in three orders of ministers. 4* 82 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. 2. That he did ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal bishop of the third order. 3. That Mr. Wesley commissioned Dr. Coke to ordain Mr. i\sbury an Episcopal bishop. Mr. W. says he ordained Messrs. Coke and Asbury himself ^'- joint superintendents^ 4. That Asbury was ordained an Episcopal bishop. 5. That " at which time [1784,"] the .General Conference, held at Baltimore did unanimously receive them as bishops — they did not dare assume the title until three years after- wards. 6. The General Conference, did not receive them as bish- ops, — Coke and Asbury assumed the title, and moved by ambition surreptitiously changed the term superintendents into bishops. 7. The Conference, when besought by these self-madt bishops to allow the title to stand, were not unanimous, and never have been — a portion of the more reflectii>g, informed and consistent are not to this day satisfied. 8. The Conference, if Mr. Coke is a fair representative of it, yvus not '■'■fully'''' satisfied with their Episcopal ordination, for Mr. Coke was not satisfied with his own ! 9. Mr. Wesley did not deliver Dr. Coke letters of Epis- copal ordination — only a certificate of sw6-superintendency. 10. Nor did Mr. Wesley recommend Episcopacy to Amer- ican Methodists, as is implied in this chapter, so far as can be learned from his writings. Mr. Wesley states in his let- ler, by Mr. Coke, to Methodists in America, "As our Amer- ican brethren are now totally disentangled, both from the State and from the English hierarcpiy, ( Mr. Wesley here calls the English episcopacy a hierarchy ; would not Meth- odist episcopacy be a Methodist hierarchy ]) we dare not entangle them again with either one or the other f Will Methodists say he did it by this same letter ? ! ! REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 83 '* They are now at full liberty, simply to follow the Scrip- tures and the primitive Church," and this, as we have seen, according to Mr. Wesley's views, would never have entan- gled them in a hierarchy — never would have furnished them with an Episcopal bishop. Did Mr. Wesley, in recommend- ing them to pattern after the Scriptures and the primitive Church, indicate that he preferred or recommended an Epis- copacy 1 If my language and assertions respecting this first chapter are considered unwarrantably bold and reckless, we invite the especial attention of all Methodists to the following testimo- ny of the late distinguished Bishop H. Bascom, D.D. That this is unquestionably the language of Bishop Bascom, I quote from Dr. Bond's Economy of Methodism, published by the Methodist Book Concern, 200 Mulberry st., N. Y.* " If we can credit Mr. Wesley's declarations, it was never intended that the Methodists should become an ecclesiastical establishment, headed hy an episcopal hierarchy, consisting of an indefinite number of incumbents, all possessing the same powers and ruling the same diocese. The model for such a state of things i^ not to be met with in the whole rantje of church history, except when four individuals at the same time claimed by divine right the chair of popedom in the Roman See. If the reader is startled at this, let him recollect that things that are alike in their nature and progress will be compared * I am preparing for the press one of the most remarkable, and, against the Methodist Hierarchy, the most potential little v/ork ever offered to the world. It is the famous Declaration of Rights drawn up by Dr. Bascom, together with his inimitable essays upon the des- potic and tyrannical charater of Methodism, of which the above quo- tations are specimens. The friends of a republican Christianity should give this little work a wide circulation — it is the greatest argument, In the least space and cheapest form, ever published. — J. R. G. 84 THE GREAT TROX WHEEL. by the human mind, and classed accordingly." — BoniVs Economy of Methodism, pp. 113, 114. "But Mr. Wesley seems not to have contemplated an episcopacy in any shape. It is, to be sure, asserted, in the preflice to our Book of Discipline; but the oldest preachers in the United States, with whom I have conversed and cor- responded 3n this subject, never saw the warrant. It has been called for by friends and foes for thirty years, but is not yet forthcoming. If such warrant exists, why is it that we can learn nothing about it 1 " — Ihid., p. 114. " But until such document or warrant from Mr. Wesley be produced, /, as an individual, must, of necessity, continue to doubt the historical probity of the preface to our Book of Discipline, in relation to this particular." — Ibid. " What had Wesleyan Methodism to do with our self- created and self-styled Episcopacy'? For, I repeat it. Dr. Coke was only set apart as a superintendent of the American Methodists, and not ordained to a third office as a prelatical bishop. The ceremony of separation was only intended to confer Mr. Wesley's authority to oversee the American Methodists upon another, as Mr. Wesley could not attend to them in person. What did original Methodism know of our order of presiding elders ? — one man having power to appoint seventy, to overrule and remove at pleasure fourteen hun- dred ? Where in the annals of original Methodism did the framcrs of our Discipline meet with the ceremony of ordi- ration for a bishop 1" — Ibid. "The improvements proposed in cur present form of government are openly denounced as * innovations.' This is somewhat singular, when every man of information knows that our whole system of episcopacy in the United States is, to all intents and purposes, an * innovation ' upon the genius and plans of Wesleyan Methodism, and one ex* RHPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 85 pressly disapproved and disavowed by Mr. Wesley." — Ibid. p. 114. " On the other hand, if our bishops and their pertinacious supporters as high-toned Episcopalians, ill as it may look (for such they really are), would yield and distribute throughout the different departments of the Church that part of their power that has come into their hands ' surrepti- tiously,' it would abate the honest inquietude of thousands, it would remove the just apprehensions of the discerning, and bring worthy multitudes into the bosom of the Method- ist Church, whose names, as things now are, will never adorn our calendar." — Ibid., p. 115. " 4th. From the preceding facts it appears, that the intro- duction of Episcopacy among the Methodists in the United States, so far from being * recommended ' by Mr. Wesley, was expressly disapproved and forbidden, and the proceedings of the General Conference of 1784, in establishing diocesan Episcopacy among us, was in open violation of the instruc- tions of Mr. Wesley ; and I now take the liberty of saying to the Rev. William M'Kendree, Enoch George, Robert R. Roberts, Joshua Soule, and Elijah Hedding, that a statement on this subject, to which I find their names subscribed, in the preface to our Book of Discipline, is believed by many to be A PERVERSION OF HISTORICAL FACT, and they are hereby pub- licly called upon to furnish some evidence of the truth of the aforesaid statement ; or leave us to infer that such evidence cannot be produced. In justice, however, to these distin- guished individuals in the Methodist Episcopal Church, I would say distinctly, I believe they are all innocent of hav- ing made this statement originally, but they have made it their oion^ by giving it the sanction of their names, as I have not been able to learn that this preface has ever been sanc- tioned by any General Conference : if it has^ upon learning it 86 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. I shall make (should God preserve my life) a similar call on the next General Conferenee, as the proper organ of infor- mation : at present the bishops appear to be the only re- sponsible persons, and on them I call. Should the policy of the cabinet induce them to remain silent, as heretofore on similar occasions, I shall take the liberty of thinking they cannot answer me, without damage to their own cause, which, it would seem, must be supported by silence. 5th. As it is in proof before the reader that Methodist Episcopacy can derive no support from the name or sanction of Mr. Wesley, both having been definitely withheld, so also does it admit of proof that the great body of Methodist ministers and mem- bers in the United States were not consulted at all in the adoption of this enormously mis-shapen system of aristo- cratic government. It was the undivulged project, the favorite scheme of a few master spirits, w^ho, meeting in secret conclave and excluding the junior members ev6n of their own body (as living witnesses declare), acknowledging no constitutional rights, and comprehending no legislative privileges as belonging to any except themselves, proceeded to the hasty formation of the present plan of government among us, and unhlushingly palmed it upon posterity as the offspring of Mr. Wesley s wisdom and experience. 6 th. The SPURIOUS origin of Methodist Episcopacy, is to be inferred from the fact that those very individuals who made these pre- tensions were unsettled, and felt misgivings on the subject. " Dr. Coke, in a letter to Bishop White of Philadelphia, doubts the power of Mr. Wesley to confer legitimate episco- pal authority ; he does the same in a letter to the Bishop of London, written subsequently, in both of which he modestly asks for reordination." — Ibid., p. 117. "In the present preface to our Book of Discipline, the adoption of our present form of gcvernment is attributed to REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 87 the express instructions of Mr. Wesley ; but the venerable Wesley has, unequivocally, disavowed the honor, and no one has ever shown or quoted the document, paper, or verbal instructions of Mr. Wesley. It is now nearly a year since all our bishops were respectfully invited to furnish informa- tion on this subject, if they had any to furnish ; they have not even deigned a reply of any kind : passing by the un- courteousness of such an act, and the insult it offers to the wishes of inquiring thousands, who, it is known to the bishops, feel a deep interest iu the subject, I shall plead their apo- logy, by taking it for granted that they would have replied if they had been able to do so, without defacing the beauty of those institutions ' received from their fathers,' many of whom are still living ; or, perhaps, like the Chinese histo- rians, they are unacquainted with their own origin^ because their living fathers conceal it. " But finally, Mr. Asbury pleads his authority as a Method- ist bishop, on the following grounds: ' 1st, Divine authority. 2d, Seniority in America. 3d. Election of the General Con- ference, 1784. 4th, Ordination of Coke, Otterbine, What- coat, and Vasey. 5th, Because the signs of the apostle were found in him.' See Asbury's Journal for May, 1805, vol iii., page 191. No 'succession' directly hinted at here, no allu- sion to Mr. Wesley. On this expose of the arcana of Method- ist Episcopacy, I would only say : it is plain Mr. Asbury is here speaking of himself as a bishop of the third order, and superior to presbyters. Of his ' divine authority' we can say nothing, only we know it was not received from the Scriptures. As to ' seniority' we have yet to learn that it ever creates any new civil or religious rights. With regard to the vote of the ' General Conference ' electing Mr. Asbury, it is only necessary to observe, they might have acted unad- visedly in this vote :f the Conference of 1784 as well as in 88 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Others ; and we know that mnny of the acts :£ that very Conference have been smce repealed, as improper and disad- vantageous. On the subject of * ordination,* as it was only an ordination by presbyters, we cannot adnait its * episcopal validity,' if more be meant than a presbyter. As it respects the last item, the signs of an apostle can only be seen in an apostle, and of course have not been seen since the apostolic age. Thus the reader will perceive that our * fathers ' acted a palpably inconsistent part in the introduction of Episcopacy among us, and have been under the necessity (created by their own indiscretion) of acting an equally awkward, and I fear posterity will think ridiculous part, in defending them- selves against the charge of a reckless usurpation of un- warranted POWER." — Ibid.^ pp. 116, llY. What will the world say to this chapter, which is the Char- ter Methodist bishops profess to have received from Mr. Wesley, to authorize them to rule and lord it over his heri- tage? ! Is it not most evidently a tissue of false statements and a mass of misrepresentations 1 Does it not bear the boldest evidence of having been fixed up with great pains by the bishops to deceive the people into the belief and sup- port of Methodist Episcopacy '? What a striking disagree- ment between it and Mr. W.'s relation of the transaction ! In this, the bishop's chapter, the term Episcopacy is used six times, as if for fear that Methodists, easy as they are to believe and take without examination every thing their ministers state from the press or pulpit, would not believe that Wesley did what he had not the power to do, and what he considered as imscriptural, ordain a bishop — a term, we have shown not used by Mr. Wesley in either Mr. Coke'^ certificate or Mr. Wesley's letter to the Churches ! Am I not forced to believe that Messrs. Coke and Asbury, who made them- selves bishops with their pens, also wrote this chapter, and REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 89 introduced the office for the consecration of a bishop, from the Episcopal Prayer Book, into the Discipline ? Will you avoid the verdict of the boldest assumption and most unwarra/ stable misrepresentation by these bishops to gain and preserve their power, by intimating that a Method- ist Bishop is not a third order, but only an office of the sec- ond ? Why then the third and distinct ordination 1 Why use the very office by which an English prelatical bishop is con- secrated] Why is the government and control of all the other ministers committed to his sovereign will"? But let Methodist historians and D.D.'s settle this. Dr. Emokv. " In whatever sense distinct ordinations con- stitute distinct orders, in the same sense Mr. Wesley cer- tainly intended that we should have three orders. For he undeniably instituted three distinct ordinations.^'' Rev. N. Bangs, D. D., and Rev. J. Emory, D. D. " THREE ORDERS of ministers are recognized, and the duties peculiar to each are clearly defmed."-T-See Buck's Theological Dictionary, edition 1S25. Here 1 leave the history of the Mystery of Methodism and the rise of Methodist Prelatical Episcopacy, to save Mr. Wesley from the charge of preferring and appointing a government and order of ministers he regarded as hierarchi- cal and unscriptural, we must conclude that the creation of Methodist Episcopacy, and the-palming of it off as Mr. Wes- ley's, to secure its adoption, was the work of those who as- sumed the lordly title of Bishops, and furnished a bold in- stance of clerical ambition and fraud, by which priestcraft has ever sought to advance itself at the sacrifice of truth and the rights of the laity. If these discrepancies are unreal, you can explain them, if the}^ are capable of explanation ; if they are not, let your silence be the outward and visible sign and seal of their absurdity and falsehood. LETTER VIII. METHODISM AS IT WAS. T(s origin and design, to study the Classics — Methodism ivitli- out either altar or divinity — Its members and preachers all zmconverted — Wesley's conviction and conversion — His ex- perience. A serious question : — Who may he said to he the originator and instigator of the zvorks and devices of wicked men ? Dear Sir : — I know of no greater contrast than that exist- ing between " Methodism as it was," in its origin, and " Me- thodism as it is " at present among us. I have not the least idea that the founder of the scheme, were he to revisit the walks of life, would know that it was Methodism, or recognize it as his oflspring. If the Church of England needed re- form, Methodism needs it to-day. In sketching the history of Methodism, I shall confine myself to Wesley's own writ- ings, and those of approved Methodist authors. It will there- fore be wholly unnecessary for you to reply, unless to cor- rect me when I am led into error by your writers. "In 1729, two young men in England, (Charles and John Wesley, members of the Church of England, and the latter a minister.) reading the Bible, saw they could not be saved (90) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 91 without holiness, followed after it, and incited others to do so." These two were joined by two others. They had their regular meetings together, following " after holiness," in the following manner : " In November, 1729, at which time I came to reside at Oxford, my brother and I, and two young gentlemen more, agreed to spend three or four evenings in a week together. On Sunday evening we read something in divinity, on other nights the Greek and Latin classics." This, I learn from Mr. Wesley, was the origin of Metho- dism, which you call upon me and the world to regard and fellowship as the Church of Christ. That I am not mistaken, I quote Wesley's own words : " On Monday, May 1st, our little Society began in Lon- don. But it may be observed, the first rise of Methodism, so called, was in November, 1729, when four of us met to- gether at Oxford." I have found the Methodist Church(?) in its origin com- posed of four unregenerate young men. Its meetings were held three or four nights in the week, and its worship was, not the^ reading of the Bible, not prayer or singing, for not one of these employments are mentioned, but reading the Greek and Latin classics! Pretty employment for a Chris- tian Church, truly ! ! On Sunday, something in Divinity! No Bible mentioned as read at any meeting — no prayer offered — no song sung ! And yet this is all the Methodist Church was at its origin ! ! Am I not justified in saying that it was not a Christian Church? That it has no more or juster claims to the title than a College Society or Masonic Lodge'? You know I am justified. You dare not say that Methodism, in 1729, was a Christian Church — was even a Religious Society^ or 92 TUE GREAT IRON WHEEL. its moitiiifTs religious convocations, or even ore of its four members Christians! No, sir, your tongue will never say- it, nor your pen write it. And if Methotlisni then was not a Church of Christ, Methodism now is not, and ought not to be so called, for it is what it ever was, a human institut(i, purely of man and not of God. These young men the following summer commenced visit- ing prisons, the poor, and the sick, and were joined by a young man from Merton College. In April, 1732, Mr. Clayton joined them, and by his ad- vice they began to observe the fasts of the ancient [i. e., Catholic] Church, every Wednesday and Friday. The first religious rite observed in this young Church(?) of unre- generate men, w^as a Itomisk one ! ! /^e^zaz/ce / ! " Two or three of his pupils, one of my brothers, and two or three of mine, and Mr. Broughton, of Exeter College, desired like- wise to spend six evenings in a week with us, from to 9 o'clock, partly in reading and considering a chapter in the Greek" Testament, and partly in close conversation." The worship of the Methodist Society still is purely of the " Greek and Latin classics" — it is without a gospel, an altar, and a song of praise. "To these were added, the next year, Mr. Ingham, with two or three other gentlemen of Queen's Col- lege; then Mr. Ilervey ; and in the year 1735, Mr. Geo. Whitefield. I think, at this time, we were 14 or 15 in num- ber, all of one heart (i. e. unregenerate doubtless, as Charles and John Wesley were) and one mind," {i. e. carnal.) Such was the Methodist Society in England up to the year 1735. How conformed to the model and pattern of the New Testament Churches ! How scriptural in its member- ship, and especially in its worship ! It is to be remarked, that at this time it did not sprinkle infants ! When the Wesleys left for Georgia, Methodism waned at REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 93 Oxford, but it was translated to America. Wesley says that '* the second rise of Methodism was at Savannah, in April, 1736, when twenty or thirty persons met at my house." He v/rites from Georgia of this Society, thus : "After the evening service, as many of my j^ci^'ishio iters (not Christians, necessarily) as desire it meet at my house (as they do on Wednesday evening) and spend about an hour in prayer, singing and mutual exhortation. A smaller number (most of those who desh-e to communicate the next day,) meet here on Saturday evening; and a few of these come to me on the other evenings, and pass half an hour in the same employment." This, Mr. Wesley tells us, was the second rise of Metho- dism. But I cannot for the life of me see any thing that will justify its being called a Christian Church, or even a Christian Society. The third and last rise, he says, *' was at London, on this day, May 1st, 1737, when forty or fifty of us agreed to meet together every Wednesday evening, in order to a free con- versation, (about what, the Greek and Latin classics]) begun and ended with singing and prayer."* " In January, 1739, our Society, (Mr. Wesley did not pre- sume to call it a Church) consisted of about sixty persons. It continued gradually increasing all the year. In April I went down to Bristol, and soon after a few persons agreed to meet weekly, with the same intention as those in Lon- don."! These meetings, at first purely literary, seem now to be only social conversational meetings, and begun and ended with prayer, as modern Singing Schools, and as Tem- perance and Odd Fellows' Lodges are. We can discover nothing to give them a claim to the title of Christian Church. * Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 318. f "Weslof's Works, vol. vii., p. 349. 94 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Wc have seen Methodism fairly begun, and traced its history minutely for ten years, up to 1739 ; from this period it commences to spread rapidly in every direction. Societies of the above feature formed in different towns and cities of England, and John Wesley assuming the control of them, dictating sundry rules and regulations to them, from time to time, appointing leaders, exhorters, and preachers, &c. It might be well to pause here and enquire in what do Methodist writers regard Methodism at this point ? What title claim for it, and what it is designed to effect ? Was it in Mr. Wesley's wildest dreams that it was a Church, or that it ought to be one ? We quote from Methodism, by Inskip, pages 37, 38 : " But this organization was not a distinct sect, holding a par- ticular formal creed, or 'prescribing any exclusive method and cerem&nies of ivorship. It was a Society in the Church. Hence, those connected with the ' Societies,' were earnestly and repeatedly warned of the evil of separating from the Church. They were also urged to attend the ordinances, and receive the sacraments, as administered by the Church." Dr. Bond in his work, entitled " Economy of Methodism,'' page 17, says : " Let it be remembered that no original purpose of estab- lishing a separate sect or denomination of people entered into the design of Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors. They only designed to waken up the different protestant denominations, and especially the Church of England, to a just apprehension of the renovating influence of gospel truth and of the impor- tance of Christian discipline." They were Societies in the Church of England. Such was Methodism prior to and during the devolution in this country. There were Methodists in all denomina- tions, because Methodism was no Church, but only a sort of REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 95 Union Society, like union prayer and social meetings, for the purpose of seeking and promoting personal piety, and had it continued such only, I would not lift my voice or pen against it ; but its ambitious leaders have set it up as a Church, and claim for it all the regard and consideration claimed in God's word for the Church of Christ, and as such 1 repudiate it as Antichristian, a mock Church, a rival and traitorous fold, to mislead those who would otherwise follow Christ. Let it be distinctly noticed, that it was not necessary for one to be a Christian to be a Methodist, no more than it is to-day, but only to desire to be one. " Only one condition is required, a real desire to save their souls^ No candid man will maintain that this is the only condition necessary to entitle one to membership in the Church of Christ. We suppose the man does not live who does not desire to be saved, and are all then qualified for Church membership 1 Did Mr. Wesley intend *o form a Church? Mr. Inskip says, " In the beginning, ]\Ir. Wesley did not conceive the idea of forming a Society at all. Afterward, however, he (not Jesus Christ, not an apostle, not an angel, but he, John Wesley, priest of the Church of England) consummated such an organization as he found (taught or exampled in the New Testament ? No, he did not consult that but as he found) to be suitable and necessary. But this organization was not a distinct sect, holding a particular formal creed, or pre- scribing any exclusive method and ceremonies of worship. It was a Society in the Church, (i. e. of England.) Very well, so long as it was only a Society in the Church of England, for the cultivation of personal religion, I find no fault — possibly it effected good — but this point I do main- tain, if it was only a Society while in the Church of England, it is certain that it is only a Society when out of it. Its 96 TUE GKEAT IKON WHEEL. sepamtion from the Church of England did not make it the Church of Ciirist. It is nothing more, and can be, so long as it is Methodism, nothing more this day than a human Society, devised at first and now governed by ambitious men ; and those who support it obey and follow meu, not Christ, and in their practice set the work device and autho- rity of men above the wisdom and authority of our Lord Jesus Christ. Mr. Anskip seems to be penetrated with the conviction that his (>hurch is but a sham Church. He claims for Methodism but little more than Masonry claims to be, and nothing more than the American Bible Society is — a " Hi/stem'^ — not a Cnurch, but only a system or scheme of a religious and moral enterprise ! " Methodism is not a mere sectarian form of Christianity, but a system of religious and moral enterprise." Page 40. Again, he says, "A more wise or better arranged system of relic/ious and moral enter- orise, could not have been conceived. Of course, like all OTiiER HUMAN INSTITUTIONS, it has its defects and .MPERFr^sctiOKS !" Page G5. Here Mr. Inskip frankly idmits that it is a human institution^ and an imperfect and lefeUvye scheme. May I allow him to tell us here who ievised the Eyrdf-Ati ? See page 54 : "Finally, it r.iay be said, Methodism in England and America, was a qecial system.''^ " To meet f^o emergency which then existed, God raised »ip a company of great men — men who were great in intel- lectual endowment, moral excellence, and inventive genius. There was John Wesley, who has justly been designated the greatest of ecclesiastical legislators — Whitefield, the most extraordinary of pulpit orators — Charles Wesley, among he best of Sacred poets — Coke, the leader of modern mis- nonaries — Asbury, the most laborious of bishops — and Olark and Benson, one the most learned, the other the best REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 97 practical commentator ever known. These men devised THIS powerful instrumentality, well styled ' Christ- ianity IN earnest.' " " Every agency they could command, however novel and irregular, they used with energy and enthusiasm." The Wesleys, Whitefield, Coke, Asbury, Clark and Ben- son, then DEVISED Methodism. They did not copy it from the Bible, or mould it according to the teachings of Christ, or conform it to the model Church, built by Christ, or Mr. Inskip would not say it was a human institution, or devised by the above men ! Will Methodist Christians think in what fold they are, whom they are following 1 and what institution they are supporting ! To show still more clearly that " Methodism as it was," was a far different thing from " JMethodism as it is," with its lofty and hollow pretensions, as well as to show that it is understood by the intelligent, we quote from the February number of the North British Review : " For a long time even after the societies under his care had become very numerous, he would not allow his preachers to assemble their people during the ordinary hours of public worship on the Lord's day, and to the last he refused to give them a general permission to administer the sacraments. The people loho joined him^ he wished to remain still members of the Established Churchy to attend upon her worship, and to receive sealing ordinances in her communion. This is the position still maintained by that section of his followers who call themselves Primitive Methodists. Wesley's plans and arrangements were directed so as to afford to those who joined his Society, advantages for gr.owing in grace, for adorning their profession, and for promoting the interests of religion, additional to those they might possess as members of the Church of England and attenders upon her ordinances. 6 98 THE GREAT UION WUEEL. lie did not intend to form a distinct and separate Churchy and in j^oint of fact did not do so. lie docs not seem to have reached any convictions,* which appeared to him to make it men's duty to disapprove of the constitution of the Church of Enghmd, or to separate from her communion. So that Wesleyan Methodism, under its founder, was not a Church, and did not profess to be a Church, but only an Institute, regulated in its arrangements by present and temporary cir- cumstances, and supplementary to the Church of England for promoting the Christian good of the community." " Different considerations seem to show that VVesleyan- ism even yet scarcely professes to be a scripturally organ- ized Church, and if so, it must be, in respect to its organiza- tion, a device of human wisdom, and therefore not destined to perpetuity, not fitted for permanence." " Wesley did not profess to be organizing a Church upon a scriptural basis. His Institute (Methodism) was the pro- duct of his own wisdom and sagacity, and must be subject to the fluctuations and instability of all merely human things." V/hat unparalleled effrontery, then, for Methodists, in the face of these facts, to declare that their Society is a Christian Church, and scripturally organized ! Before I close this epistle I would enquire into the pecu- liar qualifications of the Wesleys to found a Christian Church, or a religious Society, for they organized the Methodist So- ciety, while Coke and Asbury assumed for it the name and pretensions of a Church. Mr. Wesley was ordained a Deacon of the Church of England in 1725, and received priest's orders about three years afterwards, 1728. In 1735, ten years after his first ordinatiT and six years after he and his brother Charles had started Methodism at Oxford, they both sailed for Georgia, to convert the Indians. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 99 He was so ill-suited with the people of Georgia, and they so displeased with him as a minister, that he reliryquishcd his scheme and fled from America, in the flice of a civil prosecu- tion for malfeasance in office, and improper behavior towards a Mrs. Vfilliamson. See his Journal, vol. iii., p. 42. On his return, and afterwards falling in with Peter Bohler, a pious Moravian, he became convinced that he was unregencrate. " This, then, I have learned in the ends of the earth — that I am fallen short of the glory of God ; that my whole heart is altogether corrupt and abominable. I am a child of wrath, an heir of hell. I left my native country in order to teach the Georgian Indians the nature of Christianity ; but what have I learned myself the mean time? Why, (what I the least of all suspected,) that I, who went to America to con- vert others, was never myself converted to God.''''* This was written January 29, 1738. He became a penitent enquirer, and in May following, (Wednesday 24th,) obtained satisfac- tory evidence to himself of having passed from death unto life. He says, " In the evening! went unwillingly to a So- ciety in Aldersgate street, where one was reading Luther's preface to the Epistle to the Romans. About a quarter before nine, while he was describing the change which God works in the heart, through faith in Christ, I felt my heart strangely warmed. I felt I did trust in Christ alone for salvation ; and an assurance was given me that he had taken away my sins, even mine, and saved me from the law of sin and death."f That I have not misrepresented Mr. Wesley, I quote the concurrent testimony of Mr. Inskip. Pp. 19, 20. " He labored some time among the colonists, with con * Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 53. |- Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 74. 100 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. siderable perplexity and discouragement. He returned to England, and under the wise and faithful teaching of Peter Bohler, was led to apprehend the truth as it is in Jesus, After earnestly struggling to obtain the blessing of God, he was enabled to ' lay hold of the hope set before him,' and rejoiced in the knowledge of salvation by the remission of sin." His brother Charles professed a change of heart May 3d, 1738. From his history we learn that John Wesley had been preaching thirteen years before he was a converted man himself! Thus while in an unregenerate state, a wicked sinner before God, and nine years before he was a converted man, he and his brother Charles, also a sinner like himself, devised and set on foot the Methodist Society ! It would be wrong for Christians to follow or obey in religion the bright- est and purest angel — Christ never authorized an angel to devise a Church for his children, much less men, and how infinitely much less unconverted men. If it did not seem too severe, I would ask you this question : Are not all sinners, of their ftither the Devil, and do not they do his will and obey his behests % See John viii., 44; and Rom. vi., 16, 20. Methodism is the work and device of ungodly men ; in whose will did it have its origin ? Let Christian Methodists consider well the fact, they are support- ing with all their talents and influence a system which they have been taught to look upon as a veritable Church of Christ, but which in fact is a human system^ devised, and set on foot, and directed, by unconverted and unregenerate men ! How will they answer the serious interrogative of the Saviour, " Why call ye me Lord, Lord, and do not the things 1 command you?" And how will they reconcile their discipleship with the test given by Christ, " If any man REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS, 101 will be my disciple, let him deny himself, and take up his cross and follow me." They certainly are not following Christ while they enter the folds and follow the teachings of John Wesley, and sub- mit to his authority, and that of his successors, instead of Jesus Christ alone. Is it not virtually rejecting Christ — his authority — his laws, and casting reproach upon his Church, for a Christian or a sinner to turn his back upon it, and enter into, and give all his influence to support and build up a rival society^ and that, too, devised by confessedly unregenerate men ? Is it not exalting a human society above the churches of Christ] Is it not offering a flagrant insult to the blessed Saviour 1 I beg and entreat of you, sir, and of your brethren, to think of these questions seriously, and decide them upon your knees before God. LETTER IX, METHODISM IN GEORGIA IN 1736. John 2nd Charles Wesley sail for Georgia to convert the In- dians^ and to j^lif-nt Methodism in America — Trouble on shipboard — Immersion of Mary Welch — Mr. W.^s ad- mission — Difficulty on land — Mrs. Parhers child — Mr. Wesley charged by his brother of being quarrelsome — Trouble with a lady — Mr. Wesley a rejected lover — His revenge — Is apprehended^ tried and condemned — Flees from justice^ and leaves Savannah by night — Seeks the sea coast and sails for England. Dear Sir : — The history of Methodism sketched in these letters would not be complete miless I follow it to America, and notice some phases of it here. There is not much re- markable to note, but features are developed in Georgia which have strongly characterized Methodism and Method- ists until the present day. In 1735, Messrs. Wesley felt called of God, or of some body else, to go to America to convert the Indians, although they were unconverted men themselves ! Accordingly they set sail October 14, in the good ship Simmonds, accompanied by Mr Ingham and Dcla Motte. We have now the em- (102) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 103 bodiment of Methodism on the Simmonds afloat, and steer- ing for the coast of Georgia, North America. Mr. Wesley behaved himself very well — studymg German and reading his prayers, except he became mortally terrified in every flurry or storm, which fact, to use his own words, plainly showed him that he was unfit to die. Having been on board about three weeks, when Mr. Wesley discovered his disposition to meddle with the regu- lations of the ship, and to raise a general disturbance among officers and men, because he claimed that he and his friends — the Methodist Society — did not receive water enough. New officers are appointed to satisfy Mr. Wesley. He does not deny the charge which the excluded officers prefer against him, i. e. of raising all the disturbance and procuring their discharge ; he says, " they were highly exasperated as to whom they ipiputed the change." — Wesley's Works, vol. iii. p. 11. Remark. — Interference and dictation in the concerns of others, which they have a strange way of making their own, are too characteristic of ^lethodists among us. After this, all things went on aboard as usual, with abun- dance of reading prayers, as storms and blows were frequent, until Thursday, February 5, 1736, the ship entered Savan- nah river, and cast anchor near Tybee's Island. Friday, February 6th, about eight in the morning, the first Methodist set foot on American soil, upon a small uninhabited island, over against Tybee, some twenty miles below Savannah. I have been thus particular in noting the " Plymouth Rock" of Methodism, as some General Conference might see fit to hold a session there, or do something else commemorative of the planting of Methodism in Georgia by John Wesley, and his first and last landing on this continent. It was over against Tyhee Island in the Savannah river. On Saturday 104 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. he \^as visited by a Geniuin preacher, and interrogated ujon personal religion, at which Mr. Wesley, the great founder of a new Church, which you call a Church of Christ, " was sur- prised, and knew not what to answer." Poor man, he was a stranger to religion, though as pious as a Pharisee. The next item I note in his Journal, is that famous entry of Saturday, February 21, 173() — "Mary Welch, aged eleven, was ba|)tizcd accoidinrj to the custom of the first Churchy and 'the rule of the ('Inirch of J'.iigland, ))y immersion. The child was ill then, but recovered from that hour." Now, sir, as this has been denied being in Wesley's Journal, as it is also denied that Wesley ever Intimated that immersion was ///c, not a, custom, (as though only one of the iiwdc.^, but the, which implies the solitari/ and peculiar custom) of the apostolic Church, I appeal to you, sir, in this case, if I have not given a correct transcript of the Journal entry for Saturday the 21st. If 1 have not, please correct me; if I have, no correction or remark is needed. 1 would call the attention of the reader of these letters, especially of Baptists, that Mr. Wesh^y does not say he baptized Mary Welch, as he is often, doubtless, represented as saying, but simply that Mary Welch luas baptized by inmiersion ; he does not say by whotn, and it makes not a straw's diHerence — Wesley says distinctly that immersion was //a^ custom of the ancient Church. This was his faith as a scholar, a graduate, and a Fellow of Oxford College. On Sunday, March 7, 1130, Mr. Wesley entered upon his ministry at Savannah, and j)reached from the 13th chapter of 1st Corinthians. in his Journal of Saturd:iy, April 17, 1 ind an acc(.)unt of the formation of the first Methodist Soeiety in America, lie says, "Not finding, as yet, any door open forthe(?) pursuing our main design, we considered in what manner wo REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 105 might be useful to the little flock at Savannah ; and we agreed, 1. To advise the more serious among them to form themselves into a sort of little Society^ and to meet once or twice a week, in order to reprove, instruct, and exhort one another. 2. To select out of these a smaller number for a more intimate union with each other, which might be for- warded, partly by our conversing singly with each, and partly by inviting them all together to our house, and this we deter- mined to do every Sunday, in the afternoon." Here we see what Methodism was in its incipiency, simply a prayer or social meeting — how useful and well calculated to accomplish its design, i. e. to secure and cultivate personal religion. Contrast Methodism in 1736, and the monster power that clerical ambition has now made of it. Let Methodists ponder this well. I find another entry in the Journal, about which much has been, and is said and written, which is positively denied. It reads, " Wednesday, May 5. I was asked to baptize a child of Mr. Parker's, second baililT of Savannah, but Mrs. Parker told me, ' Neither Mr. Parker nor I will consent to its being dipped.'' I answered, * If you certify that your child is weak, it will suffice (the Rubric says) to pour water upon it.' She replied, ' Nay, the child is not weak, but I am resolved it shall not be dipped.' This argument I could not confute, so I went home, and the child was baptized (what was done to it ?) by another person." The above extract from the Journal, which you will not contradict, shows conclusively three things : 1st. That the general practice of the Church of England, at this period, 1736, was to immerse healthy children. The case of Mary Welch corroborates this. 2d. That the strict construction of the Rubric was falling, or beginning to fall, into disuse, since one was found 5* 106 'i'iJl'' (3 UK AT IliON WIIKKTi. who would s])iiiikl(' (lor we- siipposo Mrs. I"*nikcr luid her own way) the cliild, altlioiij^h its piiroiits ciTlifit'd ihut it was not, weak, wliidi was a jyalpahli- violation ofllic liiibric. .'M. 'riial, Mr. Wesley was a linn Ueliever in iniinersion l)ein<; the only (.'hristian or adrnissihle l)a[)tisni, rrr^y>^ /;* cleasin'e of tiie Itailill" of Savannah. It nuist have been beeanse of his eonseii-ntions senij)!es, his serlptnral reasons, and liot his fear of modifying the rules of the Church of Enj^land, for we lind him eharged l)y the grand jury, with 1st. Not declaring his adherence to the Church of England ;" and 2d. " With dividing t,he morning service on Sunday." As additional and conclusive proof that we are correct, we (juotc tln^ following from tlu^ Life, of Wesh-.y, by Henry Moore, vol. 1st, |.age -I'jr), ].ul>Iished for the Methodist Episcopal C/hurch in IS21. Moore was the only surviving Irustci^ of Mr. Wesley ^s MSS : '' When Mr. Wesley baptized adults professing faith in (■hrist, he chose lo do it by trine immersion, if the })ersons would submit to it, Jtulging this to be the aposlolic method of l>(ij)ti::iiid, indicatiotis of Mr. Wesley's exceed- ing unpopularity is evident from the fact that oidy ono lamily came to the comminiion. Mr. Wesley says it was owing to a few words which a woman had spoken, that set the whole town in a blaze. We shall lu>ar nK)re about a woman. On Tuesday, the 2*2ii, Mr. Wesley writes, " Observing much coldness in Mr. '« behavior, 1 asked him the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 107 reason of it. He answered, ' I like nothing you do. All your sermons are satires (there could not be much of the spirit of religion, for Mr. \V. was not converted until two years after this) upon particular persons, (i. e. personal attacks) therefore I will never hear you more, and all the people are of my mind, for we wont hear ourselves abused. Besides, they say, they are Protestants, but as for you, they cannot tell what religion you are of. (Not at all strange, poor fellow, he had no religion !) They never heard of such a religion before. They do not know what to make of it. And then your private behavior — all the quarrels that have been here since you came, have been long of you. Indeed, there is neither man nor woman in the town who minds a word you say." We can testify that like founder like people. The facility with which Methodists can to this day promote quarrels, and throw a whole town or neighborhood into ferment and con- tention, is becoming widely noticed, and it is passing into a proverb, " they beat the Methodists to quarrel." It was so with their father John, whether in England or Georgia. This is one of the striking characteristics of Methodism every where — it must rule supreme and absolutely, or it will "quar- rel" with all wbo will not yield to its direction. A difficulty arose between Mr. Wesley and some one in Carolina, who would marry Mr. Wesley's parishioners with- ou*:. license. Mr. Wesley took a journey away to Charleston to complain to his bishop, and did not leave until bishop Gadsden promised to see the fellow should offend no more. Mr. Wesley had a storm at sea and almost a shipwreck coming back, to pay him for his trouble. I mention this trifling circumstance to aid in the delineation of Mr. Wesley's character, he was so jealous of his rights. July 3. Mr. Wesley begins to experience fresh trouble 108 THE GREAT IRON WUEEL. from the ladies. It is a widow this time, who testifies that Mr. Wesley addressed her repeatedly on the subject of matrimony, and she rejected him. I know not whether this was the same woman who set all the town in a blaze a short time before, so that none would attend on Mr. Wesley at the communion. In his Journal I find this entry : " Immediately after the holy communion, I mentioned to Mrs. Williamson (Mr. Causton's niece) something I thought reprovable in her behavior. At this she appeared extremely angry ; said she did not expect such zisage from me^ and at the turn of the street through which we were walking home, went abruptly away." August 7. Mr. Wesley repelled this Mrs. Williamson from the holy communion, and on Monday following the Eecorder of Savannah issued a warrant for Mr. Wesley, and on Tuesday he is taken by the Constable and carried before the Bailiff, and is held over to the next Court for trial. Mr. Causton warmly espouses the defence of his niece, and boldly alleges that Mr. Wesley's course towards Mrs. Williamson was "purely out of revenge, because he Mr. Wesley, had made proposals of marriage to her, tohich she had rejected, and married Mr. Williamson," and now Mr. Wesley sought to disgrace her to indulge his spite. Mr. Wesley does not deny addressing Mrs. Williamson. "Tuesday 16. Mrs. Williamson swore to and signed an affidavit, intimating much more than it asserted, but asserting that Mr. Wesley had many times proposed marriage to her; all of which proposals she had rejected. Of this I desired a copy, Mr. Causton replied, ' Sir, you may have one from any of the newspapers bf America.' "* * This bill or indictment, I am informed by Judge Warren, of Albany, Ga., is still preserved in the Court House at Savannah, where it can be seen. REPUBLICAXISM BACKWARDS. 109 Mr. Wesley is tried by a grand jury of forty -four, upon an indictment often specifications, and tiie jury was charged to beware of spiritual tyranny^ and to oppose the new illegal authority which ivas usurped over their consciences. Mr. Wesley was naturally tyrannical. The jury found a true bill against John, the founder of Methodism, for his conduct towards Mrs. Williamson, and nine other charges. Poor man, he was surrounded by difficulties— unconverted, unmarried, a woman prosecuting him for his conduct towards her, flir from home, and his own people thoroughly disgusted with his conduct, and outraged by his arrogance and imperial dictation / ! He is thinking of home, and the poor common people of England, who will bear his insults and lordings over them far better than these Georgians. Mr. Wesley concludes that he has mistaken the call to America, or answered for some one else. He writes October 7, " I consulted my friends, whether God did not call me to return to England.'" Poor fellow, God call you^ to be sure ! His friends decided not that God called him, but " that he ought to go, but not yet." What does the great Wesley think of running away from America, and away from a court trial, for the ill treatment of a- woman, and unwarrantable spiritual dictation, and a pub- lic nuisance ? ! ! He writes in his journal of November 3, " I appeared again at the court, holden on that day, and again at the court held Tuesday, November 25, on which day Mr. Causton de- sired to speak with me. He then read me some affidavits which had been made, September 15, last past; in one of which it was affirmed that I then abused Mr. Causton in his own house, calling him liar, villain, and so on, (alas, how familiar, Mr. Soule, are these terms with your editors and preachers !) It was now likewise repeated before seve^-al 110 THE GREAT 1110^ WHEEL. persons, which indeed I had forgot, that I had been repri- manded AT THE LAST COURT for an ENEMY tO, and IIINDERER of the PUBLIC PEACE." " I again consulted with my friends, who agreed with me that the time we looked for was now coined No wonder. But Mr. Wesley will stay and stand his trial, will he not — he will not run away like a guilty felon from these shores 1 Hear him : "In the afternoon, (December 2, 1737,) the magistrates published an order, requiring all the officers and sentinels to prevent my going out of the province ; and forbidding any person to assist me to do so. Being now only a ^moner at large^ in a place where I knew by experience every day would give fresh opportunity to procure evidence of words I never said, and actions I never did, (what a charge against your own brethren and Church !) I clearly saw the hour was come /or leaving this place ; and as soon as evening prayers were over, about eight o'clock^ the tide then serving, I shook off the dust of my feet, and left Georgia." Thus did Mr. Wesley shake off forever American dust from his feet, but he could not so easily rid himself of the unenviable character that he had earned for himself here in the short space of one year and nine months. It is not expected that Mr. Wesley would ever love Ame- rica after such a leave of it, and his future life and writings attest the fact that he never did. This was the first effort to plant Methodism on the soil of Georgia, and that by its founder — the great Wesley. Thus have I traced its history, until Methodism took ship and tide in the person of Wesley, on that ever memorable night, at eight o'clock, and sailed ajvay for England, Thursday the 22d, on board of the ship Samuel, Captain Pearcy. See Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 45 LETTER X. Methodism not necessarily a Christian Society — May he com- posed of sinners alone, preachers and members, as at first — Capt. Foy the inventor of Class Meetings^ Class Leaders and Stewards — A Catechetical Review of the facts of this letter. Sir : — Having noticed in my last Letter, Methodism as it was, in its conception and birth, I am prepared to mark, step by step, its growth and development into "Methodism as it is." Change, is written upon every page of its history — it is a system of change, void of every feature of stability or permanency. This, of itself forfeits all its claims to the title of a Church of Christ, since his Church was to remain unchanged through all the mutations of time; and, then, no one but Christ has any right to change the institutions of his Church. It would be impious in angels or men to pre- sume to add to or subtract from, or change in the least re- spect, the laws or organization of the Church of the living God. Angels would start back in horror at the thought of such daring ! But Methodism, devised by Mr. Wesley, was changed and modified by him, from time to time, during his whole life, to suit his taste, and since it belonged to him as a Society of his own creating, he had a right to modify it (HI) 112 THE GREAT IRON AVIIEEL. "at/ libitum,''^ and ^^ ad infinitum.'''' I find no fault with h..Ti for this, or for any thing he did, or to liis Methodism, as he conducted it at the beginning, for he did not claim that it was a Church — he never presumed to call it a Christian Church, or advised others to do so. But its present arro- gant claims to divine origin, and to be recognized and com- muned with as the Church of Christ, set up for it by the suc- cessors of Wesley — and Methodism as it is, and as made by them, I do most utterly and heartily repudiate, as an un- scriptural, anti-reasonable and anti-American power, a cleri- cal despotism of the direst type, dangerous to religion, and to the religious liberty of this land. To sustain my first position, Inskip in his history of Me- thodism, says, p. 37, 38, " In the beginning. Mr. Wesley did not conceive the idea of forming a Society at all. (Much less, then, a distinct Church, or any part of it.) "Afterwards, however,^Ae consummated such an organization as he found to be suitable and necessary." Here it is frankly admitted that, 1. Mr. Wesley had no idea at first of forming a So- ciety ; 2. That he did, at length, organize one himself with- out consulting any one — it was his own work ! 3. That he did not consult the Scriptures for a plan, or conform his or- ganization to its teachings, but fixed up his system to suit his own notions, and as he thought to be suitable ! Why, sir, if he thus coolly and deliberately had gone to work with the design of founding a Christian Church, he would be justly entitled to the i'liia o^ Antichrist f Thus setting up his authority and kingdom in open opposition and hostility to that of Jesus Christ, who is the only Lawgiver in Zion, and is Head over all things to his Church. Though Wesley did not do it, and I will do him the justice to say, had no thought of it; yet have not his successors done if? Have not they set up Methodism, and called it the Church of REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 118 Christ ; and is it not this day urged forward by its rulers as a rival of Christ's true Church, though originated, as we have seen, with an unconverted man, been modified by men, and governed by human laws, subject to perpetual change to suit the whims of men until now 1 And as a rival Church, is it not hostile to the progress, and even the existence of Christ's Church in the world? Does it not subvert the con- stitution, laws, government, membership, and ordinances and design of the Church of the New Testament I Let can- did men think? Let Christians who love our Lord Jesus Christ consider the questions well ! But to proceed with my proof: " But this organization was not a distinct sect, holding a particular formal creed, or prescribing any exclusive method and ceremonies of worship. It was a Society in the Church'" (of England.) And when it left the Church of England, it was a Society in the world, and can be nothing more or less, so long as it remains Methodism. " Hence those connected with the ^Societies' were earnestly and repeatedly warned of the evil of separating from the Church" (of England.) "They were also urged to attend the ordinances, and receive the sacraments, as administered by the Church" (of England.) "And this course was con- tinued a number of years, at least as long as it was deemed expedient and proper. However, as providential indications were given, and the wants of any particular time or place, were clearly developed, Methodism modified its instrumen- talities, and changed its position^ It thus vindicates its right to change, and its claim to the title of a "religious proteus." Let me trace its changing progress. Its first rise was in 1729, at Oxford^it appeared in 1736 in Savannah, Ga. — and its first appearance in London was in 1738, May 1st, on which day a Society of forty or fifty was 114 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. organized in London Mr. Wesley travelled from place to place, and organized his Societies. He supplied these Soci- eties with preachers from those who joined with him, and those he appointed as exhorters and preachers from among the most zealous and intelligent of his members. In this year Wesley leased the Foundry and fitted it up for preaching, and here, for the first time, we find Methodism with a temple ; and, strange as it sounds, from 1729 to 1735, it was without an altar ! and the object of its worship^ the Greek and Latin classics ! If we look into the Foundry in 1738, we will find a Metho- dist Society, and John Wesley its founder and master, with- out laws or officers, save its head — simply a religious meet- ing of all who wished to save their souls or hear Mr. Wesley preach. As a Society, it had as yet but one element of organization — but one bond of union, -and that was the condition of admission. It could not be regarded so much as a Christian or religious Society, in the sense that Christians alone, or religious persons, were embraced in it, or admitted to its privileges, but as a Society of individuals, having a religious end in view, i. e., to save their souls. I would call attention here to the fact that Methodism was not and is not strictly a religious or Christian Society, since it did not, and still does not require a j^rofession of religion as a condition of mem- bership! / It may consist of unconverted persons alone, PREACHERS AND MEMBERS, as it did iu thc beginning, from 1729 to May 24th, 1738, twenty-three days after he organized his first Society in London ! and nearly ten years after the first rise of Methodism / / REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 115 Condition of Admission into a Methodist Society, A.D. 1734-1 784. Inskip quotes Wesley's own words. " One circumstance more is quite peculiar to the people called Methodists ; that is, the terms upou which any person may be admitted into their society^ (not the Church of Christ!) They do not impose, in order to their admission^ any opinions whatever ! Let them be Churchmen or Dissen- ters, Presbyterians or Independents, it is no obstacle ! The Presbyterian may be a Presbyterian still ; the Independent or Anabaptist use his own mode of worship ; so may the Quaker {?) and none will contend with him about it. They think and let think. One condition, and one only, is required: a real desire to save their souls. Where this is, it is enough, THEY DESIRE NO MORE, THEY LAY STRESS UPON NOTHING ELSE ! " — Inski}), p. 35. Unconverted men, then, sceptics, univer- salists, and infidels, if they wish their souls to be saved, Avere as properly entitled to membership in ancient Methodism, as was Mr. Wesley himself. By referring to the Discipline of Methodism South, page 23, you will find that a profession, of religion is 7iot a condition of membership in a Methodist Society to-day! "There is but one condition previously required of those who desire admission into these societies, ' a desire to flee from the wrath to come, and to be saved from their sins.' " Is this the only condition of membership in the Church of Christ — was it the only condition of admis- sion into the Churches of the New Testament 1 Up to this period we find Methodism without a bishop, eldership, or itinerancy, class meetings, leaders, or stewards, or even baptism and the Lord's supper. 116 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. The Origin of Classes and Class Meetings — of Class Leaders and Stewards. I will allow Mr. Wesley himself to inform us how class meetings and class leaders originated. " But when a large number of people were joined together, the great difficulty- was to keep them together. For they were continually scattering hither and thither, and we knew no way to help it. But God provided for this also, when we thought not of it." A year or two after, Mr. Wesley met the chief of the society in Bristol, and inquired, " How shall we pay the debt upon the preaching-house 1 " Captain Foy stood up and said, " Let every one in the society give a penny a week, and it will easily be done." " But many of them," said one, "have not a penny to give." " True," said the Captain; " then put ten or twelve of them to me. Let each of these give what they can weekly, and I will supply what is want- ing. Many others made the same offer, so Mr. Wesley divided the societies among them, assigning a class of about twelve persons to each of these, who were termed leaders.''^ — Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 310. From the above, it will be seen, 1. That the class and the class leader was the invention of Captain Foy, and not con- ceived of by Wesley at all, only adopted by him. Think of it. The class meeting law is considered one of the essential fea- tures of Methodism, " a vital doctrine,'''' with the rulers of it. Since they will exclude every member, however pious he may be, if he refuses to obey a law that was Mot of Mr. Wesley's devising, but suggested to him by Captain Foy, of his Majesty's marines, we suppose ! An English captain of the marines invented the class meeting ! which American Christians must now obey, or be excluded ! ! REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 117 2. That both the class and the class leader were devised and Instituted purely for a secular end, the collection of money from the society. The Methodist class leader is then the chief publican or tax collector of Methodism, and successor to Captain Foy ! Yet, for refusing to attend the class meet- ings, which were, and still are, X\\q, pay c^ay.s^jf Methodists — a meeting originating in the mind of a marine captain, for the purpose of paying taxes, the Discipline of modern Methodism directs that the member be excluded from the Methodist Society, although guilty of no immorality — of no offence towards God or man ! Another duty was enjoined upon these leaders, which duty was accidentally suggested to Mr. Wesley : "Not long after, (the appointment of leaders,) one of these informed Mr. Wesley that, calling on such a one in his house, he found him quarrellinir witli his wife — another was found in drink. It immediately struck into Mr. Wesley's mind, " This is the very thing we wanted ; the leaders are the per- sons who may not only receive the contributions, but also watch over the souls of their brethren. 'J'hc society in Lon- don being informed of this, willingly followed the example of that in Bristol, as did every society from that time, whe- ther in Europe or America." — Vol. vii., p. 316. The class leaders, then, were designed to be the tax- gatherers and spieSy or informers y of the class appointed to them. There is one more ofilccr so nearly allied to the leader, that I will notice his origin here, i. e. the steward. "In a few days some of them said, 'Sir, we will not sit under your preaching for nothing, we will subscribe quar- terly.' I said, ' I will have nothing, for I w\ant nothing. My fellowship supplies me with all I want.* One of them re- plied, 'Nay, but you want £115 to pay for the lease of the 118 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. I'oundry, and likewise a large sum of iiiuuey to put it into repair.' On this consideration, I suffered them to subscribe ; and when the society met, I asked, ' Who will take the trouble of receiving this money and paying it where it is needful 1 ' One said, ' I will do it, and keep the account for you.' So here was the Hrst steward. Afterward I desired one or two more to help me, as stewards, and in process of time, a greater number." — Wesley's Works, vol. v. p. 220. Stewards, then, are the receivers and disburse rs of the money collected by the j^uhlicans. Let us review the features of Methodism developed be- tween A. D. 1729-1738 ; and as you teach your people by questions and answers, it may be more agreeable to your^ self to glance over the history in this form. Q. In what year did Methodism first appear 1 A. November 2G, A. D. 1729.— Wesley's Works, vol. vii., p. 348. Q. By whom was it originated — is it of heaven or of men 1 A. Of men, as Methodists themselves boast that English Methodism was founded by John and Charles Wesley, and two others, at Oxford, A. D. 1729. Q. What was the original design of Methodism, religious or literary 1 A. Purely literary^ as the first Methodists devoted the evenings of the week to the reading of the Greek and Roman classics. Methodism had no altar for many years, and its worship was the classics. — See Wesley's Works, vol. iii., p. 6. Q. Were the originators of the scheme of Methodism converted men 1 A. Not one of them, as can be discovered. Charles Wesley did not profess a personal knowledge of religion until Wednesday, May 3d, 1738, and John not until Wed- nesday, May 24. 1738. KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 119 Q. May it not be justly said that Methodism came up out of the earth ? A. I think so, and many reflecting men are beginning to think sOj it being purely of an earthly origin, and in this re- spect answering to a type of power to arise and take the place of the second beast, or Roman Catholic Church.— Rev. xiii., 11. Q. With whom originated the class meetings and class leaders, and stewards, of Methodism, and for what purpose ? A. With a certain Captain Foy, in the year 1738, for the purpose of collecting money from the people. The society was divided into classes of twelve persons, and a collector, called a class leader, was set over them to receive their weekly contributions ; for this purpose they met weekly, in classes of twelve, and were called class meetings. A person oifered to receive the money so collected, and pay it over, and Mr. Wesley accepted him, and called him a steward, and then appointed others in his society. Q. What otJier duties did Mr. Wesley enjoin upon these leaders or tax collectors ; and how did the duty occur to him? A. He afterwards appointed each of them to be spies and informants upon their several classes, and to report what they saw or heard, to the preacher in charge ; • and this idea was given to Mr. Wesley from one of these leaders volun- tarily informing upon his brethren ! Q. What characters in the Church of Rome do the class leaders put you in mind of? A. The inquisitors, whose duty it is to inform upon their brethren to the general of their order. Q. What meetings are held by these leaders and stewards, and for what purpose ? A. Weekly, with the minister in charge, the leaders to 120 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. pay over the money to the stewards, and to report all offen- ders to the mhiister. Q. Did Mr. Wesley ever mahitahi that these officers, meetings or regulations, were scriptural, or suggested to him by the Scriptures 1 A. Never. He never professed to have consulted the Scriptures for his institute or his regulations. The Society gathered to hear him preach. Capt. Foy suggested the class meetings and class leadership to him, by offering himself to be one — another person offered to be steward — and a class leader became an informant ; and so was suggested to Mr. Wesley both these officers and their duties, and the class meetings. Q. Is not the class meeting considered an essential and vital part of the system of Methodism 1 A. Yes. " Class meetings are an essential part of our system." * * "It is not claimed that they are of divine origin." — Inskip, p. 192. Q. But does not the discipline require that all those who refuse to attend class shall be excluded, even if devotedly pious persons ? A. Yes. See discipline, section 3, Ans. 2. Q. Is not this, then, a palpable violation of the commis- sion, if Methodists claim their Society to be a Church of Christ, since they teach the observance of what they themselves admit Christ never commanded, and exclude his followers for not obeying the laws and traditions of men, as the class meeting, which he has positively forbidden them to do ? A. I think so. If Bishop Soule, and his brethren And- rews, Capers and Paine, whose names subscribe and enjoin the observance of the discipline, claim that Methodism is the or a Church of Christ, then is it unscriptural in its practice, and they themselves openly and palpably violate the express REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 121 command of Christ in the commission, by teaching for ob- servance what Christ has not commanded ; and Methodism is a form of Antichrist, opposing as it does Christ's autho- rity. LETTER XI. ''METHODISM AS IT IS." INTRODUCTION. Dear Sir : — Having briefly sketched " Methodism as it was," — Wesleyan Methodism originated and designed to be by its author, Mr. John Wesley, I now wish to call your at- tention to " Methodism as it is," or to American Methodism, as it now exists among us here. This letter is designed only as an introduction to this subject. I have satisfactorily shown you, and every other candid man, that the scheme of Methodism originated, not with God, but with Mr. Wesley and his coadjutors, and that, too, ten years before he was a converted man, himself confessing it ! A Church scheme devised by good men would be bad enough — but one originating with an unregenerate^ a zvicked man, as was Wesley, from 1729, the date of the birth of his system until May 24, 1736, is far too earth-born for the tastes of reflecting men. I have also shown, most conclusively, that Mr. Wesley never, for one moment, claimed that he was originating a Church, in any sense, nor until the day of his death did he claim — as, sir, I fear you do — that Methodism was a Church of Jesus Christ. It was, in any given place, only a Society (122) ■ REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 123 in the Church of England^ the object of which was the pro- motion of personal piety ; and it was open to all who sought, both as Christians, to cultivate the graces of the spirit, or as sinners to seek the salvation of their souls. Only o«ae condition was required in the lifetime of Wesley, a desire to " flee the WTath to come." No Church-rite or ordinance, as baptism, or the Lord's Supper, or ministerial ordination, was administered — it was only a religious Socie- ty^ we repeat, designed to promote the attainment and cul- tivation of religion, prayer and exhortation — as a simple prayer-meeting of any Church ; hence Episcopalians, Pres- byterians, Congregationalists, Lutherans, or Baptists, could belong to Methodist Societies, as they now can to a Bible Society, and still be Presbyterians and Baptists. Mr. Wes- ley nor his cotemporaries. would have been offended with me had I called his Societies by the name he gave them. Socie- ties, as your brethren now are, but he would have been highly incensed should I have called them churches, or Methodism a Church or the Church ! What a change has taken place ii\ a few short years — not m Methodism, to make it a Church — but in the demands of Methodists upon the charity of Chris- tians ! Methodist Societies in America continued as appendages to the Church of England until the Baltimore Conference of 1784. They claimed only to be Societies^ not churches or a Church ; they did not presume to ordain ministers, to bap- tize, or to administer the Lord's Supper ; the ordinances of the Church were not known among them, more than among the various Bible and Auxiliary Bible Societies of the land. If my statement is denied, I refer to your own historical doc- uments. See Inskip, p. 43 : " The first regular Conference was held in Philadelphia, June, 1773. At this Conference, the authority of Mr. Wes- 124 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. ley, and the doctrine and discipline of the Methodists, were formally recognized and adopted. They also agreed unan- iinoushj not to administer the Sacrament, and all the mem- bers were exhorted to attend the Church (of England) and to receive the ordinances there. Methodism then served only as a great drag-net, with which to gather in the Church of Eng- land ! The close of the revolution marked the passing of Me- thodism from this, its chrysalis state, as it proved to be. Methodism is now, not to be transformed, but to claim a new name and position — its 12,000 Societies are to be made into one Church. Now, sir, mark the cause of my astonishment, at the fa- cility with which it is accomplished, the ease with which a purely human invention — a Society set on foot by a man, not professing the slightest conformity to the direction of the Word of God — is made as by a magic word, *' the Church of Gf'od, the pillar and ground of the truth." Was the organism of Methodism disturbed I Not in the least. Were the laws and enactments, the polity of Mr. Wesley, laid aside, and the teachings of Christ substituted in their place ? Was the authority of Mr. Wesley, as head of the Church and of the ministry, repudiated for the autho- rity of Christ, who is Head over all things to his Church, and the only master of his ministers ? Were all those who made no profession of religion — the hosts of the ungodly and wicked, that had been gathered into those Societies, for- mally excluded from the visible bounds of the new Church 1 By no means — not one of these changes — all things were allowed to remain as they were from the beginning of Me- thodism. It was only " resolved" by sixty Methodist Circuit riders^ not an individual member was consulted in the mat- ter, or had a voice in so momentous a proceeding — it was REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 125 the work of ambitious Episcopal deacons and priests, who wished to be Episcopal Bishops, Right Rev. Fathers in God, and Ruling Elders ; I say it was determined by them to set up for themselves, as Church dignitaries and Church rulers, anvi therefore it was simply resolved, that the Societies in America " become a Church, under the name of the Method- ist E. Church." See History of Discipline. They commanded, and Methodism stood fast and forth a Church of Christ, with Messrs. Coke and Asbury as its visi- ble head, clothed in almost pontifical power ! ! By this sim- ple process — by the passage of a simple resolution did Wes- leyan Methodism become Coke and Asburian Methodism, or, as claimed by you, sir, and your cotemporary bishops, the Church of Jesus Christ, which the prophets foretold was to be " cut out without hands," to be set up by the God of heaven, and which Christ himself declared was to be built by himself, and to continue indestructible and unchanged, from his ascension to his second advent. Bishop Soule, I earnestly and most respectfully appeal to you, sir, — must I believe that human Societies can be thus easily transmuted by a simple vote — by sixty men saying *'Aye" — into veritable Churches of Christ, with a right at once to demand fellowship of me and of the Churches of Christ, and that recognition, association, and intercourse, due to ve- ritable Churches of Christ ? It seems to me, sir, seriously and before my God, that your claims upon me and my denomination are preposter- ous, and, in the sight of heaven, almost impious. If I sin in viewing your claims thus, I call upon you, as you love my soul, to make one effort^ at least, to enlighten and convert me from the error of my Ways. Are you not morally bound to do so 1 Let us see how this precedent will work when applied to 126 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. other hiiinan societies. Suppose at the next Annual Cele- bration of the Order of Free and Accepted Masons in the United States, this resolution should be proposed : " Whereas, since it is deemed by us expedient, on account of the age of our order, and to secure its recognition and fellowship by all Christian churches, therefore, Resolved^ That, from henceforth, we will be known and recognized as the Masonic Episcopal Church of the United States ; and pur Grand High Priests be called, and exercise the functions of, Episcopal Bishops, and the next highest officers exercise the office of Presiding Elders." Very well. Now let the Odd Fellows do the same, and we have the Odd Fellowship Church. Suppose now, that they resolve to initiate their members by a sprinkling, or pouring, or an immersing ceremony, in which the candidate professes to recognize Jesus Christ as the Son of God — and, also, at stated times, a supper of bread and wine is observed after the manner of the Lord's Supper, would your Christian charity allow you to recognize them as true Churches of Christ 1 Would you fellowship and recognize them as Christian Churches by inviting their preachers or chaplains into your pulpits 1 Would you not look upon their act as impious? Would you eat the Lord's Supper with them in token of fellowship 1 Would you receive their members as baptized"? Could the world or those societies justly de- nounce you and your brethren as illiberal or uncharitable should you refuse to recognize their claims as Churches of Christ 1 There might be many good men in them, and their High Priests or chaplains might be even ministers, but would this entitle them to be regarded as Christian Churches. Now, sir, the Methodist E. Church stands forth in this light before the world — humam societies, retaining their man-con- trived organizations, laws and traditions, terms of admission, EEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 127 and unregenerated membership, voting themselves the Church of Christ, and demanding recognition and fellowship of all Churches ! What is such a society, but a great rival and antagonistic institution to the Church set up by the God of Heaven. You can understand why I cannot, and why Baptists can neither fellowship you at the Supper, or receive those initiated into your societies by the application of water by any mode, or invite your preachers into our pulpits, thereby endorsing your claims before the world, if any Baptists are guilty of any one of the above acts, they are manifestly inconsistent, and do it doubtless through false charity^ a spe- cious liberality, or pure inconsiderateness. LETTER XII kf ethodism began in America hy a woman — Mr. Wesley falsely tharged with forming an Episcopal Church, and ordaining Coke a Bishop — Methodist Episcopacy originated by fraud and forgery — Methodists know not whether Bishops are Bishop)S or Elders — divided among themselves. Sir : — It is a fact worthy of notice that Methodism took its successful start in the United States through a woman, an aged Methodist woman, who came over to New York in 1766 — her name is lost — in a former company that came over in 1765, were a few who had been once Methodists in England, among whom was one local preacher ; but they had all fallen from grace before the old lady's arrival, and Embry was lashed into his duty by her severe reproofs. Thus we see the precious seed deposited already in America through the direct influence of woman. See Gorrie, p. 39. In noticing " Methodism as it is," I begin with the organi- zation of the Methodist E. Church. The Episcopal part of the concern was not the conception or design of Wesley — ^he utterly abhorred Episcopacy — but of Messrs. Coke and Asbury, his American superintendents. We have no right to believe that it is such a Church as he wished or expected (128) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 129 Methodists to organize in this country. Though Mr. Wesley never intended to start a new sect, or to his dying day, wished his followers in England to separate from the Church, yet, America having achieved her independence, and union of Church and State for ever abolished here — and many of his preachers had forsaken their Churches — Mr. Wesley gave his consent for American Methodists to form, at a proper time, a separate Church, but when they did so, not to form an Episcopal Church, and create prelatical bishops — but in his own words in patterning it, to " follow after (or organize it according to the teachings of) Scripture, and the Primitive Church." Neither of which did Mr. Wesley believe taught Episcopacy. He says, "But that it (Episcopacy) is pre- scribed in Scripture, I do not believe." But as the Societies still wished to be under " his care,"" while he lived, he so- lemnly set apart Dr. Coke as his assistant, to superintend the affairs of the Societies in America. For the sake of my readers, I will copy his letter to the brethren, informing tliem what he had done, and I hope they will compare it carefully with what you said he did do, in the first section of the Discipline : "Bristol, September 10, 1784. "To Dr. Coke, Mr. Asbury and our brethren in Ntrth America. " By a very uncommon train of providences, many of the provinces of North America are totally disjoined from the mother country, and elected into independent states. The English government has no authority over them, either civil or ecclesiastical, any more than over the States of Holland. A civil authority is exercised over them, partly by the Con- gress, partly by the provincial assemblies. But no one either exercises or claims any ecclesiastical authority' at all. In 6* 130 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. this peculiar situation some thousands of the inhabitants j)f these States desire my advice, and in compliance with their desire I have drawn up a little sketch. Lord King's account of the Primitive Church convinced me, many years ago, that bishops and presbyters are the same order, and consequently have the same right to ordain. For many years I have been importuned, from time to time, to exercise the right, by ordaining part of our travelling preachers. But I have still refused, not only for peace sake, but because I was deter- mined, as little as possible, to violate the established order of the National Church, to which I belonged. " But the case is widely different between England and North America. Here there are bishops who have a legal jurisdiction. In America there are none, neither any parish minister. So that for some hundreds of miles together, there is none either to baptize or to administer the Lord's Supper. Here, therefore, my scruples are at an end ; and I conceive myself at full liberty, as I violate no order, and invade no man's right, by appointing and sending laborers into the harvest. *' I have accordingly appointed Dr. Coke and Mr. Francis Asbury, to be joint superintendents over our brethren in North America; as also Richard Whatcoat and Thomas Vasey, to act as elders among them, by baptizing, and ad- ministering the Lord's Supper. And I have prepared a liturgy, little differing from that of the Church of England, (I think the best constituted National Church in the world,) which I advise all the travelling preachers to use on the Lord's Day, in all the congregations, reading the Litany only on Wednesdays and Fridays, and praying extempore on all other days. I also advise the elders to administer the Supper of the Lord on every Lord's Day. " If any one -will point out a more rational and Scriptural REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 131 way of feeding and guiding these poor sheep in the wilder- ne:5s, I will gladly embrace it. At present, I cannot see any better method than that I have taken. "It has indeed been proposed to desire the English bishops to ordain part of our preachers for America. But to this I object, 1. I desired the Bishop of London to ordain one, but could not prevail. 