'

YALE UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

i938

THE FERNLEY LECTURE OF 1885.

METHODISM

IN

THE LIGHT OF THE EARLY CHURCH.

BEING THE

FIFTEENTH FERNLEY LECTURE;

DELIVERED AT

NEWCASTLE-ON-TYNE, AUGUST 3, 1885.

WILLIAM F. SLATER, MA.

LONDON:
T. WOOLMER, 2, CASTLE STREET, CITY ROAD, E.C. ;
and 66, Paternoster Row, E.C.
1885.

\A-wvj33

PREFACE.

The following lecture, in its printed form, has attained
dimensions somewhat out of proportion with its character
as a single address. The nature of the subject and of the
questions arising out of it has seemed to make it desirable
that not only the results of the inquiry should be furnished
to the readers, but also a fair view of the process by which
these results have been obtained.
For convenience of arrangement and reference the
lecture is divided into chapters. Extracts from works in
other languages which appear in the text are generally
given in English, and this rule has been largely followed
in the notes. In the case of the ' Fathers,' free use has
been made, for this purpose, of the translations of the
Anle-Nicene Christian Library, published by Messrs. Clark,
Edinburgh. Obligations to other authorities for information and
suggestions on the various points, which have come under
consideration, are indicated by the references in the notes,
and by the index at the end of the volume.
It was not to be avoided that the discussion of such
topics as those which occupy this essay should assume a
controversial aspect. It is hoped, however, that this has

6 Preface.
not precluded the exercise of due courtesy to writers who
belong to other schools of thought and training. It has
not been intended that the defence of one branch of the
Church should prevent the due recognition of the merits
of the other branches. If no one discerns in this apology
for one section of Christianity some argument for the
religion of the Saviour, in its broadest significance, the
true aim of its composition will only have been too
effectually disguised.
It ought to be said that, although the ' Fernley Lecture '
is always given in connection with the assembling of the
Wesleyan Conference, the lecturer alone is responsible for
the views which it contains. It is a disadvantage peculiar
to a publication of comparatively narrow limits that
subjects, which, if touched at all, deserve an ample ex
position, can only receive a cursory observation. These
limits have, certainly, been more compatible with the
time and opportunities at the disposal of one engaged
in the manifold duties of the pastorate, than such as would
have permitted an adequate investigation. Fossibly, this
sketch, with all its imperfections, may, in some slight
degree, help the delineation of the ecclesiastical position
of the Methodist community, and of its true relation to
the primitive and to the universal Church of Christ.

The Manse, Gkeen Lanes, London,
August 25, 1885.

CONTENTS.

CHAP. I. INTRODUCTORY

II. THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT
III. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH

IV. ArOSTOLICITT

V. UNITY AND CATHOLICITY
VI. UNITY AND CATHOLICITY
VII. ORDER AND PROGRESS
INDEX TO AUTHORS AND SUBJECTS

PAGE 9
IS46

102120
141
163

METHODISM IN THE LIGHT OF THE
EARLY CHURCH.

CHAPTEE I.

INTEODUCTOKY.

' To imbibe into the intellect the Catholic Church as a fact is either to be
u Catholic or an infidel.' 1
' "When you talk of the novelty of our religion, does your own not come
into your thoughts ? ' -
It has not been by design that the subject of this lecture
is so closely allied to that of the 'Fernley Lecture'
delivered at the Newcastle Conference twelve years ago
by the learned Connexional editor. Under the title of
' The Holy Catholic Church, The Communion of Saints,'
we were presented with an exposition of the intrinsic
nature of the Church itself as a living and Organic unity,
with a special exhibition of Fellowship as the product and
token of its life. The enquiry we now propose is, How
Methodism — its history, its creed, its forms, its aim —
appears in the light of the primitive Church % Incidentally,
we may have to refer to some of the points of scriptural
exegesis and of historical enquiry, upon which Dr. Gregory
discoursed — as many here will remember — with such
evident ' research, originality, vigour, and adaptation to our
own time.' 3 But the abiding interest of the subject must
be our apology, if any is needed, for this attempt to
1 The Difficulties of Anglicanism, by J. H. Newman, i., 193.
2 Lactantius, ii., 71. 3 Min. of Con/., 1873, p. 259.

10 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
compare the facts and phenomena of 'Methodism' with
the facts and phenomena of primitive Christianity. We
shall do this with the hope of learning something upon
the question, whether this great development of the
Christian profession may be regarded as a legitimate,
healthful, and benign diffusion of the name and spirit of
the religion instituted by Christ and published by apostles ;
or, whether it is an unauthorized, corrupt, and mischievous
imitation of it. We cannot shrink from such an enquiry
because it may bring us face to face with an ideal which
we have too seldom approached, or because it may force
upon us questions which it would be convenient to evade.
We may reasonably believe that it will supply us with fresh
reasons for the adoration of that ' manifold wisdom of God,' *
which is especially exhibited in the Church. And it is our
privilege to pray that the ' Spirit of Truth,' promised and
given through Christ, may enable us to learn from such an
enquiry all that we ought at this time to receive and know.
The opportunities for such an examination were never
more favourable than now. For many ages the history
of the planting of Christianity was hidden under deep
accumulations of tradition, much of which had no authority.
All records and sources of the history were for many
centuries under the hands of men bound to a more or
less false theory of their meaning. The memory of the
pristine Church became a half - mythical picture of
paradisiacal unity and perfection.2 Every saint was
supposed to bear not only a pentecostal halo round his
i Eph. iii. 10 : n o'gXvra/xiXa,- ao$ia. tsu Gsou, ' manifold ways and measures
of God ' (Meyer). Commentators have often forgotten that the Apostle
spoke of the variety which the Church embraced in its unity.
- 'Criticism has put a lens to our eyes and disclosed to us on