2. If they consented, we know the slowness of their proceedings ; but the matter admits of no delay. 3. If they were to ordain them now, they would expect to govern them. And how grievously would this entangle us ! 4. As our American brethren are now totally disentangled, both from the State and the English hierarchy, we dare not entangle them again, either with the one or the other. They are now at full liberty, simply to follow the Scriptures and the primitive church. And we judge it best that they should stand fast in that liberty wherewith God has so strangely made them free. "John Wesley." You certainly cannot affirm, in the face of Mr. Wesley's assertion in this letter, that he believed in Episcopacy, though he did think the Church of England the best National Church in the world — and I am free to admit it, and yet I believe a National or Episcopal Church both unscriptural and unajwsiolical. Mr. Wesley distinctly repudiates the third order, and says he was convinced years ago that " bishops and presbyters are the same order.'" Is not this enough 1 Do you say that he ordained Mr. Cok^. a bishop, when he believed him as rnuch a bishop as himself, before he laid hands on him?! But suppose I show that Mr. Wesley looked upon those ministers who received the title, and exercised the powers of the third order, or prelatical bishops, in the light of " heathenish priests and mitred infi 132 THE GREAT IRON AVHEEL. DELS," will it not be convincing ? Hear him : ' For these forty years I have been in doubt concerning that question, ' What obedience is due to heathenish priests and mitred INFIDELS.' " * * " Some obedience I always paid to bishops in obedience to the laws of the land, but I cannot see that I am under any obligations to obey them farther than those laws require." * * "I submit still to mitred infidels." * * Now, I have as good grounds to pronounce you, sir, and your three fellows-bishops, " heathenish 2}'^^^sts and mitred infidels,^'' as Mr. Wesley had to apply such epithets to the bishops of the Episcopal Church ; indeed, if they deserved the titles so do you, and all Bishops of Methodism — but, sir, should I presume to use such language in addressing you, or speaking of you, what an outcry would be heard throughout your Societies in the whole length and breadth of the land. Every circuit rider would take this letter for his text at his next appointment. Must I believe you when you declare in the Discipline that Mr. Wesley did ordain Dr. Coke an Episcopal bishop, and authorized him to ordain Asbury one ? Can you say it in the face of the above 1 Can you say it in the face of his objugatory letter to Asbury ? (see Letter, No, VIII.,) in w^hich he says, " How^ can you, how dare you suffer yourself to be called a bishop 1 I shudder, I start, at the very thought ! Men may call me a knave or a fool ; a RASCAL, a SCOUNDREL, and I am content, but they shall never, with my consent, call me a BISHOP ;" and do you say Dr. Coke and Mr. Asbury were bishops ? Can a servant be greater than his lord? Hear his obsecration to you, Bishop Soule, and to your fellows, whom Mr. Wesley would regird as mitred infidels : " For 7ny sake, for God's sake, foj CHRIST'S sake, put a full end to this !" Will you KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 133 listen to his prayer ? How could his anguished spirit rest, were he permitted to see "heathenish priests and mitred infidels," ruling and directing the interests of his Societies in America ? Am I, with all the lights before my eyes, to believe your declarations in the first section of the Discipline, (1.) That Mr. Wesley did prefer the Episcopacy for his Societies in America (?) (2.) That he did actually ordain Dr. Coke a bishop C?) (3.) That he did deliver to him letters of Epis- copal orders (?) and (4.) Authorized him to ordain F. Asbury an Episcopal bishop {I) (5.) And that, at " rity fronsi his own private views of Episcopacy, and the right of presby- ters to ordain a bishop of the third order. Nothing is more clearly established than that Mr. Wesley did not believe in the third order; tha: he abhorred it; that he deemed it al- (143) 144 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. most, if not quite, sacrilegious for a minister to assume and exercise the rank and jurisdiction of a prelatical bishop; that he spoke of them as "heathenish priests and mitred infidels." He did not feel himself authorized to ordain one, or to choose and appoint Episcopacy for his societies. Will Methodists claim that Mr. Wesley was warranted by the Scriptures to ordain a jjr-elatical bishop? They cannot. They do not only teach that the Bible does not warrant such an officer, but violently opposes the existence and Antichris- tian rank, and spiritual jurisdiction of such a lordling. But have they such an order of ministers ? Methodism is divided about it. The conference editors and small doc- tors of divinity, book-writers like Mr. Hinkle, McFerrin, Inskip, Gorrie, et cu7n multis aliis, deny, in the very face of their Discipline, that they have a third orde7\ and the mass of Methodists believe them ; while the bishops and the learned doctors of Methodism maintain that the bishops are verita- ble Popish ones of the third order, and by three ordinations ! Hear Dr. Emory : " In whatever sense distinct ordinations constitute distinct orders [not office/^ in the same sense Mr. Wesley certainly intended that we should have three ORDERS, for he undeniably instituted three ordinations."'* Orders, not offices. Hear Dr. Emory and Dr. Bangs conjointly : " Three ORDERS of ministers are recognized, and the duties peculiar to each are certainly defined. "f And Methodists believe their learned doctors and historians of course! Does it not require an unreasonable amount of credulity to be a Methodist 1 But Mr. Wesley must have had authority from some * Emory's Def. of Fathers, sec. 7. t Art. by Bangs and Emory. Buck's Th. Die, 1825. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 145 source, and since it is not allowed by either Episcopacy or by Scripture and they teach and hold that God gave Mr. Wesley the grace to usurp the special right to exercise the authority and to transmit it in regular succession of bishops to posterity ! This exalts the mission of Mr. Wesley to a dignity equal to Paul's. Dr. Bangs claims that Mr. Wesley had a divine call to found Methodism, and that God sanctioned him in the work ! So Mr. Alexander Campbell doubtless considers that he has one. See Bangs' Original Church, p. 106. Mr. Inskip regards Mr. Wesley as especially raised up by God. " To meet the emergency which then existed, God raised up a company of great men, &c., — the Wesleys, Coke and Asbury, &c. These MEN devised this powerful instrumentality, i. e., Methodism. Page 54. " Methodism is a creation of ProvidenceJ^ i. e., of God, since there is no chance. Its claims, are then, all as sacred as God's word ! Mr, Gorrie claims that Mr. Wesley acted under the especial direction, inspiration, or sanction of God. Page 215. "As Mr. Wesley, under God, was the founder of the Methodist Societies." If Mr. Wesley indeed acted " under God" in what he did, then is his Discipline (the first section excepted) as authoritative as the New Testament, and ought to be added to it and follow the Book of Revela- tions ! Methodists act upon this belief, we suppose,, when they exclude a member for not observing the laws of Mr. Wesley, though they do not violate any of the laws of Jesus Christ ! The bishops first taught and still encourage these writers to teach the " idea that Methodism is a new Church, founded by Mr. Wesley, under the special sanction and direction of God !" " We believe that God's design in raising up the preachers called Methodists," &c. Dis. p. 4. 7 146' THE GREAT IRON" WHEEL. "God THEN' TriRusT TiiEM OUT to ralse up a holy people.** Dis. p. 3. "Our venerable friend, who under God, had been the father," (See. Methodist editors freely admit Mr. Wesley's " divine call.^^ " As the father of Methodism, he had the right, of priority and seniority in the Methodist Societies, and as he deemed himself called hy Divine Providence, to provide an ordained ministry and/or^ of Government."* Was not his mission then inspired and equal to any apostle 1 What do these bishops and writers teach that God called Mr. Wesley to do 1 Why, " under God^'' to ordain an epis- copal bishop, and place him over his Societies, when under the illumination, inspiration or guidance of the 8ame spirit, he did not believe that such an order was taught by Scrip- ture, or existed in the Primitive Churches — indeed, was ab- horrent to his own feelings ! This spirit was as inconsistent with itself as are the spirits of the " rappers" in our own day ! But the chief ministers of Methodism — the bishops and elders, persuade the people that they have some divine or superior right to govern them — that this power or right is given them by the Saviour or some one. Notice the phra- seology of the language used in ordaining a Methodist preacher. Suppose him abjectly bowed Lo the very feet of his " chief ministers" who interrogate him, " Will you reverently obey your chief ministers to whom is committed the care and GOVERNMENT OVER YOU." Do not these chief ministers claim that it is committed to them to rule gratia divino or jure divino ? This is the divine right plead by kings, popes and despots, &;c. * Methodist Episcopalian. REPUBLICANIS:\r BACKWARDS. 147 Do you say that this power or right is committed to the chief ministers, by Wesley ? He had no more authority to invest a Methodist preacher with the absolute government of two or two thousand other preachers, than I have to elect the king of France. Man is only man's equal, in Church or State. Do you say the people conferred this authority upon the bishops 1 The people have not now and never had any voice in the creation of a Methodist bishop, or in the election of a presiding elder or any minister of Methodism, as such. They never gave to any man this right. Who then, called, and therefore conferred upon Methodist bishops this fearful ministration of absolute power ? By whom do they teach their people they were called 1 See the office for their ordination, page 127. The candidate for the bishoprick, is asked by a bishop, " Are you persuaded that you are truly called to this ministration, according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ ?" Ans. " I am so persuaded." If he is truly called by the grace and will of Christ, then woe is him if he does not govern. And mark it, he is not called to preach to save sin- ners — no, no such menial labor — he feels called to govern — to rule with absolute and pontifical sway, the laborious preachers. But if we look into the prayers used upon one of these occasions, ^ve can learn the claimed source of this power, " Almighty God, giver of all good things, (this implies that the order or grace of a bishop is a good thing,) who by thy Holy Spirit hast appointed divers orders of ministers in thy Church, (this is certainly false which I prove by Me- thodist publications*) mercifully behold this thy servant • " On the whole, we think it apparent, that bishops, presbyters, and 148 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. (another mistake) now called to the work and ministry if a bishop," &;c. Called by whom 1 See question above. '' By the will of our Lord Jesus Christ." At what particular point ot time is one of these favorites of Heaven indued with this supernatural right, or grace, or power. When the Holy Ghost is given to him. In what way does it come — through what medium is it conferred ? Through the hands of a bishop and two elders. Read page 137. Upon the head of the kneeling candidate they lay their hands and pro- nounce the charmed words, " Receive the Holy Ghost for the office and work of a bishop of the Church of God now committed unto thee by the imposition of our hands, in the name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. Anient " And remember that thou stir up the grace of God (here it is at last, the plea of kings and popes ! ) which is given thee (how, by whom?) hy the imposition of our hands, (and *v'hat an imposition!) for God hath not given us the spirit of fear, but of power, and love and soberness." We have sufficiently shown that the rulers of Methodism rule by the same right, claimed by the principalities and powers, and the rulers of the darkness of this world, and spiritual wickedness in all the high places of earth — the grace of God — a divine right — which is false, and as dishonoring to God as it is impious. Destroy this forged and iniquitous charter of tyrants, temporal and ecclesiastical, and Episcopal Methodism with all the soul-crushing tyrannies and habitations of cruelties with which humanity is now cursed, would fall. pastors, were originally the same. Hence, affectionate salutation is sent to a Church, with its bishops and deacons." Philadelphia Tract, No. 312, published by the Methodist Episcopal Church, 200 Mulberry Street. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 149 Then why a third distinct ordination if an elder is of the same order with the bishop ? If it is only an office to which he is raised, why use the very form of ordaining to a third order the order of prelatical bishop used by the Church of England 1 Do Methodists claim and teach people the doctrine of SUCCESSION also ? Most certainly. We call Jesse Lee to the stand. "The bishops introduced a question in the annu- al minutes, which was as follows : Ques. Who are the per- sons who exercise the episcopal office in the Methodist Church in Europe and America 1" Ans. " John Wesley, Thomas Coke, and E. Asbury, by regular order and succession.'"' What a fabrication of Messrs. Coke and Asbury ! What an unhallowed scheme in them to usurp the office and authority of bishops ! Bishop John Wesley 1 He said he had rather be called a rascal or a scoun- drel ; and well he might ! Mr. Inskip says : " Our design is to show, that it is our duty, as ministers of Christ, and the successors of the apos- tles and John Wesley !" Here we have the doctrine of regular order and succession from the apostle John Wesley, first bishop down to Joshua Soule. But do Methodists teach that Mr. Wesle}"- did design to perpetuate and transmit a succession of bishops 1 Most as- sm-edly. " In conformity with this view he deemed it necessary to PERPETUATE the authority among the Methodist preachers in America, that there should be in the first instance a general mrperintendent appointed to transmit that authority to pos- terity." Does not this look a little Popish 1 The presbyters, or in the scriptural vocabulary of Metho 150 THE GRKAT IRON WIIEKL. dism, Iho elders, whom he ordained lor America, were not invested with that authorifi/, but Dr. Coke, the superintend- ent, ivas / How did Dr. Coke possess the grace of impart- ing the grace of a bishop? Evidently because, it is claimed, that he received it from Wesley, and Wesley received it from God direct ! How do these bishops teach us that this grace is transmitted ? Why, sir, like animal magnetism, through the hands or fingers of one bishop into the head of another. The head, not the heart, is the peculiar receptacle of this ^race. If I am thought as making light of holy things, turn to Dis. p. 151, and read the way the new-made bishop receives the grace. "Then the Bishop and elders present shall lay their hands on the head of the elected persons, kneeling before them upon his knees — (it is an awfully solemn affair ! kneeling upon his knees, to be sure!) — the Bishop then saying "Receive the Holy Ghost — (blasphemy, is it not?) — for the office and work of a Bishop of the Church of God (of Mr. Wesley) now committed unto thee by tpie imposition of our hands, in the name of the flither, (if in the name means, by the au- thority of, as it does, this is a daring falsehood !) and of the son, (this is another,) and of the Holy Ghost, (this is ano- ther, three ! ) And remember that thou stir up the grace of God which is given thee, (how is the ^race of God bestowed ?) hy this imjwsition of our hands P In the name of Luther, do Protestants teach in the nineteenth century one of the most blasphemous doctrines of Rome, that her priests can perform miracles, and impart by blessing, by prayers, or by the impo- ntion of their hands, the very grace of God ? ! Monstrous ! monstrous ! It is priestcraft run mad ! ! But this is not all the teaching of that imposition, " for God hath not given W5 the spirit of fear, but of power, and love and soberness!" The reader can see that the terms "fear, love and soberness" REPUBLICAN ISil BACKWARDS. 151 are only put in as a sort of setting for the bishop's gem, *'*power" — they mean nothing in the connection. What is the doctrine of Methodist Episcopacy 1 That God gave to Wesley the grace to teach and rule as he did, (as) the first bishop of the new-latter-day-Zion, and that Wesley transmit- ted this invisible grace to the head of Coke, by the imposition of his hands, and Coke imparted it to the head of Asbury, and so the impontion has been passed along down to the last person you and your fellow bishops imposed upon. Now, sir, I do before Almighty God, and before the whole world, pronounce the whole of this third order, Episcopacy, ordination, and succession, and transmission of the grace of God through the fingers of priests, high-handed priestcraft, and an imposition upon the million of Methodists in America. I challenge contradiction. No one will dare to defend the doctrine that priests, whether in Papal or Protestant Rome, can im- part the " grace of God," or the " divine right" to lord it over God's heritage, by the imposition of their hands; or to prove to me, or to the world, and hundreds of enquiring Methodists, that God hath given them the •' spirit of power," thus to do. I unhesitatingly affirm that it is the monstrous doctrine of the Roman Catholic and Greek Apostacies — it is Popery in essence. It is the Popery of Protestantism ! Look at it 1 What is that doctrine 1 Simply this : " that Christ gave to his Apostles the right and grace of ordination, and through them transmitted this right to the first Bishop, thje third of three orders of ministers, by succession, down to the present time." Thus the High Churchman tells us. Christ called Peter, and authorized him to transmit the mysterious grace, and poiver, and right of ordination to Linus, next bishop at Pome, and he to Cletus, and he to Clement, &;e., &c., &c., down to the present Archbishop of Canter- bury. " Why," a writer asks, " do these go back some 1800 152 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. years to get this succession from Christ V Evidently, be- cause Christ is that far off from them. But, according to Methodists, Christ was not so far off from Mr. Wesley. Oh, no, he "ca//ec?" Mr. Wesley, and made him, by special favor, as much a bishop as the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Roman Pontiff! Well may Mr. Wesley reject the line of succession back to Peter. He is the Peter of Methodism. They may reject the old doctrine of apostolic succession farther back than Mr. Wesley, for he is their apostle, and we affirm as much an apostle as was Paul, if the testimony of Methodist writers and historians can be believed ! ! In concluding the subject of this letter and the one preced- ing it, you will perceive that I have exposed the fruitful seeds and germs of Popery. 1 have proved : 1. That Mr. Wesley never ordained Dr. Coke a bishop — the third of three orders — deacon, presbyter, bishop, and that the statements of the Discipline (sec. 1,) are false Jioods and impositions upon the world. 2. I have shown that a bishop in the Methodist Society, as his validity is recognized in the Discipline, and as is explained by Drs. Emory, Bangs, and other standard writ- ers, is a bishop of the third order, by divine call and regu- lar succession in the new and divinely appointed line from John Wesley. 3. I have consequently shown that Methodists hold and t^ach the " divine right " of Mr. Wesley and all other bishops. 4. That they teach the papal doctrine of succession. Finally, we can see from the instructive history presented in the assumptions of the Methodist bishops, the way in which the Roman Episcopacy begun, i. e. by management, fraud, and decopticn, and usurpation — little by little, until it became the overwhelming despotism of the world. TETTER XIV. THE POLITICS OF METHOBISM. ' We are no Republicans, and never intend to be." — Wesley. Sir : — We have seen how the Methodist Episcopal Church was brought into being. Messrs. Coke and Asbury adopted the Book of Discipline prepared by Mr. Wesley for his so- cieties — not for a church — and making the proper additions, it became the statute book, the New Testament, of Meth- odists ! The subject of my inquiry in this letter is, what is the character of the government of this new society 1 is it re- publican, and so harmonizing with our institutions, and cul- tivating republican sentiments in the hearts of its members, or is it despotic and hierarchical, and so antagonistic to all that is republican ? This, sir, I conceive to be a matter of momentous importance, and should deeply concern every patriotic American Christian or citizen. The time is com- ing when they will be compelled to concern themselves, and it may then be too late, when Papal and Protestant hier- archism conspiring, shall have overthrown our civil and religious liberties. The Discipline of Mr. Wesley's societies was adopted with unimportant changes, as the statute book of the new Church, and that Discipline is a " rod of iron," comprising the laws of the purest, most perfect and oppressive despotism. 7* (158) 164 ■ THE gri<:at iJio.\ wheel. Wliat was mcthodism prior to its being claimed as a Church, and what \Ncrc the political views of Mr. Wesley, and of his American preachers ? Mr. Wesley declared himself an enemy of both civil AND religious LIBERTY ! ! He was a most violent opposer of our fathers in their struggle for independence. He was a most bitter maligner, and asperser, and libeller of the character of our revolution- ary heroes and patriots. Did he not publicly denounce John Hancock, the then President of the American Con- gress, with being a " smuggler" and a " felon ?" Did he not charge him with having smuggled tea at noonday into Bos- ton ; and then, not to lose by his cargo, employing persons in disguise to throw into the sea the other tea, which came from London 1 And when asked, " Do you compare Mr. Hancock to a felon," did he not answer, " I do in this respect — I compare every smuggler to a felon — a private smuggler to a sneaking felon, a pickpocket — a noonday smuggler to a bold felon, a robber on tlie highway. And if a person of this undeniable character is made President of a Congress, 1 leave every man of sense to determine what is to be expected of them. — See Wesley's Works. Let no Methodist censure mc for rebuking spiritual wickedness in high places, when they allow of such language from Mr. Wesley, in slandering one of the purest patriots who struggled for our glorious liberties. Mr. Wesley wrote and preached in scorn against all the principle? of liberty, for which Hancock, Washington, and Jefferson contended, and did all in his power to counter- act the influence of American and British mind — did all in his power to urge on the mother country to crush the infant colonies, and destroy the traitors and rebels — and did all that he could by his pen and mighty influence over American REPUBLICANISxM BACKAVARDS. 155 Methodists, to encoarage them to aid the tories here, or remain true to England. We copy a few of his political sentiments : '* The supposition that the people are the origin of power, is every way indefensible." "You (Americans) profess to be contending for liberty, but it is a vain, empty profession." •' No governments under heaven are so despotic as the re- publican ; no subjects are governed in so arbitrary a man- ner as those of a commonwealth." " Should any man talk or write of the Dutch Government as every cobbler does of the English, he would be laid in irons before he knew where he was. And wo be unto him. Republics show no mercy," &c. One more to cap the climax : " Probably that subtle spirit (the devil) hoped by adding to all those vices, the spirit of INDEPENDENCE, to havc overturned the whole work of God (i. e. Methodism !) as well as the British government in North America." Again, " the spirit of independence, which our poet so justly terms ' the glorious fruit of angels and of gods,' (that is in plain terms, of devils,) the same which so many call liberty^ is overruled by the justice and mercy of God."* What does Mr. Wesley teach in the above, but that the overthrow of English despotism and the establishment of civil and religious liberty here, was the work of devils ! What then ? Our fathers who fought and the heroes who bled for our liberties, were in Mr. Wesley's opinion, DEVILS ! ! and Methodists taught so to regard them ! Do you, Bishop Souie, so regard them to-day ? Does your Society so re- gard them ? If not, I ask you in the name of every Ameri- can Christian and patriot, why do you still print and circulate * Let the reader, if he wishes to see moi'e, read Mr. "Wesley'a sermon on " National Sins and Miseries." 156 THE GREAI IRON WHEEL. publications containing such sentiments througliout the length and breadth of this free land ? ! It is not strange that all the Methodist preachers in this country were iories, and either returned to England, or took refuge among the torles. Mr. Asbury concealed himself among the tories of the State of Delaware!* But it is proper to enquire what were Mr. Wesley's reli- gious views of government ! Was he a Despot or Repub- lican ? Did he understand that the discipline enjoined a republican form of government '? Did he consider his socie- ties republican, or intend them to be 1 See his letter to Mr. Mason, January 13, 1790: " My Dear Brother : — As long as I live, the people shall have no share in choosing either stewards or leaders among the Methodists. We have not nor never had; any such cus- toms. We are no republicans, and never intend to be. It would be better for those who are so minded to go quietly away."f Mr. Wesley spake the truth. Methodists to-day in church matters are no more republicans than they were when Mr. Wesley wrote the above. Do your people their leaders or stewards, or even the trustees to their meeting-houses ? We could not look for such a monarchist and enemy of Rejjublican principles, as was Mr. Wesley, to establish a reli- gious society upon other than despotic or monarchical prin- ciples ! What is the character of the government of Methodism 1 We will allow the late eloquent Cookman, a Methodist preacher of the Baltimore Conference, and Chaplain to the Senate of the United States, to illustrate it. In his speeches, pp. 145-6, comparing Methodism to a wheel within a wheel, he says : See Wesley's Life of Asbury. f Wesley's Works, vol. 7, p. 98. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 157 " Now, sir, let us apply this to Methodism. The great iron wheel in the system is itinerancy ; and truly it grinds some of us tremendously 1 the brazen wheel^ attached and kept in motion by the former, is the local ministry ; the golden wheel, the doctnne and discipline of the Churchy in full and successful operation. Now, sir, it is evident that the entire movement depends upon keeping the great iron ivheel of itinerancy constantly and rapidly rolling round. But, to be more specific, and to make an application of this figure to American Methodism, let us carefully note the admirable and astounding movements of this wonderful machine. You will perceive there are wheels within wheels. Firsts there is the great outer wheel of Episcopacy^ which accom- plishes its entire revolution once in four years. To this there are attached twenty-eight smaller wheels styled annual conferences^ moving around once a year ; to these are attached one hundred wheels^ designated presiding elders, moving twelve hundred other wheels^ termed quarterly conferences, every three months : to these are attached four thousand loheels, styled travelling preachers, moving round once a month, and commu- nicating motion to thirty thousand wheels, called class leaders, moving round once a week, and who in turn, being attached to between seven and eight hundred thousand wheels, called members, give a sufficient impulse to whirl them round every day. O, sir, what a machine is this !" Truly, " what a machine is this !" We say to every one, " Let us carefully note the admirable and astounding move- ments of this wonderful machine !" How potent for good — if controlled hy angels! How omnipotent for evil — if turned by men ! — Why, in essential character, it is the very system of the Jesuits of Rome ! It is, in principle, a crush- ing military despotism. It is astounding ! It is astounding that any set of men, after the American revolution, should 158 THE GREAT IRON WIIKEL. liavc dared to fabricate, and set in motion, this great Iron Wheel of Episcopacy ! Just look at it, and you see it is a perfect system oi passive obedience and non-resistance. Every smaller wheel being "attached" to the wheel next in power above it, and the whole moving in absolute control of the Great Outer Wheel of Episcopacy. The reflecting man must see on a glance, that«Z/ real liberty of thought and action is destroyed, as truly ^ by this system, as by the ecclesiastical system of Borne — as by the drill of an army — as by any despot* ism upon the face of the earth. LETTER XV. Methodism a Great Iron Wheel — a Clerical Despotism, and yet American Christians tolerate and support it! Sir : — If, in my last letter to you, I seemed to use an unbecoming figure, in comparing Methodism to a '■'Great Iron Wheel,^^ you must remember that the comparison was not mine, but one of your own most popular ministers, and since I write not for you, so much as to ynu for others, I beg the reader to examine the wonderful and astounding machine of American Methodism once more. Here it is from the lips of your own eloquent Cookman. " You will perceive there are ' wheels within wheels.' First. There is the great outer wheel of episcopacy, which accomplishes its entire revolution once in four years. To this are attached twenty-eight smaller wheels, styled annual con- ferences, moving round once a year; to those are attached. one hundred wheels, desiynated presiding elders, moving twelve hundred other wheels, termed quarterly conferences, every thi'ee months ; to these are attached four thousand wheels, styled travelling preachers, moving round once a month, and communicating motion to thirty thousand luhcels, called class- leaders, moving round once a week, and who, in turn, being attached to between seven and tight hundred thousand wheels, (159) 160 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. called members^ give a sufTicient impulse to whirl them around every day. What a machine is this? — Cookman. Here we sec that each wheel is a passive thing, turned by a power above it, and it forced by this superior power to whirl the wheel below attached to it, until the last wheels act upon .the people to whirl them around each day ! What is Methodism but a perfect system of passive obedience and non-resistance? The great driving, all-controlling and all- directing power is in the Great outer Wheel — the bishops. What is it but a monstrous system of clerical absolutism ! the most fearful Hierarchism on the face of the earth 1 A distinguished Presbyterian writer and editor of the Calvinis- tic Magazine,* has thus forcibly commented upon Mr. Cook- man's " Great Iron Wheel." " It is astounding that any set of men, after the American revolution, should have dared to fabricate, and set in motion, this great Iron Wheel of des- potism." But it is not this that astonishes me — knowing the authors of it were ambitious priests ; but it is astounding to me, beyond my power to describe, how one million of American freemen — patriot Christians — the sons and daugh- ters of revolutionary heroes, can be made " to be whirled around every day" at the pleasure of a class of petty spiritual rulers and lordlingsl — to be the merest puppets ever wired, or worked by stagemen ! It is this that astonishes me be- yond measure, and the reflection sickens my very heart. Oh, my country, my country ! — how much it is to be feared for thy liberties from these ! Oh, religion — what an astounding machine, managed by ambitious and designing priests, is at work to overthrow thee ! * F. A. Ross, D.D., pastor of Pres. Church, Chattanooga, Tenn, Mr Ross is sustained in his views by the most eminent members and pro- fessors at Princeton, and by Presbyterians generally. METHODISM MECHANICALLY ILLUSTRATED. KsPrBiJCANiSM Back WAR DP : or, Meihodism ACCORPixf; to Cookman.— Pnafe ICO. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 161 Do you say that it is because it is not the grinding ma- chine tha^Mr. Cookman represented it, that your members support it ? Methodism is so declared to be by a living bishop ! In 1844, the General Conference, the " Outer "Wheel," suspended Bishop Andrew by an arbitrary act. Mr. Hamline sustained the act, and argued, that the Conference had the power. " Mr. Hamline argued, that the General Conference had the power to suspend the Bishop, in a summary manner, without trial — because, according to the genius of the Metho- dist system, every officer, under the Bishop^ could be thus suspended, or removed from office. He affirmed, that the Class-Leader could be removed by the Itinerant Pastor — the Itinerant Pastor by the Presiding Elder or Bishop — the Presiding Elder by the Bishop — at any time during the in- terval of Conference." Mr. Hamline summed up his evidence by saying, that the Methodist system of removal or suspen- sion was ''peculiar* "First. That suspension, removal, or deposition from office, in the Methodist Episcopal Church, is ' summary.'' ' Without accusation^ trial, or formal sentence. Ministerial^ noijudicial.^ " Secondly. ^It is for no crime, generally for no misdmeanor^ hut for being unacceptable.' " Thirdly. That ' 7nost of the removals are by a sole agents namely, by a Bishop, a Preacher whose will is omnipotent in the premises.* " Fourthly. That ' the moving officer is not legally obliged to assign any cause for despotism. If he do so, it is through courtesy, and not of right.^ • " Fifthly. That ' the deposed has no appeaV — that * if indis- creetly or unnecessarily removed, he must submit ; for there is no tribunal authorized to cure the error, or rectify the wrong* 162 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. "This system, Mr. Ilamline acknowledges, is one of sur- passing energy, and centralizing of power — and he pronounces it ' WORTHY OF ALL EULOGY.' "There is the system — from the lips of a Methodist Preacher — now a Methodist Bishop ! Look at it, ye sober and reflecting lovers of religious liberty, and civil too. — Look at it, ye members of the Methodist Church. Look at it. What ! A system ' worthy of all eulogij ! ' What say you^ Genius of America? She answers, ''The Methodist sys- tem is death to all the institutions for which Washington fought and freemen died !' What says the Gospel ? The Gospel tells us, '"'The Methodist system is Antichrist^ — For it is the very identical priestly power which has crushed and trodden under foot the liberty wherewith Christ doth make free, in every age cf the world!' Worthy of all eulogy ! Look at it — eight hundred thousand members, attached to thirty thousand class leaders, and every one of these thirty thousand class leaders liolding his office at the mere discretion of some one of four thousand travelling Preachers, and every one of these four thousand itinerant Preachers moving in his circuit, at the omnipotent will of some one of a hundred presiding Elders — and every one of these hundred presiding Elders holding his station at the mere pleasure of some one of a half dozen bishops; — and when summarily removed from office, none may ask the reason why, nor the despot the reason give ! And this is the system, lauded by those who wield it, as 'worthy of all eulogy !' This is said in the United States — and American freemen — not foreign Roman Catholics, toler- ate, aye, submit to the usurpation ! " Will it be said, in reply to these remarks, that the General Conference was divided on the resolution advocated by Mr. Ilamline 1 And that the Methodist Episcopal Church South, does not sanction the views of Mr. Hamline? But REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 163 we will not have dust cast in our eyes. Those who now constitute the Methodist Church South, denied the applica- bility of Mr. Hamline's summary process to ike biskoj)S, on the part of the General Conference, but admitted, (so far as we understand,) the correctness of Mr. Hamline's interpre- tation of their Discipline, as to all the ojicers beloio the bishops. But let us press this point a little farther. We will ask some questions. " 1. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that removal from office in the Methodist Church is ' peculiar.' " 2. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, it is ' summary' — ' without accusation, trial, or formal sentence — ministerial, not judicial.'' Will you deny it? "3. ^Jr. Hamline and the General Conference say, '•re- movals are for no crime, generalhj for no misdemeanor, but for being unacceptable.^ W^ill you deny it 1 "4. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that ' most removals are by a sole agent, namely, a bishop or a preacher, whose will is omnipotent in the 'premises.'' Will you deny it 1 " 5. Mr. Hamline and the General Conference say, that ' the removing officer is not legally obliged to assign any cause for deposing. If he do so, it is through courtesy, and not of right.'' Will you deny it ? "6. Mr. Hamline and the. General Conference say, that ' the deposed offcer has no appeal — that if indiscreetly or un- riecessarily removed, he must submit ; for there is no tribunal authorized to cure the error, or rectify the wrong. ^ Will you deny it ?"* I now call upon you, sir, to look this monstrous system of clerical usurpation and despotism full in the face, and tell * Calvinistic Magazine. 164 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. the people of Temiessee, of the whole South, if you consider such a system worthy of all praise by Christian freemen 1 Unseal your lips, and, with your eye upon that dread, that awful bar, before which you must soon stand, say, if you dare sav, that it is not both anti-scriptural and anti-republi- can? Tell them, if you dare, with your eye on the last Testament of Christ, that our blessed Saviour ever taught, or enjoined upon his ministers to teach, such a Ood dishonoring and man-dehasing system as Methodism ! Read his last words, teaching them to " observe all things, whatsoever / have commanded." Did Christ originally command the Great Iron Wheel of Methodism to be rolled by an army of four thousand priestly rulers, over the rights and consciences of his followers'? Did he redeem them by his blood, and make them kings and priests unto God, to be slaves to such a horde of petty lordlings, to be enslaved and oppressed by such a consolidated spiritual tyranny as this Iron Wheel? God forbid ! Do you deny that Methodism is a despotism 1 Then can you affirm that the Russian, Turkish and Chinese despotisms are pure republics^ and the subjects of the same are in tlw perfect enjoyment of the unspeakable blessings of civil and religious liberty ? Will Bishop Soule tell us if the people in the Methodist Society, according to the system, (we thank God the system does not work perfectly, because it is in free America) — " will he tell us, if the people, as recognized by the system — the people — the members, whirled by the Great Iron Wheel, are not the merest puppets — moving round ' every day'' under the ' whirV of the class-leaders — who are whirled around by the travelling preachers — who are whirled around by the presiding elders — who are whirled around by the bishops — who are whirled around by the General Conference] Will you tell us, if the wheel turned KEPUI5LICAN1SM BACKWARDS. 165 at proper speed, and all the parts were working right, whether these eight hundred thousand members might not be made to whirl around exactly alike — even dressed to order in stiff collars on one side, and dove-colored bonnets without rib- bons on the other — doing identically the same thing, and at the same time, in every place, where the wheel moved, from the St. Johns to the Rio Grande V " There is a cotton factory, in which a thousand spindles whirl round under the impulse of so many bands, which bands are whirled by so many drums, which drums are whirled by a long shaft-line of communication, which shaft is whirled by a great water-wheel, and every spindle spins just so mu^/h cotton, a day, an hour, a minute. So with this Great Iron Wheel. Could it be made to work as perfectly as is desired by those who turn it, every Church member would whirl around — a machine, living, it is true, but as really a machine, as each spindle in the fiictory. The per- fection of a soldier, said Bonaparte, is that he be an intelli- gent machine, having neither thought nor will of his own. This is the result aimed at, and in a lamentable degree accomplished by the Roman Catholic system — and this must be the result of the perfect motion of the Great Iron Wheel. Here a very important question comes up . From whence does the Great Iron Wheel derive its power ? Listen! '• This General Conference," says Mr. Ilamline, " is the sun in our orderly and beautiful system. Look into the Discipline. First, you have our Articles of Religion, in which God appears. What is next in order ? The General Conference^ which, like the orb of day, rises to shed light on the surrounding scene. It is first shaped, or fashioned, and then, like Adam, by his Maker, is endowed with dominion^ and made imperial in its relations; and, saving the slight reservation of the constitution, it is all-controlling in its influences 1" There it is , There you have the answer to 166 THE GRKAT IRON WHEEL. the question, from uhcnco docs the Great Jron Wheel derive its power ? You sec that the power thus professed by the General Conference, is claimed to be derived directly from God ! Yes. There you have it. " It," the General Confer- ence, "is first shaped and fashioned, and then, like Adam by his Maker, is endowed with dominion and made imperial !" Yes, God has endowed the General Conference of the Meth- odist Episcopal Church with dominion^ and made it imperial. Not Regal. No. Regal dominion was not despotic enough. But God has endowed the Conference with dominion^ and made it imperial. The Ccesar^ the Czar^ the Emperor is the highest style of power, unlimited, and unchecked. God has made the General Conference imperial. So said Mr. Hamline, and so said the General Conference itself. " Now, M^e ask, where is the power of the people in this system ? Answer. No where. No where. They are the spindles, whirling, yonder, under the augmented, transmitted 'power through drums, and bands, and wheels. Where are the people "? There they are, whirling around every day, attached to the class leaders, who are attached to the itiner- ants, who are attached to the Presiding Elders, who are at- tached to the Bishops, under the imperial control of the outer, Great Iron Wheel of the General Conference." " The thing is a naked despotism — imperial power in an ecclesiastical aristocracy, unblushingly avowed and glorified, in. We have said, that in essence, this system is the same as that of the Jesuits of Rome. The Edinburgh Encyclo- paedia says: " Loyola, (the founder of the Jesuits,) resolved that the government of the Jesuits should be absolutely mo- narchical. A General, chosen fur life by deputies from the several provinces, possessed supreme and independent power, extending to every person, and applying to every case. Every member of the order, the instant that he entered its REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. "^67 pale, surrendered all freedom of thought and action ; and every personal feeling was superseded by the interests of that body to which he had attached himself He went wher- ever he was ordered ; he performed whatever he was com- manded ; he suffered whatever he was enjoined ; he became a mere passive instrument, incapable of resistance. The ^adation of rank was only a gradation in slavery •, and as perfect a despotism over a large body of men, dispersed over the face of the earth, was never before realized." I request that this system of the Jesuits may be com- pared with the Great Iron Wheel, and with the imperial power, claimed for the General Conference, and derived, by Mr. Hamline and the Conference, right from God^ by four thousand travelling preachers, and thirty thousand class- leaders ; and strange to say, a half million of members, are made to believe that they enjoy religious liberty, when de- prived of every governmental right and liberty for which blood was shed on the battle fields of the Revolution, or the hill of Calvary! Do the people enjoy liberty'? Look at the people under the revolutions of this Wheel-within-a-wheel power !* Does not every reader see that it is Republi- canism Backwards 1 Is not such a government as anti- American as it is despotic ? Are not the people governed without the faintest voice in the election of their rulers or direction of their government 1 Is not during power con- centrated in the great ponderous outer wheel, the Episcopa- cy, or General Conference 1 Are not the people — the mem- bers — arrogantly denied the right to participate in the legislative councils of their Church ? Is not this anti-Ameri- can "? Read the Declaration of Rights adopted by the Con- tinental Congress, Oct. 14, 1774: • Our artist has illustrated their liberty with great clearnese. 168 THE GREAT IRUX WUEEL. " Resolved, 4,— That the foundation of English liberty, and o^ all free government, is a right in the people to partici- pate in their legislative council." Is Methodism, then, a free government? Ought not American citizens to be as free in Church as in State 1 Do they despise the legacy of our hero ancestors 1 Where, oh ! Mhere is the spirit that bled at Lexington, at Bunker's Hill, and at Yorktown. Is it enthroned and consecrate in the bosoms i)f American Methodists who can thus surrender tho 'ffbD^t inestimable rights of men 1 LETTER IVI Methodism the Popery of Protestantism — as absolute and all- controlling as Jesuitism — Papal Bishops. Dear Sir : — In my last, I asserted that the Methodism of the Discipline was a naked clerical despotism, and, in essence^ Popery itself, and the worst form of Popery, Jesuitism. Let us impartially compare them. The Edinburgh Ency- clopaedia says : " Loyola (the founder of the Jesuits) resolved that the government of the Jesuits should be absolutely mo- narchical. A General, chosen for life by deputies from the several provinces, possessed supreme and independent pow- er, extending to every person, and applying to every case. Every member of the order, the instant that he entered its pale, surrendered all freedom of thought and action ; and every personal feeling was superseded by the interests of that body to which he had attached himself. He went wher- ever he was ordered ; he performed whatever he was com- manded ; he suffered whatever he was enjoined ; he became a mere passive instrument incapable of resistance. The gra- dation of rank was only a gradation in slavery ; and as per- fect a despotism over a large body of men, dispersed over the face of the earth, was never before realized." Now, will you turn back to the Wheel-illustration by your own Cookman ? The great outer wheel — the bishops 8 a») 170 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. answer to the General of the Society of Jesuits. Method, ism has many Generals instead of one ; so that it is Jesuit- ism in this respect, only "a great deal more soP^ The power of the bishops, like that of the General of the Jesuits, extends ovei' and throuffh the whole Society — over all its agents and officers. The second feature is also alike. Every minister or mem- ber, the instant he enters Methodism, surrenders all religious freedom/ Think of this, Americans — think of it ! He is no longer his own, but the servant, if a member, of all the clergy, and the leaders or petty overseers they appoint over him besides. The most ignoble sort of thraldom ! If a minister, while he rules those under him, he himself is a slave of his chief ministers — those above him in rank ! Therefore the third feature holds good — ^'■gradation in rank is only gradation in slavery .^" The fourth general feature of Jesuitism is also perfect in Methodism. The minister who joins the Society of Mr. Wesley is compelled to go wherever he is ordered, without asking any cause or questions ; return when commanded ; to perform whatever is enjoined by his chief ministers ; is a mere passive tool in the hands of his masters, to do their gracious wills and biddings ! You may say that Methodist ministers elect their bishops — so do the Jesuits elect their General ! And many a slave chooses his master ; nothing is more common. But is he any the less a slave 1 American Christians have heard much of the awful oath taken by Catholic priests and bishops to the Pope ; many never saw it. I lay it before you, and place by its side the oath you enjoin upon all your ministers to obey you, together with your fellow-bishops, the Popes of Methodism ; and I humbly ask you to point out to me any important differ- ence ; LOOK AT THIS! A Komisli priest SM'earing to obey his master, the Pope, and whompnover lie may ?ri' fit to place over iiiiii REPtJBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 171 THE OATH OF A ROMAN CATHOLIC PRIEST. **I, N., elect of the church of N., from henceforrard will be faithful and obedient to St. Peter the Apostle, and to the holy Roman Church, and to our Lord, the Lord N., and to his successors canonical ly coming in. I will neither advise, consent, nor do any thing that they may lose life or member, or that their persons may be seized, or hands anywise 'laid upon them, or any injuries offered to them, under any pre- tence whatsoever. The counsel which they shall entrust me withal, by themselves, their messengers, or letters, I will not, knowingly, reveal to any, to their prejudice. I will help them to defend and keep the Roman Papacy, and the royal- ties of St. Peter, saving my order against all men. The Legate of the Apostolic See going and coming, I will honor- ably treat and help in his necessities. The rights, honors, privileges, and authority of the holy Roman Church, of our Lord the Pope, and his aforesaid successors, I will endeavor to preserve, defend, increase, and advance. I will not be in any council, action, or treaty, in which shall be plotted against our said Lord and the said Roman Church, anything to the hurt or prejudice of their persons, right, honor, statOj or power, and if I shall know any such thing to be treated or agitated by any whatsoever, I will hinder it to the extent of my power ; and as soon as I can, will signify it to our said Lord, or to some other, by whom it may come to his knowledge. The rules of the holy fathers, the apostolic de- crees, ordinances, or disposals, reservations, provisions, and mandates, I will observe with all my might, and cause to be observed by others. Heretics, schismatics, and rebels to our said Lord, or his aforesaid successors, I will to the extent of my power persecute and oppose." 172 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. Now consider the oaths of Deacons and Elders to their Lords, the bishops. Imagine professed Protestant Chris- tians and ministers of Christ Jesus, if you can do it, upon bended knees bowing before the Bishop, and solemnly vowing in God's awful name to discharge the items of the following oaths : METHODIST DEACOn's VOW. « The Bishop.— win you REVERENTLY OBEY ikem^ to whom the charge and government over you is committed following with a glad mind and will their godly (ghostly /) admonitions 1 A. — I will endeavor to do so, " the Lord being my help- er ! !" Q. — To whom is committed the charge and government over Deacons by the Discipline 1 A. — ^To Presiding Elders and Bishops. Is not here a solemn voiv taken to obey — and that most reverently — these their spiritual lords and masters ? Is there not a solemn appeal made to God for the truth of their willingness to obey 1 It is, then, an oath. Now turn to Discipline, pp. 136-137. In the ordination of Elders, the following most solemn and awful oath is ad- ministered : A METHODIST ELDEr's OATH. The bishop reads — "And now that this present congrega- tion of Christ here assembled may also understand your minis and wills in these things, and that this your promise may the more move you to do your duties, ye shall answer plainly to these things which we, in the name of God and his Church, shall demand of you touching the same." Is not this an oath! is it not a solemn appeal to God ? — How like the last scene ! What is the difference in principle? REPUBLIC AXIS^I BACKWARDS. 173 is not this affirmation put in the name of God ? It is, then, an oath. What is it these servants answer to one question in the category ? The Bishop. — " Will you reverently obey your chief ministers^ unto whom is committed the charge and govern- ment over you ; following with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions, submitting yourself to their godly judgk MENTS ?" Ans. " I will do so, the Lord being my helper ! ! " Read it again — is it not a mistaT^e? Can such a solemn, awful oath foil from a professing Christian's, much less Clyis- tian minister's lips ! Read it : The bishop says : " Will you reverently obey your chief ministers^ unto whom is committed the charge and government over you ; following with a glad mind and WILL their godly ADMONITIONS, SUBMITTING YOURSELVES TO their GODLY JUDGMENTS 1 " Answer of the elder : " I will so do^ the Lord [forgive the poor deluded soul,] being my helper." Blessed Saviour, and can this be the language of one of thy ministers — of a Protestant Christian freeman, in the nineteenth century 1 And didst thou not most solemnly command thy disciples to acknowledge no master — no law- giver but thyself; and to teach only what thou hast enjoined upon them % And do they not here, as do the ministers of Antichrist, solemnly vow to take self-appointed lordlings for their masters, in all things regardless of what thou hast commanded — and that so fully, so absolutely, as to exer- cise no judgment or will of their own in reserving any liberty to consult thy will? Father, forgive them, they surely know not of what they do ! Their leaders do cause them to err. 174 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Is not this, Bishop Soule, a more stringent oath than Ae Catholic priests take to obey and do the bidding of their Pope ? Does it not positively deprive one of the exercise of any mind, or will, or judgment, of his own 1 Does it not reduce the Methodist circuit-rider and elder to a mere pas- sive tool, blindly subservient to the will and wishes of their ghostly superiors ? Am I mistaken ? Read under the duties of preachers page 50: "Act in all things, not according to your own will, but as a son (a slave would be abetter word) in the gospel. As such it is your duty to employ your time in the manner which we direct, in preaching and visiting from house to house, in reading, meditation, and prayer; ABOVE ALL [all what ] above any one, or all the above — reading the Bible or prayer to God?] above all, if you labor with us in the Lord's vineyard, it is needful you should do that part of the work which we advise, at those times and places which Vi'E judge most for his glory ^ — Discipline, p. 50. I unhesitatingly pronounce the above oath and requisitions upon the inferior ministers of Methodism, equally, and more, if possible, degrading than the oath of submission required of Catholic priests — equal, fully, to the darkest Jesuitism. Methodist bishops require of their inferiors the reverence and submission due to God alone — reverential, absolute and perfect obedience! I It is of Antichrist, since the chief ministers put themselves in the place of Christ — and require the in- ferior orders to obey them implicitly in all things, having no thought, will, or judgment of their own, or the least concern for the commands of Jesus Christ, or the glory of God ! It is a most clear rejection of the authority and directing guidance of God, on the part of Methodist ministers. The direction God gave to his servant Jeremiah is still in force. " Say not I am a child : (to be ordered about by others — a son to any one in the gospel) for thou shalt go to all that KEPUiiLlCAXlSM BACKWARDS. 175 / send thee, and whatsoever / command thee thou sha.lt speak." But those Methodist bishops presumptuously and impiously thrust themselves before God and his servants, and assuming the prerogative of the Almighty, virtually say, " Not so, but you must be a son to us, and go to all, and wherever, we shall send thee, and have no concern, no mind or will, for what God commands, or do what is for his glory, but whatsoever we command, direct, you must speak and do ! ! Then it is also a positive and aggravated rejection of Jesus Christ as their master — and of his supreme authority over them, both by Methodist bishops and their ministers. Christ positively commands, " Call no man your father upon earth (if Methodist ministers acknowledge themselves sons in the gospel to the bishops, and do they not acknowledge the bishops to be their fathers ?) for one is your father who is in heaven." " Neither be ye called masters; for one is your master; even Christ, and all ye are brethren^'''' i. e. only equals in rank and authority. , Can a method ist minister say that Christ is his only mas- ter? He would assert falsely. Let him look at his oath. He has solemnly abjured Christ, and taken men for his master — his presiding elders and bishops ! Are not Methodist ministers, then, in the most odious sense, men-servers ^ They are to do the will of their mas- ters, the bishops, in ever^/ respect whatever, whenever, and wherever it may be ! A consolidated clerical despotism — a hierarchy of the most effective and powerful kind ! It is anti-Christ— I unhesitatingly pronounce it ANTICHRIST ! ! The Catholic priest must reverence as well as obe]/ his superiors — so must a Methodist 1 But the Catholic is required to reject the Bible as the only, rule of his faith and practice, and 176 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. to swear his adhesion to the traditions, ordinances, discip- line, and rules of his father, the Pope, and his councils. This we also consider impious. But Methodist ministers are sol- emnly bound to do the same thing — reject the Bible as their only rule of faith and practice, and put the Discipline — the statute book — the laws and traditions of the bishops, and the Conference, in its place ! He is sworn, for he takes a solemn oath, to place the Discipline above the Bible, as the Catholic does the decisions of the Pope and his councils ! See his Discipline, page 50, " And remember, a Methodist preacher is to mind every pointy great and small, in the Methodist Discipline — there- fore, you will need all the sense and grace you have." The Discipline is made, and he vows to make it, his Bible ! — it is above the word of God to him ; he is to obey the Dis- cipline^ in preference to the Bible ! It is not for him to care what Christ commands ; for, above reading and prayer, he is to " do what his chief ministers command him" — it is not for him to seek to please God, but his bishop and cleri- cal masters ; nor is he to be concerned for {he glory of God, but of Methodism ! He may safely preach that there are many non-essentials in the JSfew Testament, but he must hold and teach that there are none in the Discipline — for he is pledged to observe every point, great and small, in it ! ! To my feelings, the above seems little short of blasphemy. I am shocked and shudder at the reflection. I have read and reread these pages, and my whole frame trembles, and my nerves quiver at every perusal. I cannot help it. I am either besides myself, or it is something supremely awful that I contemplate. To my mind it seems that the Method- ist preacher who takes the above vow, takes man for his Gi>i — takes a solemn oath of allegiance to serve and obey REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 177 a presumptuous mortal, who has the arrogance to demand it at his hands ! It is to my mind downright idolatry, and that of the grossest kind ! To obey and to serve a mortal, religiously^ is to render to men what we owe to God alone. To serve or obey, is to ¥^orship. This is the definition given by Christ : " Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou serve." To obeg is to serve, to serve is to worship — to worship or obeg a mortal, or any body in reli- gion but God, is idolalrg. Hence, to obey the commands, behests, and arbitrary dictation of spiritual masters and rulers — called " chief ministers" — is to serve them, is to worship them — yielding them that homage, reverence, and obedience due to Christ alone. No ; I might be crushed to earth — racked upon the wheel, until every limb was dissevered, burnt to ashes, or torn, piecemeal, but never, no, never, unless God should forsake me, would I, on bended knee, in the name of God, swear such allegiance to mortal — to any created being — no, not to the arch-angel Gabriel himself! What true American freeman, through whose heart dashes the pure, untainted blood of Freedom's sires, would bend and swear blind and implicit servitude to a tyrant over both his conscience and his judgment ! What Christian minister, who feels the warm glowings of the sacred fire of Christian free- dom in his heart — upon whose eye has gleamed the light — whose bosom has felt the throbbings of that " glorious li- berty," wherewith Christ makes free — who has felt the emancipating, disenthralling genius and power of the gospel of man's salvation, would tamely succumb to such a dis- graceful and degrading yoke of bondage, as to call men their masters, and become the servants of men ; " Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of menj'' says Paul. Ex- 8* 178 THE GilEAT IRON WHEEL. cuse me ; I cannot even copy these Antichristian and a6- horrent oaths, without my bload taking fire in " holy indig- nation." The Pope himself makes no greater demand than this — nothing that more clearly stamps and characterizes him as "Antichrist," or the "Man of Sin," and Son of Perdition. But these preachers solemnly swear to obey the '-'godly judgment''' (is there no infallibility implied here T) of their chief ministers ! What are some of the requisitions 1 1. To take care that every part of our Discipline be en- forced in his district. 2. To attend the bishops when present in his district. Page 40. Pretty lackeying this ! ! The ministers of Christy the lackeys of spiritual potentates ! See the oath of the Ca- tholic Priest. He is sworn to attend and wait upon the Pope when his Holiness passes through his district ! ! 3. He shall read the rules of the Society with the aid of the other preachers, once a year in every congregation, and once a quarter in every Society. Page 44. In receiving a preacher into full connection, the following questions are asked : " Do you know the rules of Society — of the bands ? Do you keep them? Have you read the form of Discipline? Are you willing to conform to them ? Have you considered the rules of a preacher, especially the 1st, 10th and 12th? Will you keep them for conscience sake ?" If he answers these, and many more, in the affirmative, the Conference admits him, and gives him a Discipline, (not a New Testament,) and this commission : "As long as you freely consent to, and earnestly endeavor to walk by these rules, we shall rejoice to acknowledge you as a fellow-laborer." Not so long as he observes implicitly the New Testament, but the Bishop's Testament, is he acknowledged ; not so long REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 179 as he faithfully serves Christ, but the " Hierarchy," and obeys his superiors. But what are these three rules so especially enjoined above all others ? To preach, to study God's Word, and follow none but Christ 1 No, but to preach, study and fol- low the Discipline, and above all, obey us, your chief min- isters ! ! " 1st Rule. To preach. " 10th. Be punctual. Do every thing exactly at the time. And do not mend our rules but keep them. Mark it, keep ' our rules ! f^ "11th. (Last clause of the rule.) And remember! a Methodist preacher is to mind every point. GREAT and small, in the Methodist Discipline ! Therefore you will need to exercise all the sense (? !) and grace you have ;" and as little of the liberty of conscience, freedom of thought, fear of God as possible, should have been added, for these men servers ! Mark well, there is nothing non-essential in the Discipline — in the Bishop's Testament — not even a point, however small, all must be kept, but these ministers may teach that there are mamj positive commands in Christ's last will and testament which are non-essential and trivial, and can fej omitted or " amended with impunity ! ! !" " 12th Rule. Act in all things, not according to your oion will, but as a son (i. e. our servant) in the gospel ! ! As such it is your duty to employ your time in the manner which WE direct in preaching and visiting from house to house, in reading, meditation and prayer. ABOVE ALL, (hear it, oh, ye heavens ! and be astonished ; oh, ye earth — hear it ! above preaching the gospel, reading God's word, obeying Christ or even prayer; yes, above all.) if you labor with us in the Lord's (Mr. Wesley's) vineyard, it is needful that you 180 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. should do that part of the work which WE advise, at these times and places which WE judge most for his glory." Slavery — spiritual serfdom — what shall I say — I have no language in which to express ray feelings. If words are nothing ! Were an angel from heaven to presume to impose such a law upon a mortal, he would be thrust down to hell in a moment — and for a mortal — a poor fallen mortal to de- mand service of his fellow ! ! If this is not a bold example and illustration of Anti- christ, and the pretensions and blasphemous assumptions of the " Man of Sin," opposing and exalting himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped ; so that he, as God sitteth in the temple of God showing himself that he is God, the world has never yet beheld one 1 Is not this an Antichristian power, that makes implicit and servile obedience to its mandates, the first and most im portant duty — the one above even the worship of God (prayer) and the reading or teaching his Word! — to heed and obey the will of man more than the wall of God ! This is setting man above God ! Be assured, sir, it affords me no pleasure to write these things — to portray these awful, and to my mind, abomina- ble features of your system. I am painfully shocked as each unscriptural feature develops itself before me — as the system passes in review before my mind. My heart sickens at these sentiments — at the picture of spiritual bondage and degradation, enjoined and achieved by these chief ministers — these Methodist " principalities and powers," and all these unhallowed and impious pretensions claimed by the especial grace of God to their word ! I am sad and pained to think that professed Protestant minis- ters should, in tne name of religion, assert such fearful Anti- christian authority and jurisdiction over their brethren. I REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 181 am grieved to think that American Christians can be found blindly and servilely to bow down to such a degrading spi- ritual and temporal vassalage. I close each paragraph, as I do each letter, humbled with a sense of the weakness of human nature, with a fervent prayer that His light and truth may go forth until this darkness shall be illumined, and this blindness be dispelled — and priestcraft and spiritual M'ick- edness, that has enthroned itself in high places, and became proud and insolent with authority, may be overthrown, and all the friends of Christ be mad# to rejoice in the glorious liberty wherewith Christ makes us free. LETTER XYII A Methodht Bishop the *Pope of Protestantism — His over- whelming Despotic Powers. " How dare you suffer yourself to be called a Bishop." — Wesley, Sir : — Not until I had carefully examined the powers claimed and exercised by a Methodist Bishop did I under- stand the force of Wesley's question to the first Methodist who presumed to assume Episcopal authority : " How DARE you suffer yourself to be called a bishop ?"' This language implies that there is an awful daring — a fearful presumption, in presuming to claim and exercise Episcopal functions. We may inquire, " In what does this daring con- sist f Evidently in assuming the power of Antichrist over men — in men thrusting themselves in between God and man, between Christ and those who seek to be his followers, and claiming from them that reverence and obedience due to Christ alone. God created every man a sovereign — the equal and the equal only of his fellow. No one was created with a divine right to command him. Not even an angel had a right to dictate a command to him. No archangel would have dared, or would now dare to lay his behests upon man and exact obedience in the least particular. No one has a right to command man but God alone. Slavery, then, (182) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 183 is not an original condition. Had there been no sin, there would have been no slavery. God himself instituted it as a punishment upon the descendants of Ham. (And I grant he had a perfect right to do so. I have no war with God, I am to see that I o.ily do not bring down his curse upon my own head by abusing those enslaved.) He has also suffered it, more effectually to work out the gracious designs of his providence, as the slavery of Israel in Egypt, for 215 years. When God removes the curse from Ham, which will not be until every curse is abolished, the slavery of his race will cease, and not until then. But in the kingdom of grace there is no slavery allowed. No race, no class of men have a curse of servitude passed upon them. All are made free and equal in Christ Jesus ; all sovereigns and no masters. Jesus Christ has constituted himself '-'•Head over all things to his church," and conse quently it is treason for any other head to claim to be over anything to the Church. Christ Jesus has taken the throne as the only King in Zion, consequently all the laws and rules, &c., of his kingdom must emanate from himself. If any other person or persons, or body of men, constitute themselves the Head of his Church, or claim to themselves the right to exercise the prerogative of the King alone — i. e. to legislate, enact and change laws, rules; rites and ordi- nances for Christ's Church, and prescribe duties to Christ's subjects, they evidently set themselves up in opposition to Christ; they are Antichrists to all intents and purposes, for they claim to exercise the prerogatives of Christ. The King and Lawgiver in Zion is jealous of his honor, and knowing the ambitious disposition of man, he was ex- plicit in his commands upon this subject — in forbidding his ministers to usurp his prerogatives in exercising authority over his followers, and his people to suffer or to submit to 184 THE GREAT IKON WJIEEL. it. Hear liim : " Yc know that they which are iccounted to rule over the. Gentiles, exercise lordship over them, and their gr^at ones exercise authority upon them. But so shall it not he among you, but whosoever will be great among you, shall be your minister, and whosoever will be the chiefest, shall be servant (not the master or ruler) of all." In the Church of Christ there were to be no lords, or those who should exercise lordly authority upon their brethren — no great ones in authority and power. He expressly says there must not be. The humblest, the most laborious, was to be the great- est among them ; not great in power, but in love and honor. Hear him again. The Jewish Rabbi were teachers of the law and had, in the days of Christ, thrust themselves into Moses' seat — assumed the prerogative of Moses to make laws, and to lay their authoritative commands upon their brethren ; they were authoritative rulers of the people. " Be not ye called Eabbi : for one is your master even Christ, and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father, (of the same import with Rabbi and Master,) upon earth, for one is your father which is in heaven. Neither be ye called master, for one is your Master even Christ.* For he that is greatest among you shall be your servants No language could be more definite than this. Authoritative power was not to be assumed. Even the title of Rabbi or Master, much less the power or authority, is positively for- bidden to be used or exercised. He alone is master, ruler, and lawgiver over his children. Does not this Scripture * This, in my humble opinion, forbids the conferring and receiving of flattering titles from one another, as " Doctor of Divinity." It is understood to be the acknowledgment of superiority, and the world looks, and the poor flattered D.D. is apt to look upon himself as some- thing above the generality of his brethren. It is pernicious in its ten- dency. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 185 rebuke the impious arrogance of Popes, who style them- selves *' Hol}^ Fathers" and " Lord God the Pope '?" claim- ing both the title and the exercise of the power? Now, Bishop Soule, look candidly into the face of these Scriptures, and tell me- -rather tell the world — how you DARE to be a bishop ! You exercise lordship over your brethren. You have most anxiously sought and gained the position of a ^'- great one''' in what you regard the Church of Christ, and you exercise authority upon your brethren. You imperi- ously dictate your commands to your brother ministers, whom you make your servants, and you have required of them to take a solemn oath and obey you reverently in all things, and above all things^ thus absolving them from their obligations to obey God rather than man, and to consult his will and his glory in all things ; you require them solemnly, in the presence of God, of angels and men, to vow to obey " you as their chief minister^ to whom is committed the care and government over themj'' to obey you, to have no mind, will, or judgment of their own — but to submit to your godly judgment. These ministers you send here and there as you will. Saying to one go^ and he goeth, and to another come^ and he cometh. Did Jesus Christ reduce his ministers to such a degrading vassalage as this ! Did he surrender them into the hands and power of man — or a set of men ? Did lie appoint a despot a sovereign lord over them, to govern Ihem, according to his lusts % Did he intend for a lordly aristocrat to " lord it" over " his heritage" — his ministers and his people % Did he even commit the direction of his ministers and the government of his church into the hands of an angel — of the highest arch-angel in the Universe 1 ! No, never. For that angel to presume to exercise the above powers, that you claim to exercise, even one item of them, to command a minister of Jesus Christ to obey him — to go 186 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. and come as he commanded — would constitute that angel an "^ arcA-Antichrist. Bishop Soule, you are now an old man, with dimmed eyes, grey hairs, and trembling limbs. I beg of you before your last few sands have run, think of this question of your own great Wesley, " How DARE you to be a bishop V How dare you presume to exercise a pre- rogative that would cost the loftiest archangel around the throne his harp and diadem. Tell me, or rather tell your brethren, and the world, who committed unto you the care and absolute government and control of thousands of Christ's ministers, if you claim your preachers as Christitm ministers 1 Did God 1 Did the Saviour ? If so, where ? Does he not for- bid it with the ample sanction of his authority ? Sir, I look upon your assumptions and the position you occupy with respect to Methodism, as I do upon the assumptions of the Pope of Rome, and the position he occupies with respect to the Church of Rome. What a daring to thrust yourself between Christ and his ministers and children — where no angel would dare to tread — and exercise your supreme lordship over them. I have said the authority of the bishop is supreme, and his power despotic. Every part of Methodism is contrived to give the bench of bishops an all-controUmg, overwhelm- ing power over the whole system, to give it any direction they please, as much as the despotic Emperor of Russia has over the Greek Church, or over his own army. Cookman rightly calls the episcopacy the " ffreat outer wheeV that puts and keeps in motion the whole machinery. ]\Iethodist bishops are elected, not by the people, but by the General Conference, composed of travelling preachers, as the pope is elected by the College of Cardinals. What are the powers of the bishops 1 We quote from the Discipline. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 187 "What are the duties of bishops'?" A. To preside in our Conferences, (both annual and general.) 1. "Who shall preside in the annual Conferences 1" A. " The bishops ; but in the absence of all the bishops, a pre- siding elder ; but in case there are two or more presiding elders belonging to one Conference, the bishop may by letter or otherwise, appoint the president." Page 31. Now, of as little importance as this may appear to the unthinking, yet does it not show how carefully the bishops have provided for the supremacy of their authority in, and over the annual Conferences 1 No annu^il Conference has the right or power to select its own president ! If one of the bishops is not present, the next in command is to offici- ate, and the bishop by letter indicates the flivorite elder, if there are two or more belonging to the body. Who is not apprised of the power of the president in and over that body, especially when he has his authority to decide all questions of law and appoint every member of the Conference to whatever field of labor he pleases, and make whom he pleases presiding elder 1 His influence is all-prevailing, and all controlling. Every minister couches submissively at his feet, as a slave at the feet of his master, because his weal or woe, his elevation or debasement is in the sovereign will and word of his lord and master the bishop. Where can there be found an assembly alike subject to the one-man power, as an annual Conference of the Methodist Episcopal Church? But what are the powers of the bishop : 2. " To fix the appointments of the preachers for the se- veral circuits, provided he shall not allow any preacher to remain in the same station more than two years successively; except the presiding elders, the book agent, the editor and assistant editor of the Nashville Christian Advocate, and of 188 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. the Southern Christian Advocate, the editor of the Richmond Christian Advocate., and the correspondhig secretary of the Missionary Society, the supernumerary, superannuated, and worn-out preachers, missionaries among the hidians, mission- aries to our people of color, and on foreign stations, chaplains to state prisons and military posts, those preachers that may be appointed to labor for the special benefit of seamen, and for the American Bible Society, also the preacher or preach- ers that may be stationed in the city of New Orleans, and the presidents, principals, or teachers of seminaries of learn- ing, which are or may be under our superintendence; and also, when requested by an annual Conference, to appoint a preacher for a longer time than two years to any seminary of learning not under our care : provided, also, that with the exceptions above named, he shall not continue a preacher in the same appointment more than two years in six ; nor in the same city more than four years in succession ; nor re- turn him to it after such term of service till he shall have been absent four years. He shall have authority, when re- quested by an annual Conference, to appoint an agent, whose duty it shall be to travel throughout the bounds of such Con- ference for the purpose of establishing and aiding Sabbath- schools, and distributing tracts, and also to appoint an agent or accents, for the benefit of our litcrarv institutions. 3. " In the intervals of the Conferences, to change, receive, and suspend preachers, as necessity may require, and as the Discipline directs. 4. " To travel through the connection at large. 5. "To oversee the spiritual and temporal business of our Church. 6. "To ordain bishops, elders, and deacons. 7. " To decide all questions of law in an annual Confer- ence, subject to an appeal to the General Conference ; but REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 189 in all cases the application of law shall be with the con- ference. 8. " The bishops may, when they judge it necessary, unite two or more circuits or stations together, without affecting their separate financial interests, or pastoral duties. 9. " It shall be the duty of the bishop, presiding in any an- nual Conference, to hear and decide appeals of the quarterly meeting Conferences, on questions of law. 10. " It shall be the duty of the bishop to choose the pre- siding elders, to fix their stations, and to change them when he judges it necessary. 11. "The bishop may allow an elder to preside in the same district for any term not exceeding four years suc- cessively ; after which he shall not be appointed to the same district for six years. 12. " The bishop shall appoint the times of holding the annual Conferences ; but they shall allow each Conference to sit a week at least. 13. " It shall be the duty of the bishops to point out a course of reading and study proper to be pursued by candi- dates for the ministry, for the term of four years, from the time of their admission into Conference on trial. 14. •' It shall be the duty of the bishops to see that the districts are formed according to their judgment, provided that no district shall contain more than fourteen appoint- ments. " In case there be no bishop to travel through the districts and exercise the episcopal office, on account of death or otherwise, the districts shall be regulated in every respect by the annual Conferences, and the presiding elders, in the interval of General Conference, ordination only excepted." Can a more perfect centralization of power in the hands of one man be conceived of — and that man responsible to 190 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. no one for the use of his iuithorlty ! He elevates and de- grades whom he pleases, and no one on earth has the right to say " why doest thou so 1" 1. lie decides all questions of law, puts his own construcr tion upon the Discipline. 2. It is his prerogative to exercise unlimited control and supreme jurisdiction over the thousand travelling preach- ers, appointing them to whatever posts, offices, stations or circuits he pleases, in a word, command them' to do what- ever he pleases, and when he pleases, and where he pleases. The bishop has only his own sovereign pleasure to consult. The welfare of every minister hangs upon the point of the bishop's pen. He can give a minister a good appointment or an indifferent one, as he pleases. He allows no preacher to petition for a certain station. He is to have no mind or will of his own, but in all things submit himself blindly to the godly judgment of his chief ministers, who have the control of him. The bishop knows well how to teach his servants passive obedience to his episcopal rod. If he learns of one becoming dissatisfied with an indifferent appointment one year, he can punish him by giving him one ten fold worse the next. If he discovers one whom the yoke of clerical domination galls, who is becoming restive under the lash, and is republican in his religious views, the bishop can resort to one of two effective remedies — either to humble him, crush his spirit out of him by keeping him in the mountains and swamps, until he gives in ; or bribe his obedience with preferment. Give him a presiding eldership^ or give him fat stations in towns and cities. See that some Methodist col- lege confer a doctorate upon him, pronise him the presi dency of some college, — or a bishopric, may be the shining goal that is held out to him in the end. How many have been kept from the paths of reform, whose feet had well REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 191 nigh slipped from the support of the episcopacy 1 The world has abundant reason to believe that the temptation of preferment prevailed over the principles of a McKendree, of a Waiigh, of an Emory, and alas, alas ! over the lamented Bascom. Did not all these men sympathize deeply with the reformers — did they not, one and all bear their testi- mony against the dangerous power and despotism of the episcopacy, and were they not made D. D.'s and bishops subsequently 1* But the weal or wo of every station^ or society, is made to hang upon the bishop's smile or frown. He claims the divine right to select the minister for each station, cir cuit or chapel throughout the wide domain of Methodism. He sends whom he pleases. He allows no society to indi- cate whom, it would have, or .to express the slightest wish about it. Each society must accept and support whomso- ever its lord the bishop appoints ! If any society has in- curred the displeasure of his highness, by having been so indiscreet as to have asked for the reappointment of some favorite preacher, or may not have contributed money as liberally as he wished, or may chance entertain too liberal views, the bishop can scourge it into repentance, by sending to it a succession of unacceptable and inefficient preachers, or some tyrant to oppress, and if that society prove refrac- tory still, he can turn the key and shut up the meeting- house against them — a house they have built with their own money, and leave them without a preacher. They are thus virtually under ban of excommunication and dispossessed, and the only alternative left them is to repent and submit, * Read again Bascom's mature and honest opinion of Methodism, in the quota'iions I have given, and above all read his inimitable De- claration of Rights, published by the Tennessee Publication So- ciety. 192 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. or revolt, leaving their possessions in the bishop's hands ! Is not this despotic power 1 Is it not the 2)ower of the Pope, to all intents and purposes ? But every preferment is in .he gift of the bishop. It is his prerogative to appoint presiding elders — to make and un- make them at his pleasure, and the under ministers, the laborers, must receive and obey them, and the circuits must support them, however tyrannical, inefficient, or unaccept- able they may be; and these under-lordlings can exercise the same authority as the bishops, upon the preachers. " It shall be the duty of the bishops to choose the presid- ing elders, to fix their stations, and to change them when they judge it necessary." Page 33. Rev. J. S. Inskip, a Methodist author, says : Page 146. " The presiding elders are chosen by the bishops ; and, however unacceptable the persons thus chosen maybe to those whose situation in life and ministerial labors they appoint and direct, they have no authority to displace them." Their official action may be altogether erroneous and unsatisfactory ; they may be chargeable with the most flagrant and oppressive favoritism ; and yet the parties oppressed have no power to remove them from office." 3. The bishops have every press in all Methodism under their control, as much as Pio Nono, or any absolute monarch in Europe. They appoint the editors, and change them at their pleasure. What are Methodist editors but the servants and tools of the bishops 1 Who can respect them as inde- pendent journalists ? Who can tell when they write their own conscientious sentiments or according to the will of their masters 1 Where, under such Episcopal surveillance and jurisdiction, is the freedom of the press, in the dominion of Methodism ? But w^e leave this now for future consideration. 4. The bishops appoint all the teachers of their schools. REPUBLICANISM BACKVVARDS. 193 All their schools, then, are under their patronage and control. 5. All the travelling agents are under their appointment and control. 6. All the missionaries in home or foreign stations. 7. They claim the right to control the spiritual and tem- poral business of the Church ! The Pope of Rome claims no more power — he could not ! 8. The bishop marks out the course of instruction, the reading and the study of all the ministers, and thus can mould them to his sovereign will and pleasure ! Thus can we see how your whole system is construed — to make all your ministers agents, editors, teachers, etc. ; and every part of the system subservient to the bishops — and how it makes it for the interest of all the above to please and to be popular with the bishops! Whom will you appoint for presiding elders — and who for editors — who for presidents and teachers of your schools — to all the places of power and fat salaries 1 Whom, sir — whom but your spe- cial favorites — those most popular with you — those most pliant, subservient and willing to sell their consciences and religious principles, if any they have, to uphold Episcopacy, and the power, authority and administration of the bishop ! All your preachers, editors, schools, agents, missionaries, etc., are your creatures, and, therefore, it is their interests, everywhere, to raise the shout, " God save the bishop ! — long live the Episcopacy ! !" No wonder there is such an outcry — no wonder the very heavens are rent from river to gulf by so many thousands of placemen and place-seeking men, when an article is published or a sermon preached, in which the all-controlling authority and vicegerency of Meth- odist bishops are questioned, denied or repudiated by a Baptist editor or faithful preacher. Where there is one such 9 194 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. sermon preached, or one such nrticle written, there should be a thousand, and there shortly will be, thank God ; the day is coming, and now is, when spiritual potentates, rulers and hierarchies will be called unto judgment by an outraged and indignant people. They will demand of you, " Who made you judge and ruler over us? Who committed us to your care, and absolute, despotic and degrading government 1 and you will be bound to answer, or flee the rocking throne of your episcopal jurisdiction. The time is coming, too, when an American citizen, a republican Christian, will feel himself insulted to be invited to enter one of your societies, and voluntarily concede his invaluable and indefeasible rights as a man and a freeman, freely put off Christ, his Testament and his laws, and allow you to weld your collar around his neck, and vow alliance to your Discipline, as above the word of God. And may God hasten the time when the yoke of your vassalage shall be broken, and your ghostly scepter turned to ashes, and your statute-book be trampled with indignation beneath every Christian foot, and Christ alone be King. LETTER XVIII Methodisi Presiding Elders — Sub-Bishops — their Irrespon- sible and Oppressive Powers. Tliey that are accounted to rule over the Gentiles exercise lordihip over them. Christ. Sir : — Having shown in my last your daring assumption in presuming to exercise the powers and authority you do, as bishop over your brethren — (assumptions so impious and daring that your own Wesley said, in denouncing the first Methodist bishop, " How can you, how dare you suffer your- self to be called a bishop 1 I shudder, I start, at the very thought ! ! ") I will now notice your Second or Aid — the officer next to you in authority, and the oppressive and tyrannical powers you delegate to him. The presiding elder is a servant of the bishop — he pecu- liarly belongs to his bishop as no other minister does. He is chosen solely by the bishop — holds his office during the pleasure of his master — can be dismissed at his master's pleasure, for no reason except the royal pleasure of his lord- ship, and his business is, not to preach — to serve God — by no means — that is not reckoned among his duties, but to serve the bishop in the character of a sub-overseer, as a spy and informant upon his brethren, and he is, for this exalted service, allowed to share in the authority of his master during the recess of Conference, and to be judged in the Quarterly Courts of Appeals. This officer, from the very nature of his (195) 196 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. office and work, ^s the most irresponsible character, in our estimation, of any in the whole society. The presiding elder is, of course, selected as one of the most pliant tools that can be found among all the ministers — one that has the least principle and the least sense of honor or shame, or he would scorn to become the sweep, the very serf of the bishop, or of any man — scorn to become the spy and informant upon his brethren in the ministry — scorn to exercise the mastery over them, so hostile to the express letter and the very spirit of the Gospel. He is accounted to rule over the Gentiles of his district, and like the under rulers to whom our Lord referred in the text, he exercises an insolent and oppressive lordship over the preachers under him, as every circuit-rider can tes- tify, if he happens not to be as pliant and couching as his mighty lordship, the elder, desires. I am aware that it becomes me to prove this. I have said that the presiding elder is the sole creature and servant of man — the bishop, depending upon him alone for his appoint- ment and continuance in office, and is responsible to the bishop alone for his official conduct. Proof: — " It shall be the duty of the bishop to choose the presiding elders, to fix their stations, and to change them when he judges it necessary" — Discipline, p. 38. No one is pern^itted to nominate the candidate — nor when elected can all the preachers in the Conference control his acts, or sus- pend him from the exercise of his office for any crime ! To his own master, the bishop, he standeth or falleth. He can be dismissed at the bishop's pleasure, for no crime, for no fiult, and that without any reasons being given, nor has he the right to ask a reason. "Suspension, removal, or deposi- tion from office in the Methodist E. Church is summary,'''' [i. e. despotic !] without accusation, trial, or formal sentence. " It is for no crime, generally for no misdemeanor, but for being REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 197 unacceptable." " Most of the removals are by a sole agent, namely, by a bishop, a preacher whose will is omnipotent in the premises." " The removing officer is not legally obliged to assign any cause for deposition." *' The deposed has no appeal, if indiscreetly or unnecessarily removed; he must sub- mit." — Bishop Hamline's Speech m Conference of 1844. I am compelled to ask you here, sir, did Jesus Christ ever clothe hrs ministers with such "summary" and tyrannical powers over their brethren 1 What right then have you, sir, to remove an elder from an office to which the Lord Jesus has called him ? What is the question you ask him '? "Do you think in your heart that you are truly called^ according to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ to the order of elders % " He answers, " I think so." Your presiding elders, of course, feel that they have unequal calling; and, if so, how dare you recall and depose from office one whom the Lord hath called — and depose from an office which the Lord hath imposed upon him 1 How, sir, but by assuming to exercise the powers superior to the King of Zion 1 But I can see how you meet this. "The offiice of presiding elder is one of my own crea- tion, and the presiding elder is a creation of my own will. Jesus Christ has nothing to do with him — he belongs to me — Christ nor the Holy Ghost has any thing to do with calling him. / call him" — The bishops call their presiding elders, and can consequently recall them. They are self-denying servants. They freely deny themselves the honor of saying with Peter, " Peter, servant and apostle of Jesus Christ — called of God ;" or with Paul, " Paul an apostle {not of men), neither [called and sent] by a man, but by Jesus Christ," that they may say, " John B. M'Ferrin, servant and apostle of my bishop, called and sent to be a presiding elder (or an editor), not of God, neither by Jesus Christ, but the will of my Lord Bishop ." ! ! 198 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Do I say too much when I say that the presiding elder is not a preacher — is not sent to preach, and that the bishop does not mention preaching in his commission as one of his duties 1 Here is his commission — here the lordly powers and ruling privileges granted to him under the bishop, for the voluntary prostitution of himself, conscience, and service, soul and body to man-service. It makes it his business to rule, to be judge, of all the " Quarterly Courts of Appeals " in his district; and to be spy and informer upon the preachers of his dis- trict ! What an honorable calling, truly ! He is the bishop's agent. Read his commission. See Dis. p. 39, sec. vi. : " Of the Presiding Elders, and their Duty. Q. " 1. What are the duties of a presiding elder 1 A. "1. To travel through his appointed district. " 2. In the absence of the bishop to take charge of all the elders and deacons, travelling and local preacher, and ex- horters, in his district. " 3. To change, receive, and suspend preachers in his dis- trict during the intervals of the Conferences, and in the absence of the bishop, as the Discipline directs. [What an irresponsible and high-handed power ! No wonder the elder is such an important personage in the eyes of the itinerants !] " 4. To be present, as far as practicable, at all the quar- terly meetings, and call together the members of the quar- terly Conference, over wiiich he shall also preside. " 5. To oversee the spiritual and temporal business of the Church in his district, and to promote, by all proper means, the cause of missions and Sunday-schools, and the publica- tion at our own press, of Bibles, tracts, and Sunday-school books ; and carefully to inquire at each quarterly meeting Conference, whether the rules respecting the instruction of children have been faithfully observed ; and to report to the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 199 annual Conference the names of all travelling preachers within his district, who shall neglect to observe these rules. " 6. To take care that every part of our Discipline be en- forced in his district. And to decide all questions of law in a quarterly meeting Conference, subject to an appeal to the president of the next annual Conference ; but in all cases the application of law shall be with the Conference. " 7. To attend the bishops when present in his district ; and to give them when absent, all necessary information, by letter, of the state of his district. "8. To direct the candidates for the ministry to those studies recommended for them by the bishops. "9. If any preacher absent himself from his circuit, the presiding elder shall, as far as possible, fill his place with another preacher. " Q. 2. Shall the presiding elder have power to employ a preacher who has been rejected at the previous annual Con- ference ? " A, He shall not, unless the Conference should give him liberty under certain conditions." I have been careful to give the whole section^ and there is not one word about preaching — that is a secondary matter. If you make it the duty of your presiding elders to preach in the Discipline, I have not been able to find it, and would be obliged to you for a reference to the page. He has but two classes of duties. To obey his bishop is the first, and to rule and watch his brethren — his equals and superiors, in true merit and self-denying labors, the second ! Some may think that I seek to turn the Quarterly Con- ferences into derision, by calling them " quarterly Courts of Appeal," and the presiding elder " Judge of Appeals," for our brethren who are uninitiated are very exact to dismiss ^eir religious meetings when these Methodist Courts hold 200 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. their sessions in their neighborhood ! ! I would not be so understood. I have called them by their true name, and in this I am not alone. Inskip says of the presiding elder, '* He has charge of the administration of the discipline throughout the district. He is to take care that every part of our discipline be enforced. He is to preside at the trials of local preachers, and in the Court of Appeals." P. 140. Again, " He comes as adviser, or Judge of Appeals.'* P. 142. If my language is irreverent, so is that of one of your own standard authors. I have said that he was not only a judge over, but a spy and informant upon his brethren — a double office that honor- able and high-minded men would scorn to fulfil. For proof, I refer to the 7th rule of his duties ; also to the authority ot Mr. Inskip. " They (the presiding elders) are also required to give all the information they can, by letter or otherwise, to the bishop, concerning the state of the M'ork in the terri- tory committed to their supervision and care." " By con- stantly travelling through his district, and having frequent and confidential intercourse^ (how admirably adapted to encourage tattlers, and for enemies to report scandal !) with the ministry and membership of the church, he is prepared to INFORM the bishops of the talents and usefulness of the former (ministers) and the wants and preferences of the latter." P. 139. What a Jesuitical system of espionage truly is this ! Every despotism on earth has its system of espionage^ supported at great cost. Russia pays annually millions, and it costs Methodism in America an immense sum for its host of presiding elders! ! " By keeping a watchful eye over all the travelling and local preachers in the district." P. 141. The ministers of Jesus Christ have no one to watch them but their Master, while the ministers and servants of men have men set over REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 201 them tx) watch and keep a spying eye upon them ! What a degrading vassalage ! " It is known that the presiding elders are placed in the position they now occupy, to give the necessary information to the bishops in making out the appointments." '• The whole question of our appointments is left under the conjoint direction of the bishops and pre- siding elders." P. 149. Thus we see the travelling preacher, the worker^ has two masters to please, and the most exacting one is the infe- rior. Unless he is a couching sycophant at the feet of his presiding elder, he stands no chance for a good appointment with the bishop. There is no alternative left him — please his lord, the presiding elder, or be kept in the swamps and the mountains. The world, from a knowledge of this pecu- liar wheel in the system, may know how to account for the peculiar obliquities of some Methodist ministers who are considered as upright men. They are not their own masters, but are bound to pursue the course, and reflect the senti- ments indicated by their immediate masters, the presiding elders. I confess to you, sir, I cannot see how either a high minded or God-fearing man can submit to be a Meth- odist minister, since any one having any self-respect would scorn^ and a man who feared God would not dare to become the slave to serve two masters, and they men in nothing supe- rior to themselves ! I have said the presiding eldership is invested tvith irrespon- sible and oppressive powers. Inskip says, p. 146, " The pre- siding elders are chosen by the bishops. And, however un- acceptable, the persons thus chosen, may be, to those whose situation in life and ministerial labors they appoint and direct, they have no authority to displace them. Their official action may be altogether erroneous and unsatisfac- toj-y ; they may be chargeable with the most flagrant and 9* 202 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. oppressive favoHtism ; and yet the parties oppressed, have no power to remove them from office," nor any right pro- vided even to petition to the bishop for their removal, any more than the slaves in the cotton field have a right to dic- tate who shall be their overseer, or to remove a cruel one ! Says luskip, p. 157, "He may be as an officer, unacceptable in the higV.est degree ; he may be tyranical, overbearing, and INEFFICIENT BEYOND ENDURANCE, and Still bc sccurc in his office ! His brethren, who know him and labor with him, may reprove and censure {if they dare I) but they cannot displace him." Nor can they complain to the bishops except at the hazard of their displeasure. Our author confesses ''there is no method by which we can communicate with them on this subject, without seeming to be uncharitable or insubordinate. In other words, there is no constitutional provision by which we can make our grievances known. In this matter, we have nothing to do but to endure and OBEY." P. 157.* And yet to such irresponsible officers, what an all-control- * To show how little regard a bishop will pay to the wishes of a whole conference, we give one example from Inskip's work, p. 157. " It is true, we may, by a vote of an annual Conference, make a general request of the bishops, as was done a few years since by one of the Western Conferences. * * But what can we accomplish by these things? The result may easily be foreseen. In one of our annual Conferences, the name of which it is not necessary to mention, a resolution was passed, requesting the bishops not to appoint the same persons to the office of a presiding elder for more than one term, etc. The design of this was to remove from the office, individuals who bad been in it so long, as to produce serious dissatisfaction. The issue of the matter was, the ensuing General Conference declared all such resolutions null and void. And this could not have been otherwise in view of the constit-ition. The resolution referred to, was too general, and not sufficiently specifio. And, furthermore, as already stated, it was imconatitxUionaly hence null and void." KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 203 ling power over the travelling preachers is delegated ! Tke presiding eldershfj) constitute the bishop's Cabinet ! ! " The presiding elders of an annual Conference bring for- ward all candidates for admission into the travelling con- nection, and for deacon's or elder's orders. They constitute what is designated the bishop's cabinet ; and frequently direct or control the entire business of the Conference. P. 144. " That they may be correctly informed, and act under- standingly, and distribute the workmen so as to make the best use of their talents, the bishops must be in communica- tion with the elders. And this communication, of course, should be strictly confidential. The bishops know to but a limited extent either the talents and qualifications of the men to be stationed, or the wants and condition of the places to which they are to be appointed. It is hence apparent, from the circumstances and necessity of the case, the office is very little inferior to the Episcopacy itself. P. 145. " From various causes, and in a manner not necessary to mention here, the presiding eldership has, in a great measure, become the appointing power of the Church." What must be the natural workings of such irresponsible power, but to fOster favoritism and oppression 1 Let Inskip testify, pp. 143, 144 — also pp. 150, 151, and 152. " It may be esteemed treasonable and hazardous to inti- mate any thing of the kind ; but it is true we have imbibed the idea, that the presiding eldership, is an instrument by which a system of favoritism is fostered, and crafty and im- proper influences are brought to bear upon the stationing authorities of the church. That such views are frequently unfounded suspicions, and without any warrant from the facts in the case, w'll be cheerfully admitted." "Still, the controlling influence the elders exert, has a tendency to excite the jealousy of their brethren, who, in 204 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. the present state of things, often seem to have but little to do at an annual Conference, save to receive their appoint- ments." The irresponsibility of the presiding eldership, is fraught WITH THE MOST DANGEROUS TENDEKciES ; and is Contrary to our economy and usage in all other respects." If Inskip may presume to say this, what may I not pre- sume to say ? I will say, that if he is correct, then the presiding eldership is not an office of church appointment. I will say it is an office that, exerts a debasing and degrading influence upon the itinerant preachers. " But the custom of which we speak is so much opposed to what may be called Methodistic propriety, and so entirely at variance with the general spirit of our institutions, that it seems to us, we use the mildest terms that can be employed in alluding to it; and say the least we can in pronouncing it, pernicious. We refer to the fact of the presiding elders, at the close of their official term, nominating their successors. That the bishops are shut up to the necessity of regarding, or are, in the proper sense of the term, bound by such a nomination, we do not pretend to say. But that they generally make the appointment in this manner, is a fact of common noto- riety." "And again, the presiding elders, it is known, are all in council with the bishops in reference to their own aj^point- ments, as well as those of others. This gives them undue and improper advantage over their brethren. They have an opportunity of influencing the minds of the bishops that all do not enjoy. This circumstance has frequently produced serious and well-founded complaints." There is a growing opposition to this office — to this sys- tem of espionage among Methodists. See Inskip, p. 143. ' Nevertheless, we cannot but perceive, that the office is REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 205 by no means of as good report among us, as in times gone by. Its utility is becoming a question of serious doubt with many." " It has been proposed to remedy all the difficulties by abolishing the office altogether." These are some of the objections urged by your own au- thors. But, sir, I object to the office and its powers, for reasons infinitely superior to all these. It is unscriptural, and contrary to the spirit of our holy religion. I need not waste ink in proving that the Scriptures do not warrant such an officer. Wesley, converted by the writings of Lord King, declares, and all your standard authors unequivocally de- clare, that there are but two orders of ministers recognized in the New Testament — deacons and elders. Where, then, is your authority for two other orders of ministers — rather officials — that do not preach, i. e. presiding elders and bishops'? If you say that the presiding eldership is not an order, only an office, by what authority do you recall a minister from a w^ork to which he solemnly declared, at his ordination, he regarded the Lord Jesus had called him to serve under you in ruling and judging alone % There is no more autho- rity in the Bible for such an officer as a presiding elder than for such an order or office as that you presume to occupy. Which one of his apostles or disciples did the Saviour autho- rize to take charge of all the elders and deacons, travelling and local preachers and exhorters, in a certain district "? Which one of the apostles presumed to dare to exercise the power of a Methodist presiding elder, much less those of a bishop, over even one of the other apostles, or the humblest preacher, deacon, or private member of the church? Did Paul, or Peter, aspire to such a preeminence 1 Never. It would have cost either of them his soul to have assumed suoh Antichristian powers ! Did not the Saviour mos*- p(>^ 206 THE GUEAT I HON WUEEL. tively and peremptorily forbid any one of his disciples to assume the mastery over his brethren, and as positively command His disciples not to recognize such claims? That he alone was their Master, their King, their Lawgiver, and they were to serve and obey none but him 1 And yet, sir, you declared at your ordination that you felt truly called to the ministration of the office of a Methodist Bishop, accord- ing to the will of our Lord Jesus Christ. Has our Lord Jesus changed his mind since he left the world, or how dare you, who exercise lordship over your brethren, declare that you are inspired or called^ or in anywise authorized to do so by the will of the King of Zion ! I solemnly charge you. Bishop Soule, in common with your colleagues in the Epis- copacy, with the assumption and exercise of impious and ^Tziichristian powers, in presuming to lay your authoritative commands upon your brethren, and in creating the office of presiding elder, and imposing his irresponsible and oppres- sive jurisdiction upon those whose right and duty it is to enjoy the glorious liberty and freedom, wherewith Christ makes his people free. Christ never instituted a spy judge over his followers, and they should forever scorn to acknow- ledge or submit to one. LETTER XIX Th: Travelling Preacher — the allegiance required — the duties imposed — the servants of servants — ijet in their turns al- lowed to exercise great authoritij over the rights of the laity — the class leaders and A:th wheel or stirrers — stewards — An important question, " Do not the clergy, the rulers of Me- thodism belong to a Church by themselves, the Annual Conferences, or Preacher s Church into which no layman can enter ? — a Church within a Church ! ! Dear Sir: — In examining the machinery of your system, one can but acknowledge the admirably adaptedness of the various parts to accomplish the end designed — a tremendous consolidation, and the most arbitrary and irresponsible epis- copal control. The society of the Jesuits has been compared to a sword, the handle of which is at Rome, and the point everywhere. I can only compare the polity of your society to an immense screw, the lever of which is in the hands of the bishops, and the controlling, crushing power is felt upon, and through every part of it. No civil despotism was ever more powerful and efficient — efficient because despotic! Having examined the powers of the Episcopacy, and the Bishop's Cabinet, i. e., the presiding elders, I proceed to no- tice th'^ relative position of the workers — the travelling (207) 208 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. preachers — and note the wheel that drives them, and the wheels they move in their revolutions. The following are the degrees through which a candidate for the Preacher's CnuRCii, — " full connection" with the annual Conference, must pass. 1. He must obtain the privilege from his society, or class meeting to exhort. This is of easy accomplishment. And jnark it, this is the only instance, in the life of a Methodist preacher, when his name comes before the laity. They are simply allowed to permit him to exhort, but this act is not saying that he may be a preacher, or their ruler the balanee of his life. It is also claimed by Methodist preachers, that they are the representatives of the laity, their duly elected representatives. When 1 When the laity merely allowed them to exhort, nothing more. Why, sir, to exhort is the inalienable right of every Christian without a license from the brethren ! But who ever heard of representatives who held their office for life, and were not amenable to their constituents — the peopled They are such representatives 2iS kings and popes are. Having obtained his recommend to exhort, he supplies himself with Wesley's sermons, and, if he has a good memory, and strong lungs, he shortly becomes a right sharp preacher, and is quite an important actor in camp meetings, and especially " in the altar." His next step is to obtain a recommendation from the Quarterly Court Conference. If he is on good terms with his preacher, and his honor, the judge of the court, {i. e., the presiding elder,) this is more than willingly granted. He remains mider the jurisdiction of this quarterly body, until he obtains a recommendation from it to the Annual Court, as a suitable person for deacon's orders. This being done, he is examined, and if accepted he is allowed to enter upon a two years' trial, after having taken the following oath. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 209 The bishop asks : " Will you REVERENTLY ohey them to whom the charge and government over you is committed, following luith glad mind and WILL their GODLY admonitions ? Ans. ^^ I will endeavor to do so, the Lord being my helper.'''' There are thousands of pious ministers, who would suffer imprisonment and death at the stake, before they would take the above oath, admitting as it does that there are any spiri- tual rulers over them, to whom the charge and government of them has been committed by the Saviour, and pledging supreme and reverential obedience, due to God only ! The candidate now enters upon his second probation, which must continue two years, before he is allowed to join Confer- ence in full connection, in order to give full proof of his de- votion to the discipline and his allegiance and obedience to his spiritual lords and masters. He must learn to be ruled before he is allowed to rule others. This training of two years is important to render the young neophyte perfectly plastic and tractable, and properly to break him into the harness, and accustom him to the bit and collar. If he proves to have too much spirit to crouch under human dictation, and possessed of too much republican and Christian democracy to be made a slave of in the church, the home of Christ's freemen, who acknowledge and call no man their master, he can be rejected as a crooked stick, or as a Methodist writer justly says, " a good enough Christian but unfit for a Me- thodist! See Bond, p. 20. But if he submits with a glad mind and will, and rever- ently obeys during his two years of probation, he is brought forward again for examination, for admission. This is made solemn and awful, to make a deep and last- ing impression upon his mind. The examination is preceded by fasting and prayer. A 210 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. lengthy examination and catechising them commences. We have not space for all the questions. The burden of the whole is to pledge him to teach and enforce every point in the discipline, and above everything required in a Methodist preacher, to obey his clerical masters. We hear young ministers say now-a-days, that a great part — or some parts of the discipline are inoperative ; and not required of them, nor by them. Now, sir, I mistrust the honesty of every minis- ter who says this, and I affirm that he asserts what he knows to he false! If he fails or refuses to execute strictly every " point" of the discipline, he is a perjured man ; he violates his solemn oath and sacred pledges, before God and men. If he changes or " mends" the rules, he does the same. With these remarks let us notice some of the pledges re- quired in his examination. " Do you know the rules of society — of the Bands ? Do you keep them 1 Have you read the form of discipline ? Are you willing to conform to it ? Have you considered the rules of a preacher, especially the 1st, lOth, and 12th? Will you keep them for conscience sake?*' Let us see what these so especial rules are. Rule 1. "Be diligent. Never be unemployed ; never be triflingly employed," &c., &c., all very good. Rule 4. " Take no step towards marriage without first CONSULTING YOUR BRETHREN ;" those to whom are committed the care and government over him of course. I would sooner send a young man to consult his mother, than to all the bishops and presiding elders in Methodistdom. But this is rule 4. Rule 10. " Be punctual. Do everything exactly at the time. And do not mend our rules, but keep them ; not for wrath hut conscience sake^ Rule 11. * * last cause ^'And remember! — a Methodist REPUBLICANlSr^I BACKWAKBS. 211 preacher is to mind every point great and small, in the Methodist Discipline ! " Therefore you will need all the SENSE (liy^and grace you have." Does this look like any part of the Discipline is inoperative or obsolete ? Rule 12. " Act in ALL things, not according to your OWN will, but as a Son in the Gospel." The son must obey ills fiither in all things, but how many fathers have these Methodist's Sons — the bishops and presiding elders : but Christ says call no man flither — papa. " As such it is your DUTY. [I sin when I neglect my duty^ do preachers Sin when they violate some little part of the injunctions of their fathers ? !] to employ your time in the manner which WE direct ; in preaching and visiting from house to house ; in reading, meditation and prayer. ABOVE ALL, [all what ? reading the Bible or prayer to God for his guidance and will to act for his glory.] Above all : if you labor with us in Lord's vineyard, it is needful you should do that part of the work which WE advise, at THOSE TIMES AND PLACES which WE JUDGE MOST FOR. HIS GLORY V Docs not the above absolve the Methodist preacher from his allegiance to Jesus Christ, from all concern to learn the will of Christ concerning him, and all concern about so living, and acting as HE himself judges for the glory of his God ? Do not his masters take all the above concern off his conscience, and take the absolute direction of him and his conscience into their own keeping ? If he should be asked in the judgment, " why have you not labored where I by my providence have directed, and with an eye single to my glory ?" What could the poor Methodist preacher answer, but, " Lord, I was taught that was not my business to consult thy will or consider where thou didst call me to labor, or what I might regard as promotive of thy glory, but the Bishops and Pre- siding Elders whom I served, taught me to form no mind 212 TITE GREAT IRON WHEEL. or will o" my own and above all reading and pray'.ng ; to obey them, and to labor where and do what t^^ey should judge most for thy glory ! !" And do those wno plead these things and thus yield themselves up to serve men, consider themselves the servants of Christ? ! ! ! After a sufficient examination and the candidate is fully pledged and committed to his chief rulers, he is required to seal his promises with a solemn oath ; which we consider equal in stringency and impiety to that taken by any Roman Catholic priest, or Jesuit to the general of his order. It is demanded of him in the name of God and his Church. See Dis. p. 136-138. The Bishop asks — " Will you reverently obey your chief Ministers, unto whom is committed the charge and govern- ment over you ; following with glad mind and will their GODLY ADMONITIONS, submiuiug yoursclvcs to their GODLY JUDGMENTS. Vow, " I will do so, the Lord being my helper." 1 cannot express the horror at all that is implied in this oath, or the complete renunciation of all concern for God's mind, will and glory on the part of a professed Chris- tian minister ! Grace assisting me, I should a hundred fold choose to suffer at the stake than to take such an oath to an archangel^ much less to sinful men. Selling myself to work their wills in preference to the will of my Saviour ! Having taken this oath, the candidate is initiated into fel- lowship in the Methodist Preacher's Church, and is put in full and complete connection with the great outer driving \vheel — the bishops ; and is henceforth under their supreme jurisdiction. He is no longer his own — no longer a minis- ter of Jesus Christ to be governed exclusively by him — he has renounced his allegiance to the Saviour as his only mas- ter, king and lawgiver, and sworn allegiance to men. He REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 213 belongs to his " chief ministers," and is enrolled among the "regulars" — to go -whither they send him ; and go he must^ and without asking any questions, and do he must whatever it is their pleasure to command him to do. God sends his ministers — and the Methodist bishops send theirs. Said Bish- op Asbury, " Show us [the bishops] the people who have no preacher, and whose language we understand, and we will send them one ; yes, we will send them one; for Methodist preachers are not militia who will not cross the lines ; they are regulars^ and they must go." — Bond E. of M.^ p. 19. He has now entered freely upon his ministerial career. He has at least a praiseworthy ambition — it may be a purely selfish one. There are glittering prizes placed before his eyes. They are pointed out to him and he is urged to canvass for their attainment. He becomes tired of Moun- tain Cove and Piney-wood Circuits — the ministerial colleges of the Conference — he covets first one of the many rich neighborhood Circuits, then a town station, where there is better society, more fashion and pay — then he longs to be- come a metropolitan " star." Having tasted of a little au- thority over the laity, and being subject to the rigorous rule of his superior officers, he thirsts for power : — the idol of the human heart. He looks upon the presiding El- dership with a longing eye. He has- learned the characteris- tics that render a preacher popular with the Circuit Judge, and his reverence the Bishop, he prostitutes himself to the work, wins the prize, and enjoys a seat in the Bishop's Ca- binet. But his ambition is not satisfied while there is a gaol unwon. The exercise of power, and the incense of flattery, that power always secure, are gratifying to the pride of the human heart. The Bishops are getting old, and must die some day. Some Presiding Elders w^ill be elected to wield their scepters, and why may not he as well be bishop as 214 THE GliEAT .RON WHEKL. any oilier man? exactly — why may he not desire and labor for it, for the Apostle says (in King James' version) "he that desireth the ofiice of a bishop, desireth a good work." Thus we sec that the Stirrup is the first step of ascent to an Episcopal Throne 1 I regard such a system of Ecclesiastical polity, offering an ascending scale of ministerial station, and rank and power, as not only manifestly unscriptural but eminently pernicious and corrupting, fostering as it does the rankest ambition in the ministry, and the cultivating of all those ways and means by which alone these ambitious ends can be attained when success depends not upori the will of the membership, but is in the arbitrary gift of clerical superiors, and where " Thrift only follows fawning.'' What young minister of common ambition, or self-res- pect, if you please, would not desire to gain the rank of a presiding elder ? I doubt if there was ever one who had not determined to be the Judge of the Quarterly Court before he had completed his Freshman year in his Mountain Cove, or Piney-wood College — if not before he had gradu- ated an Exhorter. If one reaches the deaconship with his obtuseness unpene- trated with such an idea, the bishop is very careful to enter it in the ordination service, a clause of which reads thus : " May they [the young deacons] so well behave themselves in this inferior office, that they may be found worthy to be called [not by God, but by the bishop] into the higher min- istries in thy Church ! " Their chief ministers, to whom is committed the govern- ment of them, are very willing for them to be ambitious, because they will be proportionably zealous, obedient, and subservient to their most arbitrary and despotic wishes. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 215 Mark the means by which a Methodist preacher can hope for advancement in rank — elevation is alone in the gift of the superior clergy. They confer it only upon their favorites. The aspirant must labor to gain the superior good will of the presiding elder, and ,he can only do this by his zeal for Methodism, and the most extreme subserviency to his wishes. Here is a fair field, and the list open for flattery, fawning, and man worship. There is not one only seeking for good circuits, or town or metropolitan stations, or a cabinet appointment, but scores of aspirants ; hence what rivalship, w^hat canvassing, what envy. But another feature in Methodism. Preachers are allowed and encouraged to be informants upon one another, and the presiding elder keeps his ears open and invites evil, as well as good reports. Indeed it is a part of his business to be a general scandal-monger. None but those who have toiled in the list can understand the pulling and working against, and checking each other in every way imaginable on the part of the rivals. What depreciation, insinuations, and misrepresentation often of each other. What tales and re- ports get to the elder's ears. Each known aspirant is under the strictest surveillance of all others. Many a one's popu- larity is blighted with the presiding elder, and he can dis- cover no trace of his enemy. What histories of " defeated efforts to reach the presiding eldership " circuit riders might write. What wrongs and injuries received. What partia- lity and favoritism, w'ithout merit, could be revealed ! Now I think it can be clearly shown that all this ambition, all these efforts for elevation, all the inffuences brought to bear upon them, tend to make these aspirants the more blind and reckless advocates of the peculiar and obnoxious features of the Discipline, and to have no mind, will, or con- science of their own, but to accomplish by all means the 216 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. wishes of their leaders. We have shown that the favorites of the presiding elder are the flivored ones. He acts upon the principle, " They that honor me will I honor." They must give themselves blindly* to the worl< of Methodism, to swell its numbers, and blindly to do the will of them that sent them. If opposition to other denominations is pleasing to his chief ministers, he must oppose contrary to reason or revelation. His zeal for his society must eat him up. By patience in so doing, he fixes the eye of his clerical superiors upon him. It will not do for him to hesitate about the pro- priety or scripturality of the measures he is advised to pur- sue ; to question whether any thing enjoined in the Discip- line agrees with, or is opposed to the teachings of God's word ; to hesitate, or to execute its laws weak-handed or faint-heartedly, would black-mark him at once. He must not consult his conscience. Suppose his presiding elder de- * A Methodist preacher vows to execute every point, great and small, in the Discipline. The blind and unprincipled subserviency implied in this can only be imagined, when it is remembered that the Dif-cipline is subject to quadrennial changes. When the preacher pledges this, he does not and cannot know what he may be binding himself to endorse and observe. The Discipline may possess new ieii- tures, new laws, after the next conference far more uuscriptural than the present ; yet he must vow obedience to them, and to execute them, whatever they may be ! The present Discipline has rules for the extirpation of the evil of slavery. Should a preacher refuse to exe- cute this abolition feature, he is liable to exclusion this year. The present Conference, now in session, will doubtless abolish the abolition features of the Discipline, and the ten thousand preachers must change their principles, and doctor their consciences in eight and forty hours, to conform to the now law, for should they execute the old one after the new one has passed, they would be excluded at once — excluded to-day for executing a law that they would have been excluded yester- day for refusing to execute! Such are the rotary consciences required in Methodist preachers. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 217 nied that immersion is even warranted by the Scriptures ; suppose he pronounces it indecent anddisgustmg,as all of your editors and most of your preachers do, and dissuade its use in his diocese, would it do for him, a circuit rider, to admit publicly or privately that immersion is scriptural baptism at all, or to immerse a person requesting it, however consci- entiously he may have believed it a Bible baptism before ? Would he cultivate the good will of his elder, should he op- pose his judgment and wishes'? His hopes of elevation would be blighted at once. But why should he trouble him- self about right or wrong, or to inquire what is scriptural or not in church practices 1 Has he not repeatedly pledged and sworn to observe every part, great and small, in the Discipline % What use has a Methodist preacher for a con- science or judgment of his own % I las he not vowed before God to have no mind or will of his own about anything* and to " reverently obey " and " follow with glad mind and will," and " submit himself to the godly judgments'"\ of his clerical masters'? He must "go it blind," shut his eyes, deafen his ears, stifle his conscience, harden his heart, and put his reason and judgment to open shame, should light, or argument, or truth, or God's Spirit, conflict with the interests of Methodism, or the requisitions of his '• chief ministers, to whom is committed the government over him ! ! J Have we not seen repeated exemplifications of this spirit, and blind recklessness in the practice of Methodist preachers, when the interests of Methodism were suffering from the light and progress of truth in any given town or com- munity '? It is easy to be accounted for. It is the corrupting system^ that the peculiar influences and iniquitous appliances * See Dis. p. 50. t Dis. p. 138. X We are aware that this is denied, but we will attempt to show it in the letter on the " Rights of the Laity." 10 218 THK GREAT IRON WHEEL. under which Methodism works its ministers, that forces theixi into such ungodly measures, and not because they themselves are naturally more depraved in heart than other men. Thus we have seen that a system that more completely subordi- nates its ministers to the perfect and irresponsible dictation and domination of the episcopacy and its cabinet, could not be well devised. But while iC surrenders to be ruled, he is allowed irre- sponsible a ihority and rule in return, under the eye of his overseer — and a very important consideration in the shape of a pe^.uniary provision for life, or good behavior. 1. He is allowed the use of the keys of Mn Wesley's kingdom, which he can open to whom, and shut against whomsoever he pleases, i. e., he can receive into or exclude from the society he rules, whomsoever he wills.* This clothes him with great importance in the eyes of the mem- bers. It is a fearful prerogative. 2. He is allowed the absolute control over one class of officers or servants at least, and the virtual control of another. The Class Leaders (the fourth wheel) are the creatures of the preachers in charge. He can make and unmake them at his sovereign pleasure, without being required to give a reason to any one. It is enough that they prove unaccept- able to him. This is the highest office to which a lay mem- ber can aspire. He is virtually the pastor of the portion of society committed to him. It is incumbent upon him to inquire how every soul prospers, not only how each person observes the outward rules, but how he grows in the know- ledge and love of God, and freely inform the preacher. His influence with him is very great. It becomes the members • See Dis. p. 72. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 219 to keep on good terms with their leaders, or they will very likely be called to account /or something. The class leaders not only examine and confess their classes weekly, but they have charge of the " love feasts," and decide who may or may not be admitted. Stewards are virtually under the control of the preacher. He is allowed to nominate his stewards for election by the Quarterly Court. If they prove unacceptable, he can easily procure their dismission by that body, since the majority of it consists of his fellow-preachers — and they will assist him in this, to be assisted in like cases in return, and of class leaders, who must do the will of their preachers, or be dis- missed. The duty of the steward is to collect the expenses, and decide upon the provision allowed the preacher. He is also allowed to watch and inform upon the members.* The Methodist itinerant preacher has secured to him a comfortable support for life. While he preaches he receives a better salary than the majority of the ministers of other denominations, from his circuit or stations, and when he is unable to preach by reason of failing health or old age, he receives a life annuity from the proceeds of the book-fund. Methodist preachers have made a pretty general impres- sion upon the people that they preach for almost nothing, while other preachers receive fixed salaries. Now, I have no objection to preachers being paid, and well paid ; few, if any, receive as nluch as they should ; but I do object to false impressions. The Discipline seems so arranged as to keep back the support of the preacher, or to make the impression that he receives only $100, and if married the same for his wife, and a few dollars for each of his children. Suppose you turn to page 166-167, and foot up the prob- * Dis. p. 168. 220 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. able allowance made to a preacher with a family of five children. Allowed for himself and wife, S250 " three children over 7, 72 " two " under 7, 32 " House rent, 150 Furniture, 50 Table expenses, say 300* Fuel, and horse and cow feed, 150 Travelling expenses, 25 $1029 Besides all this, provision is made for all his " occasional distresses," as sickness, &c., &c. Now, add his marriage fees and presents to the above sum, and we see a pretty hand- some support. If he is stationed in town or city, he would be allow^ed much more. The support received by the bish- ops is from 1 1,500 to $2,000. Surely Methodist preachers should be the last to complain. With such a support, and his old age snugly provided for, he can say, without feeling very bad, " No foot of land do I possess, No cottage in this wilderness." Methodist ministers are required by the Discipline to act as colporteurs to sell the books of the " Book Concern." Also to act as agents for their Church papers, and to place them in every family, if possible, in their own circuits. This accounts for the immense sale and wide-spread circulatiou of Methodist books, and the tremendous subscription list of their papers. They can collect every cent of the accounts due from their ministers or members, since the ministers are * Let the reader insert those of his own family for one year, if he thinks $300 is too much REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 221 empowered to arraign the delinquent before the Society, and exclude him, if he is able and wont pay, and the minister is subject to trial, unless he pays. Look at it in the light of a circulating medium, the itinerancy is one of surprising effi- ciency. For it is not only made their solemn duty to sell their books, and gain patronage for the papers ; but it is made their pecuniari/ interest to do so. The nett profits of the Book Concern and of their Church papers, goes into the fund, which is used to pay up any deficiency in their salaries, and to support them when superannuated. Unless their books are sold and their papers patronized, they would not only not receive that part of their salaries which their circuits or sta- tions fail to raise, but would have no fund lo support them when superannuated. It is the most efficient scheme of col- portage in operation upon the flice of the whole earth, and to it Methodism owes the rapid spread of its Societies in the United States. Methodist circuit riders are every ivhere, sent to follow the tide of emigration into every new country, anti- cipating the movements of any other denomination, and pre- occupying the ground with their peculiar views, their books and their papers. Every man who can sell a few dollars worth of books or get a subscriber to their Church papers is useful to the Conference and is generally used. If he is not fit to operate in old communities, he is sent to the frontier settlements and ter- ritories. THE METHODIST PREACHEr's CHURCH. Before closing this lengthy letter allow me to ask for in- formation which is very much desired, and awakening no lit- tle inquiry of late, " To what Church do the chief ministers of Methodism — bishops, and travelling preachers belong V No one ever saw the'r names enrolled upon the class pa- pers, or upon the books of any local Society, I believe, and 22S THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. the question arises, Where are their names kept 1 On some Church-book, of course, if they belong to the Church, and upon. The local preachers and laity have their names en- rolled upon the books of the Society in any given place, and upon the class-papers of such a Society or " Church," but who ever saw the name of a travelling preacher, or presid- ing elder, or a bishop, upon the books of local societies, or Methodist Churches 1 Where, then, are their names kept ? Where do the rulers belong 1 To the Church 1 Not if the local societies are churches. If r understand your scheme at all, the rulers have a church especially for themselves ; they do not deign to asso-. ciute with the ru^ed — the " ignoble vidgus.'^ The rulers all belong to the Annual Conferences, and no where else can their names be found. To the annual Con- ference are they amenable, and at its bar they are tried. I respectfully inquire if the annual Conferences, in and of themselves, are Christian Churches, or Churches at all ? If so they ate very singular ones, for they are Churches all the members of which are ruling preachers, and where do we find an instance of such a Church in the New Testa- ment 1 All annual Conferences -are composed of preachers, and rulers only ! If annual Conferences are not Churches, then Methodist preachers belong to no Church — not even to the Methodist Episcopal Church ! ! If they are members of a Church at all, then are the annual Conferences' Clerical Churches, or the Rulers' Church — an imperial and privi- leged body, into which no layman can ever enter, more than Peri into Paradise !* * I hope my brethren ministers and members wil aid me in asking this question until an answer is obtained : ''Are axxual Conferences Chukches ?'' If not, To what Church do the rulers of Methodism belong ? REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 223 Is not this so 1 But, to which body you, yourself, and your fellow-bishops belong — whether to the Societies, or the mem- bers' Church, or to the travelling preachers' Church, or whe- ther you bishops have a Church of your own — the bishops* Church, or as privileged characters, belong to no Church, I am unable to learn. I know you can be disciplined by General Conference alone, and I suppose that persons must belong to the jurisdiction or government that can discipline them. I would respectfully ask you, Bishop Soule, if the apostles, and ministers and bishops of the New Testament Ckurches were not members of the sajne body that the brethren were*? See Acts i., 13, 16. Were not the tw^elve apostles members of the Church at Jerusalem with Mar2/ and the one hundred and twenty disciples, and the same body to which the three thousand were added ? Answer this. Were not the bishops or pastors of the Churches of Antioch, Ephesus, Corinth, and the Angels of the Seven Churches of Asia, members of those local bodies ? Why then are you not a member of the society in Franklin, and why are not your ministers members of the societies ? Again, Were not each of the above Churches, in and of itself, a complete Church 1 Did it take two, or five, or all the Seven Churches of Asia to make one Church, as it does all the Methodist E. Societies in the w^hole South to make the Methodist Episcopal Church South'? Is one of your local Societies a complete Church 1 Is the McKindree Society in this city a complete Church ? Is the so-called Methodist Church in Franklin, within a short dis- tance of your house, a Church? If so, are you a member of it ? If not, in what local body is your membership 1 I ask for information not through a prurient curiosity. I wish to understand your polity so as not to misrepresent it. I am 224 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. an honest inquirer after truth. I do not wish to nnisrepresent your Church polity. I seek information of you, the highest source of authority in Methodism. If I am wrong^ however humble and unworthy you may regard me, will you, if a child of God, deny me light, and allow me to go on in error^ misleading and causing others to sin ? Be it far from you. LETTER XX LOCAL PREACHERS. What the?/ forfeit in locating — Strong considerations to keep them in the saddle — they are degraded — The petty oppression to which they subject themselves — Loss of influence. m Dear Sir : — A travelling preacher is evidently considered the most useful to your Society, and, indeed, the only legiti- mate preacher ; consequently, the strongest possible mflu- ences are brought to bear upon the preachers to keep them in the saddle, and every obstacle thrown in the way to deter them from locating, or becoming pastors. The office of Pastor, the most common office of the Chris- tian minister in the days of the Apostles, is wholly ignored by you, and that of the Evangelist substituted in its place. Thus you oppose your wisdom to that of the Head of the Church. You have no pastors settled with your Societies to go in and out before them, whose daily example and pious living, and the influence of whose whole life of godliness may be exerted upon the members and their rising families. Your people have " strangers " for their shepherds. So soon as they come to know and love the preacher, his labors are interrupted in the midst of the greatest usefulness, and he 10* (225) 226 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. is torn from them and sent, they know not whither, and a stranger thrust into his place. They are not even allowed the right to petition for his return. This evil and wrong is deeply felt and deplored by preachers and people. But the travelling preacher — after spending the best of his days, and wearing out the strength and vigor of his manhood in the service of the " Church," under the authority of the bishop, — for reasons satisfactory to himself, determines to " locate." 1. He may have felt the influence of some malignant star — he has not gained the favor of his Presiding Elders, and while he has labored hard and done well, he has been shuf- fled about from one side of the Conference to the other to fill " hard appointments" to make room for favorites. He has become disheartened, broken in spirit, and perhaps ren- dered measurebly useless from the treatment, and he re- solves to locate and spend the residue of his strength iu building up the cause in some destitute neighborhood ; or, 2. His family may have become large, and his wife sickly, and no longer able to break up and move every year or two and be jaded about from " pillar to post," from one side of the Conference to the other, without the shadow of a reason, and he is compelled to locate ; or, 3. He is imperatively required to be more at home, to assist in the proper government of his children ; or, 4. His own health has become too feeble to endure the hardships of itinerancy^ while, as pastor, he might be able to do good service for many years, and Providence seems to open a wide and effectual door of usefulness before him. Exercising the right of private judgment as to the field in which to labor, which is the inalienable right of every minister of Jesus Christ, he locates. Few can appreciate what the step costs him. The polity of Methodism seems to have been ar- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 227 ranged with a design to deter the settlement of its ministers, since it must be done at the sacrifice of everything connected with Methodism dear to a Methodist preacher's heart. 1. When riding his hard circuits in mountains and coves, through rain or snow, heat and cold, preaching, selling books and circulating his church papers, it was a consolation to him to know that he was securing for himself an interest in a fund from which he would be supported when he had worn himself out, and should he fall in the midst- of his years, his poor widow and orphaned children would be supported from the fruits of his labors. In locating, from whatever cause, he is cut off from all this, and cuts his wife and children off from any prospective benefit of the labors of a long life. He forfeits all his right and interest in the preacher's fund, which he has spent his best days to accumulate ! Is this equitable ? Who doubts that multitudes of Methodist preachers became such through the influence of this strong consolation held out to them by the elders % And who doubts that multitudes con- tinue their connection with the Methodist through the influ- ence of this fund for superannuated preachers, and the widows and children of preachers ? Understand me, I do not object to the Church of Christ providing for the old age of its ministers, or the widows and orphans of its ministers, as well as its own poor, /ar from it. It is its duty to do so, but I do regard it as unjust and cruel to subject its ministers to the forfeiture of all this, because they regard it their duty and for the glory of God, to labor altogether in one field! 2. But more, he is degraded at once in the eyes of the whole tr: veiling connection, in the eyes of his bishop, of the world, for they take care that it shall be so. He forfeits his membership in the preacher's church — the annual Confer- ence, and he is excluded from it, and refused in all time to come, if he remains a local preacher, all possible connection 228 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. with it. He can never again liave a seat in that body, par- ticipate in the counsels of his brethren, for the extension of the cause for which he has so long and Aiithfully labored and sacrificed the best of his days. 3. lie is degraded from the rank he held with them and liis name is erased as no longer worthy of appearing among those of the "travelling connection," and he falls one degree in rank and more than one in respect and influence. Indeed he must take the lowest place and be subjected not only to the rule of his equals, but his inferiors in every respect, age, learning, character and usefulness. 4. His name is carried down and put upon a class 2Mper^ and some smooth-chin and brainless boy of a class leader now has jurisdiction over the aged veteran in conjunction with some equally endowed circuit rider ! What a fall ' what a degradation ! How humiliating to a man possessed of self-respect ! 5. He is subjected to the most rigid and oppressive espion- age on the part of those whose love of rule is gratified in subjecting their former sovereign to their wills, if they have no old scores to settle with him. I said the law, touching local preachers, can be executed by class leaders and their preacher in charge, so as to be made insupportably oppressive. It requires that the names of all local preachers shall be enfolled in the journal of the quarterly Conference, and also on a class paper^ and they shall meet in class, if the distance of his residence is not too great, (and health, of course, will permit, but this is not mentioned,) and if he neglect he may he dep>rived of his min- isterial office ! Who is to report his absence from " class 1" The class leader, of course. Who is to judge if his health is sufficient to attend class? Who allowed to decide that his distance is not " too great^'' or the weathe^^ not too inclement, REPUBLICANISil BACKWARDS. 229 or his excuse insufficient ? The class leader and preacher in charge. They cannot exclude him without a hearing, but they can arraign him as often as they please before the quar- terly court — the majority of it being class leaders and preach- ers in charge, and he being nothing but a local minister^ and can be represented as troublesome^ disposed to exercise too much authority and influence, and greatly in the way — the class leaders and circuit riders can easily come to the con- clusion that upon the whole he had better be divested of his ministerial office. He can appeal to the annual Conference to be sure, but he knows that there is little favor shown a poor local preacher in that body, and if he has become obnoxious to his travelling preacher, and is considered in the way, he knows there is little chance for him and he yields to his fate, and falls like a noble eagle tormented, wearied, and pecked to death by a flock of tomtits, or as an elephant is said to be killed by a swarm of ants ! If he has rendered himself obnoxious to the presiding elder and preacher in charge, by any exhibition of restive- ness under their petty oppression, determines to consult his usefulness and happiness by simply removing to a distant neighborhood, he does it at the forfeiture of his ministerial office, for the law empowers the presiding elder or preacher in charge to give or withhold a certificate of his official stand- ing as they please, for if he removes without a certificate from one of these, " he shall not (?) be received as a local prea- cher in other places."* The heart of many a local preacher has been crushed under the cruel and irresponsible domina- tion of ill-disposed and arrogant class leaders ! Local preachers are generally a persecuted class. Their motives for locating are questioned. Their fidelity to * See Discipline p. 70. 280 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. "Methodism" is suspicioned. They are regarded as deser* ters from the ministerial ranks. Such a step is made a reproach by the " riding'' class, and by Methodist Editors. A local preacher thus expostulates with Mr. McFerrin, the editor of the Methodist Advocate in this city, who, living at home and on a fat salary^ can even write disrespectfully of local preachers, and seek to fix reproach upon them. We make an extract from the article as it will throw light upon feeling existing, as a necessary consequence, between local preachers and the ^^ pets'' ^ of the presiding elders: " You seemed at a loss to understand how we could recon- cile it to our consciences to leave the regular work to serve tables. If this does not make it a ' reproach,' at least, by implication, then we were mistaken as to the real force of your language. We are willing to admit that you did not design to make it a reproach, but we still think that the general tenor of your article warranted that conclusion. " 'As to Brother Hicks' remarks about the bish&p and his cabinet, fat appointments, &c., &c., &c., we jsretend not to know anything.' The language we have italicized in the preceding sentence, was remarkably well selected. From our personal knowledge of you, we are perfectly satisfied of your sincerity when you say, ' We never directly or indi- rectly sought for any special appointment ;' yet in reference to some you have known, it is indeed well to say, ' we pretend not to know anything.' Verily, it is best, in some cases, to be ignorant. " Some preachers, who, with a great deal of sanctimonious- ness, venture to say ' they are not afraid of hard appoint- ments' so manage it as to remain located for years near some comfortable farm, or important mercantile interest; and the truth is, there is no such thing as moving them. The bishop dare not do it. He is told plain ou*;, * Thus far REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 231 we will go, and n3 farther." While others are shuffled about from one side of the Conference to the other ; as it were, a matter of pastime. Have you never known a brother, who has done well on a circuit for one year, taken up and put down at the same distant point, simply to make room for some of the immovables ? "All this, to some extent, has perhaps, grown out of another evil, which seems to be prevalent in every Conference where we have been. We have reference to that system o^ favor- itism that ought not to exist among men professing godliness, some are petted^ and kept constantly under the wings of their presiding elders, while others, equally as deserving, are left to weather the winds and rains, as best they can. These things you may ' pretend not to know,' but mere lookers-on in Vienna have seen them. And we honestly believe they have done more toward breaking down our 'time-honored itinerancy,' than anything else." — Advocate of August 1853. If the preacher locates with a very extensive and power- ful influence, he becomes obnoxious at once, to the " preacher in charge." Suppose he is a far superior preacher, and the people for more desirous of hearing him, and his opinion far more influential in the town or community, the circuit rider is not long discovering it, nor long in putting on foot a course of treatment to remedy the (whim) evil. The class leader is enlisted and the discipline is put into rigid execu- tion against him. It is biniited about that he wont or dont observe the rules — very good but not pious — not much of a Methodist in his feelings, for he don't attend class. Every absence is noted, and they are frequent it may be, for not having been accustomed to " attend class," since it is not re- quired of the privileged orders^ Preachers, Presiding Elders^ or Bishops it comes rather hard to him — it is distasteful, tell- ing his experience over fifty -two times a year, and being 232 THE GREAT IIIOX WHEEL. asked as many times by a class leader in whom he may have no confidence. " Well, Brother W., how d' you feel," or, " well, do you love the cause brother A. ?" Bah ! Just as though there was any doubt of it ! Not only can he be watched for failing to attend class, the *' leader" and preacher being allowed to decide if he lives near enough and if his health is sufficient, if the weather is good enough and if his excuses are sufficient or insufficient, which gives them room to bring him to trial a dozen times a year, it may be, but more than this is allowed them ; the preacher may reprehend him on a ba^-e report that the local preacher has used improper words, and the preacher is the judge vvhat words are improper in a local preacher, or is he reported to be guilty of improjoer te?7ipers, and the preacher is the judge, or improper actions, and his reverence, the preach- er in charge, is the judge !* These reports may be utterly groundless — may have been put in circulation by the clabs leader as a part of the scheme to injure him, yet two or three trials for words, tempers, and actions, and as many- appeals taken to the higher courts, and that local preacher's influence and usefulness, however great they may have been, are at an end, though he may have been triumphantly acquit- ted. Such is the frailty of ministerial reputation. By treatment similar to this and the discipline allows it, and it seems for this very purpose, places the character, use- fulness and happiness of the local preacher in the hands of the class leader and preacher in charge, and he is shortly reduced to a cypher. We know of several local preachers and we have but written their history, and theirs is the history of scores and hundreds. Where is there a local preacher who ever left the circuit with a commanding charac- jL * See Discipline page 91. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 283 ter and controlling influence, who was ever able to keep it five years'? More, lives there a local preacher who enjoys to-day one-tenth the influence and reputation he did when a member of the Preacher's Church ? He is a degraded man. He is snubbed about and domineered over by beardless class-leaders and circuit-riders until he loses his self-respect. What chapters of the lives and wrongs of local preachers might be written ! The iron has pierced through the soul of hundreds, and they, who have been the faithful servants of their society through the vigor of youth and strength of manhood, are going down to their graves dishonored and oppressed by its unfeeling unkindness and tyranny. I dedicate this chapter, through you, to the thousands of local preachers in the South-west. A church polity which admits of the corruption of ministerial rank and such irre- sponsible oppression of the deserving, cannot be warranted by the Scriptures, but must be displeasing to the Saviour, who said, " So it shall not be among yow." LETTER XXI. The Roman Catholic features — the Doctrine of the Poiuer of the " Keys" held by the Methodist Clergy in common with the Pope — The Divine right to govern held by the Method- ists in common with the Pope and Priests of Rome — Methodist Ministers claim the power to admit into, and exclude from, their societies whomsoever they please, and the Discipline grants them the power. The Christian who enters one of Wesley's societies surrenders all his rights as a man and a Christian, and fearfully jeopardizes both his moral and Christian character. Dear Sir : — I have frequently declared that, according to my understanding of your Discipline, it virtually gave your ministers supreme power over the societies, empower- ing them certainly to receive into, and virtually to exclude from them, whomsoever they pleased. For this opinion 1 have been pronounced a falsifier of your polity, a mis- representer of your Discipline, and a slanderer of Method- ism. Now, sir, I have collected sufficient authority, I think, to clear myself of these charges, and I herewith submit it to your decision. If my proofs and authorities are insufficient to sustain me, I appeal to you, as a professed Christian teacher and father, to show me their inconclusiveness ; and which if you do, I promise to retract at once my expressed opinion- (234) KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 235 But if I sustain myself — if my opinion is correct, you need not take the trouble to write — your silence will be an all- sufficient consent. I will state my charges definitely. You hold and teach that the " keys of the kingdom of heaven," were committed alone into the hands of the Method- ist clergy, and so the Church of Rome teaches.