Introductory. 1 1

brow, but the secret of pentecostal wisdom and authority
in his breast.1 Peter and Paul, John and Apollos,
Ignatius and Tertullian, were credited with the same
opinions. Many Church writers seemed to teach no less
than that the apostles transferred their gifts of inspiration
and authority to presbyters and bishops, who ensured to
their successors the same benefits. We know how this
view culminated in the proclamation of ' infallibility ' in
1870. The Church, the creed, the worship, were nothing
if not ' apostolical.' By ' apostolical ' was meant historical
connection with the apostles by successive ordination and
appointment. It was on this account that, from the second
century, there was such an enormous succession of
apocryphal and forged writings. ' Gospels ' of Peter and
Thomas and Nicodemus ; ' Acts ' of Philip and Barnabas ;
' Canons ' and ' Constitutions ' and ' Teachings ' of Apostles
abounded. The name of Clement, because of his supposed
connection with the See of Eome, presented an overpowering
fascination to the fabricator of ' pious frauds.' Genuine
writings of the apostles have been subjected to needless
primitive Christianity rents and craters undreamt of in our simplicity.'
(S. B. Gould, Lost Gospels, Pref. p. vii. ) Cf. Bagehot's Lit. Studies, ii., 47.
1 ' It was a pleasing dream which represented the primitive Church as a.
society of angels ; and it is not without a struggle that we bring ourselves to
open our eyes and behold the reality.' (Conybeare and Howson, Life and
Epp. of St. Paul, chap, xiv.)
"Wesley replied to Middleton (Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers of
the Early Church, 1749), when he reflected upon the credibility of the
Fathers, tracing his opinions to Daille" (Right Use of the Fathers). Dr.
Middleton's intention was to refute the Papists who pleaded miracles in
proof of their system. Middleton urged that the apostolic Fathers say
much of extraordinary gifts, but not of miracles ; and he thought that
Irenseus and Tertullian would not have made so many mistakes in the
interpretation of Scripture if the apostolic powers had been continued. But
Middleton had drunk too deeply of the ' sceptical spirit of his time. He
proved too much.

12 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.

suspicion, because it has been impossible to deny these
fraudulent practices in the earliest Christian times. The
revolt of modern criticism against the principle of authority
has not been without justification, though it may have led
sometimes to extreme conclusions. But we need not dread
exploration, which only reveals more clearly the veritable
work of the primitive founders. Behind occidental plaster
and oriental colouring there are perpetually appearing the
indubitable tokens of apostolic hands. And, amidst so
much falsification, the preservation of the writings of the
New Testament must be held to be of the singular and
merciful Providence of God.
But the study of the first age of the Church is still em
barrassed by the lack of documents.1 The only compositions
of authority, which have come down to us from the thirty
years after the death of Peter and Paul, are the writings
of St. John. Uncertain and fragmentary epistles attributed
to Clement and Ignatius 2 — if we except the newly-found
' Teaching of the Twelve Apostles ' 8 — are all that remain
from the first third of the second century. The early
Christians were a poor, persecuted, fugitive community,
whose gospel was chiefly oral.4 They treasured the word

- Dr. Westcott (Canon, p. 237) says of the first century after Christ, ' It
is the dark age of Church history. In the absence of any trustworthy
guidance, every step requires to be secured by painful investigation.'
2 The Second Epistle of Clement is now generally considered to be not genuine ;
it is scarcely likely that the First has escaped the perils of transmission.
It is doubtful who this Clement was. See Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biog., i.,
554, etc. On this Epistle and the Epistles of Ignatius, see infra.
3 See infra. Also Schaff, Hist, of the Ch. (100-325), p. 640.
* The persecution under Diocletian in Asia (a.d. 304) was specially directed
against the Scriptures and Christian writings. Eusebius, H. E., viii. , 2,
mentions particularly 'the inspired and sacred Scriptures' (a! tl hhot xa'i
iipa) ypatpai xriTa. /ultras ayopas Tupi trapaSi^e/xwat). The ministers were

Introductory.

in their hearts rather than in books. Literature can only
prosper among people who have leisure, liberty, and wealth ;
and these were denied to the first believers. We cannot
be surprised, therefore, that there was no Church history
until the time of Eusebius.1 Traditions were valuable
according to their suitability for edification, or for the
vindication of dominant views. Down to the times of the
Peformation there was scarcely any criticism. The
chroniclers, like Socrates (a.d. 440) or Mcephorus (a.d.
1 327), repeated what had been said before. Beda, the
ecclesiastical historian of Britain, who lived and died at
Jarrow (a.d. 673-735), may be taken as a fair specimen
of the Church historian of the earlier and purer portion
of the Middle Ages. He wrote many commentaries on
Scripture, and taught theology and general science to a
crowd of pupils who made Jarrow a university town in
that day. But Augustine was his master in theology
and ecclesiasticism. His learning prevented him from
being so credulous as some of his contemporaries ;
yet it is seldom that a story is too marvellous for
tortured to compel the surrender of these writings. There is no reference
to the destruction of writings in the earlier persecutions under Trajan and
Domitian, though it doubtless occurred too frequently during the first three
centuries. The poverty of the Christians would prevent the abundant
increase of copies. When Constantine became Christian, all this was
changed. Arnobius (Adv. Gent., iv.) asks (a.d. 305), 'Why indeed have our
wTitings deserved to be given to the flames ? '
1 a.d. 324. He says : 'As the first of them that have entered upon this
subject, we are entering upon a trackless and unbeaten path.' Wesley
(Journal, Nov. 19, 1741) speaks slightingly of Eusebius : ' So weak,
credulous, thoroughly injudicious a writer have I seldom found.' An
Oxford dignitary has more recently said : ' Eusebius, father of ecclesiastical
history, is like Herodotus . . . Real historical investigation is unknown to
him.' (Jowett, on Epp. of St. Paul, i., 420.) A more favourable, and
perhaps just, estimate may be found in Dr. Lightfoot's article in Smith and
Wace's Did. of Christ. Biog.