* That thus empowered, your ministers can receive into, and exclude from the Church, whomsoever thei/ please, allowing the laity, by right, no voice in the matter whatever. If this be so, every one will admit it is conferring upon Methodist ministers the most dangerous powers. It makes each preacher the absolute Pope, during his short reign, over the societies in his circuit. He can open, and no man, not all the members of the society protesting, can shut — and he can shut the door, though against virtue, piety, and worth, and all the membership cannot open ! Is not such absolute priestly power as this repugnant to every Christian heart, as it is opposed to every teaching of the Saviour or apostles ? Ought it not to be as heartily abhorred, frowned upon, and repudiated by American citizens — republican democrats, as the same priestly features is in the Roman Catholic Church? Certainly, if true. But is it not true 1 I propose to prove it, 1. By the Discipline. 2. By an episcopal decision. 3. By the declarations of your most accredited writers. 1. The Discipline proceeds upon the ground that the su- preme governing power of the society is in the hands of the ministry. In the direction for the reception of members, it * And so the Presbyterians teach, that the keys were committed into the hands of the ruling elders, who can open and shut the Church at their pleasure. 236 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. gives n ) one but the preacher in charge any voice in the matter. It allows the applicant to be recommended to the preacher by the class-leader, but it does not say that the preacher shall receive him upon this recommendation. It provides for the examination of the applicant before the society, but it does not say that, if the examination is sat- isfactory to every member of the society, the minister shall receive him. Not a word of it. It is left with the preacher in charge to decide whether the applicant shall be received or not. If from another Church, his answers must be satisfactory to the preacher alone. I submit the whole chapter on the reception of members. " Of the Reception of Members into the Church. " Q. How shall we prevent improper persons from insin- uating themselves into the Church 1 "A. 1. Let none be admitted on trial, except they are well recommended by one you know, or until they have met twice or thrice in class. " 2. Read the rules to them the first time they meet. " 3. Let none be received into the Church until they are rec- ommended by a leader^ with ivhom they have met at least six months on trial^ and have been baptized ; and shall on exami- nation by the minister in charge before the Churchy give satis- factory assurances, both of the correctness of their faith, and their willingness to observe and keep the rules of the Church. Nevertheless, if a member in good standing in any other orthodox Church shall desire to unite with us, such applicant may, by giving satisfactory answers to the usual inquiries, be received at once into full fellowship." * No candid man will deny that this is a fair construction of the chapter, and even the uncandid must admit that this constructiov could be put upon it by the preacher. But I REPUBLICANISM BArKWARDS. 237 shall prove it by the decision of Bishop Capers, that the minister in charge has the right to say how the Discipline shall be construed. The Discipline plainly vests the power to receive members in the hands of the minister, consequently to shut the door against whom he will. It also virtually in- vests him with the power to exclude from the society an obnoxious member. I submit the whole statute touching the trial of accused members. Q. 2. How shall an accused member be brought to trial 1 A. 1. Before the society of which he is a member, or a select number of them, in the presence of a bishop, elder, deacon, or preacher, in the following manner : Let the accused and accuser be brought face to face ; but if this cannot be done, let the next best evidence be procured. If the accused person be found guilty by the decision of a majority of the members before whom he is brought to trial, and the crime be such as is expressly forbidden by the word of God, sufR- cientto exclude a person from the kingdom of grace and glory, let the minister or preacher who has the charge of the circuit expel him. If the accused person evade a trial by absenting himself, after sufficient notice given him, and the circumstances of the accusation be strong and presumptive, let him be esteemed as guilty, and be accordingly excluded. Witnesses from without shall not be rejected. 2. But in case of neglect of duties of any kind, imprudent conduct, indulging sinful tempers, or words, or disobedience to the order and discipline of the Church, first let private re- proof be given by a preacher or leader ; and if there be an acknowledgment of the fault, and proper humiliation, the person may be borne with. On a second offence, the preacher or leadei may take one or two fliithful friends. On the third offence, let the case be brought before the society, or a select 238 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. number, and il 'here be no sign of real humiliation, the offender must be cut off. 3. If a member of our Church shall be clearly convicted of endeavoring to sow dissension in any of our societies, by inveighing against either our doctrines or discipline, such per- sons so offending shall be first reproved by the senior minis- ter or preacher of his circuit, and if he persist in such per- nicious practices, he shall be expelled from the Church. 4. Nevertheless, if in any of the above-mentioned cases the minister or preacher differ in judgment from a majority of the society, or the select number, concerning the innocence or guilt of the accused person, the trial, in such case, may be referred by the minister or preacher to the ensuing quarterly meeting Conference. 5. If there be a murmur or complaint from any excluded person, in any of the above-mentioned instances, that justice has not been done, he shall be allowed an appeal to the next quarterly meeting Conference ; except such as absent them- selves from trial, after sufficient notice is given them ; and the majority of the travelling and local preachers, exhorters, stew- ards, and leaders present, shall finally determine the case. Under the above statute I claim that any member, how- ever innocent he may be of any immorality, or however pious and conscientious, should he be obnoxious to the preacher, can be excluded by the unreasonable and dan- gerous powers committed to him. Suppose A. is the obnoxious member. The minister can bring him to trial upon the plea that he has neglected some duty enjoined hy the Discipline — he may have conscientious objections to attending band or class-meetings — he may ar- raign him for conduct he considers improper — the preacher may fret the member, aye, insult him, until he looses the command of his temper, and thus cause him to use improper REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 289 words, and then he can indict him for " indulging a sinful temper or words." The member may conscientiously object to some of the features in the Discipline — say the abolition feature of the notorious 9th section, or against band or class-meetings, or against the close communion feature (see page 96) ; or he may refuse to have his children sprinkled, because his preacher can show him no authority in God's Word (yet the Discipline requires it) ; or he may object to giving the Supper to impenitent unbaptized persons, as Methodists do ; or he may regard the practice and doctrine of denying baptism to a young convert for six months as unwarranted, or the seekership feature of the society as pernicious, or he cannot conscientiously teach and propagate the doctrine of " falling from grace," i. e., the possibility of the ultimate apostacy and damnation of a genuine child of God — a doc- trine subversive of the whole economy of redemption through Christ, dishonoring to Christ, and pernicious, and that con- tinually ; we say the preacher can arraign him upon some count, for we do not believe that there is one intelligent Christian man in the Methodist societies who can endorse, teach, and applaud eVery feature of the Discipline. We never conversed with a Methodist ten minutes concerning it, who did not repudiate many of its features. Well, A. is brought to trial. Now, every lawyer, and every one who has suffered in law, will tell ycu that the ver- dict depends on the jury. The lawyer will tell you, " Let me pick my own jury, and I will condemn or acquit any man." Well, the Discipline provides that the accused shall be tried either before the society, or a select number ; but who is to decide whether he shall be brought before the society or the select number ? The prosecutor. If he decides that he shall be tried before a " select" jury, who has the power to select 240 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. the jury^ or to decide of how many it shall consist 1 The prosecuting preacher. Can he not select his own tools and dependants, the class-leaders, to do his work ? Certainly. Cannot the preacher employ what witnesses he pleases 1 Does the Discipline allow the accused the right to object to, or disqualify, any witness or juror ? It does not. It is with the preacher to say who shall testify and who sit upon the jury. Both witnesses and the jury may be the defendant's most implacable enemies ! But may the preacher remain with his jury while they make up their judgment 1 The Dis- cipline is silent ; he doubtless will feel that it is his duty to do so — since it is his prerogative alone to construe the law, the select number might not know on what law or evidence to render judgment. When the judgment is rendered, who is to award the punishment 1 The preacher ! Comment is unnecessary ! Who would give a sixpence for his character or life if the civil law allowed his enemy, clothed with such iniquitous powers to prosecute him ? It is urged that the condemned can appeal to the quarterly court. Certainly he may. But of whom is thai court com- posed ? Of preachers, of class-leaders, stewards, and ex- horters ! It would be natural for preachers to aid each other in ridding their societies of members obnoxious to them — members who are obstacles to their tyranny; and cer- tainly the class-leaders would not willingly offend their mas- ters, and thus lose their favor and offices at the same time ! The preachers having things their own way in the quarterly Conferences, a poor layman would stand no chance for jus- tice, if the preacher had decreed his ruin. It is urged that the preacher in charge is not authorized to construe the language of the Discipline, so as to decree how and by whom the accused shall be tried 1 I submit an episcopal decision. The following interrogatory REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS 241 was proposed to Bishop Capers during the last Conference, held in Trenton, Tennessee. " Has the preacher in charge a^ right to say how the Discipline should be construed f Bishop Capers. — " He has the right." Every man at all acquainted with common law will say that this decision virtually makes each preacher in charge a supreme and absolute ruler, aye, despot if you please. Who now will, can deny that the preacher in charge is the pope of the societies he oversees ? And what freeborn democrat- ic republican ; what Christian man, whom Christ has made free^ free from petty priestcraft and ecclesiastical despotism ; what man who respects his inalienable rights or prizes his Christian or moral character, would trust himself and his character in such a government "? Two or three enemies and one circuit-rider, could effect his degradation and ruin at their sovereign pleasure. Think of it, reflect candidly upon it. Having producd the Discipline and an episcopal decision to sustain me, I now submit the authority of your learned doc- tors of Methodism, your editors and accredited writers. Dr. Hodgson, in his letter to the Philadelphia Christian Advocate^ says : " Our Lord Jesus Christ, who is the ' Head over all things to the Church,' conferred upon his apostles, in the words following, the authority not only to teach, but also to rule ;" "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of hea- ven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." Matt. xvi. 19; xviii. 16. He also contends for the possession of this same power in the clergy of the present day. ^ What more does the Popish clergy contend for, to sup- port their lofty and Antichristian pretensions to rule the IV- 242 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Church of God ? Is not this passage the very one they rely upon ? Do they not put the very same construction ipon it? If Methodists are right, the Catholics are equally so. If the Rovnish clergy impose upon the laity and subjugate them to their authority by the false construction of this passage, so do the Methodist clergy also. Catholics passively allow their clergy to exercise supreme rule over the Church, so do the members of Methodist societies! If imposition is practised in the one case, it is equally so in the other. But again Dr. H. says : " Thus we have been able to trace the supreme governing power of the Church from Christ to the apostles, from the apostles to the bishops, presbyters or elders, but no further. All attempts to prove that it belongs, in whole or in part to the laity, utterly fail." Is not this conclusive ? Will not this satisfy you and all Methodists, that I have not misrepresented their polity, when I have declared that you and your clergy claim to exercise, and do exercise, the supreme governing power of the Church, the laity having no part or lot in the matter, any more than the blind, priest-ridden Catholic'? What greater power, Mr. Soule, dcjes, or can, the Pope of Rome exercise than the supreme power. He claims that the supreme power to rule the Church was committed to Pope Peter, and through him to Pope Pio Nono, while you claim that it was committed to Bishop Peter, who was also an elder, and through a succession of bishops and elders, to you and your elders. What more have you to claim but that those to whom you and your ministers refuse to open the door of the Church, and those against whom you close it, are shut out of heaven, *to invest your Church with all the powers and terrors of the Church of Rome, and you and your brother bishops and ministers, with all the impious REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 248 prerogatives of the man of sin and son of perdi- tion 1 ! ! In the name of an offended God and insulted Saviour — by- all the terrors of the doom of Antichrist and false teachers, I beg, I entreat of you, in all affection and earnestness, think upon these things. Are you not opposing a rival, a human society to the kingdom of Christ ? And are you not perverting his laws and the teachings of his word to deceive and mislead into it the unreflecting multitude, who suppose any organ- ization called a Church is as legitimate and scriptural as any other 1 But I have still other proof, and of the highest possible authority. It is that of the editor of the great central organ of Methodism, The Christian Advocate and Journal, of New -York city. The editor says : " Now, whatever others may think, the Methodists have always professed to believe that the Head of the Church still gives us pastors and teachers. Some pretenders have deceived us, we admit, and we have reason to believe that the primitive churches were not exempted from this misfor- tune. But still, we have much cause of thankfulness to God, in the bestowment of so many pastors and teachers whose faithfulness, gifts and success, assure us of their divine call to the ministry. To these wb accord the scriptural authority of admitting to the ordinances of the Lord'^s house such as believe through their word. " We know nothing of the right of the society to admit members into church fellowship ; and the Methodist preacher who concedes this right, betrays his trust, and should be held amenable for his delinquency to his brethren. We know not if this has ever happened ; but Mr. Lee speaks of the con- trary doctrine as a matter which is not questionable ; and hence we have inferred that he, at least, practised upon this 244 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. opinion when he was a travelling preacher; and, as ht, has done so with impunity, if he has done so at all, we have been led to fear that some portions of the Church may be gradu- ally sliding into a compromise, which would so alter the relation between pastor and people as to subvert our whole economy. " It will not be understood thai we object to the pastor's consulting with the society, or such of the members as he may deem best qualified to advise him, or give him inform.a- tion with regard to the probable sincerity of the applicant for membership. On the contrary, the pastor is bound to do this; but it must never be put to vote, either in the society or elsewhere. Having made the proper mquiries, and being satisfied of the desire of the candidate ' to flee the wrath to come, and save his soul,' he must admit him on probation ; and at the expiration of the probationary term, if he have a good report from the leader, and if it shall appear that he has continued to ' evidence his desire of salva- tion' by a conformity to the requirements in our ' general rules,' the pastor must admit him to full membership, what ever objections may be made to it by the fastidious or cen- sorious. " But whatever controversy may exist on this question elsewhere, or however it may have been settled among other denominations, it is certain that ' ike right of the society to admit and expel church members' is not Wesleyan nor Epis- copalian Church Methodism. ' We have no such practice, neither any of the churches,' acting under our Discipline. " The admission and expulsion of church members by a vote of the Society, is as absurd in theory as it would be ruinous in practice." In view ^f the above proofs I submit the question to you and to tht most prejudiced members of your societies, have REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 245 I misrepresented your polity ? Do not your minlsteis claim to possess the " keys of the kingdom of heaven" that were committed to Peter ? And is not this key power a danger- ous prerogative to assume and to use ? Let the convert, about joining one of your societies, remember, that he enters a society in which he must surrender every natural and religious right, place his char- acter and temporal salvation in the hands of irresponsible preachers, who will allow him no voice in administering the government of the society, no voice in deciding who shall be introduced into the fellowship of the society ; that he subjects himself to the liability to be tried at any time for the most trifling offence, aye, excluded from the society and Church (of Christ, if Methodist societies be churches of Christ), and his Christian and moral character tarnished for ever, and that, too, for violating no precept of Ood'a Word, but simply one of the unscriptural traditions of the elders of the Methodist Episcopal Church i Excluded from the Church, not for hav- ing violated the New Testament of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, but the ever-changing testament of his lords and masters, the bishops and travelling preachers ! And let such a man remember, also, when he is upon his trial for some real or alleged violation of the Discipline, he is not allowed to challenge the jury that is packed against him, or disqualify a witness, even though he be an enemy that may have been summoned to testify against him, but must submit to be led as a sheep to the slaiLghter, dumb as a lamb before its shearers. Were the annals of their trials but published, what gross injustice, what cruel wrongs, what wanton and irremediable injuries would be brought to light ! How many inno- cent and devoted Christians have been sacrificed to the envy or revenge of those appointed by the Gentiles to rule 246 REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. over him ! I appeal to you in the behalf of the inalienable rights of the 500,000 of your members, that you repeal this inquisitorial feature from the statute-be ok of your societies. LETTER XXII. The principle of the " Kep Poioer^* still further examined — It involves the Romish J^ogma of Apostolical Succession and Infallibility — All Protestant Church Polities are adminis- tered in accordance with this Doctrine — Protestants cannot successfully combat the Papacy. Dear Sir : — It must be evident that the authority to deny the hiity all participation in the government of the Church, and the doctrine of apostolic succession and Church or clerical infallibility (the Methodist clergy are the Church, since in their hands are concentrated the supreme legislative, judicial and executive powers), rest upon the same ground, and^ therefore, you can as reasonably assert the claim of infallibility as the "power of the keys," i. e., the supreme governing power. The Catholic apostacy rests her infallibility upon the ground you rest your " key power," and indeed she is consistent, for to assert the " power without assuming infallibility in its use, is absurd and preposterous." Mark the reasoning of Rome : " In constituting the Christian Church, Christ directly com- missioned a body, or corporation of ministers, or clergymen, to whom he gave authority to expound the doctrines of Christ- ianity to the laity, to administer to them certain ordinances or sacraments, and also to ordain and consecrate other minis- ters ov clergy to the exercise of these divinely-appointed func- (247) 248 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. tions, and he promised, in the power of his Spirit, to be with this organization of his Church until the ending of the world." According to this theory, the Catholiclaity, in perfect con- sistency with its principles, renounce all right to the exercise of any individual or private judgment respecting the doctrines of Christianity, as expounded to them by their clergy, re- specting the signification or interpretation of the Scripture writings, and they repose, with unshaken confidence, on the bosom of their Church (or clergy), M'hich must be infallible. Christ has promised to be with her (or them) always, even to the ending of the world. Is not this substantially the same doctrine for which Drs. Peck and Hodgson contend ? for whose language I refer you to my last letter. Does not Dr. H. agree with the Catholics, that Christ gave to his ministers, as a body, the keys, and thus divinely authorized them to authoritatively teach and govern his Church, promising to ratify their acts, and be with them to the. end? Is not this the ground of the reason why Dr. H. so vehemently asserts "all attempts to prove that the power to govern the Church, in whole or in part, belongs to the laity, fail utterly ?— P. Ch. Ad. " With us (Methodists) churches have no more right to elect their pastors than pastors their churches." " The right never existed."— CA. FoL, p. 127. But only look the logical consequences of this prin- ciple in the face. Let the Catholic draw the conclusion for you. If Christ gave the ministers of the gospel an exclusive authority, in virtue of their divine commission, to preach the gospel (i. e. declare and expound what Christianity is and requires), these ministers alone are authorized to say what faith or practice is required from the laitv. It is utterly contradictory to the theory of a divinely- commissioned clergy, that the laity should exercise any pri- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 249 vate judgment whatever on any Christian doctrine, institu- tion, or practice ; for, to what end or purpose should the ministers of the gospel be commissioned by divine authority to preach [i.e.^ expound all Christian truths), if any layman has the right also to exercise his private judgment on such sub- jects, and to either approve or reject the expositions of those who have been divinely commissioned by Christ to expound the principles of Christian truth, he also being with them in the presence of his Spirit, until the ending of the present world. This key power assumption places you side by side with the Catholics, involving you deeply as them in the dogmas of apostolic succession and infallibility also : for, if you w\i\ admit that Christ gave a divine commission to his ministry, as a body, by which they have an exclusive right, ex-officio, to teach and to rule {i. e., to enact, construe, and execute the laws, and decide what faith the Church shall hold), he pro- mising ever to be with them, and to ratify their acts, then vou will also admit that he is so with them some way, as to guard them against the enactment of wrong laws, rules, and directions, and erroneous decisions and doctrines. Do not the laity of your society, as do those of all others governed by a body of men as the clergy alone, or the clergy and a bench of ruling elders, virtually concede the claim, that their clergy or rulers,^\1len in conference or session assembled, are infallible, and, therefore, surrender all right to have a voice in determining the doctrines they are to believe, or the laws to obey and regulations to observe, or whom they should fellowship as fellow-members 1 Do they not implicitly leave all these, so vitally important, matters, as they do all things else, to the arbitrary decision of the clergy, their rulers, and thus repose as confidently upon the bosom of their ministers as though they believed them as infallible as the poor, deluded Catholic does his priests ? If you do 11* 250 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. not Claim to be infallible, why do you presume to exclude a member from your societies and one whose piety ybu will attest by a written certificate, smiply because he has not im- plicitly obeyed a law you have, in the exercise of your authority, imposed upon him, or been able to believe a doctrine you have prescribed for his creed ? You are between the horns of a dilemma. You must openly assert with Rome, infallibility, as a necessary accom- paniment of the power of the keys, or surrender the keys, or what is left of them, to the laity. For it is apparent, if you have no peculiar grace above the laity, to secure you from error in determining doctrine and law, and enable you to administer the discipline of the Church, then, in the name of right reason, and man's natural rights, come down and allow the people to govern themselves in Church relation, by the directions of their own proper Master, King, and Lawgiver, Jesus Christ. But again, just so long as you admit Dr. Hodgson's construction of Matt, xviii., so long will you yield the whole controversy upon these topics in favor of the Papists, and, indeed, upon all the issues between you. Grant your doc- trine of the key power, and you must concede the succession, and then you are forced to admit that the Romish apostacy is the only true Church of Christ, since it is the only reli- gious (?) body that has held to these dogmas for 1000 years ; and then you can and must grant that all her traditions, as sprinkling, pouring, and infant baptism, and images, and cross- ings, and penance, and baptismal regeneration, are as proper and binding as any thing in Holy Scripture, for they are all the enactments of an infallible Church ! Why should Protestants adopt and practice some and not all of them 1 How can Methodists successfully controvert the pretensions and resist the encroachments of the papacy with such a mill- EEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 251 stone around their necks 1 They cannot, as we shall soon see, without being entangled in their words, and thrown into a maze of absurdities and contradictions. You cannot assert the right of every individual to exercise private judgment in all religious matters even, without virtually and explicitly denying the positions of these gi^ave Methodist doctors, that Christ divinely commissioned a body of ministers and their successors in office, regularly coming in of course, to rule supremely and preach exclusively. You are again forced to an alternative, to deny the divine right of your clergy to rule — surrender the keys, or deny the laity the exercise of private judgment in matters of religion, as the Pope does. You practically decide to act with him. Do you allow the laity the right to judge in matters of doctrine 1 Did you ever allow them the liberty to decide what should be the articles of their creed 1 Who determines the creed — the doctrines Methodists are to believe ? Their ministers — and they can change them when they see fit. The power and right to create implies the power to destroy. Did not the last Conference, South, strike out the whole ninth section ? Yesterday a pious Methodist could have been cast out of Methodism as a vile sinnner, for violating that section, but to-day the act of yesterday is not the least sinful or immoral. Who are so potential as to make the damning sin of to-day the virtue of to-morrow but the infallible rulers of Meth- odism. It is proper and praiseworthy, accoirding to the Discipline, for a Methodist to immerse to-day, but after next Confer- ence, it may be a sufficient ground for expulsion in disgrace from the society. Do you allow your members the right of private judgment and the free expression of it, in matters you have laid down in the Discipline — rules and regulations purely of your own invention and enactment 1 By no means — 252 THE G]iP:AT IRON WHEEL. a member could not commit a more mortal sin thjrfi to inveigh against, or even express his opinion unfavorable to the requirements of the Preacher's Testament — the Disci- pline ; it commands that such an ofTender shall be excluded, though an eminently pious person. No more do yon allow them the exercise of their judgments in the discipline — in the reception and exclusion of members. Not the shadow of any thing that resembles the exercise of private judgment do you allow the laity. I ask you — and through you I ask every Methodist who dares to think — "Do the Romish clergy deny their subjects more than the Methodist clergy deny theirs 1 I have discussed this subject at this length, to make clear the operating cause that is leading so many Methodists and Episcopalians back into the bosom of the mother Church. Says a learned reviewer of Dr. McCulloh's work on the credibility of the Scriptures : " But whatever may be the defects or merits of Dr. Mc- Culloh's work, I apprehend I have sufficiently shown by my preceding remarks, that if Protestants will affirm that ministers of the gospel have a divine commission to exer- cise ecclesiastical functions, it will be impossible for any Protestant who reasons consistently on such a premise to avoid joining himself to the Catholic Church. We have had, during the past ten or fifteen years, abund- ant proof of the correctness of this inference in the history of the Church of England. During this period of time, nearly two hundred clergymen of that denomination have abandoned their living, renounced their friends, and every prospect of temporal benefit as ministers of the national Church, and have joined themselves to the Catholic Church as mere priests in the humblest position and capacity. It would be impossible to impeach their disinterestedness or REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 253 integrity in the case, for the Catholic Church either has no rewards to offer them, or at least, has never yet given them any thing equivalent to the temporary advantages they had renounced. The only explanation, therefore, that can be made concerning these remarkable conversions is, that the Protestant theory on the subject of the organization and constitution of the Church of Christ, if consistently carried out, leaves the religious and conscientious Protestant no alternative." Protestants may never hope to prevail in the coming con- flict with the Papacy in this country, until they renounce the " power of the keys" — the unscriptural doctrine of the di- vine right of the clergy and elders to rule the Church — ay, more, until they repudiate the multitude of Romish traditions they now sanction and enjoin, and take the Bible, and the Bible alone, for their rule of faith and practice. Baptists have this battle to fight alone and unaided, and even to defend themselves against the various Protestant sects in the fight. It is a question of tremendous im- port. Are PfiOTESTANT SECTS PREPARED SUCCESSFULLY TO WITH- STAND THE INFLUENCE AND POWER OF POPERY, THAT DARKENS OUR LAND, AND BOLDLY THREATENS THE ABOLITION OF OUR IN- STITUTIONS, AND THE ULTIMATE SUBVERSION OF BOTH OUR FREE GOVERNMENT AND OUR RELIGION ? We think not, for Protestants are not a unit^ — they are violently antagonistic — they hate each other with a cruel hatred, scarcely less than they differ from and hate Baptists. Episcopalians are opposed by Presbyterians and Methodists; while Episcopalians and Presbyterians unite in making war upon Methodists. Old and New School Presbyterians and Congregationalists are each seeking the overthrow and an- nihilation of the other, and still, like Pilate and Herod, they 254: THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. will all unite in a league of amity and friendship to oppose the influence of Baptists, either in seeking the salvation of sinners, or the dissemination of their principles. Talk about all these uniting in open communion at the Lord's table, in token of Church and Christian fellowship ! What iminous hypocrisy^ what a solemn mockery — a bias- phemous farce to thus prostitute the holy emblems to the propagation of a fahehood ! We say Protestants are en-* gaged in a fierce and deadly conflict among themselves, to annihilate each other ; how then can they unite against Po- pery ] But could they unite, wherein can they judge the Catholics without condemning also themselves ] What principle of papacy, save that of idolatry, can they attack without their blows recoiling most fearfully upon their own systems and practices 1 1. Will they deny that the Roman Catholic Churcli is a Scriptural Church, and denounce her as the " Mystery of In- iquity,'' the " Woman dressed in scarlet, the Mother of Har- lots and abominations of the earth ?" Cannot Rome justly say, Spare me, my dear children^ and honor your mother if you would be respected. Do you not all call yourselves Protestants and reformed '\ You then ad- mit yourselves once to have been a part of myself and to have proceeded forth from me. Do you not to-day call yourselves " branches of the Church 1" Of what Church are you branches, but of the Holy Roman Catholic, in which you all acknowledge you originated, and from which, as a branch from a parent trunk, you confessedly proceed ? If I, the Catholic Church, am the mother of " harlots^'' and ^' abominations'^ of the earth, you are all mj children, and consequently are those harlots and abominations ! You do not well, my daughters, thus to cast reproach upon REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 255 your parentage. I commend to you the example and filialness of your sister, my favorite child, the Episcopal Church, which, like a prodigal, is returning to her mother's house. Could not Rome thus cause the well-aimed blow to recoil upon her Protestant childrei:^* for they are her legitimate offspring, and if she is the mother of abominations and har- lots, Protestants are they. If the fountain is corrupt, all the waters that flow from it are also corrupt. If the Church of Rome is an illegitimate church, they are illegitimate churches also. " Either make the tree good, and its fruit good, or else make the tree corrupt and its fruit corrupt" (Matt, xii., 23), is a principle established by the Great Teacher. 2. Will they deny her the age she claims — that she was founded by Peter, and once presided over by him '? They must do this, else Rome stands forth a Christian and apostolic church, and besides her there is none other. But they deny her claims and charge her with being, from the days of Paul, that spirit of Antichrist that worked in the early churches, corrupting Christianity ; that it was early repudiated by all the pure churches ; that popery had no ex- istence in its present form until established by Hilderbrand, A.D., GOG; that no church similar to the Roman Catholic was instituted by Christ or his apostles, or existed within GOO years of their day, and moreover, all the teachings of the Scriptures positively forbid the ilea of such a monstrous system. Cannot Rome reply, "My dear children do you not see that you commit suicide by taking such a position to discre- dit my claims ! You cannot, with the least regard to reason, * Baptists are not Protestants, having never belonged to the Catho- lic Church, more than to-day. " Baptists," said Sir Isaac Newton, *' are the only people thatueyer symbolized with popery." 256 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. believe that such systems as yours existed in the days of the apostles, surely, each radically differing from, and destruc- tive of the other ! Did Paul found an Episcopal Church at Antioch, a Preabyterian Church at Ephesus, and a Methodist one at Philippi ? Certainly not. All the churches that were founded in the apostles' times were one and identical in doc- trine^ in organization, ordinances and practices. But you dc not even claim that you existed in the days of the apostles, or were founded by them. I know the parentage of each of you, and beheld you when you were born. You, my most dutiful Church of England, are the offspring of my wayward and licentious boy, Henry VIII., who was led astray by the love of the beautiful Ann Boleyn, A. D. 1534. " You, my Lutheran daughter, by the bold and impetuous Martin Luther, A. D. 1525. " You, my Presbyterian daughter, by the stern and austere Calvin, A. D. 1541 ; while I acknowledge you, dear Metho- dists, being all the children of Wesley, by the Church of England, (A. D. 1784,) as my legitimate and worthy grand- children^ and though quite too noisy and fanatical, yet I can- not but be quite partial to you, since, next to your mother, the Church of England, you possess nearly all my features ; indeed, the likeness is strikinor and remarkable !" 3. Will Protestants charge the Church of Rome with being " mystical Babylon" and that " scarlet woman," drunken with the blood of the saints ? May not Rome reply, If I ani Babylon, because I have persecuted and shed the blood of the heretical Anabaptists, then do you also belong to Babylon^ for which one of you all have not imbued your hands in their blocd? Your own garments are scarlet and blood-dyed, as well as my own ! It REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 257 becomes us to keep these family matters among oui selves, and not charge each other before our enemies.* 4. Will Protestants denounce Rome for the iniquitous and blasphemous assumptions of her clergy of the" divine right" to legislate for the Church of Christ, to make, change, or abolish, rites and ceremonies, &;c. ? Do not Protestants claim the same Antichristian POWER 1 See Meth. Discipline, p. 20. " Every particular church may ordain^ change^ or abolish^ rites and ceremonies, so that all things be done to edification" — of whom 1 The rulers are the judges, of course ; they, then, claim to ordain or Institute, change and abolish, until they are themselves perfectly suited, pleased and satisfied ! Is not this claiming Antichristian powers 1 Does the Pope claim more power 1 Calvin says, " From the beginning, the church has freely allowed herseK, excepting the substance, to have rites a little dissimilar^ for some immerse thrice and others only once ;'''' and he therefore abolished immersion altogether, as incon- venient, and ordained sprinkling in the room of Christ's ap- pointment. He had as good a right to have forbidden bap" tism entirely, as to change its action in the least. He did abolish Christian baptism and substituted clerical baptism instead of it. » 5. Will Protestants protest against the unscriptural orders of the Catholic clergy, since Christ made all his ministers equal, and only one order 1 But the advocates of Episco- pacy, whether Protestant or Methodist, have their three or- ders at least, and their inferior and superior ministers. 6. WiTi they protest against the irreligious practice of the % * Read Rev. xviiL, 24. " The blood of all the saints is to be found in Babylon." If Protestant sects have shed the blood of saints, are they not a part of mystical Babylon ? 258 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. inferior Catholic clergy of being solemnly sworn to obey rev- erently in all things the superior clergy 1 The Methodist and Episcopal inferior clergy are compelled lo do the same thing ! See office for ordination of deacons and elders. 7. Will they charge the Catholics with blasphemy for giving the titles that belong to God to the pontiff', and car- dinals and bishops ] Are not Episcopalians and Methodists guilty of the same sin? See the title given to the late Bishop Hedding, in the Methodist preacher.* "The Right Reverend Father in God !" This smacks of my Lord God the Pope. See titles of the Episcopal clergy. 8. "Will they object to the Pope because he claims the power of the keys ? The Protestant clergy claim each the same power ! Methodist bishops and elders claim it, and Presbyterian ministers and their elders ! 9. Will Protestant sects attack the Catholics because they claim that the supreme visible headship is vested in the Pope of Rome, since the visible Church has no earthly head ? But they have each a head ! Queen Victoria and her parliament is the Head of the Church of England, as Pio Nono and his bench of cardinals is of the Catholic. The bishops and Gen- eral Conference is the head of the Methodist society, and the General Assembly of Presbyterianism, all legislative bodies. I should prefer one great grand head to so many little heads! 10. Will Protestants object to popery on the ground of her traditions? They hold, teach, and practise her most pernicious one — that has done Christianity more injury than all the other traditions of popery together ! Infant baptism is a tradition of " the Church" as well as sprinkling and pouring upon for baptism, and Catholics have never failed to cast it into the teeth of Protestants, that while they protest * Introduction, p. 6. RE^UBLICAXIS.^[ BACKWARDS. 259 against the authority of the Romish Church, they practise oue of her principal traditions. What says Dr. Pise (a priest of the Romish Church, and of high standing among that order in New York, second, perhaps, to none but Bishop Hughes), in a lecture recently delivered in New York : " There are many things believed by all Christians at the present day, not to be found in the Scriptures. This is true with regard to infant baptism, that we and all Christians j pedobaptist] believe in, for there is no authority for it in Scripture. We nowhere find that the apostles baptized infants, and if it be proper and necessary to baptize infants as well as adults, we have no other author- ity and MUST depend entirely on tradition" — of the Church of Rome, of course. 11. Will they denounce popery for its opposition to the circulation of the /?M/*e word of God, so that every man may have eueri/ word of the '• Word of Life" faithfully translated into his own language ? Protestants, as sects, are bitterly- opposed to the purest possible version in all languages and tongues, and indeed, to-day are giving apwre version to no na- tion of earth ! Did they not refuse to circulate the version made by Dr. Judson, because it translated every word % So of other versions. 12. Is NOT Popery an absolute and tyrannical hierar- chy, oppressive to humanity, hostile to its best interests, and in its influence opposed to, and destructive of all free insti- tutions, as of civil and religious liberty 1 We have seen that the leading Protestant sects are hierarchies or despotic aristocracies also. It is a fixed fact, and easy of clearest de- monstration, that hierarchical and aristocratical church orga- nizations are hostile, in their influence, to republican institu- tions, that they insensibly prepare the rising generation to favor, if not to seek, a civil government of the same charac- 260 THE GREAT IKON" WIIKEL. ter. It is aJinittcd tliat nuihlng is more dangerous than a religious hierarchy or monarchy in a Republic. Is the Ro- man hierarchy dangerous, and are the Protestant hierarchies less so'? It is the principle, not the name, for a hierarchy is subversive of religious freedom in whose hands soever it may be. The time is not far distant when Protestant hie- rarchies will be repudiated by all Christians, as the papal is to-day. 13. Will Protestants charge upon the Catholics that they re- cognize and support the adulterousunionof Church and State, telling them that the Church of Christ " is not of this world 1" Rome could reply : — You, my daughters, have committed Jiarlotry and made yourselves the '* abominations of the earth" by the same act. Where have you had the power, and have not united the State to your churches ? Have not Episcopalians done so in England, and all her colonies, and did they not retain the union in America so long as possible? Have not the Presbyterians in Scotland, and in all the con- tinental kingdoms of Europe, as well as Lutherans, and did they not do the same thing in the American colonies 1 I could continue this table of identity of principles to double the number, did time allow ; but these are sufficient for my purpose, to show that the reformation must be radically re- formed, and Protestantism itself protested against, before it can successfully grapple with the papacy, or deserve to re- ceive the countenance of republican-loving, American Chris- tians. A democratic religion alone can become the religion of America, unless we, as a nation, are given up of God, and the existing republican element is to be overpowered by the tremendous counteracting effect of the huge overshadowing Papal and Protestant hierarchies, planted everywhere throughout the whole land, exertipg, as such ever do, the greatest power where religion is most corrupted. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 261 We a-so see the unfortunate antagonism with all the Pro- testant sects, into which we, as Baptists, are brought when- ever we attack the principles of Papacy ! Our blows break theii force upon Protestants ; and Catholic priests smile in security behind them, as behind a bulwark. We can only reach Romanists through Protestants, for they are entrench- ed behind them. Their priests the more securely keep them in darkness by directing their attention to the fact that Pro- testants hold and practise their traditions, and defend nearly all their important principles / It requires great moral cour- age and Christian heroism in Baptists to attack these prin- ciples, since they know they will be precipitated into a fierce conflict with all Protestant sects, and expose themselves to their displeasure, hatred, and often their bitter persecu- tions. This ought not so to be. We cannot believe that the Saviour ever intended his followers to be thus divided and conflicting. We believe there are many precious Christ- ians in the Pedobaptist sects, though in great error. We have no bitterness, nothing but love in our heart towards them, and this leads us to pray for them, and endeavor to convince them of their error ; to leave men and follow Christ. They should unite with us against the inrolling flood of Catholi- cism, if they love their country or the religion of Christ. And they cannot do this so long as they hold the distinctive principles of the papacy in common with Papists. We be- seech them, for the sake of their land and religion, to repu- diate these and unite with us upon the word of God, and let the Bible, and the Bible alone, be our religion. Let our prin- ciples be blazoned upon our banner. A PURE Bible only, our Prayer-Book, Confession, and Discipline. No regeneration but by the Holy Spirit and the Word OF God. 262 THE GREAT IRON- WHEEL. No SALVAT/ON BUT BY GRACE. OBSERVING ALL THINGS AND THOSE ONLY, WHICH ChRIST COMMANDED, AND AS HE COM- MANDED. 1 protest, I have not noticed the papal features of Protest- antism but with the kindest feelings and the purest motives. These are the weak points of Protestantism. It is behind the age as well as unsupported by the Bible. The reformation needs another Luther. Were he once more to direct it, we have reason to believe that, with the light of this age, he would reform it of every feature of Romanism ; he would effect the reformation he so ardently desired in his day, re- store to it the primitive immersion of believers, and repub- licanize its government. Protestantism is chilled in the shadow of the 16th century. It has made no advancement. It is still either afraid to trust the people with self-govern- ment, or its clergy have become too corrupt to yield up the reigns and sceptre of ecclesiastical domination. The 19th century has demonstrated the truth of God's word, that man is capable of, and created for, self-government, and that it is the only form of government that will secure for humanity, individually or nationally, in Church or State, the proper in- centive to progress, the largest freedom, and the greatest happiness. Let Protestantism, then, bow to this flict, and grant to its membership the inalienable right which the Cre- ator and Redeemer of man vouchsafed him, and which the Papal and Protestant clergy have so long and so iniquitously usurped and withheld. The principle of hierarchism, in Papism or Protestantism, while it is opposed to republicanism, offers the greatest dis- couragement to original thought, free and unprejudiced in- vestigation, unbiased and unrestrained action. It is also, like Papism, opposed to the Bible, and a pure Bible alone, being the only and all-sufficient rule of faith and practice, for RErUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 263 the masses. It adds a Prayer-Book, or a Confession of Faith, or Discipline — a hurnan code of laws — to the divine and in- spired Discipline and Statute-Book of the Kingdom of Je- sus, — the New Testament. But I propose to notice briefly, the unscripturalness of this Romish interpretation of the giving of the keys. It is evidently figurative, since the Saviour did not give literal keys to Peter. The expression was doubtless used in allusion to the fact that the key was a badge of office, as steward of the house > or it may allude to the presentation of the key to the young doctor of the law. Martin says, — " When the Jews made a man a doctor of the law they put into his hand the key of the closet in the temple, where the sacred books were kept, and tablets to write apon ; sig- nifying by this that they gave him authority to teach and to explain the Scriptures to the people." — Quoted hy A. Clark. " Whatsoever ye shall hind on earth^^"* &c. This was doubtless borrowed from a phraseology in com- mon use at that time. In chapter xviii. 18, the authority to hind and to loose is committed to the disciples. Dr. Clark says : " This mode of expression was frequent among the Jews ; they considered that every thing that was done upon earth, according to the order of God^ was at the same time done in heaven." " The binding and loosing were terms in frequent use among the Jews, and they meant hid- ding and forbidding, granting and refusing, declaring lawful and unlawful." He tells us that this mode of expression was used in two senses : first, in doctrine and in judgment, concerning things allowed and not allowed in the law; secondly, to bind is the same as to forbid or declare to he forbidden. Dr. Lightfoot remarks : " When the time was come 264 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. wherein the Mosaic law, as to some part of it, was to be abolished and left off, and as to another part of it was to be continued and to last for ever, he granted Peter ^ here and to the rest of the apostles (chap. xv. iii. 8.) a power to abolish or confirm what they thought good, and as they thought good ; being taught this and led by the Holy Spirit, as if he should say, " Whatsoever ye shall hind in the law of Moses, that is forbid^ it shall be forbidden^ the divine authority confirming it ; and whatsoever ye shall loose, that is permit or shall teach, that is permitted and lawful, shall be lawful and per- mitted." Hence they hound, that is forbade circumcision to the believers ; eating of things offered to idols, of things strangled and of blood, for a time, to the Gentiles ; and that which they bound on earth was confirmed in heaven.'''' Many other things they loosed and hound by the same authority, the Holy Ghost leading and directing them. Whatever this power was, it was entrusted to the apostles alone, and not to their successors in office, for they had none. For Protestants to claim that this passage warrants the doc- trine of the divine right of the clergy to the supreme rule of the Church is claiming too much, for if this passage proves that the clergy are the successors of the apostles in such a sense that they are authorized to exercise their prerogative to bind and loose, then it proves too much for your clergy, for in John xx. 23, it is added, " Whose soever sins ye remit^ they are remitted unto them, and whose soever sins ye retain they are retained." Will you also claim for Methodist preachers the absolute and supreme power to forgive sins as well as the supreme power to govern the Church? You may as consistently. In whatever sense we understand remitting and retaining sins, or binding and loosing, those who exercise it needed the infallible direction of the Holy Spirit. Hence Jesus, on REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 265 conferring the authority, breathed on them, and said, Receive the Holy Ghost, v. 22. The power of the keys, as exercised by the apostles, doubtless ceased with them. During their ministry all the instructions and laws Christ intended for his churches were sufficiently unfolded and explained for the observance of his followers. lie clothed the apostles with this authority that we might receive their words as of equal authority with his own, since they taught and spake only as they were moved by the Holy Ghost. But instead of the Scriptures warranting the lofty claims of your ministers to rule the Church, they rebuke them, and show that they partake of the spirit of Antichrist. Paul gave it as one of the unmistakable features of the man of sin, that he as " God," i. e., with supreme authority — " sitteth in the temple" — house or Church — " of God, showing him- self that he is God ;" i. e.^ usurping the place and claiming the prerogatives of God. Christ taught that he was the " head," the " husband," the sole " lawgiver of his Church ;" but alas ! Catholic Popes and Protestant Ministers all have usurped his place, and exercise his authority over his Church — if their scmi-jMpal societies can be regarded as his churches. 12 LETTER XXIII. The influence of poiver and rank iqyon Ministers of the Gospel is pernicious — Promotes ambition, 6^c. Sir : — This series of letters would be essentially incom- plete if I failed to call your attention especially to the perni- cious influence of power and rank upon ministers of the gospel. This, therefore, will be the theme of my present communi- cation. I need not inform you that ministers are men " of like passions" and infirmities with other men. They are com- pared to vessels, but they are said to be " earthen vessels." Alas ! that there is so much about them to remind others as well as themselves that they " are of the earth, earthy." I think, sir, if you will faithfully examine Matthew 23 : 8-12, you will be convinced that Jesus Christ inculcated the doc- trine of ministerial parity. He had condemned the vanity and ambition of the Scribes and Pharisees, who loved the uppermost rooms at feasts, and the chief seats in the syna- gogues, and greetings in the markets, and to be called of men, Rabbi, Rabbi. The great Teacher said to his disciples, " But be not ye called Rabbi : for one is your Master, even Christ ; and all ye are brethren. And call no man your father upon the earth : for one is your Father v/ho is in heaven. Neither be ye called masters : for one is your Master, even Christ. But he that is greatest among you shall be your servant. And whosoever shall exalt himself, shall be abased ; and he that shall humble himself, shall be exalted." (266) KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 267 Defectb e indeed must be the mental and mDral vision of the man who does not see that the Lord Jesus, in these verses, intended to suppress ministerial ambition and pro- mote a feeling of ministerial equality. "All ye are breth- ren." " One is your Master, even Christ." This is equiv- alent to the expressions, "Ye are all equal ;" — "You have no Master but Christ." Do you not, sir, agree with me in saying that it would have been most fortunate for the interests of Christianity if these teachings of Christ had been practically remembered from the days of the apostles till now 1 How different would then have been the records of Church history ! How many occurrences which should tinge the cheek of Christendom with shame would never have taken place! — How much blood would never have been shed, and how many martyr fires would never have been kindled ! Then there would have been no disgraceful contests about "Peter's keys." liome would never have had a Pope, nor the Greek Church a Patriarch. The archbishops of Canterbury and York would never have been heard of, and the term bishop, in its Methodist acceptation, would never have been applied to J. Soule. In how many instances has a forgetfulness of the teachings of Christ operated perniciously ! But I come directly to the subject of this letter — the in- fluence of power and rank upon ministers. You cannot deny that the " Discipline" gives great power to Methodist preach- ers. From the time they "join Conference" they begin to exercise this power. " Circuit-riders," who are sometimes referred to as " beardless boys," claim an authority which ought to satisfy the ambition of a Romish priest. Your friend Dr. Hen||le insists that preachers have the right to receive members into the Methodist Church. True, he ad- mits that they may take the laity into "advisory cooperation,'* 268 THE GREAT IIION WHEEL. but utterly repudiates the idea that the laity should have any "authoritative control" iu the matter. He denies, in- deed, that the right on the part of the preachers to receive members implies (as he admits some had contended) also the right to expel them. Both these rights (/), I suppose, are often exercised by your preachers. If you say the Discipline does not confer them, then it follows that Methodist preach- ers have such a thirst for power that they are not satisfied with the exuberant authority conferred by the Discipline. There is a love of power natural to man, and permit me to say that Method istic regulations must cultivate and promote that love of power in your preachers. How can it be other- wise, while they are men, and not angels'? I know the Methodist doctrine of perfection may be referred to, but you, sir, must admit that the exemplifications of this doc- trine, like angel-visits, are " few and far between." The love of power in a circuit-rider or stationed preacher excites aspi- rations after the larger power incident to a presiding elder- ship, while the possession of the latter power invests the office of bishop with strong attractions. What elder does not have day-dreams of the glory attendant ,on the exercise of Episcopal authority 1 That glory is regarded as the greatest distinction known to Methodism. To be a bishop in the Methodist sense of the term is considered an unspeak- ably higher honor than to be a bishop in the scriptural accep- tation of the word. It seems to me, sir, that the influence of power and rank upon Methodist preachers must be decidedly bad. The power and the rank go together. An advance in rank is an increase of power. Every step taken from membership in Conference to a bishop's seat augments ministerial authority, and unites by stronger ties what Reverdy Johnson termed the " clerical arist'^cracy." How frequently, too, is arrogance REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 269 an accompaniment of power ! And who has not .>een dis- gusted with the arrogance of Methodist preachers 1 Who has not scornfully smiled at witnessing the airs assumed by circuit-riders'? Presiding elders often manifest a haughty disposition, though they have prudence to conceal many things which a circuit-rider makes public. Bishops may be expected to exercise greater discretion than elders, though the power they possess is, in this free country, appalling. A bishop may say to one of the inferior clergy, " Go, and he goeth," and to another, " Come, and he cometh." He tells the elders over what districts of country they shall preside. He stations what preachers he pleases, and puts on the " cir- cuit" those he thinks best fitted for the business of " riding." It may be said that some of the Methodist bishops are very humble men. Probably so; and some of the archbishops of England have been comparatively humble, and also some of the Popes of Rome. Still, it is a great mystery how humble men can occupy these positions ! ! However, so far as Metho- dist bishops are concerned, the twenty-second of their "Arti- cles of Religion" may afford them relief. If I understand that article it teaches that what is " not repugnant to the word of God," provided it is " ordained and approved by com- mon authority," becomes obligatory. You may, for aught I know, persuade yourself that the office which you fill in the Methodist Episcopal Church South is " not repugnant to the w^ord of God," &c., and that, therefore, it is not inconsistent with the character of a minister of Christ to accept the offi- cial position you occupy. The principle, however, is a dangerous one, and as absurd as dangerous. Look at it. A reader of the New Testament would never draw the infer- ence from its teachings that it is a bishop's duty to preside over a large territory, having under him the inferior clergy, &c. No ; the conclusion would be that a bishop is identical 270 THE GREAT IRON WHEFL. with a pastor. Very well. It accords with the word of God, then, for a bishop to superintend a congregation, and labor for its spiritual improvement. Indeed, where tho size of a cl/urch demanded it, there was doubtless, in apostolic times, a plu- rality of bishops. Hence Paul, in taking lea^^-e of the Ephe- sian elders, calls them overseers (episcopous }\ the original), and writes to the saints at Philippi with tht " bishops and deacons." A church therefore might have *nore than one bishop ; but for one bishop to preside over i\ hundred or a thousand churches, was a thing unknown to the mspired apos- tles of Christ. Do you say, " It is not repugna it to the word of Godf This is like the argument for infant baptism. How often has it been contended that it is no^^ in so many words, forbidden; and on this account it is r.-)t wrong to practise it 1 You know, sir, that the Baptist reasoning is, that the commission of Christ enjoiniiig the baptism of be- lievers virtually prohibits the baptism of infanti*., And so the New Testament references to bishops are sucli as to pre- clude the idea that they at all resemble Episcrtpalian or Methodist bishops. If I have given a correct acccimt of the office of bishop, according to the teachings of the Scitiptures, it follows that the official station you occupy is "reprgnani to the word of God." It comes directly in conffict ^ith iv:. It practically falsifies the word of God. I ask you, s.t. li this is not alarming ? Here is the highest office in the reabn*- of Methodism — the office of bishop — to which hundreds o^ thousands of the laity look as the highest earthly distinction inaccessible, indeed, to them, and to which thousands of preachers turn their aspiring eyes, and hope that it is among the unknown possibilities of the future that they will b? bishops of the Methodist Church ! And yet, sir, the New Testament no more authorizes this office than it does tht establishment of a telegraphic conn^-^tion between the moon REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 271 and the planet Jupiter. All this anxiety is about an office which the word of God does not sanction. And to what in- triguing and electioneering has this anxiety led ! But I forbear. There is another respect in which power and rank among your preachers must have a bad influence. I allude to the fact that they are irresponsible to the people. They rule over the people, and, being clothed with authority, they do many things they ought not to do. But are they accounta- ble to the people 1 No. Who appoint the class-leaders ? The preachers. Who can remove the class-leaders at plea- sure 1 The preachers. Who nominate the stewards ? The preachers. Who compose the Quarterly Conference? The preachers and their appointees and nominees. Who com- pose the Annual Conferences ? Preachers alone. Who com- pose the General Conferences ? Preachers. This looks very much like a ministerial aristocracy. Let p, preacher be guilty of conduct inconsistent with the Christian profession, and who is to try him ? Preachers. The laity have noth- ing to do in the matter. Your lay members have my pro- foundest sympathies, Bishop Soule. Your system reduces them almost to ciphers. I w^onder that men who have American hearts in their bosoms can submit to it. I ask you if their irresponsibility to the people does not have a bad influence on your preachers ? Does it not puff them up with pride and arrogance ? Does it not make them tyrannical ? Have you seen no indications of this sort? What kind of civil rulers do you think we would have, if they were released from all responsibility to the people 1 I know John Wesley abhorred republicanism ; but I ask you how you would like a civil tyranny in this country 1 Can you not say with one of the fathers of the Revolution, " Re- sistance to tyranny is obedience to God." If you can, in reference to civil rulers, how can you tolerate, and in your 272 THE GKEAT IRON WUEEL. official position even exemplify, an ecclesiastical despotism, the most oppressive known to Protestant Christendom ? You are aware, sir, that the Presbyterians and Episcopalians are less tyrannical in their forms of government than the Methodists. Go into a Presbytery, Synod, or General As- sembly, and you will find laymen as well as clergymen. In an Episcopal Convention there are lay as well as clerical dele- gates. In a Methodist Annual or General Conference, how- ever, not a layman is to be found. The voices of the clergy alone are heard. The three departments of your govern- ment — legislative, judicial and executive — are in the hands of the preachers. And what did the celebrated Bascom say of this state of things 1 Here is his language, taken from his " Declaration of Ptights : " " A government uniting the legislative, judicial, and execu- tive powers in the hands of the same men, is an absurdity in theory, and in practice, tyranny. * * * * In a gov- ernment, civil or ecclesiastical, where the same men are legis- lators, administrators, and judges, in relation to all the laws, and every possible application of them, the people, whether well or ill treated, are in fact slaves ; for the only remedy against such despotism is revolt." This is strong language, but no stronger than true. If Dr. Bascom lived and died in a Church whose government he considered a " despotism," I do not know that it is my duty to account for it. Protestant Methodists have intimated that he probably had assurances that distinguished honors would be conferred on him if he would remain where he was. If such assurances were given and proved influential, we have another proof of the weakness of human nature, and of the mischievous effect produced by power and rank upon preach- ers of the gospel. Look into Church history, sir, and you will see the inci> REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 273 pient developments of the spirit which generated the Papacy. First there was an infringement upon the rights of the laity — then ambitious, power-loving clergymen trespassed on the rights of their equals in the ministry — city preachers were looked up to as superior to those in the towns and country ; and thus things wxnt on, step by step, until Rome claimed the " Universal Bishop," and Popery stood forth in its re- pulsive atrocity. Ministerial ambition led to Popery, and the Methodist form of government cherishes ministerial ambition.* The following sensible article recently appeared in the Boston Olive Branchy a Protestant Methodist paper ; and it being from the pen of one who has had extensive experience in Methodism, I with pleasure add it as corroborative testi- mony : "influence of the METHODIST EPISCOPACY UPON THE MINISTRY. " Mr. Editor : — It is nearly twelve years since I became extensively acquainted with the ministry of the Methodist E. Church in New-England ; and during that period of time I have closely watched the influence of her Church government upon the ministry itself. That the influence is bad, is by no means problematical to every unprejudiced mind. That it destroys that manly independence which should characterize every ambassador of Christ, is too obvious to admit of a doubt. The ministry generally, instead of acting like free men^ is trammelled and biased by the influence of bishops ana presiding elders. The itinerant ministry feel bound to carry out every feature of the system which is recommend- ed by those who " lord it over God's heritage," w^hether it * This was wriUen by Eld. J. M. Pendleton, of Ky., at our request. 12* 274 THE GREAT lUON" V/IIEEL. be in accordance with the spirit of Christianity or not. Comparatively few, save those who are acknowledged to be the "prime ministers" in the Methodist E. Church, can, in the emphatic sense of the word, be termed freemen. So much succumbing cannot be found in any other ministry as in that of the Methodist E. Church ; and the grand secret why the ministry is in so much bondage, is because she is so entirely dependent upon bishops and presiding elders for her support. If an itinerant preacher should fail to carry out into practical effect all the dogmas of presiding elders, proscription would be the order of the day ; and that min- ister, who dares to go contrary to the given advice of his superiors in office w^ould be marked and remembered in the cabinet, and have to suffer himself with his innocent and un- offending family, the first opportunity the offended presiding elder has to exercise his proscriptive influence. There are too many painful instances on record to prove that the spirit of proscription is carried out, to admit of doubt for one moment on this point. Witness the case of Rev. J. D. Bridge, removed from Springfield to Duxbury. The itine- rant ministry is generally exposed to any and every injury that the bishops and presiding elders may choose to inflict ; and not a few feel, too, the power a bishop can wield every opportunity he chooses. The itinerant ministry are suffering from ecclesiastical despotism every year, more or less ; and those who are brought to feel severely the rod of oppression, if they speak out and tell the truth on the subject, or seek for an asylum anywhere else, are not saved, even then, from the " powers that be." Every possible influence is used to destroy their ministerial and Christian characters ; and to no small extent is their usefulness curtailed. And many who have left the Methodist E. Church from disaffec- tion, have, from the influence that has been exerted against REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 275 them, been compelled to retire from the duties of the Christ- ian ministry, and enter into secular concerns ; and the ben- efits that might otherwise have been realized in the world, have been lost." LETTER XXIV. THE EPISCOPACY AND THE PEOPLE. DEDICATED TO AMERICAN METHODISTS. The Principles of legitimate Governments — Man's inalien- able Rights — They cannot he conceded or alienated without Sin — They cannot he usurped without Impiety — What is a Tyranny and a Despotism, according to Bishop Bascom ?— Methodism proven to he a Tyranny, a clerical Despotism^ Anti-American in its Genius and Tendency — Repuhlican- ism backwards — A New Definition of Methodism, and an Illustration. " It is true to a great extent, that throughout all divisions of the Christian world, intellect has taken but comparatively little hold of the subject of religion, and still less of the subject of Church government ; and this affords the ministry an oppor- tunity of misleading the people." — Bascom. "A government uniting the legislative, judicial, and executive powers in the hands of the samemen, is an absurdity in theory, and in practice tyraxnt." — Ibid. Dear Sir : — Having noticed the influence of Episcopacy of ministerial ranlc and power upon the Methodist ministry, I propose to notice briefly how this Great Iron Wheel power works down upon the people — how unmitigated its tyranny, and how presumptuous in the usurpation of their rights as men and Christians — rights that cannot be conceded or alien- ated without sin, or usurped without impiety. 1 hold it to be a self-evident truth, that all men were created free and equal. Our Creator endowed us with th« (376) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 277 power, and guaranteed unto us, by- the charter of our crea- tion, the right of self-government, restricted by no statutes save those imposed directly by himself; ay, more, he made it our duty to preserve this right, and has made its surrender or concession an injury inflicted upon our minds, our progress, and our happiness, as it is insulting to himself. I assert it as an axiom, that it is man's duty to be free, and exercise his right of self-government, in all nations and under all circumstances, in both Church and State. The Gospel of Christ sustains and vindicates to man these inalien- able rights ; and, therefore, wherever it fully pervades his soul, it makes him everywhere a republican, as well as a Christian. Humanity, wherever oppressed, robbed, and degraded by the pride, and rapacity, and venality of tyrants and usurpers, called kings and emperors, has a right to free itself of its oppressors^ and rise to the dignity, and assert the rights of man. I find these principles stated in Bascom's famous *• Declaration of the Rights of Man," from which I shall quote largely in the present letter. '' Art. 1. God, as the common Father of mankind, has created all men free and equal, and the proper equality and social freedom of the great brotherhood of the human race, in view of the gifts and grants of the Creator, are to be in- ferred from all his dispensations to men. Every man, by the charter of his creation, is the equal of his contemporaries — the essential rights of every generation are the same. Man, as the child of God's creation, continues man immutably, under all circumstances ; and the rights of ancestry are those of posterity. Man has claims which it becomes his duty to assert, in right of his existence, such as the indefeasible right of thinking and acting for himself, when thought and action do not infringe the right of another, as they never will, when truth and justice are made the basis of human intercourse. 278 THE GREAT IRON WUEEL. Tlicse rights, common to the great family of man, cannot be abolished by concession, statute, precedent, or positive insti- tution ; and when wrested or withheld from the multitude of mankind by their rulers, may be reclaimed by the people, whenever they see proper to do it." Man, then, was created a sovereign. The people are, and of right ought to be, sovereigns. They cannot with im- punity surrender their natural rights. No legitimate civil government can call upon them to do so. God is the author of no government, civil or ecclesiastical, that denies to man the estimable and ennobling gifts of his Creator. In becom- ing a member of civil society, the exercise of his rights may be slightly modified, but they should not, cannot, without in- jury both to himself and to the government, be relinquished. His sovereignty must be recognized, and his rights exercised, or he becomes mentally imbecilitated and degraded, and the government speedily vitiated and a curse. For example : While it is the right of the American peo- ple to enact directly every law, and give an expression upon every public measure connected with the administration of this government, they may, to facilitate the legislation of the country, modify the exercise of this right, and elect rep- resentatives to enact the requisite laws, and devise the pro- per measures, subject, however, to be amended or abolished by other representatives, in case they are not approbated by the people. The great principle is in this case preserved, that the voice of the people is the source of all power; their representatives and executive are but the servants of the people. The power works outward and upward from the people ; the supreme power is in their voice. That govern- ment in which this power is in the hands of a few — of a par- ticular class, as the preachers, not elected by the people, and not amenable to them, is a " tyranny in one of its most dan REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 279 gerous forms." We quote from Bishop Bascom's work, above alluded to : — " Art. 2. Man was created for society ; his natural rights are adapted to the social state, and under every form of so- ciety, constitute properly the foundation of his civil rights. When man becomes a member of civil society, he submits to a modification of some of his natural rights, but he never does, he never can, relinquish them. He concedes the ex- ercise of these rights, for his own and the general good, but does not, cannot cast them off. His rights receive a new direction, but do not terminate ; and that government which deprives man of rights, justly claimed in virtue of his crea- tion, and interwoven with the constitution of his nature and the interests of society, denies to him the gifts of his Creator, and must be unjust. God can be the author of no govern- ment, contravening the wisdom of his arrangements in the creation of men. "Art. 3. In every community there is a power which receives the denomination of sovereignty — a power not sub- ject to control, and that controls all subordinate powers in the government. Now, whether this power be in the hands of the many or a few, it is indubitably certain, that those mem- bers only of the community are free, in whom the sovereign power resides. The power of a community is essential to its freedom, and if this power be confined to a few, freedom is necessarily confined to the same number. All just gov- ernment must be founded upon the nature of man, and should consult alike the natural rights, civil wants, and moral interests of his being. All rightful authority is founded in power and law ; all just power is founded in right, and as one man's natural right to the character of lawgiver is, to all intents, as good as another's, it follows, that all legitimate law must have its origin in the expressed will of the many 280 TIIK GREAT IRON WHEEL. " Art. t. As all men are essentially equal, in their rights, wants, and interests, it follows from these, that representa- tive government is the only legitimate human rule to which any people can submit. It is. the only kind of government that can possibly reconcile, in any consisted way, the claims of authority with the advantages of liberty. A prescriptive legislative body, making laws without the knowledge or consent of the people to be governed by them, is a despot- ism. Legislators without constituents, or peers and fellows deputing them as their representatives and actors — thus con- stituting themselves a. legislature beyond the control of the people — is an exhibition of tyranny in one of its most dan- gerous forms. In the momentous affairs of government, nothing should be made the exclusive property of a few which by right belongs to all, and may be safely and ad- vantageously used by the rightful proprietors. The justice of every government depends essentially upon the original consent of the people ; this privilege belongs to every com- munity, in the right of the law of nature ; and no man or multitude of men can alter, limit, or diminish it. Constitu- tional law is an expression of the will of the people, and their concurrence in its formation, either personally or by representation, is essential to its legitimate authority." Every just or legitimate government is founded upon, and restricted and controlled by, a constitution created or adopted by the people, and in that instrument the sovereign rights of the people are distinctly recognized and called into exercise. In civil governments, the constitution is the act of the people asserting their natural rights, and securing themselves against the chances of maladministration. All republican governments are based upon constitutions ; ab- solute governments, tyrannies, and despotisms have none ; for, says Bascom, — KEPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 281 " Art. 5. No community can be said, without mockery, to have a constitution, where there is a consolidation of the different powers of government in the hands of the same . men, and the remaining portion are left, of course, without any security for their rights. Such a case presents an abso- lute government ; a government of men, not principles. A constitution is not the creature of government ; the na- ture of things renders it impossible that it should be an act of government. In strict propriety, it exists anterior to gov- ernment ; — government is basied upon, proceeds from, and is the creature of, the constitution. A constitution contains the elements and principles of government, and fixes the nature and limits of its form and operations, but is an in- strument distinct from government, and by which govern- ment is controlled. It is a preliminary act of the people, in the creation of government. It sustains to government the same relation that laws do to the judiciary ; the latter is not the source of law, c/mnot make laws or annul them, but is subject to and governed by law. A constitution recognizes the rights of the people, and provides for their assertion and maintenance. It settles the principles and maxims of gov ernment. It fixes the landmarks of legislation. It is the sovereign voice of the people, giving law and limit to them selves and their representatives. " Art. 6. A government uniting the legislative, judicial, and executive powers in the hands of the same men, is an absurdity in theory, and in practice, tyranny. The execu- tive power, in every government, should be subordinate to the legislative, and the judicial independent of both. When- ever, therefore, it happens that these three departments of government are in the hands of the same body of men, and these men not the representatives of the people — first making the laws, then executing them, and finally the sole judges 282 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. of their own acts, there is no liberty ; the people are virtu- ally enslaved, and liable to be ruined at any time. In a gov- ernment, civil or ecclesiastical, where the same men are legislators, administrators, and judges, in relation to all the laws, and every possible appliciition of them, the people, whether well or ill treated, are in fact slaves ; for the only remedy against such a despotism is revolt. No constitution can be presumed a good, one, embodying the principles of correct government, which does not sufficiently guard against the chances and possibility of maladministration. All absolute governments owe their character to the manner in which they are administered, whereas, ir. a representative government, with proper checks and balances, it is the in- terest, even of the vicious, to promote the general welfare, by conforming to the laws. The greater the equality estab- lished among men by governments, the more virtue and happiness will prevail ; for where the voluntary consent of the governed is the basis of government, interest and duty combine to promote the common weal." In all the churches of Christ, which are governments, the New Testament is the constitution, containing all the prin- ciples upon which governments are to be based, and its laws and discipline administered. And since the constitu- tion determines the form and character of the government based upon it, therefore the New Testament must, with sufficient clearness, determine the form of government Christ intended for his churches. In that sacred constitution, the Christian's and humanity's " Magna Charta," ail man's in- alienable rights as a man and a Christian are asserted and vindicated to him, and the most terrible woes thundered upon the ears of all Rabbis and masters who may presume to enslave them. '* Art. 9. The New Testament furnishes the principles, REPUBLICANIS.U BACKWARDS. 