14 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
him.1 In his time, moreover, the primitive light had
become so much obscured that it was almost impossible
for a Christian not to be a Eomanist.
But at the Eeformation criticism began its work. That
work still goes on ; and already every party in the Church
— Eomish or Protestant, Ultramontane or Gallican, Jesuit,
Benedictine or Franciscan, Episcopalian, Presbyterian or
Congregational, has found it necessary to enquire into the
beginnings of Christianity — to explore the fons et origo of
every doctrine, institution, and custom bearing the Christian
name. Investigation has been assisted by the errors of
forerunners. About fifty years ago there arose in Germany
a school of critics, called, from the town in which its
principal representatives resided, the ' Tubingen school,' who
professed to have obtained fresh light on the origins of
Christianity. Few persons, even among those who agree
with their philosophic method and principles of interpreta
tion, would now accept their scheme of the history. But
their attacks upon the genuineness of the books of the
New Testament, and upon the received outline of the
genesis of the Church, have changed the face of sacred
criticism. The advance of Christian scholarship in our
own country and in America is largely due to the demon
stration of its necessity and importance which they have
given. The application of their naturalism to the current
of early tradition has precipitated obscuring elements, and
has exhibited its depth and contents more clearly than ever.
i In Hist. Eccl., cap. 31, 32, he relates the wonderful story of the
preservation of St. Cuthbert's body oleven years after death, and of the
cures of palsy and distemper at his tomb at Durham. Beda also rests in the
same cathedral, where every visitor is shown the inscription, Hac sunt in
fossa, Bedai venerabilis ossa.

Introdzictory. 1 5

Other schemes, which have been prematurely erected
upon the basis of the new information, have also had their
day. Strauss and Eenan have made their appeal to the
enlightened judgment of mankind, in vain. The Christian
world refuses to accept these expositions of the life of
Christ, of His miracles, of the resurrection. But the
refutation of such criticism, and of that of Baur and
Schwegler, of Volkmar, Keim, Hausrath and Pfleiderer,
has demanded a fresh examination of the original docu
ments. An impulse from another quarter, but in the
same direction, has fallen upon the evangelical section of
the Church. The ambition — inherited from previous gene
rations of English churchmen — to establish Christian unity
on so-called ' tradition ' and episcopal succession, without
subjection to Eome, — embodied in the system known as Trac-
tarianism, Puseyism or Anglicanism, has been proved, by
innumerable perversions and other indubitable signs, to have
failed. We do not question the sincerity of writers like Pusey
and Liddon, who think their method of meeting the claims
of Eome the best.1 They profess to set ' catholicity' against
' catholicity,' as indeed does every school of Protestant opinion.
Out of this concentration of enquiry has come encouraging-
elucidation of many dark portions of this interesting story.
In so great a fire of criticism, which so many have conspired
to kindle, no marvel if much ' wood, hay and stubble,' have
been destroyed, and the builders thereof have suffered loss.2
1 See the unhesitating exposure of Popish errors in Littledale's Plain
Reasons against joining the Church of Rome (S. P. C. K.), Bennett's Broken
Unity, Curteis's Bampton Lectures, etc. The active hostility of the
Puseyites against Romanism is sometimes overlooked.
2 ' Humana? constitutiunculas de cultu, de victu, de frigidis ceremoniis. ' —
Erasmus (in Meyer on 1 Cor. iii. 12, 13).

16 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
But the ' gold, silver and precious stones,' which belonged
to the original and inalienable endowment of the Church,
have been made more secure. Further, we need scarcely
add that the spirit of modern science, including that
of history, which is impatient of traditional authority —
refusing to listen to uncertain fables, however venerable,
and demanding verification for every doctrine, has been
favourable rather than otherwise to the faith which
rests upon the simple stories of the New Testament
— on the unquestioned facts of the lives of Jesus Christ
and His apostles. Fresh interest has also gathered round
such questions from the unprecedented advances towards
the unification of mankind made in our times. Wonderful
inventions have rendered possible a rapid and universal
interchange of ideas. The world thrills every day with the
consciousness of the same facts. Men are not now beiner
trained in secluded families, in separate spheres, but all are
accessible to the same influences, and ' one event happeneth
to them all.' At the same time, evidence of the native
unity of the race has been supplied, together with a
providential preparation for its realization, in the marvellous
victories of the gospel in every part of the world. The
miracles of Pentecost may almost be said to have been so
repeated as to make a Jerusalem of the whole earth. In
every nation under heaven men have heard the gospel
speaking with power in their own tongue. This accele
rated development of the idea and reality of the oneness of
humanity has given fresh interest to the question, What is
to be the religion of the assembling nations, and what shall
be the form of it ?
We venture to say that these circumstances enhance the

Introdttctory. 1 7

value of the intense simplicity of primitive Christianity.
It reveals itself more and more as a system of divinest
breadth and grandeur, independent of national distinctions,
of continental or insular limitations, free from dependence
on the patronage of human hierarchies or the mechanism
of human rites. Living power, and not prescription or
privilege, is its witness. It addresses itself anew to every
generation, that each may have a Pentecost of its own,
attended by its own apostolic gifts and institutions. The
universal dominion for which the Csesars pined, but which
belongs only to the ' King of the Jews,' was never nearer
than in these days of colonization, steamships and tele
graphs. But it becomes clearer that this world-church
can only be built up out of that which is common to man.
A divine salvation, working out effectual redemption, and
making provision for universal ignorance, sin and misery,
embodied in its own selected and free organization, can
alone be the material and the form of it. It cannot be
framed out of the mouldering timbers of decaying church-
forms. It will be too vast to be confined within the walls
of any temple ' made with hands.' Humanity, not the
Church of Eome, nor yet that of Jerusalem, is to be its
measure. Its circumference, comprehending all periods
and people, will include all the ransomed in its ' com
munion of saints.' It is in the light of this imposing and
growing conception of sanctified humanity that we are
called upon to compare the movement dating from the man
who said, ' The world is my parish,' with the ideal placed,
nineteen centuries ago, before the minds of those who were
commanded to ' go and preach the gospel to the whole
creation.' B

CHAPTEE II.
THE WOPvK OF THE SPIRIT.
' IXbi enim ecclesia, ibi et Spiritus Dei ; et ubi Spiritus Dei, illic ecclesia
et omnis gratia. ' 1
' There are crises in the history of Christianity when new forms are given
to the outward organization, and He makes those a people that were not a
people.'2 ' In the latter end of the year 1739, eight or ten persons came to me in
London, who appeared to be deeply convinced of sin, and earnestly groaning
for redemption. They desired (as did two or three more the next day) that
I would spend some time with them in prayer, and advise them.' 3
The course of events out of which Christianity arose was
entirely unexpected and unpremeditated by men. Though
a Messiah had been long looked for among the Jews, who
could have foreseen or predicted that He would appear
among rustics and fishermen in Galilee rather than among
priests and politicians in Judea ? Who could have
anticipated the subversion of Eoman paganism, the
abolition of slavery, ideas of universal enlightenment and
of a brotherhood of humanity, from the doctrine of a
crucified man, working in the souls of a few ' unlearned
and ignorant men ; ' 6 or in the bosom of a rabbinical
1 Irenseus. 2 Dr. Pope. 3 ' Rules of Society. '
4 See Dr. Edersheim's Prophecy and History in relation to the Messiah,
1885. 5 The E. V. retains this phrase for Uttpuvot aypd.fifz.xToi ui iIiZtxi.
It is, more literally, ' unlettered and self-taught.' The priests observed that
18

The Work of the Spirit. 1 9
student, whose zeal for the established religion of his
people made him ' a persecutor and injurious ' ? Neither
Pilate, nor Herod, nor Caiaphas knew that in a few
centuries the pretended successors of ' the pilot of the
Galilean lake ' would displace the Ctesars, or that they
would set up a priesthood claiming powers to which the
sons of Aaron never aspired. Much less did they know
that God had opened in Jerusalem in their day that
' fountain for sin and uncleanness ' to which all nations
might come that they might ' wash and be clean.' ' The
stone which the builders refused is become the head of the
corner. This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in
our eyes.'
St. Paul reminds us that ' the things which eye saw not
and ear heard not, and which entered not into the heart of
man . . . God hath prepared for them that love Him.' 1
The ' constitution and course of nature ' are, without doubt,
framed within lines of invariable law ; yet sometimes the
issue, which the operation of these laws produces, is so
different from anything which created reason could have
expected, that men consent to say, ' This is the finger of
God.' Since God presides over the physical and the
metaphysical worlds alike, it cannot be that the plan of
the one should be wholly alien from that of the other,
however vast the differences which sometimes distinguish
the apostles had not received a literary or legal training. ' Simplices quique
ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotse, quae major semper credentium pars est '
(Tertull. Adv. Prax., 3).
1 1 Cor. ii. 9. This passage does not agree with either the Heb. or the
LXX. of Isa. lxiv. 4, lxv. 17. Origen (followed by Meyer and others) says,
' Invenitur in secretis Ellas prophetae ' — an apocryphal book. Schwegler
(Nach. Zeit., 352) argues that Hegesippus, because he refers with disapproval
to one who used this expression, was an Ebionite, and opposed to St. Paul.

20 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
them. To the eye of an observer, who was content to
regard secondary causes alone, there might have seemed
to be in chaos all the ' promise and potentiality ' of cosmos.
Yet only an Infinite Mind could have recognised the
existence and concurrence of those conditions, and only
the Infinite Power could have made the fiat effectual at
the critical moment. To Gibbon the rise and spread of
Christianity seemed to have been owing to political, social,
and religious conditions which existed in the Eoman,
Jewish, and heathen world at the time of its origin. But,
admitting the existence of all these conditions, we must
yet look higher for the wisdom and power by which that,
which seemed to be the feeblest of systems, at that very
time proved its ability to combine all these conditions,
and to employ them successfully in its own service.
Supposing that the hypothesis of the evolution of animal
life from lower forms should prove to be true, yet it
would not supersede the necessity of reference to creating
skill and goodness, which, at a particular point, inter
vened to produce a creature like man, who has reason,
speech and religion, from organisms which have none of
them.1 So was it with the genesis of the Church. ' In the
beginning God created the' new 'heaven and the' new
' earth.' The Church, the creed, the ministry, were all born
together on that day of marvellous ' beginning.' Had not
the prophet said that the day when the 'living waters
1 See Dr. Hatch's remarks, Organis. of Early Churches, p. 214, where
he makes use of a position taken by Dr. Pusey in reply to the scientists.
If fresh discoveries respecting the mode of creation do not interfere with
the fact, neither need discoveries respecting the formation of the Church
invalidate the divinity of its institution.

The Work of the Spirit. 2 1
shall go out from Jerusalem ' shall be ' one day which shall
be known to the Lord ' ? x The sudden apparition of this
new ' commonwealth of Israel ' in all its perfection seemed
to suggest the apocalyptical vision of the New Jerusalem,
descending like a bride adorned for her husband. Its
advent, like that of creation, was noiseless. The only
sound that broke upon the ear was that 'rushing of a
mighty wind ' which deaf chaos heard as ' the Spirit of
God moved upon the face of the waters.' No echoes of
ecclesiastical axe or logical hammer reverberated as this
house built by David's ' greater Son ' assumed its heavenly
proportions. More manifestly than in Solomon's time,
' the glory of God filled the house.' 2 That glory had now
found a ' spiritual house.' The hundred and twenty were
' all filled with the Holy Ghost,' 3 and ' there were added
to them in that day about three thousand souls.' 4 The
Spirit was first and the Church followed. ' It is not first
the Church and then the Spirit ; but conversely, the Spirit
forms the Church as the sphere and organ of His working.' 5
The baptism of fire brought the gift of convincing speech ;
and this was followed by the grace of repentance and the
power of faith. The original creed of the Church of God,
which had enshrined for so many ages the doctrine of the
Divine Unity, was now found to contain the unknown
treasure of the Sacred Trinity. Thus Christian theology
1 Zech. xiv. 7, 8, 'an only day' (Keil and Del.). But the reference to
Gen. i. 5 in "jnx tiV cannot be mistaken : ' the first day,' A. V. ; but
R. V. has ' one day ' in Gen.
3 2 Chron. vii. 1.
3 On Acts ii. 4, Wxfol. win;, Chrysost. says (Meyer), 'He would not
have said " all" except others had shared.'
4 Acts ii. 41. s Pope's Compend., ii., 330.