283 but not the forms of Church government; and in the adaptation of forms to these principles, Christian bodies should be gov erned mainly by the few facts and precedents furnished in the apostolic writings. The will and mind of the Great Head of the Church on this subject, so far as clearly revealed, whether by express statute or fair implication, cannot be contravened without impiety ; but in relation to a variety of topics connected with the internal police and external relations of the Church, on which the Scriptures are silent, it is left to every Christian community to adopt its own regu- lations, and the same is true of nations. Ministers and pri- vate Christians, according to the New Testament, are entitled to equal rights and privileges — an identity of interests implies an equality of rights. A monopoly of power, therefore, by the ministry, is a usurpation of the rights of the people. No power on the part of the ministry can deprive the people legitimately of their elective and representative rights ; as the ministry cannot think and act for the people in matters of principle and conviction, so neither can they legislate for them, except as their author- ized representatives. "Art. 10. The government of every Christian Church should be strictly a government of principle, in relation to the governed; and every private Christian is as deeply and reasonably interested as the ministry. Dominion over conscience is the most absurd of all human pretentions. The assumption that absolute power in the affairs of Church government is a sacred deposit in the hands of the ministry libels the genius and charities of the New Testament." Christ most energetically foibade his disciples the right to surrender or to concede the exercise of the rigiit to have an equal voice in the administration of the governme.::t and dis^ 284 TilE GREAT IRON WHEEL. cipline of his Church, lie distinctly and imperiously com- manded then: neither to submit to or acknowledge authorita- tive rulers, for such m ere the Jewish Rabbis, and masters^ and teachers, though they w^ere their own ministers, who should seek to usurp their rights. To yield the government of Christ's Church nito the hands of such, is, therefore, a sin against the blessed Saviour ; for it is a direct and open violation of his express command. It is a matter, then, of VAST MOMENT wliat form of Church government we recog- nize and support — of as great moment as sin against Christ. The man who wilfully or willingly violates this injunction of the Saviour, sins as heinously as he who blasphemes his name. It is a solemn and weighty matter to decide what form of Church government we will recognize and support. And it is a sin of no common turpitude for professed min- isters to usurp the rights of Christ's children, and assert abso- lute jurisdiction in the affairs of Church government, exer- cising supreme legislative, judicial, and executive powers; and thus converting the churches of Christ into scats of power and corruption, and unmitigated tyrannies, for their own aggrandizement, oppressing his children by thus daring to exercise authority and lordship over them. The King of Zion, who will terribly judge the impious usurpers of his throne, thus solemnly warns them : " Neither be ye called masters, for one is yours, and all ye are brethren" (therefore only the equals of each other and your brethren). " Ye know^ they that are accounted [appointed] to rule over the Gentiles, exercise lordship over them, and their great ones exercise authority/ upon them. Bui so it shall not be among you." Is not this authoritatively explicit? Did Christ intend that there should be a class of authoritative rulers of " great ones" in his Church, to exercise lordship REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 285 over, and uuthority upon, his disciples — chief muiisters to dic- tate to and govern inferior ones — bishops having power to say to hundreds and thousands of Christ's ministers, go when and where they please — and they must go, or be cast out of the Church — and to come at their sovereign beck and cain Did not Christ positively forbid it? Is it not an open and insulting violation of the Saviour's express com- mand 1 I am but an humble disciple of the blessed Saviour ; but, if I know my own heart, I love him — love his honor, love his cause and kingdom ; and I beg of you to beware that you do not violate this solemn injunction. Do you say," We bishops and presiding elders are the benefactors of our people, because we take all concern for the government off their hands and minds, and leave them nothing to do but to pray and to give their money % and we are the benefactors of the world, because we send our ministers to preach to it ?" Then, hear the Saviour — " The kings of the Gentiles exercise lordship over them, and they that exercise authority are called bene- fiictors ; but ye shall not be so." In view of these and other explicit commands of Christ, I am forced to conclude, with your own Bascom, that to assert and teach that such dangerous prerogatives are guar- anteed to a privileged class, as ministers in the Church of Christ, is to " libel the genius and charities of the New Tes- tament ;" and that it is impiety in Christians to concede such prerogatives to their ministers, as it is for ministers to usurp and exercise them ; for, " Art. 10. Whenever a Christian people place themselves under a ministry who claim the right of thinking and decid- ing for them in matters of faith and morality, they are guilty of impiety, however unintentional, to the great Head of the Church, inasmuch as it is required of every Christian to re- flect and determine for himself, in all cases, and the duty 286 THE GliEAT lllON WHEEL. cannot 1)C peifonned by ant)ther. And those ministers who aim at a principality pf this kind, in the personal concerns of faith and practice, are plainly guilty of usurped dominion over the rights and consciences of the people." I ask not your people now if they be Americans, if they be freemen ; but if they be Christians, if they love or fear the Saviour, how dare they reject Christ as their only master, and recognize and support your unscriptural jurisdic- tion over them 1 And I most fervently pray God that they may be brought to reflect upon this matter. The principles of your system, developed above, lay at the threshold of my opposition to Methodism, driving as they do directly against the supreme authority of Christ over his Church, and violating his express and solemn commands. But there are numerous specifications involved in, and positive evils growing out of, the workings of the system. And 1st, Methodism is degrading to your people. You train them from the first day of their probation to submit to the absolute dictation of Methodist preachers in all reli- gious matters, to believe what they bid them, i. c, every thing contained in the Discipline — and to do what they bid them to do — and almost to think their thoughts. Every process through which the subject passes, and the whole economy under which he is kept, and by which he is turned into one of Mr. Cookman's spindles, to be turned around every day by the class-leader, are degrading to the man. The people are deprived of the exercise of thought and deliberation, and concern and responsibility in matters of Church government, while to their faith, their thought and conscience, the Book of Discipline is as the Procustian bed — and to its exact dimensions they must contract or be stretched. This pledge is exacted from the members at the threshold. See Discipline, Part I., Sec. 2. KEPUBLICANISM BACKWAKDS. 287 All absolute governments of this character, ever have, everywhere do, and always must, degrade, enervate and im- becilitt^te their subjects. Of this feature Dr. Bascom clearly says : — " It should not be overlooked, moreover, that when the •ministry are considered by the laity as the sole judges and depositories of faith and discipline, the people lose the only powerful motive, the only direct incentive, they can possibly have to inquire and decide for themselves, in the infinitely momentous concerns of truth and duty. Such a monopoly of power by the ministry tends directly to mental debase- ment, consequent indecision of character, insincerity, and misguided zeal. "Art. 15. Government, as a fixed and stable cause in the progress of human affliirs, is finally productive of a large amount of good or evil ; it is strictly, in its operation, a moral cause, in the formation of character ; for it necessarily presents circumstances and considerations, in the light of rea- sons and motives, which lead to results in the formation of character, that become habitual and permanent. The good of all concerned, therefore, should be the object proposed m the adoption of any form of government ; and when a system of government is adopted which calls off the atten- tion of the governed from the general welfare, by depriv- ing them of all control in the enactment and execution of the laws, the natural and unavoidable tendency of a govern- ment of this description, is vicious and demoralizing ; and such are the character and influence of all non-elective govern- meiits. The members of a community who place themselves under the exclusive control of a few irresponsible persons a.s their sole masters in matters of government, thus tamely depriving themselves of the right of representation, and even of existence, except by expatriation, betray a criminal 288 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. negligence of their best interests, and great inattention to the general welfare; and all governments recognizing such a distinction, contravene necessarily the influence of enlighten- ed conviction and independent inquiry." You deny to man the greatest boon of freedom — liberty of thought^ of speech^ and the press, ivhich is his right by creation, by regeneration, and by the charter of American free- men. You bind him to your Book of Discipline, and theii put him in connection with the wheel power. If he thinks differently from that book — if he objects to any one of its teachings — if he discover the effects of the wheel movement to be pernicious, " to grind him tremendously," and deprecates it to his friends around his own fireside, or if he protests against it and seeks to rectify it, he violates his vow — he has infracted one of the capital laws of the realm, and is obnox- ious to discipline, and if he repents not, to exclusion and dis- grace, if not ruin. He may cordially adopt the doctrine of justification by faith only, without works, as set forth in Article IX., which precludes the possibility of the idea of the ultimate apostacy and ruin of a true believer. I say he may cordially receive this doctrine as set forth in your articles, and yet, as cordi- ally abominate and repudiate the construction which you and your ministers put upon this article, and which passes for current Methodism, i. e., that a true believer may fall from the grace of regeneration and be re-regenerated and fall again and again, and be as often regenerated over, or fall and be lost for ever. Should he do so, and should he speak his thoughts, (for of what practical utility to me or the world are my thoughts unless I can speak or write them ?) — if he gives utterence to his dissent publicly or privately, and if it reaches the ears of the informers the class leaders, or of the minister in charge he is at once arraigned for inveighing REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 289 figaiiist the doctrines and discipline of me Church, aivd if he does not confess his sin (?) in thus exercising his inalienable right as a man and a Christian, and promise implicit submis- sion and silence in future, he must be cast forth as unworthy of a lot among Methodists — stained in character, and injured in business. Here is the law that virtually forbids freedom of speech : " If any member of our Church shall be clearly con- victed of endeavoring to sow dissensions in any of our socie- ties by inveighing against [i. e., dissenting from and speaking again>^t] either our doctrines or discipline, such person so of- fending shall be first reproved by the senior minister or preach- er of his circuit, and if he persists in such pernicious prac- tices, he shall be expelled from the Church." He may have violated no command of Christ ; indeed, may have spoken according to the sacred oracles in all he said ; yet, if contrary to the Bible of Methodism, the Book of Discipline, he must be cast headlong out of the Church of Christ (if Methodism be a Church of Christ and not simply Mr. Wesley's scheme, as Methodist writers frankly admit, and Baptists generally be- lieve). Is a Methodist then allowed to think freely, to speak his thoughts fearlessly, to investigate, to discuss, to write, unless all his thoughts and words square with the " clerical measure V* But where can he print his thoughts ? The Metho- dist press is in the hands of the travelling ministers ; they and they only are allowed to edit or control it. Should they print elsewhere, they are amenable to their masters for every sen- tence, as are the preachers to their " chief ministers." See the law : "Any travelling preacher who may publish any work or book of his own, shall be lesponsible to his Conference for any obnoxious matter or doctrine therein con- tained."— Dis. p. iii, chap. vi. § 21. Who judge what may be considered " obnoxious matter ur doctrine ?" His chief ministers : and their decision is ab- 290 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. solute. If a member is the otrender who is judge of what is to be considered obnoxious ? The ministers, or whom they may see fit to appoint. Here is the crushing power of the wheel. Who can tell what may be considered obnoxious to the judges? This principle is grossly anti-American, and is the essence of despotism. Compare the above law of Methodism with the following in the Declaration of Rights adopted by our Continental Congress : " Declaration OF Rights. — Resolved^ That the people have a right peaceably to assemble, consider of their griev- ances, and petition the king ; and that all prosecutions, pro- hibitory proclamations, and commitments for the same arc illegal.'" You deny the jieojyle the liberty of /he press. How do the despots of Rome, of France, of Austria, of Russia, control the press so that not one word shall appear that is not favor- able to the iniquitious powers of the throne, and iniquitous administration of those powers 1 By a law similar to that adopted by the rulers of Methodism. Every editor in the realm is either appointed by the throne, or every man who writes, and every editor who publishes, matter that is deemed obnoxious to the censors appointed by the ruling powers, is liable to rigorous punishment. What is the result in these countries "? what must be the result in any country under such a suppression of speech and the press ? A gagged press — degradation of mind, of man — oppression — slavery ! Can it be less so in the kingdom of Methodism 1 Do not the bishops assume to themselves the appointment of every editor of the whole realm 1 And therefore every Methodist paper is a court journal. Do you not deny the eligibility of a layman — of a private member, to the office of editor of any one of all your papers ? You do. I assert whja REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 291 every intelligent man may know, mat freedom of thought, of speech, and the press, is not more stringently and thor* oughly suppressed in the empire of the Pope, or the Czar, than in the dominions of Episcopal Methodism. A late spirited writer justly says : '•''Episco2Ml Methodism is anti- America 71 in its direct tend- ency to suppress freedom of speech and of the press. That this is its tendency, no one acquainted with the system can consistently deny. Let a number of members of an Episcopal Methodist society express their conviction that the government of their Church might be bettered ; let them print their views and circulate their opinions and excommu- nication is the penalty at once, either for orally discussing the matter, or printing their views. Suppose the press was under the control of Episcopal Methodism, it could not utter a sentiment at variance with the ''Discipline" without being placed under interdict. A Methodist preacher cannot — dare not publish a book that shall encourage free inquiry into Episcopacy, or that will induce discussion of its merits, without the fear of exclusion. Now, how does Rome prevent the freedom of the press where she has not political power? By this bugbear of excommunication. Place the free press of America under the control of Methodist Episcopal bishops, and there could be no free discussion — Republicanism would be strangled, and the car of Liberty rolled backward. The Methodist Episcopal press now is under the control of the bishops — the editors of all the papers, magazines, books, tracts, etc., etc., are appointed by the Conference, with the approbation of the presiding bishop. " If I am an American I must forget it in becoming an Epis- copal Methodist. If I love republicanism, I must not ex- press my preference for it in the government of the Church of which I am a member. Freedom of speech is denied 292 THK r.RKAT IRON WHEEL. me on pain of exclusion. To speak of repubi.canism in Church government is to " sow dissension," and that is to be punished with excommunication. Americanism encourages freedom of speech ; Episcopal Methodism suppresses it : it isj therefore, anti-American." But I love the burning thoughts of your own Bascom. I have said that the withholding of these inalienable rights of freedom, and which it is the imperative duty that Christian- ity enjoins upon all men to exercise, tends to degrade the people. " Where all the power and forms of government are held and managed by a few, who act without delegated right by consent of the people, the authority of the rulers is absolute, and the people are disfranchised of all right in the various relations existing between them as subjects and those who hold the reins of government. Such a government must always lead to mental debility, will depress the moral vigor of a people, and necessarily abridge the liberty of reasoning and investigation." Methodism is not a school of republicanism, in which the children of this generation are taught and trained to be the re- publicans of the next, and inflamed with all the glorious senti- ments of freeborn and Christ-born republicans, as the Church of Christ is — but it is teaching the sons of the people that it is right and duty to concede those rights in the Church to their ministers, and consent tamely and servilely to be taxed and ruled without the privilege of representation. It is therefore moulding the character of American children into monarch- ists — into concessionists and submissionists to tyrants — into believers in the divine right of kings, and ministers, and bishops ! It is preparing them to be ruled by a king. It was a favorite aphorism with James I., " No bishop, no king." No episcopac} , n: throne. Episcopacy is the right arm, the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. ^ 29o handmaid of monarchy. It was designed to mould the peo- ple to take and wear the yoke of monarchy. Well might the persecuting Laud say, " If these Anabaptists succeed in plucking down the throne of the bishops, the thrones of kings will fall with them." Does not government insensibly mould the character of the governed 1 "Art. 15. Gove::iment, as a fixed and stable cause in the progress of human affairs, is finally productive of a large amount of good or evil ; it is strictly, in its operation, a moral cause in the formation of character ; for it necessarily pre- sents circumstances and considerations, in the light of rea- sons and motives, which lead to results in the formation of character, that become habitual and permanent. The good of all concerned, therefore, should be the object proposed in the adoption of any form of government ; and when a system of government is adopted which calls off* the atten- tion of the governed from the general welfare, by depriv- ing them of all control in the enactment and execution of the laws, the natural and unavoidable tendency of a govern- ment of this description is vicious and demoralizing ; and such are the character and influence of all non-elective governments. "Art. 16. Any government that does not allow the people to meet, deliberate, and decide upon matters that concern themselves, is evidently oppressive. For those who are not the representatives of the people to make laws for them, and then deny them the freedom of candid inquiry and hon- est animadversion, is a measure as irrational as it is unjust. The maxim which assumes that the ministry have a right to rule and dictate exclusively in the great concerns of religion, is the fruitful source of implicit faith^ which tamely, and without inquiry, receives instruction at the hands of men, as authoritative and final — impiously receiving ' for doctrines, the c4 umandm^nts of men, ani perverting the oracles of 294 ' THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. God.' When thfc5 ministry judge and determine tor the peo- ple, without their legitimate concurrence, as matter of right, conformity becomes a question of policy, instead of result- ing from conscience and principle. A government which denies to the governed the right to inquire, remonstrate, and demand withheld justice ; which, from its structure and operation, is calculated to darken the understanding and mis- lead the judgment ; and thus compel obedience to its mea- sures in the great interests of right and wrong, must be es- sentially unjust, and ought not to be submitted to." I have already made this letter too long, without enume- rating a moiety of the rights you have usurped from the people. You tax the people, and yet deny them the right of repre- sentation. Taxation without representation is an oppressive form of tyranny. Methodist ministers fix their own salaries as pastors, as agents, as editors, &c., &c., to the end of the chapter. They decide what religious interests they will sup- port, and how much money shall be devoted to each, and how much money shall be raised from the people of each circuit or district. The preachers fix the amount the peopl** have to pay, and say boastingly, " Protest if you dareP "At the late annual meeting of the American Board, Dr. Durbin is reported to have described the manner in which the Missionary Board of the Methodist E. Church treat the question of funds, in the following language : " 'They do not inquire, he said, what their churches are able or willing to contribute. They simply make an esti- mate of the amount needed to carry on their mission ; for this amount they draw upon the churches, and say to them? ' Protest it, if you dare.' " — Zion Herald. They have the entire money power of their Church in their own hands, and use it without regard to the wishes of the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 295 people, or without being amenable to them for the manner (tf its disbursement. The Methodist clergy are a monied monopoly^ and possess far more temporal power than the Catholic clergy of this country f and this is a dangerous feature to American republic- anism. " Why is it that we fear Romanism ? Not simply be- cause the votaries of the Pope yield assent to the ridi- culous superstitions of their debasing religion. Not simply because their priests and bishops exercise oppressively an assumed power. This last feature is anti-American in Romanism as well as in Episcopal Methodism ; but this does not trouble us. If Romanists or Methodists choose to degrade themselves by submission to priests or bishops, and voluntarily sacrifice that liberty which, as freemen, they have a right to enjoy, it is their own fault. But the supporting of assumptions to temporal power is just cause of alarm. The effort of Romish bishops to gain the control of all the Cath- olic Church property, has been loudly decried, and some noble instances have occurred where even Roman Catholic congregations have determined, in the exercise of their free- dom ae American citizens, to resist these arrogant demands. But it seems to be forgotten that Episcopal Methodist bish- ops make the same demand, and this demand is submitted to without a murnmr by American Methodists... Who hold the deeds for every inch of ground, and every Episcopal Methodist chiirch in the land ? The Conference, alias, the bishops. Where is the Methodist Episcopal congregation that has dared to follow the example of the Roman Catho- lic congregations above alluded .to, in opposing this arrogant assumption of temporal power? Let Americans in the Episcopal Methodist Church blush to be told that, with all their boasted intelligence and freedom, they fear excoramu- 296 THli] GREAT IliOX WliKEL. nication from their bishops more than Roman Catholics fear the Pope's nuncio, or the bulls of Pio Nono himself " A vast amount of property is thus held under the control of Methodist bishops. A lay member of the Church has no voice in the disposition of funds which he himself aided to raise. The preachers can dispose of it only by suggest- ing the way in which it may be appropriated. The bishops control it, and may designate it as they see fit. " Now, is there no danger to American liberty from, a hier- archy possessing such ample pecuniary resources as these ? Are the bishops of the Episcopal Methodist Church so imma- culately pure as to be beyond the reach of selfish and secta- rian prejudices 1 May the time not arrive when they will consider it to be their duty to use their vast influence and as- sumed power in politics ? May they not conclude that they will be doing God service by using their influence to induce political action which will favor Episcopal Methodism 1 The support which they see the lay members of their churches giving to their assumptions of temporal as well as spiritual power, has a direct tendency to encourage them to exercise that power in controlling the affairs of the State for their own advancement, and so as to secure the continuance qf their power unmolested. The man who can see and feel it right to exercise a bishop's office in the Episcopal Methodist Church, can scarcely see it wrong to exercise a monarch's office in the State, for both are alike, and equally anti-American."* You deny the people the privilege and right to hold ihs meeting-houses theg have' hailt loith their own money. You deny them the right to appoint the trustees who shall hold their chapels in trust for them. You and your fellow-bish- ops hold the keys of all the Methodist chapels, raeeting- J. Q. Adams. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. .29'/ houses in America, and you can lock them up to morrow so» that no one could open them. You can excommunicate all the churches in a county or State, should they displease you — disobey your wishes, and deprive them of their ministers and consequently of the ordinances of religion, the baptism of their children, until they returned to your episcopal juris- diction and allegiance ! Could the Pope of Rome do more ? He was wont to do the like of this, and you can do it. You deny the people their right to invite whom they wish to preach in houses they have built with their own money. ]{ all the members of any given society should wish a cer- tain minister, who may have made himself obnoxious to the Episcopal displeasure by showing the unscripturalness and anti-republican principle of Episcopacy, to preach one ser- mon for them — they could not, all together, give him the house to preach in, unless the chief ministers, the rulers, saw fit. You deny your members their inalienable right to elect their own preachers. You deny the existence of the right. You call for proof. I answer : — The people are sovereigns. They are masters rather than slaves. They, at least, are commanded to call no man, be he pope or bishop, master ; and therefore that man or potentate or clerical power is not in legitimate existence that has the right co set over the churches of God whomsoever he pleases for a pastor, and displace them when he pleases, in total disregard of the expressed wishes of the people. That the general Conference can by a vote withdraw its jurisdiction from half a nation was illustrated by the act of that body, in 1844, and the despotic powers of the Confer- ence established by the admission of the counsel and the de- cision of an American court ! A writer places both fa^Ma in a strong light. 13» 298' THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. " All the Conference did towards a division was to agree that if the Southern brethren found it necessary to organize separately, they would withdraw their jurisdiction from such portion as choose to belong to the Southern organization. This they had a right to do, for they have power to withdraw their jurisdiction from any portion of their field of labor, at any time they please, from any Conference, district or station. The government is with the ministry ; they take the people under their jurisdiction, and they can withdraw that jurisdic- tion when they please, and it has often been done on a small sc^le. The bishops appoint the preachers, and by their ap- pointment the preachers acquire their jurisdiction in their respective localities, but let the bishops decline to appoint a preacher to a given circuit or station, and leave its name out of the minutes, which they have power to do, and the work cf jutisdiction is done. Bishop Hedding once told St. Paul's Church, at Lowell, Mass., that he could not appoint a preach- er to serve them, on account of some objectional resolu- tions they had adopted. The Church was afterwards pro- nounced out of the jurisdiction of the Methodist Episcopal Church, by a public proclamation, issued by the preacher that had been appointed to the charge. Was there not a withdrawing of jurisdiction in this case? The plan of sepa- ration was also a withdrawal of jurisdiction on the part of the Methodist Episcopal Church, and if it was on a larger scale, it was done in a less objectionable manner. " But they are placed in an unpleasant position ; to save their funds they have submitted their church polity to the examination and decision of a court, and that court has pass- ed upon it, and decided that the General Conference acted within its lawful powers in adopting the plan of separation. They opposed this decision on the ground that for the Gen- eral Cor.ference to p -.ssess such power is despotic and dan- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 299 gerous, and we jigree with them in this conclusion. But the Conference did adopt that plan. If they did it lawfully, as the court has decided, they possess despotic and dangerous power, according to their own admission ; but if they did it unlawfully, then the General Conference of 1844 performed a despotic and unlawful act, for which there is no redress under any constitutional provision, and which a civil court has failed to correct, and what they have done once they can do again, whenever occasion shall arise. They may take which horn of the dilemma they please." Yet this iniquitous power you claim and exercise. You possess unlimited power over both preachers and people. " No appeal can be made from the bishop's designation of a preacher to his field of labor. The preacher may not wish to go to the field assigned, and the Church may not do- sire to have the preacher who is sent to them ; but there is no appeal. Go he must, -and have him the people must, or they are both liable to excommunication from the Methodist Episcopal Church. An instance or two will illustrate this point : — "At the session of the New York Conference, in 1839, it was in someway intimated to the Washington street Church, in Brooklyn, Long Island, that the Rev. B. Griffin was to be appointed to that charge. The Cimrch accordingly, through a committee appointed for the purpose, presented itself before the bishop and remonstrated against Mr. Griffin's being sent to them as their pastor. But the remonstrance was disre- garded, and Mr. Griffin was stationed at Washington street." L\t the session of the New England Conference, in 1841, both of the large societies in Lowell, Mass., petitioned for particular preachers ; but they were told that they should not have tne men they asked for. One of the churches (St. ♦Paul's) then requested t ■ be left without a supply by the 800 THE GllEAT IRON WHEEL. bishop — having made arrangements to employ a local preach- er. But the bishop regarded not the request, but forced a preacher upon them. In both these cases, the preachers pe- titioned for also added their request to the voice of the churches, so that the wishes of both preachers and people were disregarded. " The other church, after being denied the preacher they wanted, selected some four or five others, and stated to the bishop that they would be satisfied with either of them. But no ; they must not have either ; and to cap the climax of in- sult, the very man was sent them to whom they had objected. In consequence of rejecting their preachers and electing others, they were publicly declared to be without the pale of the Church. This alarming step of excommunicating whole churches without the form of a trial, developes another of the anti-American features of Episcopal Methodism — especially when it is considered that the subject was carried up to the bishop, and he approved of it, and pronounced it Method- ismr^ I might multiply instances of this kind, but the limits of this tract will not permit. The simple fact that the power thus assumed by Methodist bishops, and countenanced and supported by the Methodist Episcopal Church may, at any time, be exercised oppressively, is sufficient to prove that this system is anti-American ; for Americanism makes no provision for the exercise of oppression, but constantly guards against the abuse even of delegated power. Episcopal Methodism, on the contrary, countenances and supports the oppressive exercise of assumed power. It is therefore Re- publicanism backwards. You deny to the members of the society the right to have any Book for the timps. pages 114-116 REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 301 voice in deciding who is a proper member to be received into *heir fellowship. You give to the preacher hi charge the aathority to say who shall, and who shall not be admitted into a Methodist society, and it is for him to say with whom the dear people must fellowship and commune as a mem- ber. You deny to the private member the exercise of his inaliev- able right as an American citizen and Christian, to be trieo^, lohen arraigned, by a jury of his peers, and the right to chal- lenge the jury. The private member is wholly at the mercy of the preach- er in charge. It is in the power of the preacher to have any private member acquitted though guilty, or condemned though innocent. 1 say the Discipline undoubtedly gives him the power. This feature was ably reviewed in 1848 by the editor of the Calvinistic Magazine, and he being an eminent Presbyterian Doctor of Divinity, I will allow him to speak. " The Discipline is a rod of iron in its regulations as to the trial of its private members. The book says : — ' How shall an accused member be brought to trial ? Ans. Before the society of which he is a member, or a select number of them, in the presence of a bishop, elder, deacon, or preacher, in the following manner : Let ihe accused and accuser be brought face to face ; but if this cannot be done, let the next best evidence be procured. If the accused person be found guilty by the decision of a majority of the members before whom he is brought to trial, and the crime be such as is ex- pressly forbidden by the Word of God, sufficient to exclude a person from the kingdom of grace and glory, let the min- ister or preacher who has charge of the circuit expel him.' ' Nevertheless, if (in any of several cases mentioned) the minister or preacher differ in judgment from a majority of y)0'2 THE GREAT IKON WUEEL. the society, or select number, concerning the innocence or guilt of the accused person, the trial in such case may be referred by the minister or preacher to the ensuing quarterly meeting Conference.' (Page 96.) The same right of ap- peal to the next quarterly Conference is allowed to the ex- cluded person, with the exception of such as absent them- selves from trial, &;c. 'And the majority of the travelling and local preachers, exhorters, stewards, and leaders present, shall finally determine the case.' (Page 98.) " Here we have the rod of iron. Such a process of trial — such a provision, or rather such a no-provision to secure justice, in the trial of a Church member, cannot be equalled in any Protestant denomination. It has no parallel out of the Papacy. Let us briefly examine it. ' The member shall be brought to trial before the society of which he is a member, or a select number of them, in the presence of the bishop, elder, deacon, or preacher.' Now, we ask, does the book tell us how the member is to be brought before the society^ or select number ?■ No ; the book is silent. To whom must the accuser go with his accusation ? The book is silent. How much notice as to time is given to the ac- cused? The book is silent. Is the accused told by formal citation the charge against him, and the names of the witnesses to support if? The book is silent. May he be turned into trial at a moment's warning, without any preparation? The book is silent. And that silence is ominous and terrible. That silence leads us to believe that the bishop, elder, dea- con, or preacher, has the whole arrangement of this beginning of actual process-. He may or may not receive the accusation at his pleasure. He may or he may not give citation to the accused, with due notice, other than his pleasure. Here, then, dagrant wrong may be done at the threshold of the court of justice. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 303 "Once more. Suppose the accused is before the judica- tory. Who compose that judicatory ? The book says, the society of which the accused is a member, or a select number of them. Very well. But here we ask again, ivlio decides whether the accused shall be tried before the society, or a select 7iumber ? The book is silent. Again. Who chooses that select number? The book is silent. What does this silence mean ? Does it teach us that this part of the process of trial is, also, under the control of the preacher 1 May he decide that the accused shall be tried by a select number ; and may he choose, or manage the summoning of that select number 1 Then he may directly or indirectly pack that jury. Look farther. ' Let the accused and accuser be brought face to face ; but if this cannot be done, let the next best evi- dence be procured.' Again we ask, how is this next best evidence to be procured 1 The book is silent. Is there any thing about the citation of witnesses ? No. Any thing as to a commission to take the testimony of absent witnesses, and the right of the accused to attend and cross-examine ? No ; the book is silent. Are we to infer that the bishop, elder, deacon or preacher is left by the book to procure this next best evidence in any way he may think propar ? And might they procure this next best evidence after this fashion : — Might theij send a committee to take the testimony of a lady, mho was asked to tell what a second lady had told her. a third lady had said ? and might this third lady be tried on such tes- timony and expelled the Methodist Church ? Verily, the accused member in the Methodist Church has no safeguard around him. For, our readers will see, First^ that the original trial before the society^ ov select number^ may be a farce, frnm the prodigious control of the preacher over the nQcieiy, or in the appointment of the select number. Sec- ondly, that the preacher has the right to refer the trial, i^ 304 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. he differ in judgment from the society, or the select number^ to the ensuing quarterly meeting Conference. Will it be said that the member, if condemned, is allowed to appeal 1 Yes, he may appeal. But where must he carry his appeal? Why, ' He shall be allowed an appeal to that same next quarterly meeting Conference.' And there, truly, he has less chance against the preacher than he had before the so- ciety, or the select number. For who compose the Quar- terly Conference ? Ans. The travelling and local preachers, exhorters, stewards, and leaders. Now, from the book, the exhorters, stewards and leaders, whatever may be true of the local preachers, are mere puppets m the hands of the itinerant ministers. And yet that court of appeals '■finally determines the case.^ " This is the rod of iron with a vengeance. A lawyer of highest standing in our country told us, that this whole thing called a trial in the Methodist Church, was the veriest burlesque upon justice. And we, here, do now challertoe any laioyer to come out and say that there is security against wrong to the accused, afforded by the Methodist Discipline. We defy him to do it. We do not challenge a Methodist editor to gabble silly sentences. We invite a lawyer — a judge of the rights of man in courts of justice, to meet this challenge, and to meet it over his own proper name. W^e defy him to do it. " N. B. — It is welJ to caution our readers who have not the Discipline. Methodists may tell them, as they told us, when we had not examined the book, ' Oh ! our trial is the fairest in the world — it is by arbitration / The accuser chooses one ; the accused another ; these two a third. The preacher has little to do with it.' But on consulting the book, we found that ihis arbitration trial had reference only to cases of ' any dispute between two or more members concerning the pay- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 305 ment of debts.' It has nothing to do with the regular trial for Church offences. Mark that. "Again. Methodists may say, ' Our trial is, in fact, con- ducted 80, and so, and so.' But let it be fully borne in mind, that any mode of trial, which actually takes place, not in the Discipline, is nothing else than the permission of the preacher — his mere jAeasure to let it he so. And such mode of trial, not in the Discipline, may be as various as the whims or consistency, the tyranny or kindness, the arrogance or humility, the regard for or disregard of popularity, which will be found in the minds of the many thousand itinerant preachers. Trial, thus controlled, is a rod of iron." I cannot allow this subject to pass without calling more especial attention to one feature not anti-American only, but anti-civilized. The member when arraigned is not allowod to challenge the jury which the preacher may select. The jury may consist of his most inveterate enemies, and still he has no more right to object than the poor victim in the hands of the inquisitorial fathers ! The right to challenge jurors (when trial by jury exists) is acknowledged in all civilized and Christian countries, even in monarchical countries. The right is considered a natural right — inalienable and indefeasible, and to violate it is con- sidered a barbarous outrage upon humanity, and a libel upon civilization. And yet the clergy — the fathers of the Method- ist hierarchy — deny it to their subjects, and that in repub- lican America; and the boasting democrats of America sub- mit to it — ay, endorse and support the barbarity ! We do not misrepresent Methodism in this; Dr. Bond in his "Econ- omy of Methodism," p. 87, thus admits and lamely apolo- gizes for it : " The right to challenge jurors, it is alleged, is acknowledged in all civilized and Christian countries. * * * We admit, however, that all civilized and Christian countries 306 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. ought to adopt it as a civil institution [and yet Methodism ought not to adopt it as a religious one !] of inestimable value ; but it does not follow that precisely the same regu- lation ought to be, or even can be, adopted in Church govern- ment, accompanied with the right to challenge jurors. The society that forbids a fair trial is an inquisition, not a Church." Then it follows that a Methodist society is an inquisition, and not a Church. But Methodists resign the right of suffrage not only in the election of their legislators and representatives, and their preachers, but in receiving and excluding members from their societies. The travel- ling preachers are omnipotent every where, ruling and controlling all. How^ever unjust and iniquitous their administration, the people must suffer in silence. They are forbrdden to express their dissent. The threat is, " Com- plain, if you dare. You will be guilty of speaking un- charitably or unprofitahly and evil of your ministers, which is expressly forbidden on pain of exclusion. The Discipline forbids uncharitable or unprofitable conversa- tion ; particularly speaking evil of magistrates and minister s.'''* — Dis. p. I, Chap, xi., sec. 11. Exclusion here stares in the face the one disposed to condemn clerical iniquity and in- trigue. Here is one of the first principles of Protestantism renounced, one of the crowning glories of Christianity dis- honored and rejected. "Art. 14th. Whenever the members of a church resign the right of suffrage, and of discussing freely and fearlessly the conduct of their rulers, whether it be done by direct concession, or indirectly by attaching themselves to, and continuing within the pale of a Church where such a system of polity obtains, they renounce, to a fearful extent, one of the first principles of the Protestant religion, and bring dis- honor upon its name. Whenever spiiitual rulers attempt Mn-iioniSM ha.« b.-cn defined, Religion on liorsel)ack. Thi.« would be a IxHer dciinition The I'RKAOiRn^ o>- TiiK I'KorLF's r.ACK— rage :'0T. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 807 to check a perfectly free communication of thoughts and feelings among the people — when the lips and the pens of the laity are interdicted, without their oversight and license — when they attempt to repress honest convictions and free inquiry — when their disapprobation is shown to all who do not support them, and their displeasure incurred by the dif- fusion of intelligence among the people not calculated to Increase their power and reputation ; then it becomes the duty of the people to decline their oversight, as men un- worthy to rule the Church of God. The rock on which the Church has split for ages is, that the sovereign power to reg- ulate all ecclesiastical matters (not decided by the Scrip- tures, and which of right belongs to a Christian community as such) has, by a most mischievous ^and unnatural policy, misnamed expediency, been transferred to the hands of a few ministers, who have been, in part, the patricians of the min- istry, and the aristocracy of the Church." — Bascom. Upon one of the court journals of the South this motto can be seen : " Methodism is religion on horseback." No^, in view of the flicts and features presented — in view of the principles laid down by Bishop Bascom — the usurpation of the rights and the systematized oppression of the people, I am compelled to amend it thus : '• Methodism is the preachers on the 2yeople's back." LETTER IXV. IS METHODISM REPUBLICAN'? It may be regarded a work of supererogation to discuss this question separately, after all the preceding discussions, directly or indirectly, involving it. But I know whom I oppose. I know that your preachers all over the land boast that Methodism is Republican — that it was modelled after the government of this nation, or our national government after it, and doubtless they succeed in making many of their followers believe it, and reecho the sentiment. But is it re- publican 'i What is the signification of the term 1 Let Web- ster be the standard : — " Republic, a commonwealth ; a state in which the exercise of the sovereign power is lodged in representatives elected by the people. In modern usage it differs from a democracy or democratic state, in which the people exercise the powers of sovereignty in person." " Republican, pertaining to a republic ; consisting of a com- monwealth." "A Hierarchy, the persons who have the exclusive direc- tion of things sacred ; used especially of a body of clergy of different ranks or orders." In all republican governments, then, the sovereign, all- directing and controlling power must be vested in the people. An organization in which the people have no voice, is desti- tute of the Jirst feature of a republican government. Not the faintest claim to republicanism can be set up for it. How is it in the polity of Methodism? Dr. Hodgson declares that the supreme power is in the hands of the travelling (808) REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 309 preachers. Is it not then a hierarchy '? If this is not enough to settle the question, I might refer you to the operation of Cookman's Great Iron Wheel illustration,* but I am dis- posed to trea' this candidly, investigate principles, and insti- tute comparisons and contrasts for the sake of the reader and inquirer ; for the age is upon us when this question of Church government will be intensely agitated. To decide upon the character of a government, we must first ascertain where or in whom the sovereignty resides, and what is meant by sovereignty. Writers on the law of nature and of nations, when they speak with exactness, use the word sovereignty to denote, not the supreme power employed in administering the government, but that on which the ex- istence of the government depends — the source of all power. In an absolute monarchy the sovereignty resides in the king ; in an aristocracy it resides in the nobles ; in a democ- racy or republic it resides in the people. In a mixed govern- ment it resides partly in the one and partly in the other. In the British government, the sovereignty resides in the Parliament, that is, in the king, lords, and commons. There, these combined have power to do whatever of a political nature they choose. They have power not only to alter the lawSjbut to change at pleasure the constitution of the kindgom. Very different is it in these United States. Here the sovereignty resides not in the government, either State or Federal, but in the people. They delegate to their rulers, not the sovereignty, but simply the exercise of certain func- tions of the sovereignty, reserving the rest to themselves. So careful are the people, that they make a distinct delegat'ion of legislative, judicial and executive powers to different men, and then make a further division of them among the Federal * The reader is invited to examine the engraving of the Iron Wheel. 810 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. and State authorities. All our constitutions, State and F*?J- eral, abound in restrictions on the powers of our rulers. The President is the supreme executive authority of the Union, having under him various subordinate executive offi- cers, as the members of his cabinet, the marshals, the collect- ors of customs, and all others who«e business is to execute the civil laws of the Union. But these, take them either individually or collectively, are not sovereign. The Governor is the supreme executive authority in each State. The mayors of cities, the sheriffs of counties, and the constables of wards and of townships, are so many subord- inate executive officers. But neither are these sovereign. In each State, there is a supreme court, having under it various inferior or subordinate courts. In the United States, there is a supreme court, to which the district and circuit courts are subordinate. But we can- not, if w^e speak with technical propriety, say that the United States Supreme Court is sovereign, for that is a body of limited powers bound by the constitution and all the laws of the Union, and the very nature of political sovereignty is such that it knows of no limit on itself imposed by human authority. Thus the British Parliament acknowledges no power above itself. And thus the people of the United States admit of no power above them to prevent their altering the constitution at pleasure. Each individual is, indeed, bound to obey the laws : but the people, in their collective capacity, are sovereign, and as such responsible to no human tribunal. Let us now apply these principles to Church government. In the Methodist Episcopal Church the sovereignty resides in the w^hole body of travelling preachers in full connexion. There is no limit on their powers in their government of the Church, except what their own sense of justice, or their own sense of expediency, under the laws of the land, may impose. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 311 In the Presbyterian society the sovereignty resides in the ministry ai-d ruling elders, who govern the body exclusively, through the Session, the Presbytery, Synod, and General Assembly. The laity are eligible to none of these bodies, save that the elders are elected from the laity, thouh this is of seldom occurrence, since the eldership is an imperial body, ruling for life or good behavior. Neither the elders nor mini-rfters are amenable to the people — the laity. la the Methodist Protestant Church, the sovereignty re- sides in the whole body of male members, as well lay as clerical, who are twenty-one years of age. And they have no other limit on their powers, in relation to their own ecclesiastical organization, than have the travelling preachers in the Methodist Episcopal Church. In the Baptist and Congregational Churches, the sov- Oi'eignty resides in the whole body of members, without distinction of sex or age. All are equal, and possessed of equal rights, equal authority and power. The Baptist Churches are pure democracies, and the only form of purely democratic governments in the world. Each Church — the congregated membership — calls and dismisses its pastors, receives, dismisses, disciplines and excludes its members. Before the whole Church the accused person is tried. The Bible alone is the criterion, it being the only rule of faith or practice acknowledged. The decision of a jnajority is the ultimate verdict, and since the Church is independent, there is no power above it, and consequently there is no appeal from its decisions ; which agrees with Matt, xviii : — " If he will not hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a "leathen man and a publican." The Church can reconsider her act, whenever a majority can be found in favor of it. There is this difference, also, to be marked between the Baptist and Congregational Churches on the one side, and 312 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. the Methodist Episcopal and Methodist Protestant Church on the other. Both the Methodist Episcopal Church and the Methodist Protestant Church are consolidated governments. The Methodist Episcopal Church is, throughout its bounds, one Church, divided into different societies according to local- ities. And the like remark applies to the Methodist Prot- estant Church. On the other hand, each Baptist and each Congregational Church, is in itself an independent sov- ereignty. Many of these form associations, but these are alliances, which may be dissolved at pleasure. According to their views, a Church does not forfeit or in the least degree impair its Church character by withdrawing from such asso- ciations. Now, in the Methodist Episcopal Church, the sov- ereignty, as already stated, resides in the whole body of the ^ravelling ministers, and it has pleased them to retain in their own hands the supreme legislative and supreme judicial powers. They have delegated these to no one. It has, indeed, pleased them to divide these powers in a certain manner between the Annual and General Conferences, but when it pleases them they can make a new distribution of these powers among themselves. The power which imposes re- strictions can remove them. A kind of inferior power of 1-egi slating and judging they have delegated to the Quarterly Conferences, or to their members, and also a power of judging in certain cases to committees appointed by the ministers. The supreme executive power the travelling ministers have delegated to the bishops ; a subordinate power to the presiding elders ; a more subordinate power to the ministers in charge of circuits and stations ; and a still more subor- dinate power to the Quarterly Conferences. In the Methodist Protestant as in the Methodist Episco- pal Church, there are superior and subordinate authorities. But there is this marked difference between them. In the REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 313 Mtithodist Episcopal Church, all power descends from the travelling preachers to the people. In the Methodist Prot- estant Church, all governing power ascends from the people to the minister. They have a constitution, which was form- ed by their delegates in convention assembled. Very, very different, is it in the Methodist Episcopal Church, as was eloquently said by a Methodist writer, more than twenty years ago : — " The Bishop appoints the minister ; the minister appoints the class-leacler and stewards ; these appoint the sexton, who, in his turn, appoints the grave-digger. So that, from him who soars aloft and overlooks God's heritage, down to him who delves in the earth and buries the bodies of the saints, all derive their power from the ministry, and all are respon- sible to them and to them only, for their proceedings." A great deal of pains has been taken by some writers to sho>v that the laity have some povrer in the Methodist Episcopal Church. It was quite unnecessary for them to take this pains. The laity have some power in the govern- ment of the Methodist Episcopal Church ; but it is precisely such power as the subjects of the Sultan of Turkey, the Shah of Persia, and the Autocrat of Russia have in the govern- ment of their respective countries — that is, a power derived from their superior rulers. I will allow the pen of a distinguished Methodist writer to draw the contrast between our republican government and the polity of Methodism,* at length : — " It is a principle of politics, and a principle verified by all human experience, that unchecked power, in the hands of any set of men, no matter whether lay or ecclesiastic, will * This article appeared in the Philadelphia Church Advocate, an able Methodist paper — not a court journal, of course. 14 814 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. degenerate into tyranny, and be exercised, not for the wel- fare of the governed, but for the gratification of the passions and the promotion of the interests of the governors. " To guard against this, the American people have made a most careful division of power among the township, county, State and Federal authorities, taking care that no one officer shall have more power than is necessary for the proper dis- cbarge of his functions, and that they shall be so arranged as to act as checks and guards on one another. With how much joalousy this principle is watched, is evident from the frequent discussion we have of the subject of ' State Eights.' Not content, however, with this division of power, the Amer- ican people make another into legislative, judicial, and executive, and are very careful that one department shall not encroach on another. " But how is it in the Church — in our Methodist Episcopal Church'? Here ail power is in the hands of a, compara- tively speaking, small body of men, the travelling preachers, and there is no division of it, except such as they make for their own convenience. If they divide this power among tlie General and Annual Conferences, it is for their own con- venience. If they delegate a part of it to the Quarterly Conferences, it is only that they may thereby the more easily carry out their scheme of ecclesiastical policy. The Quarterly Conferences have no powers except those which the travelling preachers have generously been pleased to grant them, and this power, which the travelling preachers have granted, they can, if they should deem it politic, take away. Even the power the private members have of recom- mending candidates for the offices of local preachers and exhorters, is not held by them as a right. It is, like the power of the Quarterly Conferences, a gracious concession by the travelling preachers. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 315 " In the Methodist Episcopal Church, no one, except the travelling preachers, has any rights. All that the local preachers, exhorters, class-leaders, and private members possess, are mere privileges, for which they are indebted to the sovereign will and pleasure of their 'Divine Right rulers. " Perhaps it may be said that the Methodist Episcopal sys- tem has its own checks and guards — that the bishops are checks on the presiding elders, the presiding elders on the ministers in charge of circuits and stations, and the minis- ters in charge on their assistants. But such checks are to be found in every despotism. They are the mere relations of superiors and subordinates, without which no government, either free or despotic, can exist. There is nothing in them which insures effective responsibility to the people : conse- quently nothing in them to prevent the government from degenerating into an instrument for gratifying the passions and promoting the interests of the governors, instead of being what it ought to be — an instrument for promoting the welfare of the governed. " Under the Methodist Episcopal system, one and the same man may, as a member of the General Conference, make laws and regulations, and afterwards, as minister in charge of circuit or station, give a judicial interpretation of them, and then carry the«n into execution. The law-giving, the judicial, and the executive functions, are all united in his person. He can act as presiding judge, and the same time as prosecuting attorney ; select his associate judges, direct all the proceedings, pronounce sentence, and finally carry, it into execution. If he does not do all this, it is an act of gracious forbearance on his part, or else a prudent deference to public opinion. 'The Discipline' gives him power to do it. 816 THE GREAT IRUN WHEEL. " Whatever his decision may be, there is no appeal from it, except to the Quarterly Conference, and that very Quarterly Conference consists, for the most part, of members who can be appointed and removed at his pleasure. " It may be that the court created by the ministers in charge, may give a decision not exactly according to his wishes. Then it is duly provided that, in cases of ' inveigh- ing against the Discipline,' and other cases which are duly enumerated, ' if the minister or preacher differ in judgment from the majority of the society or the select number, con- cerning the innocence or guilt of the accused person, the trial in such case may be referred by the minister or preacher, to the ensuing Quarterly Conference.' " Did ever any thing equal this 1 According to the princi- ples of common law, no man can be tried twice for the same offence. But this is not the principle of Methodist Episco- pal canon law. It is not enough, if a travelling preacher has an antipathy to a private member, that he can determine, in the first instance, whether he shall be tried by the whole society, or by a select number. It is not enough that he has power to determine how many this ' select number' shall be, and of what persons it shall consist. It is not enough that he has power to direct the whole proceedings. If they do not terminate exactly as he desires, he has power to remove the case to the Quarterly Conference, and then, if the class-leaders do not decide as he wishes, he has power to remove them and appoint others in their stead. " Can the travellmg preachers read this, their own law, and not blush that they have suffered it to disfigure their statute-book f • You must remember, and I hope the reader will remem- ber, that it is a Methodist, and a member of the Methodist E. Church in full connection and fellowship, who writes this. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 817 He knows whereof he affirms — he has watched the workin^g of the wheel-within-a-wheel power for years, and now, for the honor and glory of Methodism, which he loves, he would have the despotic and tyrannical features wiped out, and the system christianized and scripturalized, and consequently re- publicanized. But I allow him to proceed : " Perhaps it may be alleged that though all this is strictly true according to the letter, yet, in its practical application it is much less oppressive than might be supposed, owing to the good temper and good disposition of those who are in- trusted with its administration ; and that prudential motives restrain in the exercise of their power, many travelling preachers who have neither good temper nor good disposi- tion. To a certain extent this is true. If it were not, the system could not be endured for a single year. But every correct system of government contains within itself checks on the power of the rulers. Knowing that the best of men are fallible, it trusts as little as possible to the goodness of men. Against abuses of power it does not depend on checks from without, but on checks from within. " These evils do not, however, exist [only] in theory. The venerable John Hood, who was one of the original members of the society in this city, and who was for more than fifty years a class-leader at St. George's and at the Union, used to say that the conduct of the travelling preachers had been arbitrary from the beginning. How could it be otherwise*? Arbitrary power must produce arbitrary action. The sou- briquet by which Richard Rankin, Mr. Wesley's first super- intendent on this continent, was known, was that of ' The Proud Scot.' These three little words speak volumes, for they show the judgment the first race of American Method- ists had of one of their earliest rulers. Arbitrary proceed- ings, among which were the violent placing and displacing 318 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. of class-leaders, led to the secession of a number of the most respectaLle members from St. George's, and to the founda- tion of the Union Church in this city.* That Church re- mained independent of the Conference for one whole year. It is not correct to speak of these evils as existing in theory only. The arbitrary proceedings of the travelling preachers drive thousands every year from the Methodist Episcopal Church. "But we have not yet given all the checks which the American people have instituted to prevent abuses of power. Not content with the division of functions already mentioned, they will not suffer any of their rulers, the judiciary excepted, to hold power for more than a certain period. The mem- bers of the State Legislatures are elected for but one or two years, the Governors of States are elected for but two or three years, or perhaps for but one, and then not always reeligible. The members of the larger house of Congress are elected for but two years ; the members of the Senate for but six years. The President himself for but four. But our travelling preachers, like the kings and nobility of Eu- rope, hold their power for life. At least no one of them can be displaced, but by the action of his brother itinerants. No matter how bad his conduct may be, no action of the laity can divest him of his ' Divine Right' to govern the Methodist people. " In the State, by the frequent recurrence of elections, the strict responsibility of the rulers to their constituents is pre- served. But the travelling preachers are under no such re- sponsibility. In point of flxct they have no constituents. They represent no body but themselves and their own order. " There is, indeed, one branch of their government, in which Philadelphia. REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 819 the American people have given some degree of permanency to their officials, and that is the judiciary.* But they have not left this branch of the government without suitable checks. The presiding judge does not, as in the Methodist Episcopal Church, select his associates. But they all derive their authority from one appointing power, and thus each is made a check on the others. They are further checked by juries fresh from the people ; and still further by the bar, men learned in the law, who, if they find a judge acting im- properly, may have him removed by impeachment or ad- dress. In this manner is secured an effective responsibility of the judiciary to the people, though in a less direct way than in the case of the legislative and executive depart- ments of the government. " Having imposed all these -checks, the American people have given some degree of permanency to the tenure of office by the judges. And in so doing they have acted wisely, as, without it, there would be no uniformity in ju- dicial proceedings. " But in our Church, as if it was intended that the Method- ist Episcopal system should be in all things the antipode of the American political system, we have directly the re- verse. Our primary courts arc mere committees, appointed as occasion may arise, or ]pro re nata^ as a physician or lawyer would say, and appointed, except in arbitration of debts, by the travelling preacher or through his sufferance. It is true, indeed, that the travelling preacher may, instead of referring the case to * a select number,' refer it to the whole society; but that, too, is a fluctuating body, and utterly unqualified to act in a judicial capacity. The court * The inferior judges are now chosen by the people in many of the States. 320 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. of appeals, the Quarterly Conference, is no better. That is composed of men selected, not for their ability to judge, but on account uf their 'gifts' for preaching, praying, ex- horting, and class-lea iing, with a few added to attend to pecuniary matters. "A body so constituted ought to be a mere council, and never attempt to exercise judicial functions. The American people never refer judiciary cases to town meetings or mixed assemblies. They refer them to bodies composed of a few men, carefully selected on account of their ability to dis- charge the duties of judges. " The Methodist Episcopal system of government is bad from beginning to end. But the judiciary part of it is the worst of all. " We have not yet finished the contrast. In affairs of State, the utmost latitude of discussion is allowed. From the press and from the stump, our highest rulers are assailed, not only vigorously, but virulently, and quite as often un- justly as justly. This is not without its evils, but the evils are not to be compared with the benefits that arise from this liberty. " Without freedom of speech and of the press, there can be no free government. But in the Methodist Episcopal Church, we have neither. There is a law forbidding the members 'to speak evil of magistrates and ministers.' It it true that there is reason to suspect that by ministers Mr. Wesley meant not ministers of religion, but ministers of State, or that if he meant ministers of religion, he had spe- cial reference to the clergy of the Church of England. * It is certain that he did not mean travelling preachers, for this law was adopted before the first Conference was held, and he never was in the habit of calling the travelling preachers ' ministers,' or addressing th ^m as ' reverends.' Our itine- REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. ' 321 rant preachers, however, who are the supreme judges, so construe the law as to make it mean their precious selves, and they are also the judges as to what constitutes ' evil speaking' in the sense of the statute, and what punishment shall be inflicted on him who dares thus to touch ' the Lord's anointed.' " It might, however, be supposed that the discussion of ab- stract principles would be allowed. Not so. Whoever ventures to assail any point or principle of Methodist polity, does it at his peril. There is another law about * inveighing against the Discipline.' In what this ' inveighing' consists, the travelling preacher is the judge ; and how he can arrange the ' select number,' or the Quarterly Conference, so as to yield him due support in his judgment, must be evident from what we have already said of the structure of our courts ecclesiastical. " We have thus far confined our contrast of Methodist Epis copal and American political government, to practical ad ministration. If we consider the foundation of the twc governments, the contrast is not the less striking. Our poli- tical governments did not form themselves, but were formed by delegates chosen by the people for that express purpose. And our governments, as well State as Federal, can exercise no powers except those ^which have thus been expresssly delegated to them. Our ' constitutions,' as well the State as the Federal, are little more than restrictions on the powers of our rulers. " But no convention of the Methodist people has ever been held to devise a plan of government for the Methodist Epis- copal Church. Our travelling preachers assumed this power to themselves, without so much as asking the consent of the laity, and, of course, adapted every thing to the promotion of the interests and the gratifications of the passions of their 14* 822 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. own order. In the American sense of the term, the Meth- odist Episcoi^al Chm'ch has no constitution. There are no re- strict ons on the power of the rulers, except those which th»y themselves have seen fit to impose. " In the Asiatic sense of the term, the Methodist Episcopal Church has, indeed, a constitution, inasmuch as its govern- ment is made up of constituent parts. But, in this sense, Persia, Turkey, and Russia, have constitutions as well as Episcopal Methodism. If the Methodist people submit to the government that has been formed for th6m by others, it is from much the same principle that the subjects of Asiatic despotisms submit to the tyrannies that rule over them. " In the State, all power ascends from the people to their rulers. In the Church, all power descends from the travel- ling preachers to the people. " In the State all the citizens, stand on one level, and each is eligible to the highest offices in the government. In the Church, we have a noble order of men, the travelling preach- ers, who alone are considered competent to govern. " In the State, the Methodist stands erect, with all the rights of a man and a freeman. In the Church, he is de- graded, if not in his own eyes, in the eyes of others. ' I know not,' said a gentleman, 'on whom the Methodist Episcopal government reflects the most discredit — on the travelling preachers who have been guilty of these unwar- rantable assumptions of power, or on the people who tamely submit to them.' " Let a Methodist venture to complain of this state of things, and he is insultingly told, ' If you do not like the Church you can leave it.' It may be that it is endeared to him by the recollection of his father and mother, and by the memory of all whom he has loved best and respected most. It may be that rJl his social relations are in the Church. It. KEPUBLICANIS:\r BACKWARDS. 823 may be that himself and family have contributed liberally to its support for more than half a century. It may be that his talents are considerable, and his piety unquestionable. It may be that it is the only Church whose doctrines and forms of worship he can cordially approve. He has no objection, except to its government. This is enough. His ' Divine Right' rulers want none but patient and submissive subjects. — ' If you do not like the Church you can leave it.' " It is unnecessary, at least for the present, for us to give any other points of contrast of Methodist Episcopal and American political government. If the one is right, the other is wrong, and the reader must choose between them. The principles of right government are, we repeat it, the same in both Church and State, though they may differ to some extent in their application. They must necessarily be the same, for both Church and State have the same object in view, namely, the well-being of man ; both prohibit the like evils ; and the government of both is of necessity intrusted to fallible men. " The ' Divine Rights' of kmgs, and the ' Divine Rights' of priests, are too closely connected to be separated. If one class of these rights is well founded, so is the other. " If the minister of religion is a minister of God, so also is the minister of State, and he is so declared to be by the apostle. " If it is right, then, that fallible men should be left without suitable checks in the government of the Church, it is also right that fallible men should be left without such checks in the government of the State. But it is not right that either statesmen or ecclesiastics should be intrusted with arbitrary power. " The principles we contend for are the principles of liberty, v/hich are deeply rooted in the hearts of the American peo- 324 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. pie, and it must be expected that, sooner or later, the Meth- odist portion of the American people will apply them to affairs of Church as well as affairs of State. " There are some far-seeing men among the travelling preachers. To them we appeal. Do you think that princi- ples so antagonistic as those of Methodist Episcopal and American political government, can exist together, and not at some time produce a collision? Do you wish such a convulsion as they have had in England? Whether you wish it or not, be assured that it will come, sooner or later. The secular press will then, as in England, take part in the controversy, and it will then be seen that the ' great body of intelligent men in America' sanction the views we advocate. " Point out this danger to the more ignorant, the more big- oted, and the more prejudiced, of your brother itinerants. They may yield from a sense of policy, what they would never yield from a sense of justice. Persuade them to make a merit of necessity, and to give at once to the people a due share in the government. It is the only way in which the peace and prosperity of the Church can be placed on a per- manent basis." Prof. Deems, editor of the Southera Methodist Pulpit^ urges that Methodism is too evidently behind the times, un- suited to the present age, and to the spirit of Americanism ; that it did very well for the sooty colliers of England — mere servants, too ignorant for self-government — but that it is out of all question to call upon American citizens, presi- dents and professors of colleges, judges, and senators, to submit to a Church government constructed by one of the most violent of English Tories. So do I think it out of all question. I quote a paragraph from the pen of Prof. Deems, as it is copied from his periodical into the Nashville Method- ist Advocate : — REPUBLICANISM BACKWARDS. 