22 Methodism in the Light of the Early Chtirch.

in its fulness had a real existence, though none could then
make it explicit.1 Only the glory of the Father was seen
to encompass also His Son whom He had raised from the
dead ; and the. energy of the Spirit, which more than filled
the disciples' souls, was felt to be the very power of God.
But the working of the same Spirit very soon impelled
the first Christians to unfold their belief in detail.
Already Peter had spoken of Jesus, whom the Jews had
crucified, as ' both Lord and Christ.' 2 He was ' David's
Lord,' though certainly David's Son ; He was the Messiah
of the prophets, though still he spoke of Him as ' a man
approved of God.' 3 A full theological definition of the
atonement was scarcely possible ; yet Peter shows that the
death of Jesus had happened ' through the determinate
counsel and foreknowledge of God ' 4 — that His sufferings
were therefore an important part of the Divine plan. They
who believed were baptized ' in the name of Jesus Christ.' 5
In order to mark the Saviour's place in prophecy he speaks
of Him as the ' Servant ' 6 of God, yet Him ' God had
glorified.' The Holy Spirit also, who was the Author of
the wonders of Pentecost, was the same who had spoken
1 ' The most perfect of all truth was imparted to the world not in one
uniform code, at one single moment of time, but by a gradual process lasting
through more than half a century ' (Stanley, Apost. Age, p. 13). ' In the
New Testament Christianity does not appear in exactly constructed dogmas,
but in the form of Christ's witness of Himself by word and deed, and of the
faith of the apostles ; . . . but the further work of forming dogmas in unison
with the objective Christianity is not superfluous or forbidden ' (Dorner,
Person of Christ, i., p. 73). 'The apostolic age is full of primal fire and
spirit ... it is, besides, an age rich in ideas ... its most characteristic
mark at first was not the Christian graces, but a holy, Divine life' (ibid., p. 93).
i Acts ii. 36. 3 Acts ii. 22. 4 Acts ii. 23. s Acts ii. 38.
6 Isa. xlii. 1,19. The R. V. has ' servant ' for tx7s in Acts iii. 13, 26, etc. ,
which the A. V., following the "Vulg. puer and filius, had rendered ' child '
and 'son.' See Lechler, Apostol. Zeitalt., pp. 26-29.

The Work of the Spirit. 23
' by the mouth of David ' and the prophets, and was plainly,
in power and person, Divine.1 In after days arose questions
which could not have been earlier brought into conscious
recognition. Can the Gentiles be admitted into the Church
on any other condition than their first becoming Jews ?
Is Judaism essential to Christianity, or can men be saved
without circumcision, and without the sacrifices of the
temple ? Does faith in Jesus make the ungodly righteous
' without the works of the law,' or, are works necessary to
give validity to the faith which saves ? Is Jesus, our
Lord, really God ; and, if so, was He, when on earth, a real
man, or was His humanity merely an appearance assumed
for the work of redemption ? These questions had all to
be met eventually. But, in the beginning, admission to
the Church was dependent only on simple faith in the
risen and exalted Jesus who had been crucified. He was
the Messiah for whom their fathers had looked ; and He
was their Lord, their Life, their All.
' Meek, simple followers of the Lamb,
They lived, and spake, and thought the same ;
They joyfully conspired to raise
Their ceaseless sacrifice of praise.
'With grace abundantly endued,
A pure, believing multitude,
They all were of one heart and soul,
And only love inspired the whole.
' 0 what an age of golden days !
O what a choice, peculiar race !
Washed in the Lamb's all-cleansing blood,
Anointed kings and priests to God.'2
As long as the Church was confined to Jerusalem, its
government was naturally in the hands of the twelve
apostles. They had been appointed to be witnesses of the
1 Acts i. 2, 16, ii. 4. Wesley's Hymns, No. 16.

24 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
life, death, resurrection and ascension of our Lord.1 They
had been sent to testify of Him, and to gather and feed the
flock of Christ. But they pretended to no absolute authority,
and exercised no sacerdotal functions. On the contrary,
they continued to attend temple services, where the Jewish
priesthood alone could officiate. As the friends and
companions of Jesus they could not but be held in high
repute. The interest which would attach to any one who
had been associated with, or had even 'seen the Lord,' appears
in many ways,2 and especially in the fact that after the death
of the second James, Simeon was elected his successor, because
he was a relative of the Saviour.3 Yet St. Paul did not
reckon himself ' a whit behind the very chiefest apostles.'
It is from this original circle of disciples that we receive
our , Lord's sayings, ' One is your master, and all ye are
brethren ;' ' He that is least among you, the same is great.'
On critical occasions they admitted to their council the
congregation of believers, especially the ' elders ' and the
first disciples. The vacancy caused by the death of Judas
was filled by a lot taken among the hundred and twenty.
When Paul and Barnabas came to Jerusalem from Antioch,
' they were received of the Church, and the apostles and the
elders.'4 The gifts of teaching, prophecy, and evangelism,
wore not confined to the apostles, or to persons whom thev
had ordained.5
1 Acts i. 21, 22 ; 1 Cor. xv. 8. 2 Eus., H. E., iii., 11.
3 1 Cor. ix. 1, xv. 5-8 ; 2 Cor. v. 16 ; 1 John i. 1.
4 In Acts xv. 23, the R. V. has, 'The apostles and the elder brethren,'
which is technically better than the A. V. But see v. 22 : ' It seemed good
to the apostles and the elders, with the whole Church.' A writer in the
Quart. Rev., July, 1885, charges the Revisers with 'ignorance' in making
this change.
1 Acts viii. 4, ix. 10, xi. 19, 27, xiii. 1, xv. 35, xviii. 26, 28 ;

The Work of the Spirit. 2 5
So far as can be observed, the ' twelve ' were the only
persons who were at first exclusively engaged in the service
of the Church. They had the principal work of exhortation
and edification to perform ; and besides, had the temporal
arrangements of the Church under their control.1 ¦ Therefore,
as the number of believers increased, it was necessary to
appoint other officers to relieve them of some part of their
duties. The apostles had been the visible centre of the
Church's unity : the believers ' continued stedfastly in the
apostles' teaching and fellowship, in the breaking of bread
and in the prayers.' 2 But a Church destined to fill the
world could not be kept in the immediate presence of
twelve men in one city, nor be retained under their
immediate supervision. ' The apostles had an incontestable
call to form a Church organization, and they undertook the
work. But they proceeded with the most cautious
moderation. They did no more at once than existing need
demanded, and so did it, that the gradually increasing
Christian organization was not more their work than that
of the new Christian life itself.'3
The first step was to appoint certain officers to attend to
secular business, which had hitherto been discharged by
the apostles. In appointing them, ' the twelve called the
Rom. xii. 6; 1 Cor. xiv. 1. Hilary the deacon s says that at first 'omnes
docebant et omnes baptizabant. '
1 Acts iv. 35, vi. 2-4.
2 The late Bp. Wordsworth gave a characteristic interpretation of Acts ii.j
42: 'The apostles' doctrine (i.e. teaching on matters of faith, practice and
worship), and fellowship (i.e. in visible communion with the apostles), in the
breaking of bread (i. e. in the reception of the holy sacrament of the Body and/
Blood of Christ), and in the prayers (i.e. in the public liturgy of the Church) "j
(Church History, i. 9). Did he mean the temple ' liturgy ' or the Anglican i
3 Rothe,. Anfange d. Christ. Kirche, p. 146. See also Dr. Gregory's
Lecture on the Church, pp. 25, 26 ; and Dr. Pope's Compendium, iii., p. 265.

26 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
multitude of the disciples unto them, and said, . . . Look
ye out . . . seven men of good repute, full of the Spirit
and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business.' 1
The position and duties of candidates for the ministry,
afterwards called ' Deacons' or ' Ministers,' do not correspond
to those of the ' Seven.' 2 From the position occupied in
this matter by the apostles, we see to what important
duties the ministers of the gospel are called. It becomes
very clear that a ministry separated to the word of God
and to prayer is not only lawful but expedient, in the
highest sense of the word ; and is even necessary for the
1 Acts vi. 3. Cf. Beecham's Const. ofMeth., p. 90.
2 ' The office of these deacons was to minister at the table in the daily
love-feasts, and to attend to the wants of the poor and the sick ' (Schaff,
Hist, of Ch., ii., p. 499). The 'stewards' among Methodists, 'deacons'
among Nonconformists, resemble the ' Seven. ' ' Their connection with the
deacons of later age is doubtful ' (Stanley, Apost. Age, p. 59). ' The seven
Hellenistic Christians are generally (though improperly) called the seven
deacons, and were elected to supply a temporary emergency ' (Conybeare and
Howson, ch. xiii.). Lechler (Apost. Zeitalt., p. 362) observes that 'deacons'
appear first in Gentile-Christian Churches, e.g. Phil. i. 1 ; Rom. xvi. 1,
Phcebe, deaconess at Cenchrea. Cf. Pliny, Ep., x. 97, Ancillai quoz ministrce
dkebantur. Gieseler (Ch. Hist., i., 80) intimates that Cyprian (Ad Rog., 65) first
called ministerial probationers deacons, while Chrysostom and the Council of
Trullo distinguish them. But Eusebius (H. E., vi., 43) says that at Rome in
the third century there were only ' seven ' deacons. This was plainly their
identification with the Hellenists. By Clement it was suggested that they
corresponded to the Levite or lowest order of the priesthood. Boehmer
(Diss. Jure Eccles., p. 377) identifies them with the first presbyters— a view
which Bp. Lightfoot regards as 'a strange perversity.' Bp. Lightfoot (Phil.,
p. 186) assumes the identity of deacons with the 'Seven;' yet, with his
usual candour, allows that the title was not applied to these in Acts vi.
Ritschl (Entsteh. der Althath., p. 355) holds Boehmer's opinion to be
probable. Justin (Apol, i., 65) says the deacons distributed the bread and
wine; and Ignatius (Ad. Trail., ii.) on this account speaks of them as
ministers 'of the mysteries of Jesus Christ.' These references connect the
deacons of the primitive Church with the ' Seven,' who were called to assist
in the 'daily ministration' (h li*x.oiia. « xa.6yp,tp,n) ; only, this does not
indicate the founding of a new but permanent ' order ' in the Church.

The Work of the Spirit. 27
perpetuation, extension, and unification of the Church.
With respect to all else in the government of the Church,
let us hear Dr. Hatch1: ' There is not a single statement''
of the New Testament, or a single fact of Church history,
that is not compatible with the belief, which is parallel!
to almost all else that we know of the working of God,
whether in nature or in grace, that the Christian
communions have a free right of organization, that different
forms of organization have been developed by the force of
circumstances as the ages have gone on, and that the forms
of organization which survive are survivals of the fittest,
and thereby part of the moral government of God.' It
was not surely intended that the exact arrangements of the
first age in Jerusalem should be followed in every subsequent
age and in every other place. It is confessed that the
apostles could have no real successors. Their followers did
not pretend to the possession of their gifts, could not claim
their rights. Others beside themselves exercised spiritual
powers. All that is said of Ananias, who carried consolation
to the humbled Saul, is that he was ' a certain disciple at
Damascus.' Through him Paul received his authority to
preach : ' The Lord hath sent me that thou mayest receive
thy sight and be filled with the Holy Ghost.' 2 Paul
himself tells us in Gal. i. 1 what we are to understand by
this ordination.3 He says that he became ' an apostle, not

1 Reply to Canon Liddon in the Contemp. Review, June, 1885.
2 Acts ix. 17.
3 The ' ordination ' referred to in Acts xiii. 3 appears to have been a
special designation to a separate mission. Paul says, Gal. i. 1, that he was
' an apostle not from men, neither through man, bat through Jesus Christ : '
ohx. &.¦*¦' ailpuirui, oV$i V iitpcimv. Ordination was one of the customs derived
from Judaism : see Hatch, Organization, etc., p. 135, who refers to Buxtorf,