825 " If we may apply the figure to Methodism, we can very readily see that a government suited to the sooty colliers of England, servants, and the uncultivated, who had grown up amid all the peculiarities of an aristocratic country, might hardly be fit for a Church among whose laymen are presi- dents and professors in colleges, judges of supreme courts, senators, and men liberalized by professional learning and polite associations. The fact is, John Wesley formed socie- ties ; ours is a Church. John Wesley did not make govern- ment a special study ; but being a strong man and a violent Tory, and finding a sect gathering around him to be govern- ed, he seized the reins — he became autocrat ; and through his helpers, he governed most ably. It was very natural that when our Church was formed, it should be built somewhat after the model of the * societies' of Wesley. Is it not too exact a copy, and may it not need mending? Even if Wesley had made government a study, and was by nature superior to the mass he controlled, there are laymen in our Church in this day, as great natively as Wesley, who have paid much more attention to the science of government. This is said with great deference and much veneration for many things in the character of John Wesley. He was before his times ; ours before him." Joseph Walker, of Dallas Co., Ala, wrote this in 1826 : — " J was personally acquainted with Bishop Asbury. I have heard him converse with the Rev. Hope Hull, who was a friend to reform, and I easily collected the information that our Church government was framed chiefly by subjects of Great Britain. Of course I never wondered much that such men should have shaped their code, and made their ecclesi- astical, laws, according to their own model. But when I consider that nearly all our present preachers are Ameri- cans ; when I consider how excellent and powerful is the 826 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. republican spirit which prevails in these United States, and how equal the civil laws under which we live ; when I see how carefully our civil and religious liberties are secured to the people of every possible variety of denomination, I am compelled to ask the question. Is not the form of our Church government, and the manner in which it is adminis- tered, an open insult to the Constitution of the United States? It surely is; and were it fully investigated and exposed to public view, such a despotic institution would make a bad appearance before the observation of a religious republic." Dr. Stevens, editor of the Boston Herald^ a court journal, and himself as humble a courtier as ever bowed or fawned at the foot of an Episcopal throne, under the excitement produced by the declarations of the lawyers and the decision of Judge Nelson, writes thus : — " We are not opposed to the division of the property ; we have shown this fully heretofore ; but we are opposed to the constructions which these lawyers put upon our ecclesi- astical system — constructions which must prove seriously detrimental to Methodism North and South, and which should call forth the remonstrances of both parties in this case. Methodism is essentially an hierarchical despotism, and needs immediate and thorough revision to adapt it to our times and our country. Its clergy have powers to direct or even divide the Church, which they have expressly denied (as in the Canada case), and which no body of free and intel- ligent laymen ought to tolerate one year." I hope this chapter, since it is chiefly from the pens of Methodist writers belonging to your own society, will be read seriously, and without prejudice, by the Methodist people and American citizens. P A E T II. LETTER IIVI. THE PECULIAR DOCTRINES AND USAGES OF METHODISM. " A Calvinistic Creed, a Popish Liturgy, and an Armenian ClergyP Dear Sir : — A review of the claims of Methodism to be considered a Church of Christ, would not be complete with- out a notice of the peculiarities of its creed — its doctrines and usages — its rites and ceremonies. All these are con- tained and enjoined iu your Book of Discipline, to which you require all who join your societies implicitly to subscribe, and by which they are to be tried ; and by its observance or violation they stand or fall — they are retained or excluded. It is preeminently prescribed as the sole rule of faith and practice to your members ; they must believe and teach no more and no less than what is therein contained. It is the Bible of Methodists. The Origin of the Methodist Discipline. With whom did it originate 1 Mr. Wesley informs us that, with some modifications, he compiled it from the Prayer- Book of the Church of England. Dr. Bond says, " Our doc- trines are avowedly those of the Protestant Episcopal Church."* We are then in a fair way to find the answer to the question ; for it is an admitted feet, that the Episcopal * Economy of Methodism, p. 20. 328 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Prayer- Book is of Popish origin ; it has all the characteris- tics which distinguish the Papal system. Episcopalians boast that their creed is that of the Catholic Church in the seventh century.* "The Prayer-Book was compiled from the Romish mis- sals used in the various dioceses of that country. Indeed, almost the entire table of collects, epistles, and gospels, now contained in the Prayer-Book, is identical with that of the Roman Sacramentary ; and many of the other prayers and ordinals of the English and American service are still to be found in the modern missal. It will not suffice to answer, that the epistles, gospels, &c., may be found in the Bible. In the order in which they appear in the Prayer-Book they are not found in the Bible, but in the Roman Sacramentary. Nor will it suffice to say, that the last revision of the missal took place in 1570, while the Prayer-Book was established, in its present form, in 1569; so that the latter could not have come from the former. The services from which both drew were, by universal admission, extant long before either of those periods. And the English Prayer-Book was not brought to the state in which it now stands until Friday, December 20, 1661, nearly one hundred years after the date assigned. The American Prayer-Book (to overlook the later addition of hymns) did not attain its present form prior to the year 1804. But, notwithstanding these revi- sions, the Prayer-Book used in your communion is substan- tially of Romish origin. Of all the ancient collects it con- tains, there are but four which are not found in the Sacra- mentary. In your morning and evening service, litanies ordinal, and psalter, the points of resemblance incessantly, and, at least in one instance, ludicrously appear. In the * See Dr. Jarvis' Church History. Bishop Whittingham. CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 829 Bible, the 14th Psalm has seven yerses; but your Prayer- Book, following the old Roman service, gives it eleven ! " Your Prayer-Book, therefore, subjects those who use it to singular infelicities. It ignobly restrains their Christian liberty, by confining their services to phrases coined by Rome. Made, like your homilies, for an age of ignorance, when ministers could not write their names, it holds the devotional aspirations of your most eloquent preachers in leading-strings, as if they were all babes in Christ. It fixes upon them the battology of the litany and communion service ; the tables of ' Holy Scriptures/ with the Apocry- pha among them ; the calendar of saints, with coj'responding festivals and fasts, some 125 in number; the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, the error of the sacraments, and the apostolic succession transmitted by the Holy Ghost. From the very fact of its origin, its language has ecclesiastical meanings, which subserve the doctrines of Rome, and which year by year are pouring converts into the bosom of the Papal communion."* The Liturgy, then, of the Book of Common Prayer is con- fessedly " popish." An English lord, speaking of the Church of England, declares it had " a Calvinistic creed, a popish LITURGY, and an Armenian clergy ;" and I will show you that your society possesses these same features. Whence came your creed and Liturgy? Second-handed from the Romish apostacy, and is boldly marked with Pop- ish features. Your Liturgy is popish. The adoption of a Liturgy is a Popish feature — a mark of the beast. "But it is only a form of worship," you may say ; " and it is pro- per to have forms." Very well ; but yours, like those of * Letters on Episcopacy, addressed to the Episcopal clergy of South Curolina. By E. T. Winkler. Southern Baptist for Feb. 2, 1853. 330 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. the Catholic Church, from which they were copied, are enjoined by an inviolable law. They constitute a part of the Book of Discipline, which you require both member and minister to observe and keep in " every point, great and small." To refuse to observe them is to refuse to keep and obey the Discipline. To speak against them is to " inveigh against the Discipline," and expulsion is the penalty. By what authority have you enacted or adopted forms of wor- ship, rites and services, feasts and fasts, which you claim the right to change at your pleasure, and enjoined them upon the Church of God, excommunicating those who will not keep your traditions? It is the popish principle which I repudiate. Who gave you this authority — this prerogative, which belongs to Christ, the King of Zion, only 1 You (the clergy in Conference assembled) claim the authority to ordain, change or abolish rites and ceremonies whenever you see fit. " Every particular Church [i. e.. General Conference, for no other body in Methodism has the power, the Conference or clergy is then the Church ! !] may ordain, change or abolish rules and ceremonies so that all things may be done to edi- fication. — Articles of Religion^ xxii. The rites and ceremonies of the Methodist Church, then, are purely the traditions of the elders — '■'■the commandments of menP Am I to worship Christ with these ? Will he be pleased with such worship % "In vain do ye worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men," is his own replv. We cannot serve two masters — Christ and men ; God and the General Conference. But to " break the rites and ceremonies" that the preachers ordain or amend quadrennially, subjects the member to re- buke and exclusion from Christ's Churchy if Methodism be a Church of Christ. What savs the law •- CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 831 "Whosoever, through his private judgment [here we see private judgment is not allowed even with respect to those things that the clergy may enjoin !], willingly and purposely doth openly break rites and ceremonies of the Church to which he belongs, which are not repugnant to the word of God [and who, pray, are to be the judges ? The very ministers who ordain the rites ! The people are not allowed to exer- cise any judgment whatever, but to take for granted that whatever the ministers command is not repugnant to God's word ! and is not this Popery full grown ?\ and are ordain- ed and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear to do the like," &c. — Art. Rel. xxii. This is one of the doctrines of your society, for I find lo in your "Articles of Religion." How blindly do you re- quire Methodists to serve you ! You require them, upon joining, to believe all you have enacted in the Discipline, and all you r^iay see fit to ordain ! To believe every doctrine and observe every rite most religiously, until you enact the opposite doctrine and a different rite, and then they are as religiously to believe and observe that ! This is one of the popish features in your Discipline, and a most abominable one too. Say not another word — and let no Methodist say another word — agjiinst the credulity of Roman Catholics, and their faith in the Pope and the priests, and their duty to yield implicit obedience to all the clergy enjoin, until this doctrine is purged from your Book of Discipline. Your Friday fast is another -popish, feature^ and borrowed from Rome. The Pope appoints for fast days " one meal." " Every Friday in Advent," &c. To abstain from fiesh. "All Fridays.'''' See Manual, pp. 29, 30. 382 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. Now turn to the very 29th page of Metbodist Discipline. " It is expected of all who desire to continue in these wcieties to evidence their desire of salvation by 'fasting or abstinence,'" Fast when ? Upon any particular day 1 Yes, sir, 'iipon a very particular day. •' He [the preacher in charge] shall take care that a fast be held in every society in his circuit on the Friday preceding every quarterly meeting." — P. 62. Law given to the bands December 25, 1744, " To ob- serve as days of fasting or abstinence, all Fridays in the year." — Dis. p. 84. But for what purpose are these stated fasts and abstinences so authoritatively enacted by the Romish Church ? For penance ! She requires of her priests to " fast oft," and if they would attain to great sanctity of life, to fast as much as health and strength will permit ; and even flagellations are advised for the same end. Read the lives of the monks and ascetics, &;c. Well, what duty does the Discipline enjoin upon Methodist ministers ? Fasting ! " Do you use as much abstinence and fasting every week^ as your healthy strength and labor will jyermit .^" / / Now, the penance of fasting is made a religious duty to the Catholic. When he comes to the confessional, he is put upon his conscience to confess if he has kept the Friday and other fasts. He is asked, " Have you neglected to perform the penance enjoined in confession ?" " Have you presumed to receive the blessed communion having broken your fast?" And how is it with the Methodist 1 When he comes to the band meeting, which is a substitute for the Romish confes- sional, he, too, is also put upon his conscience concerning the Friday fasts." See Dis. p. 84, directions given to band societies. " To observe as days of fasting or abstinence all Fridays in the year." CHKISTIANITY REVERSED. 333 Now, these Friday fasts are enjoined by the Discipline, are among the directions given to the band societies, and each meiLber gave " satisfactory assurances of his willingness to observe and keep the rules of the Church" (Dis., p. 30), when he joined the Church. Therefore, to violate this rule is to violate his solemn pledge and vow, which is sin, or a " fault," at least. One "of the questions to be asked in the "band" is, "What known sins have you committed since our last meeting ?" But you may say, '* It is proper to fast, and the Scriptures exhort us to fast." Grant it ; but they nowhere command Christians to fast on Friday, and upon every Friday in the year. Nor can you find an instance where any one fasted on Friday, within the lids of the New Testament. It is the Romish principle to which I object — the observ- ance of days, and this arbitrary enactment of a law to ob- serve every Friday in the year as a fast day, and making it as sacred a duty to keep it as to keep the Christian Sabbath. And then it is evident to all that it requires equal authority to command men to abstain from/ooc? one day in the week, as to abstain from work. God alone has the right to enjoin such a law ; and for man to do it is to usurp the prerogatives of the great God. You, sir, and your ministers in General Conference assem- bled, have as good a right to command the Congress of the United States to fast every Friday, on pain of expulsion at your hands from their places, as to lay your commands upon the Church of Christ, and enact that its members shall fast every Friday in the year, or by you be excluded from their citizenship in the kingdom of Christ. • You have as good a right to enact in your next General Conference that every adult man and woman shall kneel at 334 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. sunrise each Friday, and say a " Pater noster," or be ban- ished out of the State, as to lay such a command upon the members of Christ's commonwealth. You might say, " It is but a good thing we enjoin." Grant it. It is a good thing to rise at sunrise, and it is a very good thing to say the Lord's prayer, if in sincerity and truth, and it is proper to kneel when we pray, but it is a most presumptuous act of high- handed and despotic authority for a congress of Methodist preachers to say that every Tennesseean shall kneel at sun- rise every Friday morning and say the Lord's prayer. Who gave you the right to command us *? Such arbitrary dic- tation on your part would be in violation of the genius of our government and the Constitution, and for a Tennesseean to acknowledge your authority over him, would be a virtual acknowledgment of the supremacy of your authority over that of the State, and of the United States. So the Christian man or woman who submits to such human authority, not only rejects that of Christ, but virtually acknowledges that the authority of ministers is above that of Christ. You have as good a right to say I shall feast every Satur- day, as that I shall /as^ every Friday, since you may grant an indulgence as rightfully as command a penance. You have as good a right, and it would be as proper for you, to say that I shall eat beef on Monday, pork on Tuesday, fish on Wednesday, and fowl on Thursday, as that I shall eat nothing on l^riday. It is one of the anti-Christian preroga- tives of the Man of Sin you have usurped. What have I to do with Romish penance ? and what has a Protestant to do with j>enance % For me or any Christian to acknow^ledge your authority in this thing, and to obey you, would be endorsing and approving a tradition of Rome — penance. Protestant penance is as wicked and anti-Chris- tian as Popish penar.ce. CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 335 Then to enjoin a Friday fast, on pain of rebuke and exclu- Eion, is to usurp one of the anti-Christian prerogatives of the Man of Sin ; and to submit to such an observance is a sin against Jesus Christ. LETTEE XXVII. The Discipline — Its Popish Liturgy/ — Its Marriage Service borrowed from the Romish Church — The Mummeries of Rome Protestayitized. Dear Sir : — A child will possess some of the features of its mother. The Liturgy of the Discipline does possess many of the features of the Roman Sacramentary. In ad- dition to those features mentioned in the last letter, to illus- trate more fully my meaning, I take the "marriage service." From what source is the marriage service of your Discipline borrowed, almost word for word ? I answer, from the ser- vice of the Romish Church. Some few of the extras of that service are omitted, as the cross, &c., and the prayers modi- fied. Let us compare them. Romish Service. The priest asks the bridegroom (who must stand at the right hand of the woman), " N., wilt thou take N., here pres- ent, for thy lawful wife, according to the rite of our holy mother Church 1 " The man shall answer^ " I will." The priest puts the same question to the bride, and re- ceives the same answer. Methodist Service. The minister asks the man, standing on the right hand of the bride, "M., Wilt. thou have this woman to thy wedded (886) CHRisTiAN:rr reveused. 387 wife, ±0 live together after God's ordinance, in the holy estate of matrimony 1 Wilt thou love her, comfort her, honor, and keep her, in sickness and in health ; and, forsak- ing all other, keep thee "only unto her, so long as ye both shall live? " The man shall answer, " I will." The same question is put to the bride. The reader can see that this part is much longer than the Romish service, and more objectionable. Romish. Here is the vow : "I, N., take thee, N., to be my wedded wife, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, till death do us part, if holy Church will it permit, and thereto I plight thee my troth." Then ihcy loose their hands, and, joining them again, the woman says after the priest, — " I, N., take thee, N., to be my wedded husband, to have and to hold, from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and iu health, till death do us part, if holy Church will it permit, and thereto I plight thee my troth-" Methodist Service. The man says after his minister, " J, M., take thee, N., to be my wedded wife, to have and to hold, from this day for- wardj for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance ; and thereto I plight thee my faith." Then shall they loose their hands, and the woman, with her right hand taking the man by his right hand, shall say after the minister, — 15 838 THE GRKAT IRON WHEEL. " I, N., take thee M., to be my wedded husband, to have and to hold, fn:m this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love, cherish, and to ohey^ till death us do part, according to God's holy ordinance; and thereto I give thee my faith." — Dis. pp. 151, 152. Why, sir, omitting one expression, I far prefer the Rom- ish ceremony to your deformed copy of it ; and one thing I do know, so long as I am an American Christian, no Methodist minister shall rehearse his Romish service over me, living, marrying, or dead — if my wish is respected when I am no more. When I want to be married with a Romish service, 1 will go to the Church- of Rome, whose rightful property it is, I will not receive stolen goods, or contra- liaiid merchandise. Why not let Rome hold and use her own Liturgy 1 What have Christians to do with her trumpery 1 I have compared the Liturgy of the Discipline with the Liturgy of the Pope only in one particular. Those who have the time can compare the Methodist service for the "ministration of baptism," "the burial service," " the ad- ministration of the supper," and " prayer of consecration," and the form and manner of ordination of ministers, inferior and superior, and the oaths enjoined, if they wish to be con- vinced how much of Rome they ignorantly worship. Methodists unwillingly acknowledge the ,very principles; and adopt almost the very forms, in tlieir Liturgy, that they condemn in the "poor, deluded followers of the Man of Sin." Do you say, '* These services are not operative now — they have become obsolete ? " Why not then expunge them from your Discipline? Why compel every minister to whom you administer the vow of ordination, to solemnly pledge himself to observe them — io mind^ not ^nend^ your rules — to CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 889 observe every point, great and small, in the Discipline 1 If that minister be a conscientious man, triie to his vow, he will observe the Friday fasts, according to the Discipline, and enjoin the band meeting, marry the living and bury the dead, and baptize infants and adults, and administer the sup- per, according to the popish Liturgy of the Discipline ; and if any Methodist minister does not so observe his Discipline, he is a perjured man ; he has sworn and performs not ; he lives in open violation of his solemn vows, and is obnoxious to trial and exclusion. Do you say, " Forms are proper in the Church 1" Very well. But forms that are enjoined by an inviolable law are sinful, both in their appointment and observance; for the prerogative of the "Man of Sin" is acknowledged and submitted to. To concede to ministers the power to ordain whatever forms, and rites, and cere- monies they may think proper, is yielding to them a most fearfully dangerous power — the very pov/er arrogated to him- self by the Pope. To concede to ministers such prerogatives is to exalt them to an equality with Jesus Christ, and to vio- late and disregard his positive commands and injunctions; to obey theirs, is to exalt them above Christ, and to say they are more to be reverenced, loved, and feared than the Saviour. The Presbyterian editor to whom allusion has been made, fihows up the borrowed plumage of the Discipline. He thinks all the improvements upon the Romish Liturgy have been made by Episcopalians, and, therefore, belong to them, and they alone have a right to complain that Method- ists have borrowed their finery, to give Episcopal character to their Liturgy. " The Discipline — Borrowed Plumage. " Methodism is not Episcopal. What right has it, then, to Episcopal forms and orders in baptism, matrimony, the 840 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. burial of the dead, the Lord's supper, and the manner of making and ordaining bishops, elders, and deacons? All this is borrowed plumage. Part of it is unmeaning, moth- eaten finery, hung up in the Discipline, and another part the sheerest mummery. First, Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right have they, then, to ' the ministration of baptism,'' as contained in their Discipline 1 It is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer-Book. And it is unmeaning finery. For what is the object of baptism 1 Episcopalians regard bap- tism as ' the only rite of initiation into the Church of God.' Presbyterians also say, it is ' the solemn admission of the party baptized into the visible Church.' But it has no such place in Methodism. Joining a class is the right of admis- sion into Methodism. And not attending class is preemi- nently exclusion from the Church. Well, is baptism ad- ministered to persons who join the class? No. How long may they remain in class, and have all the privileges of Methodism without baptism ? Six months ? six years ? or sixty ? How many unbaptized seekers are in the Methodist Church? Bishop Jayne says there are 50,000 seekers in the Church North! How many in the Church South? The ministration of baptism, then, in the Discipline, is bor- rowed plumage ; and it is very much an unmeaning finery. " Again : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right have they, then, to ' the solemnization of marriage,' as in their Discipline ? It is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer- Book ; and it is unmeaning finery. Do Methodist preachers perform that splendid ceremony ? We do not know how it may be on all occasions. But we once witnessed the cele- bration as it was done by one of the brethrer/. The trem- bling couple stood up. They had no need to tremble long. * Join hands,' said the preacher. ' In the name of the Lord, CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 341 I pronounce you husband and wife. Lord ! as thou hast made these two one flesh, grant them thy blessing. Amen ! Take your seats ! ' We may have failed in the very words ; we have not missed the time many seconds. A Churchman would have wondered if that was meant for Episcopacy. Certainly, it was the funniest, little odd-come-short marriage rite we ever witnessed ; and entirely eclipses the shortest of the short of our attempts in marrying a deaf and dumb man. "Again: Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, th3n, have they to ''the order for the burial of the dead,'' as in the Discipline ? It is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer-Book ; and it is finery hung up for show in the Dis- cipllne. But in the place of it, there is, after due time and notice, a funeral sermon. And, be it said, th\s funeral sermon, in practical influence, is becoming like the Roman Catholic mass for the dead. This sermon is preached for the asking. And friends expect the preacher to put the souls of their dead at rest in heaven. This sermon, in some places, seems to be necessary to the consummation of the funeral. We were asked once in these very word^ — 'Will you go to-day to Mr. 's funeral P ' His funeral ! ' said we. ' Why, we thought he died a year ago V ' O yes,' said our neighbor — 'he died then, but he has never had hxs funeral yet!' We give another illustration, right to the point. A man had shaken hands with a Methodist preacher and joined class — then fell back — lived as before for a considerable time, and died in delirious fever, absolutely preventing all conversation with him. By request, we preached at the grave a prepared sermon with all proper and yet guarded delicacy of allusion to the dead. But it would not do at all. Months after, a high funeral sermon was offered up, and the friends came away with their minds at res^. This evil is not. however, 342 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. confined to the Methodist Church. It exists elsewhere, and needs to be arrested. Man now, as ever, loves extreme unc- tion and the mass for the dead. " Again : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, then, have they to ' the order for the administration of the Lord's sapper,'' ^s in the Discipline'? It' is borrowed from the Episcopal Prajer-Book ; and is finery hung up for show in the Discipline. Tlie Lord's supper has august regard paid to it in the Episcopal Church. It is the day of days — the time of times. But what and where is the supper in Method- ism % Did any body ever hear a Methodist speak with any interest of expecting to approach, or having been at, the Lord's table 1 Does it not evidently fill a place in the mind of a Methodist greatly below the class meeting and the love feast — to say nothing of the shout and the bodily exercise? Does the Lord's supper occupy, in Methodist meetings, a time and place fully known to all ? Is it not postponed for frivolous reasons, shuffled aside, and poked away in a corner'? And when administered, how often may the elder feel ^'' straitened for time,'' and ^ omit any part of the service except the praijer of consecration,'' that the altar and the straw m.ay be prepared for more exciting exercises ? " Lastly : Methodists are not Episcopalians. What right, then, have they to ' the form and manner of malcing and or- daining of hishop>s, elders, and deacons,'' as in the Discipline '? All this is borrowed from the Episcopal Prayer-Book ; and it is not only borrowed plumage — it is the grossest mummery. Presbyterians reject Episcopacy in all its claims. But they can respect the faith of those who believe they trace prelatical mystery back two thousand years. And our imagination may even kindle with theirs, when they look upon the kneel- ing man and the mitred dignitary whose hand communicates, as they think po^j^er and grace from Christ, and Paul, CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. S43 and Clement, and Gregory, and Cranmer, and Tillotson, to rule the flock. Just as we can honor loyalty, or admire some noble Pei'cy, as his heart swells, and eye gleams over the heraldic shield which has come down to him, borne upon the breast of belted earls through glittering lances, and shadowy plumes, and banners of ancestral glory. Wc can feel that all this is in keeping with Europe, and the monarch, and the military noble, and the Established Church. But we would have no sympathy at all, if we saw a Tennesseean, at a British coronation, astride an English war-horse, wield- ing the battle-axe of Richard, and playing the part of cham- pion for the king in the gaudy show. We would open our eyes, and cry out, ' J(5nathan, what business have you there f And s(>, when we see strait-breasted Mr, Stubblefield, the Methodist preacher, made a bishop by some Francis Asbury or Lorenzo Dow, we cannot help thinking of the daw and the peacock's feathers, or other fable about borrowed honors, or of old Mr. Burchell, in the Vicar of Wakefield, when he said fudge to certain persons pretending to be fine ladies from London. "And when Methodist divines are clothing one of their' number with Ejnscopal orders, there is a particular thing in the ceremony worse than fudge. For, what do the preach- ers mean when they utter these words, ' Receive the Holy Ghost,'' at the ordination of their bishops ? We know what Episcopalians mean. They understand that the g< ace of apos- tolic succession is thus conveyed. Now, Presbyterians can hardly acquit Episcopalians of impiety in the consecration of a bishop ; because these zvords, as we receive them, are never used in the Scriptures but to express miraculous power communicated by inspired hands. What, then, is it but some- thing akin to blasphemy, when Methodist ministers, in their . Episcopal mummery, say these loords ? " 344 THE GREAT J RON AVUEEL. If all the above mummery is not binding, expunge it — expurgate these jDopisb features. Christianize and Ameri- canize your Discipline, f you intend to urge its acceptance, or a respect for it upon American Christians. Your Liturgy IS the imnge of the Romish, and you thus cause your follow- ers to worship the beast in his image. LETTER XXVIII. "And there were added to the Church daily (Gr. SoudzoTtienous) the saved.^' — Acts k The Pojnsh features of the Discipline — Unscriptural terms of admission — The Societies used as drag-nets to sweep the . world into the Methodist Church. Dear Sir : — It must be admitted that the published stand- ards of a Church, as its Confession, Creed, Discipline, &c., faithfully represent the fliith and practice of that Church. It is understood that these creeds and Discipline are the pro- perty of the public, and open to examination and criticism. Of this, no denomination can justly complain, unless its creed is misrepresented ; and then correction is admissible. It is my design to state all your doctrines with the utmost fairness, and if I am misled, 1 charge the fault upon your own standard writers. I repudiate your conditions of admission into your socie- ties, provided you claim that they are Scriptural churches. Your conditions of admission are essentially Popish, and are indeed more objectionable than those of the Romish apostacy. Your very conditions of admission prove your societies to be wo churches, in a scriptural sense. It would be useless for me to prove, what is so conspicu- ously taught in the whole New Testament, that the universal condition of Church membership is personal faith in Christ Jesus. Upon a satisfactory statement of this, the candidate is received into Christian fellowship^ and, upon a public 15* (846) 846 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. profession of it in baptism, into Church fellowship. The Scriptures everywhere teach that the churciies of Christ ^vere composed of baptized believers ; not only giving no warrant for, but forbidding, the admission of any other cha- racter. (1.) John, whose ministry was the beginning of the gospel of Christ (Mark i. 1.), baptized only upon a profession of repentance and faith in the Christ to come (Mark i. 7. Acts xix. 4). (2.) Jesus made and baptized all the disciples he recei^ ed. (3.) He enjoined in his last commission : 1st. Preaching or discipling. 2d. Baptism to those believing ; and this speci- fication of baptism to one particular class, is equivalent to a prohibition of it to any other class.* od. Teaching the ob- servance of all he had commanded. (4.) We have the example of the apostles. The apos- tles preach the gospel, " and they that gladly received the word were baptized." "And the Lord added unto the Church daily [sodzomenous) the saved ;" i. e., believers in Christ, for such are saved. " Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved." (5.) The apostles addressed the primitive churches as companies of justified, sanctified persons : " Paul, unto the Church of God which is at Corinth, to them that are sancti- fied in Christ Jesus, called to be saints," and numerous like passages. (6.) Paul distinctly forbade the Church at Corinth to in- troduce unbelievers (i. e., infidels) and non-believer-s into the Church. "Be ye not unequally yoked together [like associating in Church relation] with unbelievers ; for what fellowship hath * According to that principle of common law, Expressio unius est exclusio alterius. CURISTIAXlTr liEVKRSED. 347 ricrhteousness with luirighteousnoi!^ ? Church, for the space of six months ? Where do you find a war- rant for a practice in open war with the practice of the apostles'? Where, but from the head of your Church — the congress of preachers *? I propound this question : Does not the right to shut a Christian out of the Church six months imply the right to shut him out six years, or sixty 1 Will you say, " He is vir- tually in the Church when he joins the society ?" But he has never been baptized — he happened not to be sprinkled in in- fancy, and having made a consistent profession of conversion, one with which all your preachers are fully satisfied, he applies for baptism at your hands. Will you grant it to him the same day, or the same week, or in six weeks, or within six months ? No, sir ; the law-book your preachers have solemnly vowed to follow positively forbids him the rite of baptism for the space of six months ! Have you any authority in God's word for this prohibition 1 Does the last commission, the great law of baptism, place a trial period of six months, or six hours, between the exercise of foith in Christ and the profession of Christ in baptism 1 Do not all the examples of baptism in 368 THE GREAT IRON WUEEL. Ihe New Testament teach us that the converts were imme- diately baptized 1 How was it with the converts of Peiite- cost 1 of Samaria 1 with the eunuch ? Cornelius and his fam- ily 1 with the jailor ? and with Lydia ? Were they not all baptized immediately upon their acceptance of Christ ? By what authority, then, Mr. Soule, are you warranted in com- manding your ministers not to baptize a believer for six months 1 Is not your practice manifestly contrary to that of the apostles 1 And by what authority do you drive in the face of their teachings and practice 1 By the authority of the Methodist congress — the preachers. If you and your ministers have a right to deny baptism to a believer for half a year, have you not the right to deny it to him for half a century, and altogether ? Christ commands immediate obe- dience. You slip in between the believer and Christ, and say, " Not so ; you ought and shall wait six months, and not then shall you be allowed to obey Christ in the rite of bap- tism, unless you satisfy my class-leader and preacher that you believe the Discipline, and will obey us Methodist preach- ers. You must obey us for six months, as a proof that you will evermore obey us, before we will allow you to be bap- tized. You must first acknowledge our authority over you, by observing one of our laws — attend class- meetings week- ly for six months, and then you may be baptized and admit- ted into the Church ! ! " Do you not require of the convert open disobedience to Christ for six months, that he may give you satisfactory assurances of his willingness to obey you — obey you in preference to Christ, and your laws to Christ's laws, and your book to Christ's Book 1 And yet you will baptize the unconscious infant at once, living or dying/ You have the same authority for the one practice that you have for the other. A scriptural precept or example for re- fusing to baptize and -^'oeive into your Church a Christian for CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 369 the space of sLx months, and for baptizing and receiving into your Church an unconscious babe, you will find in the same chapter and verse of God's word. But I weigh one unanswerable objection against your practice of giving the Lord's Supper to the unregenerate and unbaptized seeker. You invert the order of the divine law, which requires faith before baptism, and baptism before the Supper. Calling upon a seeker, a confessedly unregenerate man, to partake of the Supper before his conversion and before his baptism, you violate and array yourself against the positive commands of Christ. To invert the divine order is to violate •t. Christ places faith as a condition to baptism in ever^/ instance, for so reads his law, and there are no exceptions, and he makes baptism an indispensable condition to the observance of the Supper. No man can invert this order without a palpable violation of Christ's command, and a sub- version of the whole Christian system. Your own Hibbard has written forcibly upon this point ; — " But why may we not suppose, also, that the same order of duty is now binding on every adult candidate for baptism 1 Is not baptism binding upon us, as the next duty in order after conversion, as much as it was upon Cornelius, or the converts on the day of Pentecost 1 Suppose Cornelius had withstood Peter on the question of the order of baptism, Suppose he had desired Peter to defer baptism till after he had communed at the Lord's table, or to some indefinite period. Would he not, in this instance, have arrayed him- self against a positive command of God 1 The command was, to be baptized. This was enjoined as the next act of religious duty after conversion. The time and relative ordei of the institution were points of palpable and direct obliga. tion, as well as the ordinance itself in the abstract ; and to 16* 370 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. invert this order, or defer baptism, would have been to oppose the divine arrangement." But Mr. Hibbard strangely forgets that in advocating infant baptism he inverts the divme order^ and thus arrays himself against Heaven's arrangement! When he can prove that baptism can in any Instance, consonant with the teachings of the commission and the example of Christ or his apostles, precede faith, then will I prove to him from that very scripture that persons may partake of the sacred Supper before they have been baptized. All Mr. H.'s rea- sonings militate powerfully against infant baptism. As this is an important subject, I lay before you an article from the pen of a writer who ranks second to none in the South. "probation among the METHODISTS. " It is a notorious fact that the Methodists receive into their societies probationers or seekers. These seekers have a six months' membership, and at the close of six months, accord- ing to strict Methodist rule, if they have not found, they are cut off from the society to which they attached themselves. It sometimes happens, however, that persons remain for years among the Methodists as seekers. They are not cut off when the probation term expires, but are permitted to renew their probation or to continue seekers without any renewal of the privilege of probationship. Methodist seekers are a sort of anomalous class. It seems that they are not of the world altogether; and yet they are not recognized as worthy of full membership in the Methodist societies. It may be they are thought to occupy a position somewhere about half-way between the world and the Church. Poor creatures ! \f this be so, analogical reasoning might suggest the idea of a place equi-distant between heaven and hell for seekers to go to when they die. Methodists, however, do CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 371 uot believe in purgatory. These are some of the notions of the grandmother which the granddaughter does not adopt. This is well enough. " The capital objection to the system of ' seekership' among Methodists is, that it is unscriptural. I am aware that some contend that it has the sanction of scripture. I once heard a Methodist preacher say, ' The expression, " This man re- ceiveth sinners and eateth with them," justified the reception of sinners into the Church, provided they were determined to seek the salvation of their souls !' What an expositor ! Whether his remarkable talent for exposition has been so highly appreciated by his brethren as to secure for him the title. Doctor of Divinity, I know not ; but I have observed in a Methodist paper that he is styled Dr. . Well, be it so. The public are beginning to learn that among Methodists the title D. D. is no indication of more than moderate attainments in literature or theology. But to the passage, 'This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them.' The Scribes and Pharisees disdained an association with pub- licans and sinners. They felt a supercilious contempt for such persons. When the Saviour came, he preached the gospel to the poor. He even associated with publicans and sinners that he might do them good. He reclined with thcni at their meals and ate with them, thus making the friendship symbolized by ' breaking bread together' subservient to the promotion of their spiritual welfare. But the man who will say that the social intercourse that Jesus had with sinners authorizes the reception of sinners into the Church is not to be reasoned with. A sensible physician would prescribe for hinr the application of ice-water to his feverish brain. " I have also heard the opinion expressed by a Methodist oreacher that a portion of the three thousand that were added to the Church on the day of Pentecost were seekeFs. He 372 THE GKEAT IRON WHEEL. said he did ' not suppose tliey were all converted. Why he did not sujypose^ he did not say. He seemed to speak with authority, and I suijpose did not think it worth while to trou- ble himself with the little matters that are sometimes called reasons. What an age of nonsense we live in ! That man is not under the canopy of heaven, who, with the aid of a microscope, can see in the Pentecostal narrative any thing that resembles Methodist seekership. What are the facts in the case 1 Peter preached to the people — charged on them the murder of the Messiah — and showed the fulfillment of prophecy in his death and resurrection. Not stopping to harmonize the divine sovereignty with human agency, he pro- claimed both doctrines, letting the people know that they had wickedly done what had taken place 'by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God.' What was the effect of this sermon 1 The people ' were pricked in their heart.* They were convicted. They felt deep compunction of con- science. They inquired, ' What shall we do V Peter said, ' Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins,' &c. " Conviction and compunction are not repentance. Hence Peter commanded the convicted to repent, &c. And who were baptized ? ' They that gladly received his word.' Peter preached the gospel. The people received his word — that is, they believed it. They received it gladly — the belief of it inspired their souls with joy. Those receiving the word thus were baptized. Do Methodist seekers receive the word of God gladly % Certainly not ; for if they did they would, in a technical sense, be seekers no longer. A glad receptiou of the word would imply that they had found what they sought. There surely was in the Pentecostal additions to the Church no class of persons bearing even a rer».ote resemblance to Methodist seekers. And thus the / CHRISTIANITY REVERSPJD. 373 apostolic practice on the very day when the influences of the Holy Spirit were so richly enjoyed, affords not a shadow of justification to the Methodist practice. "A majority of the Methodists, I imagine, do not insist that there is any Scripture which sanctions their system of seek- ership ; but they assume the position that there is nothing in the word of God that condemns it. This principle may be very mischievous in its operation. It is, however, a principle of Methodism, as will be seen from the following extract from the 22d of the Articles of Religion, as published in the Discipline : " ' Whosoever, through his private judgment, willingly and purposely doth openly break the rites and ceremonies of the Church to which he belongs, which are not repugnant to the word of God^ and are ordained and approved by common authority, ought to be rebuked openly, that others may fear to do the like, as one that offendeth against the common order of the Church, and wounduth the consciences of weak brethren. Every particular Church may ordain, change, or abolish ritea and ceremonies, so that all things be done tc edification.' " ' Not repugnant to the word of God,' is a very convenient phrase for those who wish to do what the Scriptures do not enjoin. A Roman Catholic may say it is not repugnant to the word of God to baptize bells, sprinkle holy water, and do a thousand such things. Episcopalians may say it is not repugnant to the word of God to have archbishops, deans, prebendaries, &c. Methodists may say that though the word of God does not enjoin class-meetings, yet they are not repugnant to it, and therefore members who wilfully neglect them shall be excluded from the society. See Discipline of Church South, p. 93. Many persons seem to think that whatever is not expressly forbidden by the w^ord of God ia 374 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. not 1 ep Jgnant to it. Is this a correct principle 1 Let us see. Card playing, horse-racing, theatre-going, &lc., are not ex- pressly forbidden by the word, but are they not repugnant toiti The Bible does not, in so many words, forbid the manufacture of whisky but is it not repugnant to the word of God to do so 1 " I think it will not do to apologize for Methodist seeker- ship by saying it is not forbidden by the word of God, and therefore it is not contrary to it. It may be repugnant to the Scriptures, though not expressly prohibited by them. " But I join issue with those who say that seekership among the Methodists is not repugnant to the word of God. I af- firm that it is. On me, then, is the burden of proof. No man acquainted with the New Testament will deny that the mem- bers of the apostolic churches are termed believers, disci- ples, new creatures, saints, &c. " Every one admitted to membership in one of the primi- tive churches made a credible profession of faith in Christ. Philip said to the Ethiopian, ' If thou believest with all thy heart thou may est' be baptized. ' He answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.' Paul speaks of ' the profession of faith.' * Ye are all,' says he, ' the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.' Here we have faith in Christ and the divinely appointed me- thod of professing that faith — viz., baptism. Are Methodist seekers believers'? They are not, most evidently. Who has not heard Methodist preachers and class-leaders, in times of religious excitement, urge inquirers (improperly called mourners) to believe in Christ. They cry vociferously, ' Be- lieve now, just now — nothing in the way but your unbelief — help. Lord. Amen.' Inquirers, then, Methodists them- selves being judges, are not believers. But notice. Before CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 375 a camp-meeting or a protracted meeting closes, these in- quirers are urged to join the society as seekers. They are urged to do this on the supposition that they have not obeyed the command so loudly thundered into their ears — ' Believe, believe, believe.' Methodists, of course, believe that their society is a Church of Christ. In admitting seekers, there- fore, into it, they virtually and practically say that it is right to admit unbelievers to membership in the Church of Christ. Is not this repugnant to the word of God ? It is as contrary to the word of God as darkness is to light* How can the Scriptures make faith in Christ indispensable to Church mem- bership, and at the same time sanction the membership of unbelievers ? If one man is required to do a particular thing because he believes, is another man required to do the same because he does not believe ? This cannot be. And this view of the matter ought to banish Methodist seekership from the world. Seekers are not believers. Those who are recognized as believers are never urged to join the Church as seekers. The inevitable result, therefore, of seekership is to brinsj unbelievers into the Church. This looks like unitinsj Christ with Belial. Horrible ! It will be said that if seek- ers do not believe they wish to believe. Suppose that to be the case. Why not wait till they do believe 1 And this re- minds me of what a rigid Calvinistic Presbyterian once said on his communion day. After inviting Christians to take their seats at the table, he said : ' I cannot invite Methodist seekers for these reasons : If God is willing to save them and they are not willing to be saved by him, they are rebels against him, and ought not to commune. If they say that they are willing to be saved according to the gospel plan, and God is not willing to save them, that sentiment is too Calvinistic for me ; and I cannot invite any who entertain it to this table.' 376 TnE GREAT IKON \YIIEEL. " The members of apostolic churches were, as I have said, called ' disciples' — disciples of Christ. The term was used interchangeably with believers. Are seekers disciples 1 Surely not. Disciples are those who learn of Christ. But those who learn of him first come to him. lie says, ' Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden ; and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you, learn of me,' &;c. Seekers have not come to Christ. If they had done so they would have found rest to their souls. How, then, can they be called disciples '? Disciples alone had a right to member- ship in the apostolic churches. As seekers are not disciples, and yet are admitted into Methodist societies, it is as clear as the sun in mid-heaven that these societies are not formed after the model of those churches. "Again, the members of the New Testament churches were new creatures, born of God, born again, &c. Are seekers new creatures 1 Have old things passed away with them 1 Have all thingrs become new ■? Has that change occurred in them which so renovates the heart as to place its affections supremely on God 1 It is useless to ask questions like these. Methodists themselves will admit that the new creature in Christ should fulli/ enjoy the privileges of Church member- ship, and therefore should not be classed among seekers. " Once more. The members of apostolic churches were called saints. They had been delivered from the dominion of sin. Being made free from sin, they became the servants of God. Are seekers saints ? Are they to be classed among the holy ? The ' Discipline' says, ' There is only one con- dition previously required of those who desire admission in- to these societies, " a desire to flee from the wrath to come, and to be saved from their sins." ' A desire to flee from the wrath to come, the most wicked man may feel — and a desire to be saved from sin is a different thing from being CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 377 saved from it. To desire to be saved is one thing — to be a saint is quite another thing. " I might go on and refer to other appellations given to the members of New Testament churches, showing that such appellations could not in truth be given to Methodist seek- ers ; but it is needless. I have shown already that it is repug- nant to the word of God to practise the system of seekership recognized among Methodists, because seekers are not be- lievers, disciples, new creatures, saints, &;c., and therefore have no right to Church membership. There are many ob- jections to the unscriptural practice of which I am writing. If it were universal, where would be the distinction between believers and unbelievers ] Its tendency is to bring them all together, and in so doing to make the churches of Christ synagogues of Satan. It perverts a fundamental truth of the gospel. That truth is that the possession of God's grace in the soul is a qualification for Church membership. Seek- ers are induced to join the Methodists as a means of obtain- ing grace. They are to be baptized as a means of obtaining grace. They are to partake of the Lord's Supper as a means of obtaining grace. Thus, instead of having grace as a pre- paration for baptism and the Lord's Supper, they are to be baptized and commemorate the Saviour's death that thev may get grace. Awful ! Those who do not love Christ partake of the emblems of his body and blood ! The seek- ership of the Methodists antagonizes with the fundamental principles of scriptural Church organization. May the day soon come when every thing so manifestly devistd by man shall be repudiated, and Jesus Christ be not only theoreti- cally but practically acknowledged as the Head of the Church.*'* * Eld. J. M. Pendleton, Bowling Qreen, Ky. LETTER XXXI. The Class-meetiyig law — An essential feature of Methodism — Exclusion the penalty for its violation — Is confessedly a commandmeni of men — To submit to it is to obey and serve men — Band-meetings — Methodist confessionals — Their ten- dency. Dear Sir : — The law that enjoins weekly class-meetings, upon pain of excommunication, is a feature of Methodism to which I most seriously object, as manifestly unscriptural. It is not regarded as a small matter. It is not considered in the light of a mere recommendation, to promote holiness of heart or life, — to be heeded or not as the members may see fit ; but it is declared to be an essential feature of Meth- odism to promote the spirit of Methodism, and enforce obedience to the Discipline. The class-meeting law had its origin with a certain Captain Foy, in the year 1738, for the purpose of taking up a weekly collection from the members, as we have seen in Letter X. Wesley, pleased with its operation, enacted it as a positive and inviolable law of his societies, and made it an essential part of his system. Methodist writers are jDretty generally agreed that class-meetings are indispensable to the existence of Methodism, and yet are as free to admit that they are not of divine appointment. " Class-meetings a,vQ peculiar to Methodism. Other church- es have occasional inquiry, conference, or experience meet- ings. But class-meeungs are an essential part of our (878) CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 379 frfUTEH It is not claimed that this institution is of divine origin. So soon as we become willing to dispense with this feature of our system, our decline and downfall will certainly and rapidly follow. This is one of the ancient landmarks, and it would be almost sacrilegious to remove or deface it." — Methodism, by Inskip, pp. 192, 193. " It is not contended that this institution is of divine ap- pointment, or that, in the specific form which it obtains among Methodists, it had any existence in the primitive Church."' — Charles Keys in Class-Leader'' s Manual^ p. 19. This is published by the Methodist Book Concern. Coke and Asbury, in their notes on the Discipline, claimed that Captain Foy spake by inspiration of God ! They say, " But we must say, that those who entirely neglect this divinely-instituted ordinance — however various the names given to it, or the modes of conducting it, may be — manifest that they are either ashamed to acknowledge as their brethren the true children of God [are all who meet in class the true children of God ? J, or are the enemies of the cross of Christ." — (Quoted from " Class-meetings^^^ by J. Miley, 200 Mul- berry street, N. Y.) " And yet," says Mr. Miley, " we regard our class-meetings simply as a prudential regulation. Mr. Wesley himself so regarded and styled them. They are a usage which our Church [i. e., clergy] has herself instituted.*' — Class-meetings^ p. 73. Dr. N. Bond, when discussing with the Reformers, says : " But if the Reformers insist upon changing the rule which makes it obligatory upon our members to meet in class, because there is no positive scriptural command for it, they MUST ALSO GIVE UP INFANT BAPTISM, and thc adpaiiiistration of the communion to females, for there is no such com- mandment FOR EITHER THE ONE OR THE OTHER." EcOUOmy of Methodism, p. 52. 880 TUE GREAT IRON WHEEL. It is worthy of notice here, that Dr. Bond frankly declares that there is no command in the Bible for infant baptism, any more than for class-meetings; and if all practices not taught in God's word are to be given up, infant baptism, as well as class-meetings, must be abolished. All Christ- ians whose religion is the Bible, and the Bible only, as a perfect rule of practice as well as faith, will respond, " Then give it up ; away with the human dogmas, and purge the Church of the traditions of men. Jesus only is our Law- giver." We are grieved that a man of common intelligence, and a professed Christian teacher, should say that there is no scrip- tural command for female communion ! Could a man make a declaration that would be better calculated to excite sus- picion as to his 'motive — his Christian honesty— and thereby injure himself with all candid readers? He might as well say there is no scriptural command for female repentance. Where did Christ or his apostles specifically call upon fe- males to repent ? He might as consistently say that there is no " scriptural command " for female baptism. Are females accountable beings ? Are they sinners ? Then they are commanded to believe. Are they believers 1 Then they are commanded to be baptized, and as baptized believers to observe all things whatsoever Christ taught his disciples to observe. And did he not command the observ- ance of the Lord's Supper % Females find their command to participate in the celebration of the Supper, where its observ ance is enjoined upon baptized believers — wherever it is made the duty of the Church of Christ to celebrate the Supper. I have clearly shown that the class-meeting law is, 1st, An essential feature, or element, in the Methodist system — the lungs, in which the blood of the system is prepared and vitalized — the heart that sends out the life-blood to every CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 381 part, and warms the whole (? ) . That it is confessedly a human law — of purely man's commandment. It now remains to be shown that it is made equal in sanctity, if not superior, to any commandment of Christ ; for, by the command of the preachers, the most pious Christian in the Methodist *' Church " must be excluded, if he, upon conscientious prin- ciples, refuses to attend the class-meeting, and be examined by, and confess his sins to, a class-leader, even though he may have no confidence in the piety of that class-leader. That Christian's life may be blameless, spotless ; he may be living in obedience to all the commands of the Saviour, but still, if he refuses to attend the class, and undergo the pre- scribed examination, and make confession, the Discipline commands his expulsion and its consequent disgrace. It commands his expulsion, even though it authorizes the preacher in charge to give him a certificate that he has not even been guilty of the least immorality in disobeying this essential law of Methodism. Here is the law touching the case. — See Discipline, p. II, ch. V. § 3. Ques. 3. Think how such a certificate would read ? " To ALL WHOM IT MAY CONCERN : — This is to Certify that the bearer, Mr. A., has been excluded from the Methodist Episcopal Church South, for refusing to attend the weekly class-meeting, and pass examination, and make due confes- sions, according to the law imposed upon the M. E. Church by our preachers, whose right it is to govern us in all things according to their sovereign wills and pleasures. In behalf of Mr. A. we state that he refuses to submit to this law from conscientious motives that are honorable to himself, considering it a human commandment and tradition of men. He feels that, by submission to this law, he would be ac- knowledging the authority and sovereign jurisdiction of 382 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. human lawgivers in the Church of Christ, which is contrary to Christ's cominandment. Finally, let it not be understood that we consider that the least impiety or immorality attaches to Mr. A. for thus repudiating and refusing obedience to the above law ; for we take pleasure in bearing our testimony to the devoted and consistent piety of Mr. A., and his per- severing attachment to, and observance of, the command- ments of Jesus Christ, and for this very reason 'he is a good enough Christian, but unfit to be a Methodist.' " Inskip, Clk. (Duly signed), " Joshua Soule. "T. E. Bond." Allow me to submit a few questions for your considera- tion : 1. Can a Methodist say, with any color of truth, that the Bible, and the Bible alone, is his religion? Is the Bible his only rule of fliith and practice, as it is of all evangelical Christians ? 2. Must he not honor and observe the laws which the preachers make from Conference to Conference, equally with those commanded by Christ ? 3. Do you not make attendance upon class-meetings of more importance than attending upon the ministrations of the sanctuary ? Do you not make the observance of the class-meeting law the evidence of repentance, or of a sinner's working out his own salvation 1 What possible connection is there between evangelical repentance, or even a desire to flee from the wrath to come, and obeying a human tradition 1 He is not obeying God in attending class-meeting, for you admit he does not sin against God in refusing to attend class. But the Class-meeting law is made the test of qualifica- tion for Methodist Church memhershi}'). No one is allowed to become a full member of the " Meth- CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 385 odist Episcopal Church " until he has obeyed this law foi full six months ! " How shall we prevent improper persons from insinuat- ing themselves into the Church"? Ans. 1. Give tickets [for admission] to none, until they are recommended hy a leader, WITH WHOM THEY HAVE MET IN CLASS AT LEAST SIX MONTHS." Here we see, by the way, how the members are at- tached to the wheels (e. ^., class-leaders) that drive them. They must meet with him in class for six months, and secure his approbation by their constancy and contributions, since it is upon his recommendation that they are to be ad- mitted to full membership in the " Church." We see also, that, according to the Discipline, whatever the qualifications of an applicant may be, he is refused admission into the Church of Jesus Christ (if the Methodist Episcopal Church be a Church of Christ), until he or she has attended a Methodist class-meeting for six months ! ! ! If you have the authority to impose such an arbitrary in- stitution as the class-meeting, and exclude all who refuse to submit to it, have you not the right to institute a " confes- sional," as the Pope has done, and command all your follow- ers, men and women, to confess their sins of deed, and of thought, and imagination ? LETTER XXXIl. Band-meetings — Virtually confessionals — Sinful thoughts must be confessed to the Preacher — Their tendency — The opinions of Presbyterians. Dear Sir : — I closed my last letter with the question, " Have you not instituted an ordinance similar to the Romish confessional V The perfect submission of your members to the clergy requires such an institution. What are . your weekly " band-meetings" but weekly con- fessionals, where not only overt sins, but sins of thought and the imagination, are to be conscientiously confessed 1 Here is the law and directions in full : — Section IV. — Qf the Band Societies. "Two, three, or four true believers, who have confidence in each other, form a band. Only it is to be observed, that in one of these bands all must be men, or all women ; and all married, or all unmarried. [^Rules of the Band Societies^ drawn wp Dec. 25, 1738.] " The design of our meeting is to obey that command of God, Confess your faults one to another^ and pray one for another^ that ye may be healed. James v. 16. " To this e^d we agree, "1. To meet once a week, at least. " 2. To come punctually at the hour appointed, without Bome extraordinary reason prevents. (384) CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 885 "3. To begin exactly at the hour with singing or prayer. " 4. To speak, each of us in order, freely and plainly, the true state of our souls, with the faults we have committed in tempers, words, or actions, and the temptations we have felt, since our last meeting. " 5. To end every meeting with prayer suited to the state of each person present. '* 6. To desire some person among us to speak his own state first, and then to ask the rest in order as many and as searching questions as may be, concerning their state, sins, and temptations. " Some of the questions proposed to one before he is ad- mitted among us may be to this effect : " 1. Have you the forgiveness of your sins? " 2. Have you peace with God, through our Lord Jesus Christ % " 3. Have you the witness of God's spirit with your spirit, that you are a child of God 1 " 4. Is the love of God shed abroad in your heart ? " 5. Has no sin, inward or outward, dominion over you 1 " 6. Do you desire to be told of your faults ? " 7. Do you desire to be told of all your faults, and that plain and home ? " 8. Do you desire that every one of us should tell you, from time to time, whatsoever is in our heart concerning you ? " 9. Consider ! Do you desire we should tell you what- soever we think, whatsoever we fear, whatsoever we hear, concerning you ? " 10. Do you desire that in doing this, we should come as close as possible, that we should cut to the quick, and search your heart to the bottom ? " 11. Is it your desire and design to be ct this and all 17 386 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. other occasions entirely open, so as to speak without disguise, and without reserve 1 " Any of the preceding questions may be asked as often as occasion requires ; the four following at every meeting : " 1. What known sins have you committed since our last meeting 1 " 2. What particular temptations have you met with ? "3. How were you delivered 1 " 4. What have you thought, said, or done, of which you doubt whether it be sin or not ?" That this is to all intents and purposes a confessional, none can deny. It is worthy of note that the very scripture, and the only scripture that the Pope urges in support of auricular confes- sion, Mr. Wesley brings forward to warrant the band-meet- ing confession ! It has no possible application to such con- fessions. If I have offended my brother, it is my duty to confess my fiiult to him^ and if he has offended me, it is his duty to confess his faults to me, but Christ never made it my duty to confess to A. the offences I have committed against B., nor to any mortal, the sins of my thoughts and imagination, and resisted temptations. These I am to lay before God, and from him seek forgiveness and cleansing, and grace for future trials. The objection I have to the Methodist confess'onal above the Romish is this : — In the former I am requii-ed to confess all my sms of deed or thoughts as particularly and rigidly as Rome requires, to a preacher and three or four others, who are not forbidden to rehearse my confession throughout the whole community ! Then, in return, my thoughts and imagination are to be freighted with the sins and evil imaginations which other- wise I may have never thought of, and which may give rise CHRISTIANITY KEVERSED. 387 to wicked thoughts and imagining which I will have to con- fess at the next band-meeting; for evil communications cor- rupt good manners. But in the confession instituted by- Rome, the solitary penitent confesses to a solitary priest, who is solemnly sworn never to reveal what is told in the confessional. No mortal ear but his own hears what is con- fessed, and he is to give counsel and grant absolution upon the satisfactory evidence of repentance. The Discipline requires as full a confession as the Missal does, and requires a confession of that which it implies is improper for men to confess before women, or even married men to utter in the presence of the unmarried — and from females the confession of deeds and thoughts highly improper for men to hear. If not, why must the bands be composed either of all married persons, or all unmarried — of all men or of all women? But what are they required to confess ? 1. " What known sins have you committed,'^ &c? 2. "What particular temptations have you met withl'' No specifications — the temptations presented to thought, though mastered and indignantly banished, must be told. If any doubt let them read the last question : "What have you thought^^'' yes, even thought, " said, or done, of which you doubt whether it be sin or not 1" I am not only required to confess what I have said, or done, or thought, which I know to be sinful, but what I have thought^ even if I am in doubt whether it be sinful ! Another thing remarkable about this band-meeting con- fession is, that the preacher in charge, even if an unmarried man, is authorized to hear confessions of this character from both the married and unmarried sisters of his charge! What if some of their stray thoughts had been concerning himself! 388 THE GJIEAT IRON WHEEL. If I mistake, I am misled by the following duty, prescribed to the preacher on charge: "(3.) As preachers, have you thoroughly considered your duty [i. c, as prescribed in the Discipline]? And do you make a conscience of execut- ing every part of it ? Do you meet every society ? Also, the leaders and bands ^^ It is his duty, then, to meet the bands. He is father con- fessor to them. It does not make it his duty to confess his sins and sinful thoughts in the bands ; if so, in what ones, those of the men or of the women? It is silent. What husband would wish his wife subjected to such an examination as that prescribed in this confession, and what she may have done and thought one week, made the theme of neighborhood gossip the next ? What father would wish his daughter thus catechised by a Methodist circuit-rider, or by any one else ; or care to have her head made the receptacle of all the wicked acts, thoughts, and imaginations of a whole band? As at the Romish con- fessional the thoughts and hearts of her votaries are cor- rupted, so nothing could well be better designed than this band-meeting to corrupt the mind and the heart of the young and old, and fill a neighborhood with gossip. and scandal. I have been told that there are few communities in Ten- nessee that will permit the institution of th\s Methodist con- fessional — ?nd to the honor of the State ie it said. The most awful state of things have been brought about in a town or neighborhood by the confessions made in the band- meetings. I submit to your consideration the views entertained of your bands, and of their tendency, by Presbyterians. They are severe, but let the Christian world judge of their just- ness : — " This is the great delusion Rome has practised. She CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 889 gives the soul relief from the burden of sin by naked confes- sion, and that, not to God, but to and through some oilier being. Rome, we know, requires in its discipline, sorrow of heart from its penitents— but this amounts to nothing in the practical working of Popery. Relief from the burden of sin upon mere confession to a priest, is felt by all under her mighty mystery of iniquity. The effect of this delusic n of Rome is two-fold. "1. It hardens the conscience, and leads to all sin. Con fession to God, with sorrow, softens the heart, makes it meek and lowly, and turns it from sin. Confession, even to God, without contrition, hardens the heart. The true Christian himself is even in danger of incurring this guilt, and experiencing this injury. But when the confession is made to the priest, the hardening process is ever going on. The very fact of telling sins against God to man gradu- ally/ obliterates the sense of guilt, extinguishes remorse, and leaves the soul prepared to draw iniquity with cords of vanity, and sin as it were with a cart-rope. This is the history of the heart as it has developed itself everywhere, and at all times, under the Romish confessional. "2. The Romish confessional makes the mind submis- sive to priestly control. This follows as a matter of course. Once bring a man to believe that his eternal welfare depends upon the confessional — and that that confessional is under the control of a priesthood — and there is nothing to which that man will not submit in the orderings of that priesthood. We need not enlarge upon this position. Of all despotisms, that of Rome over the body and the soul has been, and is, the most perfect and terrible." Here the writer refers to the Rules for band-meetings, and adds, — " Now we affirm, that here we have the Roman Catholic 390 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. confessional in bud and flower, if not as yet in its perfect fruit. Just examine the working of this class-meeting sys- tem. The class-leader [who is the mere tool of the travel- ling preacher] must see each 2^erson in his class once a week at least — to advise, reprove, comfort, exhort — carefully to in- quire how every soul in his class prospers — not only how each person observes the outward rules, hut how he grows in the knowledge and love of God. Again, while the class-leader is obliged to see each person in his class once a week at least, the members of the Church are under the same obligation to meet the class-leader — with the penalty hanging over THEM OF EXCLUSION FROM THE ChURCH IF THEY NO NOT. The class-leader may meet the members in private, or in the class. — [Mr. Wesley's works, vol. 5, p. 187.] He may ask them any questions he pleases touching their religious state. Again, the class-leader may be one of any band-meeting, of single men or married, as the case may be ; and being the class-leader, he would naturally and obviously be the leader of the band, as the band is only a more secret class. — In that band he must ask, and each member has hound himself or herself beforehand, to answer, such questions as these : 1. What known sins have you committed since our last meeting ? 2. What particular temptations have you met luith? 3. How were you delivered? 4. Whai have you thought, said^ or done, of which you doubt whether it be sin or not ? Look there ! These questions do cover the ivhole ground occupied by the Romish confessional. There is, absolutely, no ques- tion, BY possibility, WHICH A RoMAN CaTHOLIC PRIEST MAY ASK, BUT MAY BE ASKED BY THE BAND-LEADER ! ! No, nOt one. The vilest questions to be found in Dens' Theology, and which the priest is required to ask, may be put to every member of a band-meeting, and they have bound themselves to answer ! CnRISTlANlTY REVERSED. 891 " Once more. The very fact that the class-meeting is sub- divided into bands of all men or all women, and all married or ail single, and the pledges to make a clean breast exacted of all who enter these more secret class meetings, is inoof 'positive that the most searching confession was sought to be had from every meraber. Yet again, let it be noticed: This class-leader, thus empowered to, receive the confessions of so inany members, as to their most secret thoughts, words, and actions, is also the person who is to ask these same members for their money for ' the relief of the preachers^ Churchy and 'poor ! ! ' Huio remarkable that confession in t/ie Romnn Catholic and Methodist churches should be connect- ed with the payment o/'monev! ! Lastly, in this connection, it is the duty of the class-leader to meet the minister [the travelling preacher] and the stewards of the society once a week, to inform the minister of any that are sick, or of any that walk disorderly and will not be reproved, and to pay the stewards what they have received of their several classes in the week preceding. "To complete this perfect drill of supervision and confes- sion, the travelling preacher in charge of the circuit appoints all the class-leaders, and chanajes them when he sees it neces- sary ; he sees that every band-leader have the rules of the band ; and he meets the men and women apart in the large societies, once a quarter, wherever it is practicable, &c. — [Dis. chap. 1, sec. 9.] From this summing up of the testi- mony in the case, it is plain that the Methodist Church, in its class-meeting system, does as distinctly require the confession of sins from its members, as that thing is required in the Roman Catholic Church. "This position will be yet more abundantly established, by considering the lame and impotent defence made by Mr. Wesley, when he was charged, again and again, with having 392 THE GBEAT IRON WHEEL. introduced the Romish confessional into his class-meeting system. Mr. Wesley was one of the greatest cavillers that ever lived, and yet made the poorest out in dodging, when hard pressed and cross-questioned. He says, ' An objeo' tion much more boldly and frequently urged, is that " all these bands are mere Popery." I hope I need not pass a harder censure on those [most of them at least] who affirm this, than that they talk of they know not what ; they betray in themselves the most gross and shameful ignorance. Dq they not yet know, that the only Popish confession is the confession made by a single person to a priest? And this itself is in no tvise condemned by our Church ; nay^ she recom- mends it in some cases. Whereas, what we practise, is the confession of several persons, conjointly, not to a priest, but to each other. Consequently, it has no analogy at all to Popish confession. But the truth is, this is a stale objection, which many people make against any thing they do not like. It is all Popery out of hand.' — [Wesley's works, vol. v. p. 184.] " And this was the way Mr*. Wesley shuffled out of the charge, made ' boldly and frequently,' by some of the first men in England, that ''all these hands were mere Popery. "^ It was thus he trifled with such men as Bishop Lavington of his own Church, and with Dr. Erskine of the Presbyterian Church of Scotland, both of whom held and charged on Mr. Wesley '■ that the leader of a class acted like a Romish priest.'' "This reply of Mr. Wesley is a mere cavil. It is frivolous, fallacious, and foolish. The great delusion of Rome, we have shown, is, that she has erected some other throne than that of God^ where confession is to be made. Now, as to the point before us, it does not make a jot of difference, whether that other throne be the confessional of a Romish priest, or the CHRISTIANITY REVEESED. 393 class-meeting system of Mr. Wesley ; for, the same actual and perfect confession is demanded at both, and it does not make an iota of difference, as to the practical results upon character, except in degree of evil. " Here yet another question may be put to us : Whether Mr. Wesley gives any Scripture for his class-meeting con- fessional ? Oh, yes. He brings just one text from the Bible. And that text exactly the same one, and the only one brought by the Roman Catholic to sustain his priestly confessional ! ! — * Confess your faults one to another, and pray one for another, that ye may be healed.^ — [James v. 16.] The per- version of this text, when applied by Mr. Wesley to the class-meeting confessional, is as gross as when tortured by the Romanist to sustain his priestly confessional. The true meaning of the passage is happily expressed by Doddridge — ' When you are conscious of having been really to blame, do not perversely vindicate a conduct which your own hearts condemn, but be frank in acknowledging it. Confess [your] faults one to another,' &c. &c. Here is the simple require- ment, to confess our faults one to another — under the dictate of conscience, in private, to the individual, and when, and where, in our view suitable. An obvious Christian duty! Now, what gross perversion of this scripture, to bring it to sanc- tion the Roman Catholic sacrament of ^^ewa^ice, in which every member of that Cliurch is required, under fearful sanctions, to come to a priest, so many times a year, and confess to him every thought, word and act of sin against God ! And we ask every man, if the perversion of the word of God by Mr. Wesley and Methodism, is not equally de- testable, when they, like the Catholic, bring this solitary text to vindicate the class-meeting system — in which every mem- ber of that Church is under obligation, upon pain of exclu- sion, to appear before the class-leader every week, and to 17* 394 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. subniit to his careful inquiry how he has observed the out- ward rules, and how he grows in the knowledge and love of God — in which every member may be separated from his wife or child in a band, where all are to be men or all women, all married or all unmarried — where, every week, they are pledged^ by order of the Church, to confess every known sin committed since the last meeting, — to confess what particular temptations they have met with, — to confess how they were delivered, — to confess what they have thought, said, or done, of which they doubt whether it be sin or no. What an outrage upon any honest interpretation of the Bible, to apply the text in James to the class-meeting confessional ! But the class-meeting system is the Romish confessional in bud and blossom, and it was proper, therefore, for Mr. Wesley to pervert the same passage of Scripture brought by the priest, and just as the priest tortures it, to sanction the same system of iniquity. " Having thus, as we think, demonstrated the resemblance between the Roman and Methodist confessionals, in principle, we will now briefly notice two other points of resemblance, as results of the confessional, in a great degree, in both churches. " 1. The conscience is hardened by it. Confession of sin to God, without contrition, hardens the conscience. Confession of sin, then, anywhere else than to God, must harden the conscience in a greater degree. Confession, therefore, in the Roman and Methodist systems must tend to a callous con- science. And it is so. Nine out of ten of the readers of this article will say, if they are not Methodists, ' Yes, it is true. We have often remarked a peculiar insensibility, as a characteristic of the Methodist common mass [whatever very many exceptions there certainly are from educational and refined associations in life] — a peculiar insensibility to moral CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 895 honor and integrity of character.'' We have not dropped this sentence in hasty writing. We say deliberately — it is so — it is so — wide and deep — and we are not mistaken in saying our readers will respond, ' Alas ! It is even so.' This is, in a great degree, the work of the class-meeting sys- tem of confessions. "2. The class-meeting system, like the Roman confes- sional, leads to submission to priestly control. We see, as the result of the latter, how, for a thousand years,* the foot of the priest has been upon the neck of the submissive Catho- lic. This is the consummation of that stupendous system, concentrated in the confessional. It grants relief to the bur- dened soul at the confessional. Let man believe that, and he is a slave to that confessional. And we see, in the Methodist Church, with just the difference between the results of one hundred years of Methodism, and a thousand years of Ro- manism, the same thing. Let men and women go into the Methodist Church. Let them believe it is the will of God that they must meet a class-leader every week or be turned out of the Church. Let them believe he is authorized to inquire how every soul in his class prospers, and that they are bound by compulsion of Church wrath to tell hovv^ they have observed the outward rules of the Church, and how they have grown in the knowledge and love of God. Let them believe it is their duty to submit to be divided into bands of three or four ; that in one of these bands all must be men, or all women ; and all married, or all unmarried ; that they must meet in these bands every week and be bound to tell to one another, \. Every known sin they have commit- ted since they last met. 2. What particular temptations they have met with. 3. How they were delivered. 4. What they have thought, said, or done, of which they doubted whether it was sin or not. Let them believe it is 896 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. also the will of God that they meet the preacher in charge once a quarter, if practicable, the men and women apart, and make other general confession to him. Let them be- lieve that the preacher will give tickets to none [to enter the Church] until they are recommended hy a leader with whom they have met at least six months on trial. Let them believe that this leader is the mere tool of that preacher, who is one of a GREAT EPISCOPACY, authorizcd by God to exert over them imperial dominion^ and, in reference to whose authority, they have not a word to say. Let men and women be in the Methodist Church, and believe this — and their minds are paralyzed and dumb. They are a deformed mass, with little better life than that breathed into it from the nostrils of the itinerancy. They are a Church stagnant as a pond, reflecting little else than that huge overshadowing cloud of despotism which frowns over it, and which must spread and shut out, at last, the light of heaven. " The submission of Methodists to their ministry is, even now, lamentable and astounding. They submit to their im- mense itinerancy being quartered upon them like an army of soldiers, without any will of their own, whether they shall come, or stay, or go. They submit to be controlled in their reading, so that there is a virtual censorship of the press over them. They are drilled to prefer hearing some old hickupping* driveler, who has ' got religion,^ to listening to Dr. Chalmers, if he is a Presbyterian. They submit to be controlled in the cut of their dress. They are drilled to ex- traordinary sameness in expression of face, and tone of voice. They are drilled to believe they verily do God service to be Methodists, whatever else they be — to uphold Methodism through thick and thin, right or wrong, precisely upon the principle on which political parties are sustained. For they are drilled to gather around the preacher in the pulpit, as around CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 397 the demagogue on the stump, and hurrah over the merest bag of wind, as full answer to facts and argument", agahist Methodism. They are drilled to believe that it is right to hate with personal, private malignity, every man wh'j speaks against Methodism, and to propagate against him any and every hearsay gabble that may create odium, as lawful de- fence of Methodism. Methodism is to be sustained — and the end sanctifies the means. This is the identical spirit of Rome. But, like causes must produce like effects. The Methodist ministry, in its class-meeting system, is Rome and its confessional, and, like priest like people. " We have promised to show the difference between the Roman and Methodist confessional. One point of difference will be sufficient for the present. The Romish confessional secures what is true, in a great degree — while the Method- ist confessional results in what is false, in a large measure. This can be made very plain. For, the Roman Catholic is not afraid to trust his priest almost to the fullest extent. The Methodist is afraid to trust his brotherhood to the same degree. The members of the band, it is true, are pledged to aecrecy. [Wesley's works, vol. v. p. 185.] But, notwithstand- ing, Methodism cannot give to every one of innumerable bands, the secrecy of the Roman confessional. It is, therefore, pre- posterous to think that any member of a class, even when he goes into the more secret band, will tell all his sins. He then necessarily gives a false pledge when he enters the band ; and his experience when there, is necessarily not true as to what he omits, if true as to what he actually reveals. The class-meeting system, then [although not so designed by Mr. Wesley], is, in fact, as perfect a school to learn people to tell what is not true as any thing ever devised by the Jesuits. " This will further appear as we nuw give the '\wm of the whole matter. 398 THE GREAT IRON WUEEL. '■(1.) The class-meeting system tends to make a Pharisee of the Christian. For, when the truly religious Methodist re- veals his experience every week, in which his progressive sanctification is disclosed to the class, his brethren, of course, must think well of him. And he must, notwithstanding his humility, think well of himself. Such a man will have little, peradventure, of sin in his own opinion to confess in the open class, if any in the more secret band. What next 1 Why, he becomes more and more confirmed in good opi- nion of himself, as he reaches a higher sanctification every week ; while the brethren will be the more impressed by his humble look and honied relations of his triumphs over the flesh and Satan. What results from all this 1' Why, the man is made a Pharisee. For, no man can tell every week in public class-meetings his supposed growth in grace, his joys and raptures, and see eyes swimming in exultation, and gazing upon him in fanatical or real religious sympathy — no man can pass through such secret, insidious, constant flat- tery, without spiritual pride. The poor man could not help being a Pharisee, even if his whole religious training did not tend that way. As it is, there is no help for him. Every body sees it, even as he walks along the street. There is an air about him not to be mistaken, as flir as you recognize him. He has enlarged his borders, and made broad his spiritual phylacteries, even if he has laid aside the standing collar and rounded front. You see it as he smiles upon you, and talks with you by the way. As he reveals what he thinks of you, and what he thinks of himself, his heart speaks out — ' God^ I thank thee I am not as other men.^ No ; the class-meeting never did, and never can, improve Christian character. It always has, and always will, injure the piety of the good man. The laws of human nature, however im- proved by grace, decide the question. And facts, every- CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 399 where, in all the life of Methodism, sustain the opinion ex- pressed, as on a rock. " (2.) The results of the class-meeting are, if possible, still worse upon the seeker and mere professor of religion. Both these grades are induced by the whole influence of Methodism to make a false religious experience. To say nothing here of its mischievous teachings upon the subject of the evidences of regeneration, Methodism encourages its members to look for high excitement — enthusiastic joy — fanatical delusions. And now, when the truly good man tells his real experience, col- ored as it may be by his creed and his fancy, these seekers and mere professors will desire to give as good an experience, too, as they can ; and, from the very fact that they have no religion, they will, in the workings of the deceitful heart, be led to tell what is false in self deception, even if they do not make a mock character for the occasion. Oh ! what facts would be disclosed if we had the history of the class-meeting from the beginning ! Alas ! what will be the revelations of the last day ! "(3.) The class-meeting confessional, if enforced as Mr. Wes- ley planned it, and as it is in the Discipline, would make the Methodist Church the most hideous school for scandal in the world. Look at the thing ! Just let us suppose they have eight hundred thousand members. (They claim a great many more.) That gives two hundred thousand bands of four members each. So, we may say, for round count, fifty thousand bands of married men^ fifty thousand bands of mar- ried women, fifty thousand bands of unmarried men, and as many of unmarried women ! Two hundred thousand confes- sionals in active operation every Sabbath day, in which every married man in the Methodist Church would be telling to other married men all his sins and temptations, and all he had said, thought, or done, that was of doubtful morality ; 400 THK GKEAT IRON WHEEL. and every married woman earnest at the same thing, and every young man and every girl ! Why, Stitan himself never, even in Romanism, invented a system '.no'/e certain to pro- duce a lax morality. Let people tetlh aho';a;?/m?i.pointed for that purpose ; and to which God hath tied us, though he may not have tied himself. Indeed, where it cailnot be had, the case is ditferent; but extraordinary cases do not make void a standing rule. This, therefore, is our first ground. Infants need to be washed l^rom original sin ; therefore they are proper subjects of baptism." 426 TUE CKEAT IliON WIIEKL. " 10. To Sinn up the evidence ; If outwun] ])aptisin be gen- erally, in iin ordinary way, necessary to salvation, and in- flints may be saved as well as adults, nor ought we to neglect any means of saving them." &lc. Comment upon the above extracts is unnecessary ; the doctrine of baptismal regeneration runs through every line, and imbues the whole. The Roman Catholic Church, or Mr. A. Campbell, or Mr. Pusey, never advocated the dogma in stronger or more explicit terms. Those extracts, like the teachmgs of the ritual, are a mass of doctrinal corruption and putrefaction. Call you such sentiments Protestantism ? Call you such teachings ei;anyeZ/caZ.^ Call you such doctrine Christianity? They are the inversion and perversion of Christianity. Can it be longer denied by an honest man, that the Method- ist Church teaches that infa?its and children are not only really regenerated, and made the children of God by and in baptism, but that, monstrous to say, ordinaribj oil infants and chilL ren dyinrj unhaptized are lost ! What says the Church? "If hifimts are guilty of original sin, then they are proper sub- jects of baptism ; seeing in the ordinary way they cannot BE saved unless this he washed av/ay. Two remarks here, before passing to tlie second baptism. 1. We see why Methodists are so anxious to have their sick and dying, I had almost said dead, infants sprinkled. They have been known to send for the preacher, t(j come at midnight through darkness and stcjrm, and for miles, to sprinkle the infant wlu-n its death-iattle mingled with the popish mummery of the ritual ! And is this Protistautism ? Is it not more like ^;a/>/6-??i ? I ask it in kindness — in sorrow and heartfelt grief. Infant regeneration and salvation under- lie infant rites in every community ; the operation is a sol- emn farce unless there is some efficacy attached. CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 427 2. Methodists are the last people in the world who should impute to Baptists the sin of making too much of baptism — of teaching that no one can be saved without baptism ? It is the thief s cry with them. They do it to divert attention from the ground they occupy. 3. Methodists may say that the above teachings are not now the teachings of their " Church." I reply, 1. They were Mr. Wesley's teachings, who is the boasted father of all Methodists. 2. They are the teachings of the Discipline, which is the only supreme standard of faith and practice acknowledged by the " Church." 3. The books that contain them (Wesley's Sermons and Doctrinal Tracts) have been published yearly Ijy the Book Concern, under the direction of the General Conference since the days of Wesley ; and I copied the above extracts in the " Concern" itself, so that there might be no mistake. 4. I could submit other standard authorities published annually by the Concern, were it necessary. Through her Discipline and the books she publishes does she only teach authoritatively and unmistakably. The above is one baptism and its design. LETTER XXXV Adult Baptism distinct from infant — Its design, with he ex- ception — No faith required of the adult, save that rcjuired by the Romish Church — And no profession of regeneration as a condition of baptism — Regeneration ordinarily the same with baptism. Dear Sir: — Having considered the teachings of your Church touching infant baptism, I now wish to show that adult baptism is a different ordinance from infant baptism. The subject is altogether different. This is the baptism of a moral agent ; that, of a subject to which the terms " moral" and "agent" cannot be sensibly applied. This is the baptism of an intelligent rational creature ; that, of a creature to which these terms are inapplicable. This, of a believer (though the office does not intimate it, save that he believes the Catholic Creed, adopted at the Council of Nice) ; that, of a non-believer. This, of a subject of gospel address ; that, of a subject nowhere addressed in the gospel, or commanded either to believe or be baptized. For adult baptism the Discipline enjoins the use of a different ritual. In this "order" the candidate is questioned, and is called upon to repeat tho Creed. In infjuit baptism no questions are asked, though they used to be put to the sponsors— the godfathers and godmothers who answered for the child ! Baptism is administered to both the adult and infant subject with the same design, i. e., to wash away original sin and regenera^'e the heart, with this solitary exception, that C428) CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 429 in the case of the infimt subject regeneration always takes place in connection with the act, while in the case of the adult it is uncertain. It ordinarily does best, nevertheless, if the subject is a pretty hard case. The result is extremely problematical. I submit the formula for the baptism of adults. The opening remarks are, with a few unimportant words, the same, and I omit them. ''''Then shall the minister say^ "Almighty and immortal God, the aid of all that need, the helper of all that flee to thee for succor, the life of them that believe, and the resurrection of the dead: we call upon thee for these persons ; that /Aey, coming to thy holy baptism, may receive remission of their s'lns^ by spiritual regeneration. Re- ceive them^ O Lord, as thou hast promised by thy well-beloved Son, saying, Ask, and ye shall receive ; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: so give now unto us that ask ; let us that seek, find ; open the gate unto us that knock : that these persons may enjoy the everlasting benediction of thy heavenly w^ashing, and may come to the eternal kingdom which thou hast promised by Christ our Lord. Amen. After which he shall say, "Almighty and everlasting God, heavenly Father, we give thee humble thanks, for that thou hast vouchsafed to call us to the knowledge of thy grace, and faith in thee ; increase this knowledge and confirm this faith in us evermore. Give thy Holy Spirit to these p)ersons^ that they may be born again, and be made heirs of everlasting salvation through our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, now and for ever. Amen. Then shall the people stand up, and the minister shall say, Hear the words of the Gospel, written by St. John, in the third chap- ter, beginning at the first verse. " There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a 430 TUE GJiEAT IKUN WHEEL. ruler uf ihe Jcnys : the same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Kabbl, m e know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest ex- cept God be with him. Jesus answered and said unto him. Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old ? Can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born ? Jesus answered. Verily, verily, 1 say unto thee. Except a man be born of water, and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee. Ye must be born again. The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth : so is every one that is born of the Spirit. llien the miahter shall s^^eak to the persons to he baptized on this ivise : — " Well beloved, who are come hither, desiring to receive holy baptism, ye have heard how the congregatic)n hath prayed that our Lord Jesus Christ would vouchsafe to re- ceive you, and bless you, to release you of your sins, to give you the kingdom of heaven, and everlasting life. And orr Lord Jesus Christ hath promised, in his holy word, to grant all those things that we have prayed for: which promise he for his part will most surely keep and perform. " Wherefore after this promise made by Christ, you must also faithfully, for your part, proniise, in the presence of this whole c(jngregation, that you will renounce the devil and al3 his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, and obediently keep his commandments. Then shall the minister demand of each of the lyersons to be baptized^ severally^ Q. Dost thou renounce the devil and all his works, the vain pomp and glory of the world, with all covetous desires of the same, and the carnal desires of the flesh, so that thou wilt not follow or be led by them 1 CHRISTIANITY KEVERSED. 431 A. I renounce them all. Q. Dost thou believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth'? and in Jesus Christ his only-bef;^otten son our Lord? and that he was conceived by the Holy Ghost, born of the Virgin Mary 1 that he suffered under Pontius Pilate, was crucified, dead, and buried ; that he rose again the third day ; that he ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty, and from thence shall come again, at the end of the world, to judge the quick and the dead 1 And dost thou believe in the Holy Ghost, the holy catholic Church, the communion of saints ; the remission of sins ; the resurrection of the body, and everlasting life after death? A. All this I steadflistly believe. Q. Wilt thou be baptized in this faith? A. This is my desire. Q. Wilt thou then obediently keep God's holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of thy life? A. I will endeavor so to do, God being my helper. Th€7i shall the minister say^ " O merciful God, grant that- the old Adam in these persons may be so buried, that the new man may be raised up in them. Amen. " Grant that all carnal affections may die in them, and that all things belonging to the Spirit may live and grow in them. Amen. " Grant that they may have power and strength to have victory, and triumph against the devil, the world, and the flesh. Amen. '• Grant that they being here dedicated to thee by our office and ministry, may also be endued with heavenly virtues, and everlastingly rewarded, through thy mercy, O blessed Lord God, who dost live and govern all things, world with- out end. Amen. "Almighty, ever-living God, whose most dearly-beloved Son Jesus Christ, for the forgiveness of our sins, did shed out of his most precious side both water and blood ; and 432 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. gave cominnndmciit to his disciples that they should go teach all nations, and baptize them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: regard, we beseech thee, the supplications of this congregation ; and grant that the jMf'Sons now to be baptized may receive the fullness of thy grace, and ever remain in the number of thy faithful and elect children, through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. Then shall the minister taJce each person to he baptized by the right hand : and placing him conveniently by the font^ ac- cording to his diacretion^ shall ask the name ; and then shall sprinkle or pour loatcr upon him [or if he shall desire it, shall immerse him in water), saying, JV., I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. Then shall be said tha Lord'^s Prayer, all kneeling. "Our Father who art in heaven, hallowed be thy name; thy kingdom come ; thy will be done on earth, as it is in heaven: give us this day our daily bread; and forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us : and lead us not into temptation ; but deliver us from evil. Amen. [Then let the minister conclude loith extemporary i^rayer.'] Does not this " whole office" proceed upon the supposi- tion that baptism is for the spiritual regeneration of the adult subject, as well as of the infant 1 Is a jirofcssion of regenera- tion required of the adult, as a condition of baptism? Mark this question well, read over the whole ritual, and see if it is anywhere intimated as necessary ? The declaration will be considered extravagant — preposterous, that the Methodist Espiscopal Church does not require of adults a profession of either evangelical faith in Christ, or regeneration of heart as conditions of baptism ! It requires a profession of a faith, 1 > ' ^ ve accustomed to call the members of the West- 464 THE GRKAT IRON WHEEL. em Church [i. e., Church of iiomej aprinlded Christians, by way of ridicule and conlenipt. They [the Greeks] maintain that [BaTTTL^G) can mean nothing but immerge ; and that bap- tism hy sprinkling is as great a solecism as immeraion by asper- sion^ and they claim to themselves the honor of having pre- served the ancient sacred rite of the Church free from" change and from corruption, which would destroy its significancy." •• F. Brenner, a Roman Catholic writer, has recently pub- lished a learned work which contains a copious history of usages in respect to the baptismal rite. He says, — " ' Thirteen hundred years was baptism generally and ordi- narily performed by the immersion of a man under water; and only in extraordinary cases was sprinkling or affusion permitted. These latter methods of baptism were called in question, and even prohibited.'' " ' In the work of John Floyer, on Cold Bathing, p. 50, it is mentioned, that the English Church practised immersion down to the beginning of the seventeenth century ; when a chan^-e to the method of sprinkling gradually took place. As a confirmation of this, it may be mentioned that the first Liturgy, in 1547, enjoins a trine immersion, in case the child is not sickly.' "We have collected facts enough to authorize us now to come to the following general conclusion respecting the practice of the Christian Church in general, with regard to the mode of baptism, viz., that from the earliest ages of which we have any account, subsequent to the apostolic age and downward for several centuries, the churches did gener- ally practise baptism by immersion; perhaps by immersion of the whole person; and that the only exceptions to this mode which were usually allowed, w^ere in cases of urgent sickness or other cases of immediate and imminent danger, where immersion could not be practised. CHRISTIANITY EKVERSEl). 465 ''It may also be mentioned here, that aspersion and affa- 810)1, which had in particular cases been now and then prac- tised in primitive times, were gradualhj introduced. These became at length, as we shall see hereafter, quite common, and in the Western Church almost universal, some time be- fore the Reformation. " Jn what manner, then, did the churches of Christ from a very early period, to say the least, understand the word f3a7TTit^(i) in the New Testament ? Plainly they construed it as meaning immersion. They sometimes even went so far as to forbid any other method of administering the ordinance, cases of necessity and mercy only excepted." Dr. Parmley, of New York, writes to Prof. Anthon, of Columbia College, N. Y., that Dr. Spring, a Pedobaptist minister, declared to him that in the original, the word ^arc- Ti^o) had no definite or distinct meaning ; that it means to immerse, sprinkle, pour, and a variety of other meanings. Prof Anthon replied : — " There is no authority whatever for the singular remark made by the Rev. Dr. Spring, relative to the force of j3a7rri^w. The primary meaning of the word is to dip, or immerse • and its secondary meanings, if ever it had any, all refer, in some way or other, to the same leading idea. Sprinkling, &;c., are entirely out of the question." This is the testimony of the first living scholar of England or America. Dr. Wall, a learned Episcopalian, in his History of In- fant Baptism : " And for sprinkling, properly so called, it seems it was at 1645 just then beginning and used by very few. It must have begun in the disorderly times after 1641, for Mr. Blake [who lived in England in 1644] had never used it, nor seen it used." 20* I 466 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. "So (parallel to the rest of their reformations) they re- formed the font into a basin. This learned assembly could not remen^ber that fonts to baptize in had been always used by the primitive Christians, long before the beginning of popery, and ever since churches were built ; but that sprinkling for the common use of baptizing was really in- troduced (in France first, and then in the other popish coun- tries) in times of popery ; and that accordingly all those countries in which the usurped power of the Pope is, or has formerly been, owned, have left off dipping of children in the font ; but that ail other countries in the world (which had never regarded his authority) do still use it." Sprinkling is then manifestly one of the traditions of the Pope of Rome. But Dr. Wall says, " Their [the apostolic and primitive churches'] general and ordinary way was to baptize by im- mersion, or dipping the person, whether it were an infant or grown man or woman, into the water. This is so plain and clear by an infinite number of passages, that, as one cannot but pity the w^eak endeavors of such Pedobaptists as would maintain the negative of it, so also we ought to disown and show a dislike of the profane scoffs which some people give to the English Antipedobaptists merely for their use of dipping. It is one thing to maintain that that cir- cumstance is not absolutely necessary to the essence of bap- tism, and another, to go about to represent it as ridiculous and foolish, or as shameful and indecent ; when it was in all probability the way by which our blessed Saviour, and for certain was the most usual and ordinary way by which the ancient Christians, did receive their baptism. I shall not stay to produce the particular proofs of this. Many of the quotations which I brought for other purposes, and shall bring, d.") evince it. It is a great want of prudence, as well CHRISTfANITY REVERSED. 467 as of honesty, to refuse to grant to an adversary what ia certa.nly true, and may be proved so. It creates a jeal- ousy of all the rest that one says." — Vol. ii. p. 384. I add to this the highest Roman Catholic authority in the world, that of Mons. Bossuet, Bishop of Meaux, who was preceptor to one of the kings of France, and the frank conces- sion to that authority by the learned Mons. de la Roque, pastor of a Reformed Church at Roan, in Normandy, who was en- gaged in controversy with Bishop Bossuet. Bossuet says, — '' In fine, we read not in the Scripture that baptism was otherwise administered ; and we are able to make it appear by the acts of councils, and by the ancient rituals, that for thirteen hundred years baptism was thus administered throughout the whole Church, as far as was possible. " The very word used in the rituals to express the action of the godfathers and godmothers, saying, they lift up the child from the baptismal font, is sufficient to show that tiie child .was plunged in it. "Though these are incontestable truths, yet neither we nor those of the pretended reformed religion hearken to the Anabaptists, who hold mersion to be essential and indispens- able ; nor have either they or we feared to change this dip- ping (as I may say) of the whole body, into a bare asper- sion or infusion on one part of it. No other reason of this alteration can be rendered, than that this dipping is not of the substance of baptism ; and those of the pretended re- formed religion agreeing with us in this, the first principle we have laid down is incontestable." And in another place, "Jesus Christ (says he) has ordered to dip, as w^e have often observed. We have also taken notice, that he was baptized in this form, that his apostles practised it, and that it was continued in the Church down to the twelftV. and thirteenth ages ; and yet baptism given 468 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. only by infusion is adniitled, without any difficulty, on the sole authority of the Church.'' " Experience has shown that all the attempts of the reform- ed to confound the Anabaptists by the Scripture, have been weak; and therefore they are at last obliged to allege to them the practice of the Church. We see in their Discipline, at the end of the eleventh chapter, the form of receiving adult persons into their communion, where they make the pros- elyted Anabaptist acknowledge that the baptism of infants is founded on Scri-pture^ and on the perpetual practice of the Church. When the pretended reformed believe they have the word of God very expressly on their side, they are not wont to build on the perpetual practice of the Church. But in this case, because the Scripture furnishes them with no- thing by which they are able to stop the mouths of the Ana- baptists, it was necessary to rely on somewhat else, and at the same time to confess that in these matters the per- petual practice of the Church is of inviolable authority." What reply did the Reformed pastor make to this au- thority 1 Did he deny that Christ commanded his disciples to immerse, and not to sprinkle 1 Did he deny that it had been the practice for thirteen centuries % Did he deny that the Romish Church had upon her sole authority changed the action into sprinkling ? No ; he denies not one of the above statements, but frankly admits . every one of them, and charges the Romish Church with having corrupted the ordi- nances by so doing. Hear him : After having recited Mons. Bossuet's words, which prove immersion to have been the ancient and proper way of bap- tizing : " 1 add (says he) to these reasons of Mons. Bossuet, that baptism is an external mark that we are willing to die to sin and to the world, and to have part in the death and burial of Jesus Christ. St. Paul says, we are buried CHRISTIANITY HE VERSED. 469 with him by baptism, which .shows that the believer was plunged in water, thereby to represent, as it were, a acrt of death and buriai. I further observe, that St. Paul oaiis it by a name which properly signifies a bath (or J^kVe/), (Tit. iii. 5,) when he says, God has saved us by the Iivcr of regen- eration.^^ lie at length repeats what the bishop urges against the Protestants concerning the change of dippi/ig into sprink- ling, (Szic, in which they agree with those of the Romish Cliurch, and then answers in the following terms : " I was willing (says he) to report this whole passage of Mons. Bos- suet, to elucidate this matter to the Protestants, who scarce ever make any reflection on it. It is true, that the greatest part of them hitherto baptize only by sprinkling, but it is certainly an abuse ; and this practice, which they have re- tained from the Romish Church, without a due examination of it, as well as many other things which they still retain, renders their baptism very defective. It corrupts both the institution and ancient usage of it, and the relation it ought to have to faith, repentance and regeneration. Monsieur Bossuet's remark, thiit dipping was in use for thirteen hundred years, deserves our serious consideration, and our acknowledgment thereupon, that we have not sufficiently examined all that we have retained from the Romish Church ; that, seeing her most learned prelates now inform us that it w^as she that first abolished a usage authorized by so many strong reasons, and by so many ages, she has done very ill on this occasion, and that we are obliged to return to the ancient practice of the Church, and to the institution of Jesus Christ. 1 do not say that baptism by aspersion is null — that is not my opinion : but it must be confessed, if sprinkling de- stroys not the substance of baptism, yet it alters it, and in some sort corrupts it — 'tis a defect which spoils its lawful form." — Stennets Answer to Russen, p. 186. LETTER XXXVIII. The Methodists terms of communion — None so dose, or so unscripturally close — They invert the ordinances and violate the divine order — The Discipline forbids Methodist preachc • s to invite members of other denominations — All who com- mune with Methodists must not only believe, but dress like them ; — Close communion in marrying — In trading, in Sab- bath-Schools, in Singing- Schools, and '■'Tune- Books'' — Baj)- tist communion not close — The testimony of Mr. fjibbard. Dear Sir : — The preachers of no denomination are so clamorous upon the subject of communion as yours. Baptist '"close communion" — Baptist illiberality and bigotry are the favorite themes of your ministers, upon all public aifd private occasions, when they think an iinpression can be made; and especially at their communion seasons, or after a revival of religious feeling in any town or comnuuiity, they do not fail to extend a kind and urgent invitation to their '• dear Baptist brethren whom they love so well,"' to ^ome and sit down with them around the table of the Lord, &c. This, to the unreflecting, seems very liberal and Christ- ian-like. But when their dear brethren refuse, they pour upon them a flood of abuse, for their selfishness, their unchristian feelings, their bigotry and narrow contractedness, and suc- ceed in very many instances in eflectually souring the minds of Christians and the world, and arousing feelings of con- tempt and even hatred against Baptists. Now, sir, I wish (470) CHRISTIANITY KE VERSED. 471 to put a full stop to this wicked course of procedure on the part of your preachers, and this I shall succeed in effecting, provided I can influence either the bishops of the Methodist Episcopal Church, or the ministers and members of Baptist churches, to discharge their duty. I shall show, 1st, That those Methodist ministers who extend such general invitations to Baptists to commune with tliem, transgress the explicit law and rule laid down in the Discipline for the administration of the Lord's Supper. 2d, That they violate their own solemn pledges and oaths when- ever they do so. 3d, That they fly directly in the face of the express command of their own bishop, whom they have sworn " reverently to obey," in all things. 4th, That Methodist communion is not only unscripturally close, but the most strict of any in professed Christendom. And 5th, and finally, will prove by Mr. Ilibhard, that Methodists are guilty of an open violation of the commission and command of Christ in their observance of the Lord's Supper. 1. All those Methodist ministers who give general invi- tations to Baptists and others to commune with them, trans- gress the law of the Discipline, which they have sworn religiously to observe. Read the law of Conference, in its statute-book, touching the Supper. *' Section II. — General Directions. ""Q. Are there any directions to be given concerning the administration of the Lord's Supper 1 ''A. \. Let those who have scruples concerning the receiv- ing of it kneeling, be permitted to receive it either standing or sitting. •• 2. Let no person who is not a member of our Church be admitted to the communion without examination, and some token I'iveii bv an elder or deacon. 472 TUK GREAT IRON WIIEKL. "3i No person shall be admitted to the Lord's Supper among us who is guilty of any practice for which we would exclude a member of our Church,"* For what is this examination, unless it be to shut out all those, whether Baptists or Presbyterians, who are guilty of any practice for which one of your own members would be excluded, as the third rule intimates'? The question then arises, for what practices would you ex- clude one of your own members ? 1. For refusing to attend the class-meetings. "^. 3. What shall we do with those members of our Church who wilfully and repeatedly neglect to meet their class 1 "yl. 1. Let the elder, deacon, or one of the preachers, visit them, whenever it is practicable, and explain to them the consequence if they continue to neglect, namely, exclusion, "2. If they do not amend, let him who has the charge of the circuit or station bring their case before the society, or a select number, before whom they shall have been cited to appear; and if they be found guilty of wilful neglect by a decision of a majority of the members before whom their case is brought, let them be laid aside, and let the preacher show that they are excluded for a breach of our rules, and not for immoral conduct," Now, suppose a member whom you have excluded foi re- fusing to obey this human law, should join the Baptists or Presbyterians, and, hearing one of the liberal invitations of your preachers, should come forward, can he get a " token," if your ministers observe this law, as they have pledged them- selves to do*? Certainly not; all such Baptists or Presby- terians or Episcopalians are shut out. * Discipline, p. 77. edition 1847. CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 473 2. For inveighing against either the doctrines or Discipline of the Methodist Episcopal Church " If a member of oar Church shall be clearly convicted of endeavoring to sow dissensions in any of om- societies, by inveighing against either our doctrines or Discipline, such person so offending shall be first reproved by the senior minister or preacher of his circuit, and if he persist in such pernicious practices, he shall be expelled from the Church. Can Episcopalians, Presbyterians, or Baptists, then, get a token from an elder or deacon, if he keeps his solemn oath to observe the directions of the Discipline ? Do not all Episcopalians regard and declare the Episcopacy of your Church, as a "sham Episcopacy," and your sect as a mis- chievous schism'^ Do not all Presbyterians hold, teach, preach, and declare, publicly and privately, that the govern- ment of Methodism is unscriptural, anti-republican, and in all its tendencies dangerous to the republicanism of this country, and equally to be feared with Romanism % Do they not also declare that your penance of Friday fasts, your class and band-meetings are popish, unscriptural and perni- cious in their influence'? Do they not openly pronounce your doctrinal views as Arminian, and therefore utterly sub- versive of the true grace of God and the plan of salvation by grace, and eminently dangerous* to the souls of men ? Do they not declare that your seekership and "probation," and your admitting confessedly unregenerate seekers to the communion, are also unscriptural and of evil tendency % Do they not everywhere '• sow dissensions," by declaring that the Romish dogma of baptismal regeneration is openly taught in your office for baptism, and in the works of Mr. Wesley, which you still continue to issue v/ith your endorsement from the Book Concern? And do not Baptists not only agree with all the above objections of Presbyterians, but 474 THE GRKAT IRON WHEEL. constantly and everywhere, al home and abroad, on the land, on the sea, from the pulpit and the press, upon the high-way and in the by-way, by the way-side and the fire-side, declare that by your form of government you dethrone Jesus Christ, reject his sole and supreme authority to rule in and over his churches, — that your bishops and preachers assume to themselves the impious prerogatives of antichrist, and as- sume the throne of Christ as kings in Zion 1 Do not Bap- tists assert that you have corrupted the membership of the churches of Christ (granting that your societies are churches of Christ) by the introduction of infants, of children, and of seekers; and that the main part and pillar of popery is the main part and pillar of Methodism — infant baptism? and, by word and deed, do not Baptists (as they should) refuse to ac- cept your ordinances, your baptisms and ordinations, as scrip- tural or valid, and publicly refuse to recognize your societies as churches of Christ or branches of his Church? Now, these facts are well known to you, and to all your minis- ters who know any thing ; and will they, in the face of these, and in the face of the inviolable directions of your Dis- cipline, invite Presbyterians and Baptists to their table ? Are we not guilty of inveighing against your doctrines and Discipline — of" sowing dissensions,^' i. e., disaffection to your doctrines and practices, among your members? Are we not guilty of practices for which you would exclude a mem- ber of one of your societies ? And could a soul of us all get a ticket to your table, if your law was executed ? You sometimes, for a show of liberality, invite our minis- ters and Presbyterian ministers, to preach with you — to hold union meetings with you ; but can you invite them to eat with you, without an open violation of your solemn vows, before God and men, to your chief ministers ] Let us suppose that our ministers are an exception to the above law — are CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 475 the^ not swept from the Methodist table by another ? It must be granted, that, according to the spirit of the Disci- pline, the minister of no denomination should be invited, who is guilty of practices for which you would exclude a Methodist preacher. Very well ; for what practices would you exclude the best of your own preachers? Whatsa^s the book of Methodist laws ? '• Q. 4. What shall be done with those ministers or preach- ers who hold and disseminate, publicly or privately, doc- trines which are contrary to our articles of religion'? " A. Let the same process be observed as in case of gross Immorality : but if the minister or preacher so offending do solemnly engage not to disseminate such erroneous doctrines in public or in private, he shall be borne with, till his case be laid before the next Annual Conference, which shall de- termine the matter."" Will not all Presbyterian and Baptist preachers glory to plead " guilty'' upon this count ] How then can one of them get a " ticket" to your table ? Then you, too, are guilty of getting our ministers to preach for you, and yet refuse to let them eat with you ! ! But who else cannot get " tickets" to your open commu- nion table '? 3. "Those who wear high heads, enormous bonnets, or ruffles, or ringsy That I speak according to the law of Methodism, judge thou : "Of Dress. " Q. Should we insist on the rules concerning dress? " A. By all means. This is no time to give encourage- ment to superfluity of apparel. Therefore receive none into the Church till they have left off superfluous ornaments. In order to this, 1 . Let every one who has charge of a circuit 476 THE GREAT iKU-\ WHEEL. or station, read Mr. Wesley's Thoughts upon Dre^s, at least once a year, in e^ery society. 2. In visiting the classes be very mild, but very strict. 3. Allow of no exempt case : better one suffer than many. 4. Give no tickets to any thai wear high heads, enormous bonnets^ rujies, or rings y There may be some Presbyterians, and Baptists, too, who are so exceedingly charitable as to have no particular princi- ples in religious matters, and think and say that Methodist doctrines and practices are all right for Methodists, provided they are sincere in believing them ; or, if they have princi- ples, they are so generously consistent as to compromise them, and these characters might possibly pass the examina- tion so far. But then, these very persons are apt to carry their heads rather high, as they generally think they are bet- ter, more catholic and liberal, than their brethren ; and I have known some of them wear a ring on their little finger, and sometimes a ruffle in their shirt-bosom. But the ladies, we know, generally believe strongly in the latest fashion, just in proportion as they are indifferent to the principles and con- sistencies of religion. If it is the fashion to wear " enormous bonnets," they will wear such : or, if very little, and those worn more upon the neck and shoulders, they will wear such, and so wear them. If it is fashionable to wear many or few ruffles and flounces, they will dress accordingly ; and as to •'rings," they, of all Christians, are guilty of the greatest ex- travagance. Can these characters get a " ticket " if the elder or deacon conscientiously keep his pledge to observe the directions of the Discipline, and the commands of his chief ministers % By no means. Is it urged that these directions concerning dress do not apjjly to the communion, but only to joining the society ? I answer, if they debar from the Church, they also shut out from the Lord's table, according to the third rule above CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 477 quoted : " No person shall be admitted to the Lord's Sup- per among us who is guWty of ani/ practice for which we would exclude a member of our Church /" The members of the Methodist Church are to be excluded from the Supper if guilty of a violation of the law concern- ing dress, and consequently, the members of all other denom- inations. This is clear and unquestionable. Elder S. Remington, who was for a long time a Methodist preacher, in his little work, "A Defence of Restricted Com- munion," has very kindly initiated us into all the minutiae of this examination : " On page 104 of their Book of Discipline, 1850, it is asked : ' Quest. Are there any directions to be given concern- ing the administration of the Lord's Supper V In the second article of the answer, we have the following: 'No person shall be admitted to the Lord's Supper among us, who is guilty of any practice for which we would exclude a mem- ber of our Church,' " We will suppose. a minister of another Church applies to an elder for admission to the Lord's Supper. The elder looks at him, and says, 'You are very plain in your dress, and as far as your appearance is concerned, I can admit you ; but 1 must examine you as to your practice.' He then takes the Book of Discipline and reads on page 86, section i., ques- tion 4, ' What shall be done with those ministers or preach- ers who hold and disseminate, publicly or privately, doctrines which are contrary to our articles of religion ? Ans. Let the same process be observed as in case of gross immorality.' ' Now,' says the elder, ' I would inquire, are you with us in doctrine V ' No, sir, I am not,' replies the applicant. ' I believe,' continues he, ' in the doctrine of personal and eter- nal predestination and foreordi nation, as set forth in the Presbyterian Confession of Faith, pp. 15-19 ; and I accord- 478 THE GKKAT IKON WHtEL. iiigly preach it whenever 1 dcein it proper so to do.' ' Then,' says the elder, ' 1 cannot admit you to the table of the Lord, as yoj must perceive from the Discipline, which I have just read/ 'But then,' responds the applicant, ' that applies to your ministers, and not to us.' ' 1 admit that it does,' rejoins the elder ; 'but think you that we ought to admit a person to the table who is guilty of what would exclude a minister from the Church 1 Besides, the Discipline says, in another place, " that no person shall be admitted to the Lord's Sup- per among us, who is guilty of any practice for which we would exclude a member of our Church." ' 'May I not further inquire,' says the applicant, ' whether this last rule which you have quoted does not apply to members, and not to min- isters ?' ' I think not,' replies the elder ; ' for we have an- other rule very similar to it which particularly applies to members. Page 92, section iv., article 3 : " If any member of our Church shall be clearly convicted of endeavoring to sow dissentions in any of our societies, by inveighing against either our doctrines or Discipline, such person so offending shall be first reproved by the senior minister or preacher of his circuit, and, if he persist in such pernicious practices, he shall be expelled from the Church." Now, if you will prom- ise that you will not inveigh either against our doctrines or Discipline, I can admit you, otherwise, 1 cannot.' ' Why, 1 thought you were open communion ; but 1 find I am mis- taken,' replies the applicant. '0 yes,' says the elder, 'we are open communion. (Jur greatest objection to the Baptists is that they will hang on to close communion.' * Well, upon my word,' says the applicant, 'all the difierence I can per- ceive between ycu and the Baptists is, you profess open com- njunion, and are in your Discipline close communion ; while the Baptists make their practice agree with their profession. From what I can learn from you and your Discipline, I find CHRISTIANITY REVEKSED. 479 that the teims of communion with you are simply these — we must believe, preach, and dress just like ike Methodists. If I mistake not, that is going a little ahead of the Baptists. For Baptists will allow their members and ministers to dif- fer on some theological points, and yet not refuse to fellow- ship them at the Lord's table. Permit me, then, my dear friend, to suggest that, instead of crying out against the Bap- tists for their close communion, boasting at the same time of your open communion, you lay your hand upon your mouth until you alter your Discipline, striking out the restrictions which render your Church more restricted in' her commun- ion than even that Church which we Pedobaplists all agree to censure for its practical want of catholicity.' '•Finally, it can be shown from the Discipline of the Meth- odist E. Church, that it is as strictly close communion as any Baptist Church in the land. Page 74, section ii., ques- tion 4, it is asked, ' What shall we do with those members of our Church who wilfully and repeatedly neglect to meet their class? A. 1. Let the elder, deacon, or one of the preachers, visit them, whenever it is practicable, and explain to them the consequence if they continue to neglect, viz., exclusion. 2. If they do not amend, let him who has charge of the circuit or station bring their case before the society, or a select number, before whom they shall have been cited to appear ; and if they be found guilty of wilful neglect by the decision of a majority of the members before whom theii* case is brought, let them be laid aside, and let the preacher show that they are excluded for a breach of our rules, and not for immoral conduct.' •' From the above laws of the Methodist E. Church, we ob- serve that non-attendance ?^j9o« c/as.9, without any immorality, is sufficient to exclude a person from the Church, Now, sup- pose this excluded person, who may be in every other sense 480 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. a worthy member, should join another evangelical Chi.rch — nothing against his moral character; no one doubts his piety ; not even the Methodists doubt his sincerity — and that he is a man of genuine religion. All that can be said of him is, ' he will not attend class.' Well, now he comes back to the Church from which he has been excluded, and presents himself as a member of another Church, in good and regular standing, for admittance to the Lord's table. Says the elder, 'My friend, 1 cannot admit you.' 'Why notl' asks the brother ; 'do you not believe that I am a Christian, and that I am bound with you, as such, to a better land ? And do you not rejoice with me in the hope of sitting down to- gether at the marriage-supper of the Lamb?' 'O yes, my brother,' responds the elder ; ' 1 must inquire (perhaps 1 am a little too fast) — are you truly sorry that you did not comply with the rules of the Church and attend class V '' I am not sorry, my brother,' he responds, 'for 1 did not then, neither do J now, believe in class-meetings.' ' Well, then, 1 must read you the law,' replies the elder. - Page 96, section iv., article 5 : "After such forms of trial a)id expulsion, such person shall have no privilege of s contradictious. Its teachings are as scriptural, as " wholesome, and as full of comfort" as the preceding ones. Peter sinned when he denied his Saviour thrice^ and " fell," but not beyond God's grace. He was in a state of faith, and consequently of justification and regeneration, while fallen ; for the Saviour, foretelling him his sin, said, " I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not;" and did it fail? Did not the Father hear the Son, whom he heareth always 1 And why did the Saviour suffer Satan thus to sift Peter ? For the same reason he permits Satan to sift his children now — to sift the chaff* out of him. Peter was an Arminian, and he needed to be converted — not regenerated in heart, but con- verted from a false doctrine. He fancied he was strong enough to stand alone — to keep himself, and that he had all along kept himself, and must in all future time keep himself, as thousands? of professed Christians imagine they must keep themselves Christians, by their good works and religious ex- ercises and duties. Christ knew that Peter needed to be converted from this idea; for such a doctrine robbed him of CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 509 part of his glory, and would depreciate the value of his atonement and power in the eyes of Peter ; and then Peter might go forth and preach, as others do, if a man can keep himself a Christian, he can make himself one. The Saviour said unto Peter, " When thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren." Did he do if? If any one doubts, let him turn to the first letter he ever wrote, and see if he does not "strengthen" them, even in the salutation itself. Read it, and see how it grinds into fine dust the doctrine of standing by works, and of keeping in faith by keeping in works. " Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, which, according to his abundant mercy, hath begotten us again unto a lively hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, to an inheritance incorruptible and undefiled, and that flideth not away, reserved in heaven for you, who are kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation, ready to be revealed in the last time." (1 Pet. i. 3-5.) Notice the richness of the doctrine, begotten according to his ^^ abundant mercy'' — bless God for that — "unto a lively hope, to an inheritance incorruptible, and undefiled, and un- fading, reserved in heaven for you, who are he'ptP Yes, there it comes — " are kept ;" and bless God for that— but it was dear experience to poor Peter ! Are kept by the power of whom, Peter % of one another ? of good works ? of one's own strength? No, no. Power of the angels in heaven? It would be a fearful hope, for angels have fallen. No, " power of God." Aye; there is the rock in the promise. Through what medium does God exert this power "? " Through faith." And how long does God promise to exert it to keep us 1 " Unto salvation." And how does it keep us % " Ready to be revealed in the last time." Well may we rejoice, who build on such a rock as this. But, Peter, are you sure 510 TlIK GRKAT IKoN WHKEL. that this faith, of which God is thu author and finisher, will not fail in some instance, when it is tried, as it were, in the fire i Hear his answer: " Wherein [in the fact that we are kept by the power of God through faith vnio salvatiojt] ye greatly rejoice (though now for a season, if need be, ye are in heaviness through manifold temptations) ; that the trial of your faith, being ?nuch more precious than [the trial] of gold that perisheth, 1 hough it [yX)ur faith] be tried with fire, might be found unto praise, and honor, and glory at the ap- pearing of Jesus Christ." Can gold be destroyed by fire? The intenser the heat of the crucible the pm-er the gold that comes from it. But the trial of the Christian's faith is " much more precious." Methodist preachers certainly do not find a ground for their doctrine from the creed of the Discipline. And when they preach apostacy, as they do, they preach contrary to the express teachings of their articles of religion ! Let this be remembered, and urged upon them. They do not find it in the ritual of baptism ; for that supposes every one baptized to be spiritually regenerated at the same time — to be intro- duced into vital union with Christ their head, and, conse- quently, made partakers of the life of Christ, which is ever- lasting. It supposes them introduced into the new covenant of God's grace, and their titles to all its blessings sealed to them by their baptism. But that is an everlasting covenant, which, unlike the old one, never can be broken. All who are sealed in that covenant are " sealed unto the day of redemp- tion." But the ritual teaches that all who are baptized are thereby introduced into the number of God's "elect child- ren." " Grant that the persons now to be baptized may receive the fulness of thy grace, and ever remain in the num- ber of thy faithful and elect children.^^ &c. The same sentence closes the prayer used upon the baptism of infants. Cer- CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 611 tainly no on ? can remain in the number of the elect, unless previously introduced into that number. Whatever views we may have upon the subject of election, we are agreed — for all agree in this — that God knows, in a particular sense, all his elect children. *' The foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, the Lord knoweth them that are his." The " elect children" are given to the Son by the Father; they are his tf> keep until he maketh up his jewels. He calls them bis sheep; for they are no longer goats : and he says of such, " My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me; and I give unto them eternal life, and the^ shall never perish, neither shall any pluck them out of my hand. My Father which gave them me is greater than all ; and none [or no one] is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." At the last day he will be able to say, as he did before his death, " Of all the Father hath given me have I lost none, save the son of perdition, that the Scriptures might be fulfilled." But Judas never was a sheep — never more than a professed discijyle ; /or, said the Saviour, " Have I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil V Not one of those whom Christ knows as his " elect child- ren" will be found upon the left hand, or sentenced to depart, at the last day. Thousands of ministers and members will be found there who were confident they would be accepted because of their works ; for these they plead, but Christ never knew them as his regenerated children. " Many will say unto me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied [preach- ed] in thy name, and in thy name have cast out devils, and in thy name done many wonderful works ?" Every sect in Christendom plead that because there have been revivals among them — wonderful works done, and numberless sin- ners gathered within their pale — therefore they are churches 512 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. of Christ. So reasoned these, but Christ never knew one of them as his. " Then will I profess unto them I never knew you ; depart from me." This scripture must conclusively set- tle the question in all candid minds, waiving all discussion whether it were possible for a child of God to be lost, that no child of God ever wi-11 be lost! There is only one expression in the baptismal office which may seem to imply a doubt on tl^ mind of some, viz. : "And our Lord Jesus Christ hath promised, in his holy word, to grant all those things that we have prayed for ; which promise he, for his part, will most surely keep and perform. Wherefore, after this promise made by Christ, you must also faithfully, for your part, promise, in the presence of this whole congregation, that you will renounce the devil and all his works, and constantly believe God's holy word, and obe- diently keep his commands." A word will explain all this conditional salvation. As I have shown in the letter on Baptism, the whole office for baptism supposes no one regenerated before baptism. The Discipline has no office for the baptism of believers ! It sup- poses all to be regenerated, introduced into the number of God's elect children and into the new covenant of grace, and all its blessings sealed to them in and by baptism. See the prayer referred to above — " Give thy Holy Spirit to these persons that they may be born again, and be made heirs of everlasting salvation ;" thus teaching that they never had pre- viously received the regenerating influences of the Holy Spi- rit. The language I am discussing, then, only binds them, on their part, to renounce the devil, &c., that they may receive the promised grace. There is popery enough in the form^ but there is no Arminianism in the doctrine — it gives no coun- tenance to the doctrine of falling from saving grace. Where, then, do Methodist preachers find their commission to preach CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 513 justification by works, from which ground ,the doctrine of the possibility oi i genuine Christian's final apostacy and damnation can be concluded 1 Not from the creed, not from the ritual — 1 hereby exonerate the Discipline from giving the least favor to such an idea. It positively forbids the pos- sihility of such a doctrine. It cannot exist in any system of theology w^hich recognizes the vital doctrine of justification by faith alone, and especially when joined with the article upon "free will" as it stands in your Discipline. If any one claims that Mr. Wesley taught it, I will hold myself bound to show that Mr. Wesley stultifies himself — that his teach- ings are contradictious. The Argument for Justification alone by Faith in the Righteousness of Christ, from Reason and Scripture. Reason teaches that our salvation must rest upon one of /hree grounds: 1. Upon our own righteousness alone, or 2. Upon the righteousness of Christ alone, or 3. Partly upon our own righteousness, and partly upon Christ's. It cannot rest upon our own righteousness : 1st, According to the Articles of Religion ; for Art. XI. endorses the teaching of Christ in these words, " When ye have done sXi that is commanded you, say we are unprofitahle servants,'' and Art. IX. declares that we are accounted righteous l>afore God only for the merit of our Lord and Saviour Jesu5 Christ by faith, and not for our own works or deservings. 2ri, According to the Scriptures — " But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared, not ly works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us by the washing of regeneration and re- newing of the Holy Ghost ; which he shed on us abundantly ihrough Jesus Christ our Saviour; that being justitied by his 514 T11I<: (iUKAT lllOX WJIKEL. grace, we should be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Tit. iii. 4-7.) " And be found in him, not having miyie own righteousness, which is of the law [works], but that which is through the faith of Christ, the righteousness which is of God by faith." (Phil. iii. 9.) 3d, The law of God by which we must be justified will only be satisfied by a perfect obedience — a perfect righteousness. It must find that either in ourselves or in our substitute — our Surety. It cannot find it in ourselves — we have all transgressed it ten thousand times, and w^e still continue to violate its letter, " and with the flesh serve the law of sin." "Therefore, by the deeds of the law there shall no flesh be justified in his sight, * * * for all have sinned and come short of the glory of God." (Rom. iii. 20, 23.) "Christ is become of none effect unto you, whosoever of you are justi- fied by the law ; ye are fallen from grace.'''' Those, then, who depend upon the law or works of righteousness, in whole or in part, for justification in the sight of God, make Christ of none effect — reject the righteousness and atonement of Christ, and despise and fail of his grace. Our sole ground of justification, then, must rest upon the righteousness of Christ alone, imputed to us. Qirist is our Surety if we accept him, and the law, failing to find the righteousness it requires of us — which we owe to it — must look to our Surety, and if it fails to find it in him, we fall under its penalty. But, bless God, it can harm us not until the righteousness of Christ fails or is found im- perfect. Wonderful and glorious plan ! We are Christ's sin. and he is our righteousness — our sins are imputed to him, and his righteousness is imputed to us ! " Arise ! my soul, arise, Shake oflF thy guilty fears- CilKISTlAMTY JiEVKKSED. 615 Ti;e bleeding Sacrifice In thy behalf appears : Before the throne ray Surety stands My name is written on his hands !" The scape-goat and the lamb of the sin-offering were types of Christ. See how clearly and beautifully they taught. " And Aaron shall lay both his hands upon the head of the live goat and confess over him all the iniquities of the child- ren of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat, and shall send him away by the hand of a fit man into the wilderness," where he will not be seen any more. Thus teaching that the great Sacrifice upon whom our sins are laid will for ever put away our sins. " My soul would lay her hand On that dear head of thine. While like a penitent I stand, And there confess my crime. Believing I rejoice To see the curse remove ; We bless the lamb with cheerful voice, And sing his bleeding love." But what say the Scriptures touching the imputed right- eousness of Christ 1 His righteousness is imputed to us when we believe in him, accept him as our substitute, our Surety, our Saviour ; and is therefore called the " righteousness of faith". " And he [Abraham] received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircum- cised ; that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised; that righteousness might be imputed unto them also." " Now it was not written for his sake alone, that it was imputed to him, but for us also, to whom it [i e., the righteousness of faith] shall be imputed, 516 TiJE gkj:at iron wuekl. if we believe in him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead ; who was delivered [suffered] for our offences, and was raised again for our justification." Now we have no ground to fear, for his righteousness is perfect — finished — everlasting — and all his righteousness is ours. And this is the name whereby he shall be called, " The Lord our Righteousness ;" and blessed are they who put their trust in him. Let us look at the apostle's illustration of this imputed righteousness — how the law looks to another to discharge the debt of obedience we owe it. He alludes to the law of marriage, and I accept it. Suppose, if you please, a young lady is impoverished and in disgrace through the improvi- dence or sins of her parents. She has incurred debts to the amount of thousands, and has nothing to pay — she never can discharge them. The law of imprisonment for debt is in force, and she can be incarcerated for life, at any hour her creditor sees fit. Her condition is hopeless, for the cred- itor is unrelenting. The son of a Rothschild sees her, pities her, loves her, offers her his hand in marriage. She hesitates, fears and trembles, because of the claims of the law upon her for her debts. He points to his immense wealth, which will be holden for her debts, provided she consents to marry him ; he explains to her how the law will, can no lunger look to her for payment, but to him, aa her husband — that her debts are imputed to him, and his wealth is imputed to her. She fearfully asks if his wealth is sufficient to discharge her liabilities. He assures her that so vast are his possessions the sum will not be missed. But she will needs be constantly — daily — making debts; she must be supported, and she has nothing to pay. He again assures her that his property will not only be holden for all her past indebtedness, but also for all the debts she CHKISTIANITY REVERSED 517 will incur while she lives; and all these cannot sensibly diminish it. His love and boundless generosity over- come her. She accepts his hand, and falls into his arms — he is her temporal saviour, her husband. Now, is she not free from the law ? Can it ever look to her again 1 Must it not look to her husband for her old debts, and for all she may incur 1 And is not her former reproach all removed, and does she not participate in the dignity and honor of her husband, and are they not one ? So the believer — the Christian — is married to Christ, says Paul. He was once in disgrace, depraved through the sins of our first parents. He was in debt to the law ten thousand talents, and had nothing to pay, and he must ever incur in- debtedness to it while he lives. He was in danger of being shut up in the law's prison-house of eternal despair. He was vile and unlovely as he was wicked, possessed of nothing to commend him to the favor or even pity of any one ; but Jesus passed that way, saw him, and, strange to say, loved him, and offered him his hand in marriage ; to make him one with him- self—joint-heir with him in all his infinite possessions, and raise him to glory, honor, and eternal life, at his right hand. His love secures the sinner's love, and he accepts the gracious, un- merited gift. In Scripture phrase, he is married to Christ, and the law relinquishes its claims upon the sinner, and looks evermore to Christ for all past, present, and future indebt- edness incurred by him. There is no possible chance for the released to fall back into the grasp of the law while Christ lives ; for the marriage contract provides against that. He is made one with Christ, and Christ, therefore, becomes his life ; his life is hid with Christ in God, and the pledge of Christ to him is, because I live you shall live also. And more ; he is adopted into God's family of redeemed ones as a child, and made brother to Christ. He no more fears the 518 THE GREAT I HON UMIEEL. law, for he is no more iiiuler it, but under grace. Christ is his law, being niade the end of the law for righteousness to him. The child of God is for ever released from his bond- age of fear on account of the threatenings of the law. " For ye have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but ye have received the Spirit of adoption, whereby ye cry, ' My Father.' " That man or woman who is still under the bondage of fear, is in a state of condemnation. Where is there a place for his falling short of salvation? Was not the believer safe, and saved evermore, the hour he first believed 1 Can he lose his spiritual life through the wiles and deceit 01' malice of the devil ? How can it be supposed, since Christ is his life 1 Can the devil harm or destroy Christ ? But his " life is hid " — from the grasp of the enemy who would destroy it, of course — where? "With Christ in God.'' Can old Satan find it now ? He could not so much as find the body of Moses, which God, for some wise purpose, sent an angel to hide, though he spared no pains, and endeavored to force the angel to discover it to him ; but he did not succeed. Can he, then, find the Christian's life ? Can he force the Almighty to surrender it? Can he, at the head of his dark legions, carry by storm the bulwarks of heaven, and pierce through all the serried rank of angelic legions ; through cherubim and archangels that form the throne and body- guard of the Eternal, and lay open a Father's heart — force from the Saviour's hand the ransomed, blood-washed soul of a redeemed saint ? And yet all this Satan would have to do to bring to ruin one child of God. Surely none can pluck him out of the Father's hand. But will every one so hid at last be saved ? " And when Christ, who is our life, shall appear, then will we also appear with him in glory." But cannot Satan by his cunning devices cheat him out of CHRISTIAXITY REVERSED. 519 his will to kis eternal possessions ? Not unless he can rob Christ of his also. Christ gave him a deed — not a mere title-bond, as Armenians would have it — to eternal life ; " to an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and unfading," that is reserved in heaven for him ; — strange to say, made him an heir of God himself, i. e., of all that God possesses to be- stow ; and. in order to make it sure — so that his title could never be questioned or destroyed — he made him joint-heir with himself, and so we are, if believers, " heirs of God and joint-heirs with Christ." Then the Christian's title, to day, is just as good, and just as safe and secure as is that of Jesus Christ. What Christian will not rejoice with joy unspeak- able and full of glory at this glorious promise and provision ? " Truly, the world knoweth us not, because it knew him not ;" nor do the carnal -minded understand either the value or the tenure by which we hold our spiritual possessions ; but we know them : for it is written, " Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither hath it entered into the heart of [carnal] man, the things which God hath prepared for those that love him. But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit." And it is the glorious prospect of these things secured to us, not upon our own works or worthiness, but the abounding grace of God, and the sure word of his promise, that cheers our courage by the way ; that weans us from the idolatry of this world's perishing wealth ; that supports us in bereave- ments; that gladdens us in solitude, affliction, and gloom; that fills our hearts with gladness, and our lips with praise, and our eyes with visions of glory in the hour of death. But does the soul that has been all his life in bondage to works still ask, " May we not be separated by the great •^nemy, or in some unforeseen way separate ourselves from he love of Christ f 520 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. Hear the apostle's answer: " And we know that all things work together for good to them that love God, to them who are the called according to his purpose. For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the first-born among many brethren. Moreover, whom he did predestinate, them he also called : and whom he called, them he also justified : and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things ? If God be for us, who can be against us '? He that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not with him also freely give us all things ? Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect? It is God that justifieth : who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand of God, who also maketh intercession for us. W^ho shall separate us from the love of Christ 1 shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword 1 As it is writ- ten. For thy sake we are killed all the day long ; we are accounted as sheep for the slaughter. Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors, through him that loved us. For 1 am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." (Rom. viii. 28-39.) This passage puts it out of the power of the man himself to separate himself; for if he is not included in the first enumera- tion, he is swept by " any other creature," for he is a creature. It is perfectly monstrous to suppose that one who has tasted of the love of Christ, which passeth understanding, been freed from the condemnation of the law and the tetror of God's CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 521 wrath, should desire to be separated from that love, rest again under that curse, and experience the forebodings of that wrath. It is not supposable. Then, the true Christian would not if he could, and could not if he would, be sepa- rated from the love of Christ. He is married to Christ, and there is no divorce in heaven for such marriages. He has been grafted into Christ, and become inseparably united to him. He»is a member of Christ's body, and that body can- not be maimed. He has entered into the new and everlast- ing covenant, and it cannot be broken. He has tasted of the tree of life, which grows in the midst of the paraiise of God, and must live for ever. "But there are very many who say they have been C^hristians more than twenty times, who are now outrageous dinners — bold, blasphemous, and acknowledged infidels." I am not surprised at this. I would expect such to be infi- dels. I never knew an infidel who had not been made so by Arminianism ; — had fallen from grace a few times — ^just enough to disgust and sicken him with the name of religion. What says God's word concerning all such characters? " He that saith I have known him, and keepeth not his com- mandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him. (1 John ii. 4.) I have translated the second verb in the perfect tense, be- cause it is in the perfect tense in the original, and all scholars will agree in this. This, then, is its explicit teaching: If any man says that he once knew Christ, once was a Christ- ian, and does not now love him, and is not now endeavor- ing to keep his commandments, he is a liar, and the truth is not in him. * There are, alas ! thousands of such liars ; and this doctrine of apostacy and falling from grace, is the maker of them all, and is multiplying such liars by thou- sands each year. 522 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL Objections to the Perseverances to all Saints answered, I am aware that there arc many urged, and many which I shall not attempt to answer, for it would be in vain. Here let me say that I have no more reason to hope that I can re- ;nove all the objections to this doctrine in the mind of an unregenerate Arminian than I could remove all the objec- tions and dislike in the carnal heart to the doctrine of the sovereignty of God in a sinner's salvation. The carnal heart, which is enmity against God, has constitutional objections to both doctrines, because they humble its pride, and leave it in the dust — they rob it of its works. 