2 8 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
from men, neither through man, but through Jesus Christ.'
That there was no such rigid distinction of office as that
which subsequently arose is certain. Paul and Barnabas
acted as ' ministers ' or ' deacons ' when relief was sent to
the poor Christians in Jerusalem.1 On their return from
Lycaonia, Paul and Barnabas ' appointed for them elders in
every Church ' — such elders as had been from the beginning
of the Church in Jerusalem, and even before that time in
the Jewish synagogues and social confederations.2
Wunsche, etc., and quotes Augustine, De Bapt., iii., 16 : 'Quid alinrn est
manuum impositio quam oratio super hominem ? '
In 2 Tim. i. 6 it is said, ' Stir up the gift of God, which is in thee through
the laying on of my hands.' But in 1 Tim. iv. 14 it is said again, 'Neglect
not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy with the
laying on of the hands of the presbytery.' There is no contradiction. The
' gilt, ' to %upnrf£ic, was toZ BioZ, of God. The prayerful imposition of hands
by the apostle and presbyters was the divinely chosen occasion for the
impartation of the gift. Mutatis mutandis, there are such ordinations still.
1 Acts xi. 29 : us lixxoilx*, R. V. ' for relief.' In Acts i. 17, 25, the apostle-
ship is called deaconship. The R. V. in Acts xii. 25, etc., translates tixxwix,
ministration. In 1 Cor. iii. 5, Paul and Apollos are called ' deacons through
whom ye believed. ' ' Apostle ' was not confined to the twelve, see Gal. i. 18 ;
Acts xiv. 4 ; Rom. xvi. 7, etc.
' Acts xiv. 23 : %upoTov»/ravTz's 2s auroT; xxt lxxXr,irixy Tpsfffivnpou;. Llddell
and Scott, s.v., say: '^sj/jot. to stretch out the hand, especially for the
purpose of giving one's vote in the Athenian IxxXmlx.' Lechler rightly
objects {Apost. Zeit., p. 358) to the Ultramontane interpretation (Vulg.
constituissent), yet thinks there was a choice by the apostles. This is the
signification accepted by the Revisers ; but it scarcely answers to an election
hy the Church, which the word fairly implies : (Beza, cumque ipsis per
suffragia creassent). In the only other place where the expression occurs,
the R. V. gives 'appointed by the Churches.' Clem., Ep., i., 44, speaks of
ministers ' appointed by [the apostles] with the consent of the whole Church. '
Ritschl argues (Entsteh. d. Alik. Kir., p. 263), that apostolic ordination
was the recognition of the charismata, and not the means by which they
were communicated. Canon Cook (Speaker's Commentary), on Acts xiv. 23
says that Paul and Barnabas only appointed ' one elder in each, where there
were several Churches in the same city ;' but this remark in favour of the
monarchian theory cannot be substantiated ; see Rothe, Anfange, pp. 184
185. The 'Teaching of the Twelve Apostles' says (xv. 1), 'Elect therefore
for yourselves bishops and deacons worthy of the Lord.' On the position

The Work of the Spirit. 29
Thus, with all the unconsciousness of infancy, the
Church was born and cradled. No man knew ' whereunto
these things would grow.' The princes of this world knew
nothing of it. The historians of Greece and Eome passed
it by without notice.1 Its unity was in its life. It had
no philosophy, though heir to the ' wisdom of God,' and
destined to confound every ' disputer of this world.' It
had no politics, though it introduced a citizenship of its
own, and was to smite mighty empires into the dust. It
had no priesthood, no sacrifices, no temple ; yet it began
at once to dissolve the worn-out priesthoods of antiquity,
to abolish their sacrifices and to claim for God every heart
as a temple. Among the kingdoms and principalities of
earth had appeared an altogether new association of men —
an ecclesia, a church, a fellowship of love. Yet this nascent
ecclesiasticism, with the apostles at its head — the proto
types and warrant of all true ministers to the end of time
— like every other organism, possessed an inherent power
to select and adapt the forms which its own growth should
require. Its theology also was immanent in the facts of
earlier revelation, and in the recent manifestation of the
Son and Spirit of God, but waiting until the enlarging
held by the 'elders' among the Jews, see Hatch (Organization of Early n
Churches, pp. 56-69). No one questions that the primitive Church and its 1
offices were fashioned more after the pattern of the synagogue than after that ),'
of the temple : see "Vitringa, De Synagoga vetere.
1 Josephus scarcely notices Christianity. Ritschl suggests that this was
because Christianity was looked upon as a Jewish sect until the end of the
first century. It was so regarded certainly until Nero's time (see Renan,
L' Antechrist, p. 13 : 'Des cette epoque la distinction nette des juifs et des
Chretiens se fit ai Rome pour les personnes bien informers'). The first «
external references to the new religion are the well-known passages : Pliny to
Trajan, x., 97 (a.d. 107); Tacitus, Ann., xv., 44 (a.d. 110); Sueton. m\)
Claud., xxv. (a.d. 116).

30 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
experience and advancing intelligence of the Church
demanded its formal exposition. We cannot think that"
the full significance of these early facts and teachings is
known to the Church even yet.1
It is not difficult to trace a resemblance between this
course of providential events and that which attended the
origin of Methodism. It also began with a few persons
who desired ' to flee from the wrath to come,' 2 and waited
' for the promise of the Father.' 3 Like the first believers,
they continued ' in fellowship, in the breaking of bread,
and the prayers.' Like them they were soon persecuted,
had to suffer contempt, reproach and loss. At Oxford
they were called ' Sacramentarians,' ' Bible-moths,' ' Bigots,'
and, to gather all the bitterness, hostility, and pungency
of dislike into one word — ' Methodists.' But what they
sought was the 'life of God in the soul of man.' They
sought it in prayer, in the reading of Scripture, of the
Fathers and of other holy authors, and in doing good.
College-rooms, which had so often echoed to the coarse jests
of the young Englishmen of that time, were filled with the
soft murmur of friends in prayer, the gentle strains of
Christian hymns, or the earnest tones of students who
1 ' The Lord hath more truth and light yet to break forth from His holy
word ' (J. Robinson, Leyden). ' Nor is it at all incredible that a book which
has been so long in the possession of mankind should contain many truths
as yet undiscovered' (Butler's Analogy). 'If so great and considerable a
part of the world as America is, being as large as all the other three, .
was yet unknowne to all the world besides, for so many generations together :
well may it be conceived, not only that some, but many truths, yea and
those of maine concernment and importance, may he yet unborne ' (Pref. to
J. Goodwin's Treatise on Justification). 'Apostoli interdum tetigere
mysteria, quorum declaratio plenior postmodum per ipsos erat exitura'
(Bengel on Acts ii. 42).
2 Matt. iii. 7. s Acts i. 4.