1st Objection. " Angels in heaven have flillen." We have nothing to do with angels ; they do not live under the same dispensation, and Christ never died for them. 2d Objection. " Adam fell." And he rose again ; and, therefore, he fell not beyond God's grace. Nor did he live in the dispensation that we do, nor was he in the new covenant prior to his fall. He was under "a covenant of works." God had created him innocent, and he was to do and live — remain upright by obedience, and live innocently before God. 3d Objection. In Ezek. iii. 20 : " When a righteous man doth turn from his righteousness and commit iniquity, * * he shall die in his sin, and his righteousness which he hath done shall not be remembered," Ans. In the discussion of this question, we have nothing to do with the Old Testament, or covenant. That was a covenant of works, which every soul of Israel, from the greatest to the least, from the king upon his throne to the peasant, and from the high priest at its altars down to the humblest worshipper; which Moses, its first lawgiver, the meekest man who ever lived ; which Aaron, its first high priest ; which David, a man after God's own heart, and CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 623 Solomon, divinely inspired with wisdom, all brake. Its con- ditions were, obey and live ; a long life and temporal pros- perity — not heaven — were its only rewards ; disobey and die, temporally, not eternally — die preinaturely — lose temporal blessings. Moses had sinned, and he was not allowed to pass over Jordan ; he was cut off before his eye had become, dim, or his natural strength abated ; the righteousness which he had done did not avail him and Aaron. But thev were not lost. God was displeased with that old fliulty covenant of works — and why 1 because it did not make fhe partici- pants of it perfect ; because all under it departed from God continually — none in the flesh could keep it. Therefore, says Paul, " But now hath he obtained a more excellent ministry, by how much also he is the mediator of a better covenant, which was established upon better prom- ises. For if that first covenant had been fliultless, then should no place have been sought for the second. For find- ing fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house t>f Israel and with the house of Judah: not according to the covenant that I made with their fathers, in the day when I took them by the hand to lead thein out of the land of Egypt ; because they continued not in my covenant, and I regarded them not, saith the Lord. For this is the covenant that I will make with the house of Israel, after those days, saith the Lord: I will put my laws into their mind, and write them in their hearts ; and 1 will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people. And they shall not teach every man his neighbor, and evei-y man his brother, saying, Know the Lord : for all shall know me, from the least to the greatest. For I will be merciful to their unrighteousness, and their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more. In that he saith, A new covenant, he hath made the first old. 524 THE GKKAT IKON WHEEL. Now that which docaycth and waxeth old, is ready to vanish away." (Eleb. viii. 6-13.) Here are some of the promises of this new covenant : *' And I will make an everlasting covenant with them, that I will not turn away from them to do them good; but 1 will put my fear into their hearts, that they shall not depart from me. And they shall be my people, and I will be their God ; and I will give them one heart, and one way that they may fear me for ever, for the good of them, and of their children after them." I, therefore, am justified in affirming, that every soul, every person once introduced into this new, this better, this everlasting covenant, will and must remain in it, and enjoy its blessings /or ever., even though he sins through the weak- ness of the flesh, as all do. The new differs from the old covenant in this : God was one of the contracting parties of that, but man, in his weak- ness and poverty of merit, was, alone and without a surety, the other; he was not able to meet the demands of the law, and the covenant was broken. In the new covenant, God is again one of the contracting parties, and man, in his weakness, still the other. But a help is found for him ; Christ offers to become his Surety, so that wherein he fails, as he must and will, through the weakness of the flesh, the law looks to his Surety. Thus we have a covenant based upon " better promises." It is and must be everlasting ; for God is upon one side, and Christ, with and for his children, on the other. " By so much was Jesus made a Surety of a better covenant." The Old Testament is, therefore, dis- missed from this discussion. 4th Objection. " In many passages in the New Testament^ the apostacy and ruin of a Christian is supposed, which is ihouyht would not, be the case, unless it were at least possible^ CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 525 not to say probable. For instance, Heb. vi. 46, and Heb. x. 26-29." It is admitted that the violation of the covenant, on his part, is supposed ; and the certain and awful consequences of such a violation declared — that they would be remediless and hopeless. But it must be granted that it is only sup- posed ; and it also must be admitted that there is not a passage in the whole of the New Testament that declares that a child of God «an or will apostatize and be lost, unless the passages in which it is hypothecated teach it. While, on the other hand, not only the nature of Christ's atonement, the nature of the work of regeneration unchangeably wrought in the heart, and the conditions of the new covenant, and the whole scheme of recovering grace preclude the idea of such an apostacy ; but, in addition to all this, there are scores of passages in the New Testament which positively and unequiv- ocally teach that no one who truly believeth on Christ will ever come into condemnation ; that not one of all given to him will be lost, and not a sheep will or can be plucked out of his hands. But, to declare that the bare fact that the final apostacy of a Christian is supposed fully establishes the fact or the fear that such an occurrence may or will take place, proves too much, for it will establish other doctrines fully as subversive of the plan of salvation, and fully as dangerous to believe as this. Let me instance a few cases. Gal. i. 7 : " But though we or an angel from heaven preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." Are we therefore to conclude that Paul intended to teach the Galatians that possibly himself or the other inspired apos- tles, and even an angel from heaven — not hell — might preach a different gospel than the Holy Ghost had enabled them to 626 THE GRKAT IRON WHEEL. preach? Who is wedded to the doctrine of apostacy with such a love that he will grant this doctrine in order to up- hold that ? Again, " If in this life only we have hope in Christ we i.re of all men the most miserable." Did Paul mean that possibly it might turn out they had hope in this life only ? But some one may say, " The possibility of apostacy is several times supposed." Very well, let; us try the strength of this plea : "And if Christ be not raised, your faith is vain." " For if the dead rise not, then is not Christ raised." " If so be that the dead rise not." "And if Christ be not risen, then is our preaching in vain." " But if there be no resurrection of the dead, then is not Christ risen." "If the dead rise not at all." " If, after the manner of men, I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me if the dead rise not at all?" Thus, in one solitary chapter, the non-resurrection of the dead is hypothecated no less ih3x\ five times, and the non-res- urrection of Christ directly twice ! Does it follow that the doctrine of the resurrection is to be questioned ] The apos" tacy of a believer is not supposed so many times. "Why should any fact or doctrine be supposed, if there were no possibility of its being true V I have shown you, if you believe the Bible, that it is as much your duty as mine to answer that question. Doubtless it was for the purpose of instruction, and to show what conclusions would inevitably follow from certain premises, or seal some fact forcibly upon the mind. Touching the resurrection, we are taught that just so cer CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 527 tainly as that Christ rose from the dead, so certainly the dead m\\ rise, and vice versa. Paul wished to impress upon the wavering Galatians, the fact that he had, by divine authority and power, preached unto them the true gospel — for any other would be a lie, preached by apostles or angels. Paul wished to teach the Hebrews the infinite superiority of the sacrifice and atonement of Christ over those of the law. Thus, The sacrifices of the law made not those for whom they were off*ered perfect — sanctified them not for ever — and there- fore had to be repeatedly offered ; they only served to bring bin to remembrance ; but The sacrifice of Christ /or ever jierfects all those sanctified by it ; and moreover, it being himself, who could die but once, consequently it could be offered but once. Proof: " By the which will \i. e., covenant] we are sanctified, through the off*ering of the body of Christ once — " the " for all" are added words, as any one can see. "But this man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, for ever sat down on the right hand of God." " For by one offering he hath jjerfected for ever them that are sanctified," i. e., those for whom it is once offered. "And as it is appointed unto, man once to die, and after this the judgment, so Christ was offered to bear the sins of many," &c. Now, what conclusion follows from this, that serves also to elucidate it ? This : that should one — you may say, could one — of those sanctified by this precious blood of Christ violate his covenant, or fall back to his first estate, then there could be no more sacrifice for him — no second application of Christ's blood — no repentance — no possible salvation. But will you say, because the apostle supposes such a case, that he meant to teach that it was possible for one re- deemed to become unredeemed, or for one once sanctified 628 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. by the application of Christ's blood to his heart, to become unsanctified ? Who says it, declares that the language of Paul, from the sixth to the eleventh chapter of Hebrews, is solecistical and contradictious ; that he stultifies his teach- inf^s ; that he denies in one verse what he teaches in the next ! And who loves the possibility of a believer's ultimate apos- tacy so madly as to assert this ? Mark my proof: Paul distinctly asserts the superiority of the new covenant over the old, because it had a better priest- hood, and "A sacrificer of nobler name And richer blood " than had the bestial sacrifices of the law. Observe, with thankfulness and rejoicing of heart, wherein the sacrifice of Christ is better : 1. " But by his own blood he entereth into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us^ The blood of bulls could not obtain this. 2. It " purges our consciences from dead works, to serve the living God," and this for ever. The blood of the old only served to purify the flesh, and the people departed from God. 3. " By means of his death, they which are called receive the jrromise of an eternal inheritance. The blood of bulls and goats could not secure such an inheritance. 4. By his blood the sins of the recipient are for ever put away ; he is sealed by it as one of the members of the new covenant, of whom it is said, " their sins and their iniquities will I remember no more ;" they are all henceforth imputed to Christ, who ever liveth to intercede for them. The old sacrifices could not for ever put away sins, and were repeat- edly offered. 5. The ^lood of Christ perfects, not for six months — not CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 529 amply from one revival excitement to another — but perfects for ever all those to whom it is once applied, and this the blood of goats could not do. Then, for these five considerations, there is no need for a second offering, for the sins of God's children are all remit- ted and for ever put away from them ; and the apostle says, " Now, where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin." The eternal salvation of every blood- washed soul is secured — it is seal'ed unto the day of redemption. Now, to say that such a soul can become unsanctified, and need again the application of Christ's blood to it, is to say that the offering of the blood of Christ is no better than that of bulls ; for it did not, more than they, for ever put away sin — did not perfect for ever those sanctified by it. It would be saying that the offering of Christ was not equal to the offerings of the law, for these could be offered again and again for the offender, while that of Christ could not be. Thus does this doctrine of repeated and intermittent regen- eration drive at the perfect and finished atonement of Christ — thus does it openly dash against and secretly undermine the rock-based pillar which bears up the salvation of a lost and sinking world."^ " Not as the world the Saviour gives ; He's an unchanging friend ; Whom once he loves, he never leaves, But loves him to the end. Else Satan might full victory boast ; The Church might wholly fall ; Jf one believer may be lost, Then, surely, so may all." • * Those who wish to see this subject discussed at length by the au- thor, are referred to a tract on Apostacy, published by the Tennessee Publication Society. 23 530 THE GREAT IKON WHEEL. It is urged that the doctrine of " once in grace, always in grace" is of most baneful tendency. Methodists have been heard to say, " Why, if I just knew I would go to heaven I would take my fill of sin." This declaration is enough to show that the love of sin has never been crucified in that heart ; that it is still alive to sin, and delights in sin, more than in God, and has joined the class just to keep out of hell ! and such a soul is undoubtedly on the broad way to hell. Zeno, when abked, " Wherein does your philosophy make you better citi. zens," replied, " If all the laws Avere abolished, we would live as we now do." Ought not the relij^ion of Christ — his regenerating grace — do as much for us as heathen philosophy did for its followers ? Suppose the young wife say, " If 1 only knew that my husband would not cease to love me, or turn me out of his house, I would take my fill of sin." Would she betray a very ardent attachment for her husband, or a pure or virtu- ous heart? I maintain that this doctrine is the mainspring of all Christian zeal and activity — of all good works in the sight of God. When do Christians pray most, praise most, give most, labor most, talk to sinners most and with tears in their eyes, sacrifice most to extend the kingdom of Christ, live most consistently, let their light shine most, and glorify God most? "' When they can read their titles clear To mansions in the skies." The Workings and Tendency of the Doctrine of Apos- • TACY AND Re-regeneration. Doctrines, like trees, may be known by their fruits. What ever may be aflirmed to the contrary, the doctrine that a man can wnregenerate himself rests upon the ground that he CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 531 can regenerate himself, for it implies the same power. The Ethiopian who can change his skin to pearly white can as easily change it to yellow, and back again to its native black- ness, and vice versa. As we might expect, a systein of works enters largely into the means preached for the sinner to at- tain justification, and works are most rigidly urged as the means by which the Christian, is to keep himself in a state of regeneration. Would you be fully satisfied of this 1 Study calmly and dispassionately, if you can^ one Methodist camp-meeting, or one " excitement" or " revival." Listen to the character of the preaching; the doctrines advanced; observe all the multiform and questionable appliances and ingenious expedients brought into requisition. The pulpit or stand is a Mount Sinai hung with the blackness of dark- ness, crested with fire, and shaken with thunderings, and wreathed with fierce lightnings ; wrath and fury, " hell-fire and damnation" are the themes of sermon and exhortation. The membership must be aroused to action. The preacher says he wants to hear - a shout raised in the camp of Israel" — that the walls of Jericho never fell down until Israel raised the shout ; and he never knew any thing done until some sis- ter ^^ got happy y " Lord, make these sisters here shouting happy, right now." What appeals follow upon this to the passions — to the affections and fears ! What scenes are de- picted of dying fathers, dying mothers, dying children and infants (violent sobbings), death-scenes, hell-scenes (a lady faints here, and another screams), and judgment-scenes — friends in heaven meeting fathers and mothers there, meet- ing children, and the dear little babes lost, there ! Hear that shout — (has the Lord answered the prayer T) — and another — and another ; and now it becomes general — the preacher's voice rises like trumpet-tone over all — " Fire ! fire ! Send 532 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. down fi-re !" " Baptize all this congregation in the Holy Ghost and fi-re." " Po-wer ! power — come in thy mighty pow-er!" Now, the excitement being at the right stage, the straw being prepared, the door of the altar is thrown open, and sinners are called upon to come forwa<'d before they drop into hell. In the midst of the uproar, parents drag their excited and terrified children into the altar, and others fiom alarm, others from pure nervous excitement, and otbcrs from sympathy, rush forward ; the altar is crowded. Now follows what some preachers call a " sanctified row.'''' The mourners are exhorted to pray mightily — and a season of prayer commences. A brother who has a strong voice is called upon to pray, and all the mourners are exhorted to pray at once, and all Christians to pray — call mightily upon God. And who can describe the scene that follows for the next half- hour — men and women, girls and boys, of all ages, are min- gled and commingled in one conglomerated mass in the straw, rolling and tumbling, and throwing their arms and limbs about in every conceivable direction; forty or (ifty " mourners" crying, screaming, praying — a hundred Christ- ians, "all engaged," some praying, some shouting, some swooning, some with the powers ; the shrill voice of the leader ever and anon rising above the din, calling for "fire," ** power!" and the ministers shouting the loud and deep *'A-raen! a-men! do. Lord I Hallelujah !" This lasts until ten or eleven, with the simple variation of a song instead of a prayer, when the noise, uproar and confusion is, if possi- ble, far greater ! This is no fancy sketch ; it falls far below the sad and awful reality as all will bear me witness. I appeal to the world, from which all reason and common sense has not departed — except during one of these " re- vivals j" I appeal to all candid, reflecting men and Christians, CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 533 is that altar a place for young children, or for old children, or for an humble inquirer to think rationally, scripturally 1 Do they know what th&y are about? They were invited for- ward as inquirers^ to be instructed — have they heard a word 1 — can they distinguish a solitary connected sentence 1 And see there — how those ministers are beating them upon their baclts as though religion was a wedge to be driven in be- tween the shoulder-blades ! This is no fiction. Mourners have been driven from the altar by the force of these blows, and left with more bruised backs than hearts. The preacli- ers and their kind friends were excited, and did not know how hard they did slap and pound them. This meeting, or camp, continues three or four days ; some few of these pro- fess, and the class-leader is in the altar the last day, and asks all who want to go to heaven, to let him put their names down on his little book — that he '• wants them all to be seek- ers — and the Methodist Church is just the place in which to seek religion — thousands have professed religion in the Methodist Church." He gets their names, and then the meet- ing closes. The week following, you can read a piece of '• revival news" in the Methodist Advocate : — "Pear Bro. McFerrin : — The Lord has powerfully revived his work on this circuit. At our camp- meeting, which has just closed, one hundred and thirty joined the society, several of whom were powerfully converted ! The ' old ship' is again afloat here." In about six months after the camp-meeting, these young converts and seekers, having become wilder and wickeder than ever, a " revival meeting" is gotten up, when the same state of things observed at the camp-meeting are acted over again ; and at the close of this, perhaps, the larger portion oi these seekers are brought out — induced to profess regenera 534 THR GREAT IRON WHEKL. tion. Tliey honestly think they are regeiieratod — tliey are told so. They join again, and another flaming report appears in the paper ! The reader woidd thinly the whole neighbor- hood had been converted and joined the Methodist Church. From three weeks to three months the majority profess un- regeneration — they have forgotten their fears, and their ex- citement has worn off, and they return to their old forsaken sins, " like a dog to eat up his vomit, or a sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire." Now, how many times can these be regenerated over, getting worse and worse, harder and harder, from each "fall," before they will become outright and downright in- fidels in the reality of spiritual regeneration, or join the Church, believing what is preached to them from the pulpit, and exhorted to them in the class, " if they expect to go to heaven they must work their own passa^je" — i. e.^ observe tlae rules ; and thus they go aboard Mr. Wesley's ship, to work their passage ! Is it strange they believe in justification by works'? Do we not see how vitally essential the doctrine of apostacy is to such preaching and expedients — to fit such machinery for making Christians. If any think I have col- ored my figures, I invite their attention to the foUo^'ing table of statistics published in the Southern Christian Advo- cate^ a Methodist paper ; and the facts were furnished by a Methodist preacher too, I expect. He founded an argument upon them against the non-pastorate policy, but I urge them in proof that these modern baptisms of fire and sanctified rows are not revivals of pure and undefiled religion — that Methodist revivals are solemn farces. This Methodist says these figures note the result of four diflferent meetings, and he was in each of them. " Of those who joined our Church, 204 in number, the fol- lowing table will indicate their ultimate destiny : CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 535 Males. Females. Total. " Methodists, 24 64 88 Backsliders, . 45 13 58 Presbytei'ians, 2 14 16 Baptists, . Episcopalians, Unknown, 4 . 3 4 1 30 8 1 33 78 126 204 "Here we have, of 171 original members, only 88 remain- ing and living and dying with us, 58 gone back to the world, and 25 joined other communions." Here, of the 204 reported converts, we find only 88 left in the society at this writing — and how many of them are still there only as seekers he does not say — and 91 gone back to the world. These figures oflfer food for reflection. But does not this intermitted regeneration doctrine tend to make infidels "? So fiir as my observation teaches me it does. During a meeting in the town of S (in no respect like the one described above) 1 approached a young lady who was bathed in tears and in evident distress of mind. I inquired for the cause of her grief. She told me that she felt that she was a poor lost sinner — that a sense of her sins and depravity was crusliing her heart. I spoke to her of Jesus, who invited just such as her to come. " Oh," said ' she, " I've got religion five or six times, and lost it, and I am afraid I should lose it if I should get it again ;" and there was an outburst of desponding grief. " Mary," I replied, "Mary, you have been deceived — you have never yet known any thing about religion. Let it get you, and it will keep you." I reasoned away her doubts and despair, and she appeared, from that day, among the inquirers for religious instruction 536 THE GREAT IRON WHEEL. and prayer. Before the meeting closed she professed a hope in Christ. '' Oh, sir," said she, " if this be religion I never knew any thing about it before." Years have passed, and as often as I see her in visiting the place, I inquire, " Well, Mary, can you keep your religion 1 have you not lost it yef?" "You were right sir, it keeps me — I feel that / am kept. Tliis is the religion I always wanted." In a revival in the city of the arm of the Lord was revealed in bringing many souls to Christ. The inquir- ers were numerous, and the congregations solemn. I be- came deeply interested in the son of a deacon of the Church, but I saw no signs of interest on his part. As the meeting was drawing to a close, 1 went to him in the congregation, and conversed with him ; told him of my interest for him ; warned him of his danger ; portrayed the love of the Saviour for the guilty and lost — the work of regeneration on the heart — the joys of religion — the peace of a believer. When I paused for some sign of emotion, he turned up his eye with a sort of indescribable smile of incredulity. " You can't tell me any thing about it, sir — I have been through it all several times ; I know all about it, and I can't be gotten into it again — it's of no use to talk to me." I saw the exact state of the case. He was, in heart, a confirmed infidel ; he was a disbeliever in regeneration of heart — in the Christian religion; he had been galvanized a halfa-dozen times; he had belonged to the Church or society — had even again and again eaten the Lord's Supper with Christians (if indeed the table at which you eat can be considered the Lord's) ; he had related his feelings in the class, and been told that he was a Christian indeed; and it all gradually left him as the ex- citement that produced it died away his heart wa? where it ever was — unregenerate — ay, worse —hardened into cold unbelief and infidelity, and his damnation sealed. CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 5bV These are not isolated cases, but simply types of the thou- sands and tens of thousands that fill the land. Go ask that universalist, that blasphemer, that outrageously wicked man "who appears lost to all shame, that infidel, if they never thought of religion, and nine out of ten of them will tell you they have been regenerated from twice to five times, and are only fallen froni grace ! Satisfy yourself as I have, and then learn that this doctrine of intermittent regeneration — this losing religion and getting it again, and losing it and getting it every three or six months, has made, and is mak- ing, more infidels — more unbelievers in spiritual regenera- tion — more despisers and rejectors of the Christian religion — more hopelessly hardened sinners, than Tom Paine's Age of Reason and all the works of the French atheists. Every man who understands the first principles of the philosophy of the mind knows that infidelity is the logical consequence of the process. Positive Scriptures against the Possibility of the Apostacy of a Believer. I proposed to submit a few passages of Scripture that un- questionably preclude the idea of a believer's final apostacy ; and my argument is, if that doctrine is claimed to be true because it is hypothecated, then are the teachings of the Scripture contradictious. My limits allow me to give but a few. The strong man armed and the stronger than he. — "No man can enter into a strong man's house and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man ; and then he will spoil his house." (Mark. iii. 27.) " When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace, but when a stronger than he shall come upon him and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armor 23* 538 THE GKKAT IRON WHEEL. wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils." (Luke xi. 21, 22. Who can bind and cast out the stronger than the strong man armed 1 The joy of angels. — " Likewise I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of the angels of God, over one sinner that repenteth." How can we understand this if the Christ- ian falls from grace? Would there not be folly in such joy ? Would it not be premature 1 Have they not learnecT, in watching the history of the Church 6000 years, to suspend their joy till the tried spirit of the saint mounts up in tri- umph to glory? (Luke xv. 10.) The Saviour'' s p-ayer. — Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also who shall believe on me through their word ; that they all may be one ; as thou, Father^ art in me, and I in thee^ that they may also be one in us, that the world may believe that thou hast sent me, and the glory which thou givest me / have given them ; that they may he one even as we are one ; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one. Father, I will that they also whom thou hast given me be with me where 1 am, that they may behold my glory which thou hast given me. I pray not that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil." (John. xvii. 15, 20,24.) Can the union between the Father and the Son be dissolved ? Can the devil sow dissension and coldness between the Father and the Son so that they will depart the one from the other 1 Can it be supposed that the Son will ever wish to sever his connection with the Father? Then, if the Saviour's prayer is answered, the union between himself and the least one of his children cannot, and will not, be dissolved. The redeemed soul will not wish to leave, the devil cannot pluck it away, and Christ will never, no never forsake. CHRISTIANITY ilEVERSED. 539 **God is faithful, ^vho \vill not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able, but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." (1 Cor. X. 13.) " The soul that on Jesus hath leaned for repose — I will not, I will not desert to its foes. That soul, though all hell should endeavor to shake, I'll never, no never, no never forsake." Religion is an anchor that parts not in the day of trial. — "That by two immutable things in which it was impossi- ble for God to lie, we might have a strong consolation, who have fled for refuge to lay hold -upon the hope set before us, which hope we have as an anchor of the soul, both sure and steadfast, and which entereth into that within the veil." (Heb. vi. 18, 19.) The sinner is tried and condemned hut once. — "There is therefore no condemnation to them which are in Christ Jesus, who walk not after the flesh but aiter the Spirit, for the law of the spirit of life iii Christ Jesus hath made me free from the law of sin and death." (Rom. vili. 1, 2.) "For ye have not received the Spirit of bondage again to fear; but ye have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, '• Abba, Father" [Our Father]. The Spirit itself beareth wkness with our spirits that we are the children of God ; and if children then heirs ; heirs of God, and joint- heirs \vith Christ. (Rom. viii. 15-17.) "That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, bat have everlasting life." (John iii. 15, 16, 36.) " Verily, verily, I say unto you, he that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall never come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John. v. 24.) 540 THE GKEAT 11U)N WUKEL. The implanted love of Christ unfailing. — " Love [falsely translated charity] never fallcth; but whether there be prophecies they shall fail ; whether there be tongues they shall cease ; whether there be knowledge it shall vanish away. " And now abideth faith, hope, love, these three ; but the greatest of these is love. (1 Cor. xiii. 8, 13.) Christ the tree of life — the bread and water of life. — -'This is the bread that cometh down from heaven, that a man may eat thereof and not die. 1 am the living bread which came down from heaven ; if any man eat of this bread he shall live for ever. "Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood hath eter- nal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. (John vi. 37-54.) " He that eateth my flesh and drinketh my blood dwelleth in me, and I in him." *'As the living Father hath sent me, and I Jive by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he shall live by me. This is that bread w^hich came down from heaven ; not as your fathers did eat manna and are dead ; he that eateth of this bread shall live for ever." ** Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again, but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life." (John iv. 13, 14.) The Christian a conqueror. — "All that the Father giveth me shall come to me ; and him that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out." • "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son and believeth on him may have everlast^ ing life ; and I will raise him up at the last day." CHKISTIAXTTY REVERSED. 541 "No mar. can come unto me except the Father who hath sent me draw him ; and I will raise him up at the last day." "For whosoever is born of God overcometh the world." (1 John V. 4.) '* The siuner who, by precious faith, Has felt his sins forgiven, Is from that moment passed from death, And sealed an heir of heaven. Ten thousand snares surround his feet, — Not one shall hold him fast ; Whatever dangers he may meet, He'll overcome at last."' Christ the Christians life. — "Ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God ; and when Christ who is our life shall appear, then shall we also appear with him in glory." "Because I live, ye shall live also." (John xiv. 19.) Regeneration will prompt obedience. — "If a man love me he will keep my words, and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him and make our abode with him." (John xiv. 23.) Some profess to love, but fall away and go back to the world. Were they Christians 1 " They went out from us, but they were not of us, for if they had been of us they would have continued with us, but that they might be made manifest that they were not all of us." (1 Johnii. 19.) The words "no doubt" were inserted by the translator. The Christian is not of those who draw hack unto perdition, — " But we are not of those who draw back unto perdition, but of them who believe to the saving of the soul." (Heb. X. 39.) No Christian act can he forgotten.— '' For God is not un- righteous to forget your work and your labor of love which 542 TiiK (;kka'I' iron wukkl. ye have showed towai-J his name, that yc have ministered to the saints and do minister." (Ileli. vi. 10.) " Whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of cold v^-ater in the name of ^ disciple, verily I say unto you he shall in no wise lose his reward." Now, if a person fall from grace and be sent to hell, how can this be true ? When, or where, or how, would he be rewarded 1 The Seed is planted only in the heart where it is desifjned to live and abide for ever. 1 Peter i. 23 : "Born again of incorruptible seed, which liveth and abideth for ever'^ The Christian not an unfinished toner. — "For which of yon, intending to build a tower, sitteth not down first and count- eth the cost, whether he have sufficient to finish it 1 Lest, haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is not able to finish it, all that behold it begin to mock, saying, This man began to build, and was not able to finish." (Luke xiv. 28.) " Being confident of this very thing, that he who hath be- gun a good work in you will perform it \i. e., perfect — con- tinue to perfect it] until the day of Jesus Christ." (Phil. i. 6.) The Christian's a sure foundation. — " Behold, I lay in Zion, for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner-stone, a siwe foundation ; he that believeth shall not make haste." "Therefore, whosoever heareth these sayings of mine and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man who built his house upon a rock; and the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew and beat upon that house, and it fell not, for it was fi^unded upon a rock." Mark, this man's house did not stand because he stood out in the storm and rain and held it up, but because it was founded upon the rock. Christ is the Rock of ages. We build upon him by faith in his blood, resting all our hopes CHRISTIANITY REVERSED. 543 of salvation upon his righteousness alone. All other founda- tions are sand. " Now, therefore, ye are no more strangers [not one of them who is a spiritual member — a living stone — ever will be a stranger again, or alienated], but fellow-citizens with the saints, and of the household of God, and are built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Jesus Christ being the chief corner-stone, in whom all the building, fitly framed to- gether [every member of this spiritual temple is indissolubly framed into Christ !], groweth into an holy temple in the Lord,m whom ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." (Eph. ii. 19, 20.) Surely, " Their rock is not as our rock, even our enemies being judges. (Dan. xxxii. 31.) Well may we sing — " How firm a foundation, ye saints of the Lord, Is laid for your hopes in his excellent word ! "What more could he say than to you he hath said — You who unto Jesus for refuge have fled ?" * * I affectionately request all who are acquainted with a passage of Scripture which they think teaches the doctrine of a believer's apos- tasy and ruin, or who have an argument which they consider valid, in favor of it, or an objection against the contrary doctrine, to com- municate such passages, arguments, or objections, to me, that they may be noticed, not only in the paper, but in a forthcoming book on A.postasy, its Grounds, and its Evils. LETTER XL. PRIMITIVE CHURCH CONSTITUTION. Lest it be said that I have pulled down, but have put up nothing to take the place of what I have demolished, I have hastily drawn up the following Declaration of Rights, and the most prominent Articles of a Primitive Church Constitution, which I believe to be most indis- putably taught in the New Testament. That these principles can be found together, embodied in speci- fic Articles, in any one chapter in the New Testament, I do not claim ; nor can thexVpostle's Creed or the acknowledged Articles of Evangel- ical Faith ; but, like these, they run through the whole body of the teachings of Christ and his apostles ; and I do maintain that the prin- ciples of Church constitution, order, and discipline are as clearly and specifically taught as are the doctrines which Christian churches are to hold and teach. Therefore men— Church rulers — have no more right to invent forms of Church government to please their own fancy, tj;ian to invent doctrines, regardless of the teachings of Christ and his apostles. The following Constitution is not submitted as a perfect one. It is only a first rude draft to illustrate my position above, and may here- after be given to the public in a more perfect and permanent form. The Christian Bible-reader will find it a pleasant and profitable em- ployment to study the teachings of Christ and his apostles, with ret- erence to this subject, and see wherein he can amend these Articles, or strengthen them with scriptural authority. (544) CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 545 DECLARATION OF RIGHTS. We hold these facts to be unquestionable : — 1. That God has given to all men, for their welfare and happiness, certain natural and inalienable rights, which he designed not himself to abrogate,* or for man to concede, or tyrants to usurp. , 2. That God can therefore be the author of no government, civil or ecclesiastical, which denies to man the exercise of the indefeasible rights vouchsafed to him in the charter of his creation. 3. That these (or man's natural) rights cannot be usurped, or their exercise denied him by State or Church rulers, without manifest im- piety. 4. That in civil society, while the exercise of these rights may be modified, they cannot be conceded without sin. 5. That touching man's moral and religious duties as an individual or as a subject of Christ's kingdom, he must look alone to Christ as the only sovereign whom he is to reverence, the only master whom he is to serve, and the only king and lawgiver whom he is to obey. 6. That while the constitution and laws of a Christian Church are determined by Christ, who is the only king in Zion, yet the supreme judicial and executive powers for the administration of Church govern- ment are invested in the membership : each member having an identity of interest, of responsibility, and consequently of power. We also hold these truths to be self-evident : — 1. That since Christianity is a revealed religion, the government of the Chiu'ch must be instituted by God, and, since he can be the au- thor of no government which denies to man the gifts of his Creator, and thus contravenes the wisdom of God in the bestowment of those gifts, that therefore Christianity secures to man the possession and exercise of all his natural rights. 2. That if it is claimed that any natural right is denied to man in the Church, as the election of his teachers, the usurper is bound to prove it by an appeal to Scriptures that positively forbid to man the exercise of that right. 3. That, therefore, man cannot justly be called upon, to produce Scriptures which expressly command him to exercise any natural right • It is admitted that God has a right to deny to man or to nations the exercise of these rights as a punishment. 646 REPUBLICANISM AND in the Church, siuce its exercise must be granted hira until it can be demonstrated that the Scriptures, by positive enactment, deny him the exercise of that right. We hold these rights to be from man inalieual)le, by tlie charter of his creation : — 1st. Freedom, social, civil, and religious. Freedom of thought, And the expression of thought, publicly and privately, unrestrained freedom of action, when thought and action do not infringe upon the rights of others. 2d. Equality of Riguts, civil and religious, and the exercise of THEM. That man is, and can be only the equal of his contemporary, and hence the claim set up by Church and State tyrants, to a charter of superiority over their fellows, to Jse a privileged class, invested with a "divine right," to usurp and wrest from man any of his natu- ral rights, is a false and impious claim. 3d. The Election op his Rulers. That man, in all countries, and in all governments, ecclesiastical as well as civil, has the inalienable right to elect his rulers, who are in fact his servants, and therefore those rulers must be amenable to the people for the proper discharge of the duties intrusted to them. 4th. The Choice of his Teachers. As it is man's indefeasible right in the State, to select and elect his civil and scientific teachers and instructors, it must be granted to be his right andduty to do so in the Church, unless it can be shown by the teachings of Christ and his apostles that the exercise of such a right and duty is expressly forbid- den. If a class of men may claim a divine right and call to preach and to teach, so have the members of Christ's Church the " divine right" to decide both what shall be taught and v;ho shall teach them. 5th. To admit into, censure, punish, or expel members from all gov- ernments or voluntary associations, civil, scientific, and therefore re- ligious, according to the laws and disciplinary regulations of that government or association, and , therefore, no "divine right'' is given, by "letters patent," to any man, or class of men. in Church, as the clergy or ruling elders, any more than in State, as kings or emperors, to receive into, censure, punish, or expel from the government or so- ciety whomsoever they please, censure for what cause they please, try as they please, and expel when they please. Such a government would be a crushing and degrading despotism. CHRISTIAN-ITY DIRECT. 547 We hold it to be the persoaal and bounden duty of every account- able person, To acknowledge and serve God — believe in, and obey Jesus Christ — to be immersed upon a profession of that faith— to unite with a Christian Church — to participate in the Lord's Supper — and to labor for the glory of God and the extension of the Redeemer's kingdom, according to the teachings of Christ ; but since these are man's indi- vidual duties, and required at his hands as acts of personal obedience and service, in proof of the love and loyalty of his heart, no one of them can be performed for him by another, in his unconsciousness more than in his consciousness — nor can an "indulgence'' be granted to him by priest or Church to disobey any one of tlicm altogether, or for any length of time. Touching the source of Church government, as well as of the laws and regulations by which that government is to be administered, we hold the following proposition is sustained by the New Testament, by reason, and by the practice of primitive churches. The teachings of Christ and of his apostles furnish sufficient prin- ciples by which to determine the peculiar form and structure of Church government, as well as all the laws and regulations necessary for its proper administration ; and that those teachings also determine the number of offices, and the relative rank, powers, and duties of its officers ; finally, that the first Church at Jerusalem, formed by the di- rections and under the eye of the Saviour, and the apostolic churches, organized by the apostles, are the authoritative models for the forma- tion of churches for all future time : a departure from which by a religious society is a forfeiture of its claims to be considered a Christ- ian Church, and involves its originators in the sin of impiety, PROOFS. " Go ye, therefore, disciple all nations, immersing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you." Comments. — This is a specific and therefore a restrictive command. It forbids those who act under it the doing of more or less than what is commanded, as the preaching of human philosophy, or speculation for the Gospel, or in connection with it. It forbids the baptism of any but believers, for no other character is specified. It forbids immersion in 548 REPUBLICANISM AND the name of Sliadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. It forbids thera to "teach for doctrine the commandments of men." It teaches that Christ had given all sufficient directions for the formation and govern- ment of churches. If it was incumbent upon the apostles or Christians, to organize churches, all the laws necessary for the internal regula- tion and discipline of his churches, as well as all Christian duties, must have been taught. If this is denied, then it is certain thf»t the specific terms of this com- mission forbid those acting under it to organize churches at all, or to enact laws and regulations for the government of such, since it for- bids the apostles to teach for observance by Christians, as Christian duties, any thing which Christ had not previously commanded them ! Lest they might not recall all those teachings, or teach them in their relative order, Christ gave them the aid of the Holy Spirit. •'.Howbeit, when he, the Spirit of truth is come, he will guide you into all truth ; for he shall not speak of himself : but whatsoever he shall hear that shall he speak." " But the Comforter, which is the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you." The teachings of the apostles, then, are the teachings of Christ, and they, with those of Christ, constitute a perfect directory to raini-sters of all they are to teach men to observe pertaining to Christianity, and consequently of all things pertaining to the formation and government of a Christian Church. So taught Paul. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness ; that the man of God may be perfect, and thoroughly furnished unto all good works'^ It was an essential part of the good works o'f Titus, as of ministers now, to preach, baptize disciples, and organize them intc churches, under some form ot government, and to teach them the laws aud regula- tions by which they were to be governed. From what source was he to furnish himself with the proper doctrine to teach, and the needed reproofs, correction, and discipline to be administered ? From the teachings of Paul and the other Scriptures in his possession. Paul could praise the Church at Corinth, because of its faithfulness in keep- ing the ordinances as he had instructed them to do. "Now I praise you, brethren, that you remember me in all things. CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 549 and keep the ordinances as I delivered them unto jou." (1 Cor. xi. 2). In writing to tb 3 Hebrews, he asserts that Christ was as faithful, at least, in all his house — his Church — as was Moses, in respect to the patterning of the old tabernacle ; and the form and internal arrange- ment were the essential parts of its orgajiization. And did Christ give no directions concerning the form and peculiar organization of his house (Church) ? Did he leave it to the fancies and caprices of men to build it one story or five — to make it an aristocracy, a monarchy, or a crushing despotism ? It is Christ's prerogative and office '• to be head over all things to his Church, which is his body,'- &c. ; and has he not determined the form of his body and the arrangement of his members ? He is also represented as the only King and Lawgiver in Zion. Was there a Church or kingdom of Christ in existence, prior to THE DAY OF Pentecost ? "We maintain that there was, most unques- tionably. John called upon the Jews to repent because it had come— " R-epent, for the kingdom of heaven has come.'''' This is the acknow- ledged rendering of the verb translated *' is at hand." When Jesus began to preach, he declared that the kingdom of heaven had come. He declared that the law and "the prophets prophesied until John ; since that time, the kingdom of God is preached, and every voaxi ipresseth into it.''' How could they press into the kingdom or organization that was not in existence ? ."But if I cast out devils by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you.-' This explains ,the evident mistranslation in our version. The Pharisees inquired when the kingdom of God should come. He replied, " Neither shall they say lo, here ! or lo, there! for behold, the kingdom of God is," not within those wicked Pharisees, but " among you,''' i. e., in your very midst, and ye cannot observe or per- ceive it, so great is your blindness ! He told them at another time, that '* the publicans and harlots go into the kingdom of God before you." I could multiply similar proofs ; but I close this discussion with two simple but unans^^erable arguments. The kingdom of God— of heaven— the Church of Christ, was in ex- istence prior to Christ's ascension and the day of Pentecost. A kingdom is a definite organization — a government. But there can be no ot'ganization or government without laws. Laws, again, determine the form and character of the government 550 KErUBLJCANlSM AND But no one has a right to enact the laws of a government but its supreme ruler, or rulers ; or of a kingdom, but its rightful king. Jesus Christ is the Eole and supreme ruler in his government ; the only king in his Zion ; therefore, he himself must have organized and given a form of government to his Church, or kingdom, before his ascension, or the day of Pentetost. And, since we have his teaching, either from his own lip:^, or through the apostles, in the New Testament, therefore the New Testament contains the principles, laws, and directions, sufficient to determine the peculiar form of organization Christ intended for his churches to have, and we may also conclude, that the Church which Christ him^-elf or- ganized in Jerusalem, is an authoritative model to be patterned after until the end of time. Another Argument. " The institutes of a kingdom cannot be in existence before the king- dom itself is set up. The Lord's Supper was an institute of the king- dom of Christ before his death ; therefore the kingdom of Christ was set up before his death. " Did not a Church of Christ, called disciples, exist before the death of Christ ? What is a Church of Christ but a company of disciples of Christ ? Did not Christ direct an offended brother to tell this Church of the matter, if he could not settle it in private (before his death) ; and direct this Church to exclude the member so offending, if he would not hear the Church? How could such a direction be given, and tio Church of Christ be in existence ? Therefore, the kingdom or Church of Christ existed before his death. " The first dawn of the morning belongs to the day. The kingdom of Christ began with the beginning of gospel preaching and ordinances, and when Christ the king was introduced to Israel." The Testimony of History. "The new churches everywhere formed themselves on the model of the mother Church at Jerusalem. — Giesseler, vol. i., § 29. '• That form of the primitive churches which was derived from the Church of Jerusalem, erected and organized by the apostles them- selves, must be accounted divine. — Mosheim, vol. I p. 81. "This Church [of Jerusalem], so constituted, is the acknowledged pattern or model, by which other Christian churches were formed. * * CHRISTIANITY EIRECT. 551 Hierarchalists, with others, say the New Testament presents no settled forip of Church government. But the Judean churches were considered as models by Paul, who praised the Thessalonians for fol- lowing their example : nor were the customs of different people allowed to influence churches in different provinces, but the teachers of reli- gion throughout the world were to follow Paul's example. This model imitated, occasioned a harmony in practice for 100 years. If there is no form, then the Scriptures cannot be a perfect rule of faith and practice ; each province, town, or society, may legislate without giving offence to the King of Zion ; and consequently, every age, from new customs, might have a new form of Church government. Yet Jesus Christ has forbidden any thing to be added to his word ; and one feature of the Man of Sin is, that he should " change laws in God's temple ; " but every plant not of scriptural authority shall be taken away, and every innovator in Christ's kingdom shall meet with his displeasure. The unity enjoined, the discipline established, the ex- ample left, and the accountability of each servant for his conduct in the service of God, prove there is a settled law for their guidance. See *' Maclean on the Commission," and ■* Glass's King of Martyrs." — Orchard's History of Foreign Baptists in all Ages, pp. 6, 7.* I conclude this discussion in the language of Wm. Hague, with the substitution of one or two words : ** However honored may be the history of any Chui'ch on earth, how- ever far it may be extended, with whatever names it may be distin- guished and adorned, its pretence of being, as to its outward constitu- tion, the true Church of Christ, is nullified by the fact that it is a Church established by human device. , So far as it is established by man, so far it is a part of a human system, and just so far, constitu- tionally considered, it has lost the character of a true Church of Christ. So that the mere fact that a Church is established by the legislation of a man, or men, furnishes a sufficient reason why Christ- ians should leave it, a^ having in its constitution those elements which are at war with the spiritual nature, the primary principles, and the high moral ends of the Christian dispensation." — Okris. Statesman.] ♦ See the reasonings of John Milton, as quoted in Letter III., also additional reasonings. t This is ^ invaluable history, and should be in the library of every Christian man. It has been published by the Tennessee Publication Soritty. and can be had of the Agents, Xashville, Tennes^c-. 552 REPUBLICANISM AND CONSTITUTION. ARTICLE I. Section 1. — A Church of Christ is a company of believers immersed upon a profession of an evangeli- cal faith, voluntarily associated, on terms of perfect equality, in a covenant or agreement, implied or ex- pressed, to receive the New Testament as their only rule of faith and practice, and to be governed by its teachings in all things. Sec. 2. — A particular Cliurch may consist of any number not less than " two or three " gathered together in the name of Christ. Sec. 3. — None should be admitted into the Church, or be permitted to receive any of its ordinances, except by baptism upon a profession of faith in Christ. Sec. 4. — Each particular Church is independent of every other body, civil or ecclesiastical, and receiving its authority directly from Christ, it is accountable to him alone. The Teaching of Scripture See Matt. iii. 2-13 : John baptized none except upon a profession of faith in Christ. John iv. 1 : Jesus made disciples before he baptized them. * Matt, xxviii. 19, 20 : None were to be baptized before they had been discipled, or taught to observe secondary duties before the pri- mary ones had been discharged — as faith in Christ, and baptism. John iii. 5 : No man is entitled to membership in the kingdom of God on earth, except he be a believer in Christ— regenerated. CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 553 Acts i. 15 : The first Church ia Jerusalem was composed of disci- ples. Acts ii. 37, 41, 46, 47 : All who were added to the existing Church on the day of Pentecost, were baptized believers — saved persons. Acts viii. 12 : The whole Church at Samaria consisted of baptized believers. 2. Cor. vi. 14-18 : Paul positively forbids the amalgamation of be- lievers and unbelievers in the Church of God, and enjoins a rigid separation between the world and the Church. Gal. iii. 26, 27 : Paul declared that the Church of Galatia were all the children of God by faith in Christ, and that all had put on Christ — publicly professed their obedience to him — in baptism. Gal. iv. 22-31 : Unregenerate children and sinners — typified by Hagar and Ishmael, who were born by natural generation, have no claims to Church membership with believers — Abraham's spiritual seed typified by Isaac, who was supernaturally born. 1 Cor. i. 2 : Paul addressed this Church as a company of sanctified persons — saints. See address to churches in all the Epistles. Christ designed that there should be the most perfect equality among his disciples ; that, united together as brethren, they should all enjoy equal rights and equal privileg-es — that there should be no privileged order or class of men, and that no factitious distinction, as Rabbi, or Doctor of Divinity, should either be granted or recog- nized among them. *• Be not ye called Rabbi, for one is your master, even Christ : and all ye are brethren,-" i. e., equal. " Neither be ye called masters, for one is your master, Christ. But he that is the greatest among you shall be your servant.'' (Matt, xxiii.) Rom. vi. 1-6 : All the members of the Church at Rome had been baptized into Christ — into public allegiance to him as their Saviour and king — into his death — a promise of conformation to it, by a repre- sentation of it by burial in water ; had risen to walk in a new life, &c. The proof to establish Sees. 1 and 3 can be almost indefinitely in- creased. To sustain Sees. 2 and 4 see Matt, xviii. 20. To be gathered to- gether in the name of Christ, may mean in the capacity of a Church ; See 1 Cor. v. 4, which undoubtedly means iu Church capacity. Col. iv. 15 : There was a Church in the house of Nymphas, which may have consisted of only his own family. 24 554 REPUBLICANISM AND Rom. xvi. 19 : There was a Church in the house of Prwcilla awl Aquila; and there was the Church at Jcrui?alem, and the churcha of Judea, Galilee, and Samaria ; of Corinth, Ephesuf, Rome, Philippi ; and the Seven Churches in Asia, which were but a comparatively short distance apart. These passages show conclusively that a Christ- ian Church is not an extensive hierarchy — a consociation or consol- idated organization of all the particular churches in a whole king- dom or country, as the Methodist E. Church, the Protestant E. Church, or Presbyterian churches of North America ; or a national religious establishment, like the Episcopal Church of England, the Presbyterian national Church of Scotland, or the Lutheran Church of Germany, ccc. " My kingdom is not of this world," said Christ. If bodies of the above character are not Christian churches, we ought not to call them so, or recognize them before the world by a recognition of their ordinances or officers, as receiving their baptisms and ordinations as valid, or inviting their ministers into our pulpits, and thus say to their followers and to the world, *• These men are the official ministers of Christian churches, hear ye them." "They (the bodies above named) are not churches, and God has given us no leave to call them so." — CrowelVs Ch. Man., p. 36. Historical and other Authority. The Earliest Writers. — Tertullian says, "Z76?* tres ecclesia e»t^ licet laici,^' three are sufficient to form a Church, although they be laymen. Dionydus Alezandrinus wrote to Stephen, Bishop of Rome, thus ; " Understand now, O brother, that all the churches throughout the East, yea, and beyond, are united together, which aforetime were di- vided and at discord among themselves. All the governors of the churches every where are at one," &c. — Eusebius, 1 7, c. 3 (vide pas- sim). Irex^us: Ea qua est in quoque loco ecclesia," tnat Chui'ch which is in any place. Socrates Scuolasticus : '• For this noisome pestilence beginning from the churches of Alexandria." " Not only presidents and elders of the churches.'" JSgisippus : "When they were gone, it is said they were rulers over — i. e., officers in — " churches." — Eusehius, 1. 3, c. 17. SozoMEXUs • Partly to set in order whole churches. CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 655 Iben^us: ^AU the churches of Asia." — EusebiuSj L 4, ^. i3. EuAGRius : Cyril, bishop of Alexandria, wrote in a letter to John, bishop of Antioch : " Christ hath granted peace unto the churches under heaven." "Seeing that as well your churches as ours." — Uua- grius, lib. 1 c. 6. Clement, Bishop of Alexandria : '• The congregation of the elect I call the Church." Ignatius, Cyprian, and Origen, when speaking of a particular con- gregation, call it a Church, as '•' the Church in Alexandria," " the Church in Smyrna," " the Church in Athens," and in Antioch. The above are the oldest and all the writers of note in the -first six cen- turies, and the like phrases abound throughout their writings. No such thing as a national Churcli, or a consolidated hierarchy was known in these centurie?, but the seeds that afterwards ripened into such an establishment were beginning to be sown. "After the idea of the Mosaic priesthood had been adopted in the Christian Church, the clergy, as was natural, elevated themselves far above the laity. — Giesseler, vol. i. p. 69. " What is the Church ? It is not the clergy, it is not the councils, still less is it the Pope. It is the Christian people, it is thefaithful.^^ — D^Aubigne. See also definition of Church of Christ in Methodist Di?ci])line, Book of Common Prayer, Augsburg ConfessioD, and confessions of all the reformed churches ; it is universally defined " coetus credentium," a company of believers. Primitive Churches were Ixdepexdext Bodies. [A. D. 117-193.] *' All congregations were independent of one an- other, although some had a peculiar reputation more than others, on account of many circumstances, ex. gr., their apostolic origin, the im- portance of the city to which they belonged, or because they were mother churches." — Giesseler ^ ch. ill. § 53. They were Bodies of Baptized Believers. [A. D. 100.] •' All the churches in those primitive times were inde- pendent bodies; or none of them subject to the jurisdiction of any other. It is as clear as the noonday, that all Christian churches hsjJ equal rights, and were, in all respects, on a footing of equality." 556 REPUBLICANISM AND '* During a great part of this [the 2(1] century, all the churches continued to be, as at first, independent of each other, or were con- nected by no consociations or confederation ; each Church was a kind of little independent republic, governed by its own laws." "Although the ancient mode of Church government seemed, in general, to remain unaltered [A. D, 300-400], yet there was a gradual deflection from its rules, and an approximation towards the form of monarchy." " This change in the form of ecclesiastical government was fol- lowed by a corrupt state of the clergy." — Mosheim, vol. i. pp. 86, 142, 201. See also, Neander, Coleman, Orchard^ pas.sim. " The Church is undoubtedly one. and so is the Human Race one, but not as a society. It was frojn the first, composed of distinct so- cieties ; which were called one, because formed on common principles. It is one society, only when considered as to \i^ future existence." *• The Church is one, then, not as consisting of one society, but because the various societies or churches were then modelled, and ought still to be so, on the same principles, and because they enjoy co^nmon privileges."— Kingdom of Christ, by Archbishop Whately (the highest living authority in the Church of England). The learned Dr. Owen fully maintains that in no approved writer for two hundred years after Christ, is mention made of any organized, visibly professing Church, except a local congregation." — Owen, as quoted by Crowell {Church Manual, p. 30). " The usual and common acceptation of the word [ecclesia] is that of a particular Church, that is, a society of Christians, meeting together in one place under their proper pastors, for the performaace of reli- gious worship and the exercising of Christian Discipline. — Chancellor King, vide Primitive Church. Primitive Churches were composed of Baptized Believers. TertuUian, in his Apology to the governors of Africa, thus defines his Church : '• "We are a body united in or by a profession of religion, in the same rights of worship [in a perfect equality] and in the bonds of a common hope. We rneet in one place, and form an assembly [Eccle- sia— Church], that we may, as it were, come before God in one united body, and so address him in prayer, &c." — Chapter 39. CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 557 Justin Martyr : As many as are persuaded and believe, that the things which we teach and declare are true, and promise that they are determined to live accordingly, are taught to pray and to beseech God with fasting, to grant thc-m remission of their past sins, while we also pray and fast with them.'' The person. •• h.ving repented of hi« sins," is ''■washed — in the laver uf baptism." "And this washing is called illumination, since the minds of those who are thus in- structed are enlightened, and he who is enlightened is baptized also in the name of Jesus Christ," &c. " We, then, after having so washed him who hath expressed his conviction and prof essed the faith, lead him to those called brethren, where they are gathered together [as in Church capacity] to make common prayers with great earnestness, both for themselves, and for him who is now enlightened, and for all others in all places, that having learned the truth, we may be deemed worthy to be found men of godly conversation in our lives, and to keep the commandments, &c. — Justin's Apology as translated by Chevallier. Sec. 80, So. These passages, from the Apologies of Tertullian and Justin, are invaluable, and must forever settle the question with all candid persons, that in thoir day [A. D. 250-300] the churches of Christ were bodies of believers " washed in that laver of baptism," washed in that water ^ upon a profession of their faith, and are then united to the body, the Church, in the same rights of worship, and in the bonds of a common hope." If any one can think unconscious infants were baptized and received thus, let him reflect upon the above passage, in this Apology of Justin Martyr. " The apostles have also taught us for what reason this new birth is necessary. Since, at our first birth we were born without our know- ledge or consent, by ordinary natural means, and were brought up in bad habits, and evil instructions, in order that we may no longer re- main the children of necessity or of ignorance, but may become the children of choice and judgment, and may obtain in the water the remission of sins which we have before committed, the name of God. the Father and Lord of the universe, is pronounced over him who is willing to be born again, and hath repented of his sins." — 'Apology, Sec. 80. The reader can see that they commenced calling the sign baptism by the thing signified— regeneration or the new birth. This led ulti- mately to the corruption of the ordinance, and introduced the dogma 558 REPUBLICANISM AND of baptismal regeneration, which has been revived of late by A.Camp- bell, of Va., and whicli is the only desijrn of baptism taught in the Methodist Discipline. See oflice for baptism,AVosley's Treatise on Bap- tism, in Doctrinal Tracts. The following note in Giesscler's Uistory, upon this period, is sig- nificant, and of great weight in its bearing against infant baptism 5 the existence of infant baptism in the second century : "At this period (A.D. 117-193) originated the custom of the Roman Church, which continued down to the middle ages, of requiring those who were baptized to recite the creed, first in Greek, then in Latin . Cf. Edm, Martene de Antiquis Eccl. Ritibus, ed. 2, t. i. p. 88; A. Gavanti, Thesaurus, Sacr. Ritum. ed. G. M. Meratus, t. i. p. 42." Giese- ler, vol. i. p. 150. It would be difficult for infants to repeat the creed in Greek ! Mosheim, although a Pedobaptist, upon the authority of these and the fathers of the first six centuries, frankly declares that during the first century, whoever professed to regard Jesus Christ as the Saviour of the world, and to depend on him for salvation, was immediately bap- tized and admitted into the Church."— Vol. i. p. S2. So Neander, Coleman— et cum mul. eel. AKTICLE II. Sec. 1. — Powers of a Church. — The members of eacli particular Churcli arc invested with full power to receive those whom they judge worthy into their fellow- ship, administer the discipline of the body, try, censure, and expel the unworthy, by a vote of the assembled body, in accordance with the teachings of the New Testament. Sec. 2. — It is the right and duty of the members of each Church to select and elect their own teachers, pastors, and officers, and dismiss them when they judge best for the interest of that particular Church ; CHRISTIANITY DIRECT. 559 such officers being accountable to the Cliurcli for mal- feasance in office or unckristian conduct, as are the jDri- vate members. Sec. 3. — Each, particular Church, being independent and sovereign, is the highest source of authority, and from its decisions there can be no appeal ; it, however, can reconsider its own decisions, whenever the majority is in favor of a reconsideration. Sec. 4. — It is the right and duty of each Church, as such, to decide and declare what it considers the teachings of Christ are respecting Church order, Church ordinances, laAvs, terms of communion. Christian doc- trine and duties, and to govern its members accord- ingly. Sec. 5. — These powers, rights, and duties, cannot be delegated, nor conceded or alienated with impunity. Scriptural Proof. Mat. xviii. 14-20. Here the Saviour gives the minute details with respect to an offending member. If the offender cannot be brought to repentance by private remoar, trance, he is to be arraigned before the whole Church — his brethren, his peers, and by them his case is tried and decided. If he will not submit to the decision of the Church, he is to be expelled. There is no higher ecclesiastical court to which he can appeal. He may apply to another Church, and that Church being an '' independent republic," can receive him, if it is satisfied that the Judgment of the excluding Church was immature or unjust. Mark well ; the Saviour did not say, tell it to the class-leader, or the preacher in charge ; he did not say, report it to the committee, or to the Session of ruling elders ; did not say, tell it to the clergy, the Conference, the Presbytery, or the Assembly, but to the Church — the assembled membership of any particular Church, and if the voice of that body is not heard, when it is according to his teachings, expel him, and h^ would ratify the act in heaven. 560 REPUBIJCANISM AND 1 Cor. V. — the whole chapter. There was an offending member in the Church at Corinth. Paul exhorted the brethren to exorcise the needed discipline ; mark, he did not write to the preacher or the Session to administer the discipline, but to the Church — the members of it. See ver. 4: "In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, when ye are come together, [?. ^ years=42 months=1260 years]. But the judgment shall sit, and they shall take away his dominion, to consume it unto the end. And the kingdom and dominion and the greatness of the king- dom under the whole heaven, shall be given to the people of the saints of the Most High, whose kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all dominions shall serve and obey him." (Dan. viL 25, 27.) "■ Thy kingdom come ; thy will be done on earth, as it is done in heaven." The Christian's Prayer. Baptists claim these promises, since they alone have suffered the persecutions of the beast for now nearly 1260 years. They under- stand the above Scriptures to teach, I. That the God of heaven — Christ — founded a visible Church or kingdom on earth, in the days of the Caesars — the Roman kings. 2. That this kingdom was never to " be broken in pieces," obliterated, nor given to another people ; the same character of subjects should ever compose it, i. e., believers ; and that it must stand for ever, despite the malice or powers of hell. That with his Church or kingdom, Christ has ever promised to be ; and for these reasons they will never need reforms, since he will not suffer them to fall into fundamental errors. But, as their great Captain and High Priest, was made perfect through suffering, so it became his fol- lowers to be, and therefore the beast was permitted to persecute them and wear them down, and drive them into the wilderness, away from public notice, into obscurity and reproach, for the space of 1260 years ; after which period the beast is to be consumed — the Church of Christ come forth out of the wilderness, leaning upon the arm of her be- loved, fair as the moon, clear as the sun, and terrible as an army with banners, to all her persecuting and despising foes. Baptists claim these promises, because their churcaes are built ac- cording to the pattern Christ gave, and they take his teachings alone for the government of their faith and practice. They alone have existed as pure communities of Christians, from the day of his ascen- sion until now. They alone, of all religious sects, have suffered the cruel persecutions of the beast for 1260 years, their enemies them- selves being judges. Baptists believe that the days of their obscurity, persecution and reproach, are fast drawing to a close, and the day beginning' to dawn when it will no longer be a reproach to be a Bap- 568 REPUBLICANIPM AND tist. The boast took his throne A. D. C>DC>, aiul, therefore, hiR end clraweth nigh, a«d with it the dit^honor and ignominy of the bride of Christ. If any doubt that Baptist churches have existed in various coun- tries, and in every century, from the days of John the Baptist until now, he is commended to the perusal of Orchard's History of Foreign Baptists, from A. D. 33 to 1800, compiled from the annals of the In- quisition, and the most authentic civil and ecclesiastical histories. I submit here a few extracts from the preliminary essay by the editor : — "For the last two hundred years our enemies, conjointly, have made one continuous effort to depreciate the claims of Baptists to an ancient origin. Like the animal in the manger, who, not being able to eat the hay himself, was determined the oxen should not, — so they, F^tistied that they cannot claim an origin prior to the days of Luther, seem determined that no one shall believe that Baptists have a valid claim to a more ancient origin. They allege that the madmen ot Munster were Baptists, and that Baptists, as such, were the authors of the rebellion and all the excesses of that period ; and they point ns to Munster when we speak of our origin and history, and sneer- ingly say, ' There was your origin, and that your early history.' " In vindication, we point them to the pages of Merle d'Aubigne : — " ' On one point, it seems necessary to guard against misapprehen- sion. Some persons imagine that the Anabaptists of the times of the Reformation, and the Baptists of our day, are the same. But they are lis different as possible.' "Fessenden's Encyclopedia (quoted with approbation by D'Au- bigne) says : — " 'Anabaptist. — The English and Dutch Baptists do not consider the word as at all applicable to their sect.' ' It is but justice to observe that the Baptists of Holland, England, and the United States, are to be essentially distinct from those seditious and fanatical individuals above mentioned ; as they profess an equal aversion to all principles of rebellion of the one, and enthusiasm of the other.' — Pre/, to Re/., p. 10. '• We ask Zwinglius, the celebrated Swiss reformer, who was contem- porary with Luther, Muncer and Stork, ' Is Anabaptism a novelty, and did it spring up in your day ?' " ' The institution of Anabaptism is no novelty, but for 300 years has caused great disturbance in the Church, and has acquired such a CHRISTIA^^ITY DIRECT. 569 Etrength, that the attempt in this age to contend with it appeared futile for a time.' This carries our history back to A. D. 225 ! But, have we not been persecuted and worn down for, lo ! these twelve hundred years ? has not the •' Wosian" apocalyptic, during all this time, been drunk with our blood, and heaven filling with our martyred brethren ? We appeal to Cardinal Hosius, President of the Council of Trent [A. D. 1750], the most learned and powerful Catho- lic of his day. Hear him testify : — " If the truth of religion were to be judged of by the readiness and cheerfulness which a man of any sect shows in suffering, then the opinion and persuasion of no sect can be truer and surtr than that of Anabaptists [Baptists], since there have been none, for these twelve hun- dred years past, that have been more generally punished,OT that have more cheerfully and steadfastly undergone, and even offered themselves to, the most cruel sorts of punishment, than these people.'' * * * We appeal to the most eminent scholars and historians of Europe, to the matured verdict rendered by Dr. J. J. Durmont, Chaplain to the King of Holland, and to Dr. Ypeig, Professor of Theology in the University of Grouingen, who were especially appointed by the king to ascertain if the claims of the Dutch Baptists had any foundation in facts of history. These distinguished men did go into the investiga- tion ; and what did they report to the king ? That Baptists originated at Munster, ao we are cliarged bj authors whos3 works are now pub- lished, and sent broadcast over this liw.j. by the *• Methodist Book Concern ?" This is what they reported ; which has never been dis- proved, or attei.ipted to be disproved : — " The Menrcuices are descended from the tolerably pure evangeli- cal Waldenses, who were driven by persecution into various coun- tries; and who, duri'ig xle latter ]^art o^ the twelfth century, fled into Flanders, und into th^ prcvins'os' of Holland and Zealand, where they lived simple a-nd exemplary lives — in the villages as farmers, in the towns by trades, free from the charge of any gross immoralities, and professing the most pure and simple principles, which they exem- plified in a holy conversation. They were, therefore, in existence long before the Reformed Church of the Netherlands.^^ Again : '-We have now seen that the Baptists, who were formerly called Anabaptists, and in later times Mennonites, were the original Waldenses ; and who have long in the history of the Church, received the honor of that origin. On this account, the Baptists may be CONSIDEKED AS THE ONLY CHRISTIAN COililU.NITY WHICH HAS STOOD SINCE 570 KE^L'BL1CAN1S^[ DIKECT. THE ArOSTLES ; AND A.S A ClIRISTIAX SoCTETY WHICH HAS TUESKRVED PUKE THE DOCTRINE OF THE GOSI'EL THROUGH AI,L AGES. Thc pcrfcctlj correct external economy of the Baptist denomination tends to con- firm the truth, disputed by the Romish Church, that thc lleformation brought about in the sixteenth ccntuiy was in the highest degree necessary ; and, at the same time, goes to refute the erroneous notion of the Catholics, that their communion is the most ancient." See Encyclopedia Rel. Knowl. It is an interesting fact, that, as a consequence of this, the govern- ment of Holland otfered to the Mennonite churches the support of the Btate. It was politely but firmly declined, as inconsistent with their fundamental principles. AVe point them to Mosheim, himself a Lutheran, yet living upon the soil, and a bitter enemy of Baptists. He was conversant with all the facts. Does he say that the Baptists had their origin at Munster ? Hear him : — " The true origin of that sect which acquired the name of Anabap- tists, by their administering anew the rite of baptism to those who came over to their communion, and derived that of Mennonites from that famous man to whom they owe the greatest part of their present felicity, is hid in tuk remote depths of antiquity, and is, conse- quently, extremely difucult to be ascertaine(J."*-^Vol_. iv. p. 427.t Finally, and witl> sLiU grc-atev vrlumph, wt now. appeal to the pages of this history, upon w'hich, not our enemies only, but the credulous and fearful of our^owab'-e+hren, may spe thc clearest and most satis- factory proof, that- not in owif cou-n'tryuloue, bu't -in mtmy kingdoms, successions of Baptist communiiies have come down to us from the Apostles, all striped, and scarred, and blood-covered — a line of martyrs slain by prisons, by fi/'e, and by swox-d, wlicm we hail as the faithful and true witnesses of Jesus, during tuoae fearful ages, when the Man of Sin Sat upon the seven hills, And from his throne of darkness ruled the world. And we may well be proud to be able to claim these as our breth- ren. Would that we were worthier to bear their name. * Thisdiflicuit task has been most successfully completed by Orchard, of England, and his history has been reprinted by the Tenn. Pub. Society. t This is from the edition of 1811. DUE DATE MSPT m mK m ,^i^:ii- i'\Hi\ ' ^%- *f+ '■^ f^' r. ^. *?>0/' a HJ ^ tdttr-pn+j mr l>Vi^ FE& i / Printed in USA COLUMBIA UNIVERSITY LIBRARIES 0021130833