The Work of the Spirit. 3 1
enquired into the original languages of Scripture. In a
manner which none could have pre-arranged, the Wesleys
and their friends were led to the knowledge of salvation
through faith alone. They had been sacramentalists : but
now they were constrained to own that baptism had not
brought them true regeneration, nor had their frequent
visits to the communion table secured them a true fellow
ship with God. They were led by a way that they knew
not ; and the conversion of the judaizing Saul of Tarsus to
the universalism of Christianity was only more astonishing
than that of the sacerdotalizing John Wesley to evangelical
truth.1 Having been led into the experience of salvation — apart
from familiar lines of ritual or ecclesiasticism, Wesley and
1 The Wesleys retained some of their early ecclesiastical views to the end
of life. Dr. Rigg (The Churchmanship of John Wesley, pp. 19-34) has
conclusively shown that John Wesley was not really a High Churchman
after the great change in 1738. He also notices Miss Wedgwood's striking
remarks on Wesley's conversion : 'Wesley's homeward voyage in 1738 marks
the conclusion of the High Church period. . . . The birthday of a Christian
was shifted from his baptism to his conversion, and in that change the
partition line of two great systems is crossed.'
In his own way Dr. Curteis appreciates the importance of Wesley's ' con
version.' This is what he says in his Bampton Lecture (Church and Dissent,
p. 359) : 'So, on Wednesday, May 24, 1738, about nine P.M., at a society's
meeting in Aldersgate Street, "Wesley persuaded himself [sic] that he too had jj /
felt the desired transition, and had passed— from what, to what? In the1/
answer to that question lies the whole doctrinal difference between modern
Wesleyanism and the Church of England. I am not aware of any other
cause of severance than this. ' We need not wonder that Wesley's intelli
gence and sincerity were not appreciated at Oxford in his own days.
' This Oxford Methodism, with its almost monastic rigours, its living by
rule, its canonical hours of prayer, is a fair and noble phase of the many-
sided life of the Church of England, and, with all its defects and limitations,
claims our deep respect. But it was not the instrument by which the
Church and nation were to be revived ; it had no message for the world, no
secret of power with which to move and quicken the masses. To do this it
must become other than it was. It must die, in order to bring forth much
fruit. And this death and rising again were accomplished in the spiritual

32 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
his friends went everywhere preaching the doctrine of
' Free Grace.' They did not know that they should
awaken England, America, the world, to religious earnest
ness. They went out to preach the gospel, and not, as
Southey once said, ' to form a Church.' The object which
they had proposed was not permanently attained. They
idid design to create a society within the Church of
'England, which should minister to its life and fruitfulness.
The Wesleys, to the end of life, declined to leave the
national Church; and, as inevitably leading to this, to
sanction the administration of the sacraments in their
societies. It was perfectly consistent therefore with the genesis
and spirit of the conversion of Wesley that he should not
ask from his members any precise confession of opinions.
In the course of time Methodist doctrine had to be defined,
in its separation from Calvinism, and from the mysticism
of Moravianism.1 The excesses of some, and the prejudices
of others, constrained him to explain and defend his
doctrine of ' Christian Perfection.' But in every instance
Wesley ventured to rely upon the combined testimony of
Scripture and experience. He valued the expositions of
Church fathers and of all pious writers, but never allowed
them to take the position of inspired authorities.2 There
change wrought in John Wesley, the leader of the earlier and of the later
Methodism.'— F. W. Macdonald ( Fletcher of Madeley, p. 25).
The spiritual condition of the Wesleys before their conversion was similar
to that of the disciples before the day of Pentecost. They were under the
teaching of the Lord, and served Him with sincere affection. They were
'servants,' but not 'sons.' The transition is well described in Wesley's
'Journal,' May 24th, 1738.
(See Appendix to this chapter, p. 40.)
1 Min. ofConfi, 1744, 1749, 1770. See also Fletcher's Works.
' Let me be homo unius libri . . . I sit down alone : only God is here

2 '1

The Work of the Spirit.

was a time when Wesley might have fallen into the error
of narrowing his belief and teaching within the lines of
solifidian and antinomian views. But while he strongly
held the Pauhne doctrines of grace, of justification by faith
alone, of man's utter helplessness and sinfulness, he also
apprehended, with remarkable distinctness, the opposite
phase of a true evangelical system. He held that the ruin
of the fall had not suspended human responsibility. He
showed that the grace of salvation had come upon all men
for their good. They who believed were diligently warned
that the benefit of Christ did not exempt them from the
vocation to good works ; but that, being freed from the
burden of guilt and from the power of sin, they were under
obligation to observe the whole law of God. Their salva
tion, made possible by the work of Christ, and becoming
effectual by the grace of the Holy Spirit, must be made
actual by living faith, and by obedience to all the com
mands of the Lord. Though it is ' God which worketh in '
us, ' both to will and to work, for His good pleasure,' yet
we must ' work out ' our ' own salvation with fear and
trembling.' 1
Dr. Dollinger2 has only partially penetrated the purport
of Wesley's theology at this point. He says : ' The experi
ence of some years convinced him [J. Wesley] as well as

... Is there a doubt concerning the meaning of what I read ? . . . I lift up
my heart to the Father of lights ... I then . . . consider parallel passages
of Scripture. ... If any doubt still remains, I consult those who are experi
enced in the things of God ; and then the writings whereby, being dead,
they yet speak ' (Preface to Sermons).
1 Phil. ii. 12 : ttii \ccutvi o-uTnpluv x-anpyd^io-h : ' the intensive xcnu.
indicating the carrying through of the 'lp yoi ' (Ellicott). ' Operamini usque
ad metam' (Bengel).
2 Church and Churches, p. 181. C

34 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
his brother Charles that Protestant justification by faith
and Calvinistic predestination were the utter ruin of all
serious religious life. " We must all fall," he wrote to his
brother, " through solifidianism, if we do not summon James
ito our help." It was a striking proof of his personal
greatness that in 1770 he was able to make his own sect
'turn from Calvinism and to become Arminians. He
obtained an effective support in his friend Fletcher, whose
writings against the Protestant system are the most
important that the theological literature of England has to
show.' But it is the merit of Wesley and Fletcher that they
have retrieved evangelical Protestantism from the imputa
tion that it precludes the practical teaching of the New
Testament.1 They did not, like Bishop Bull and many
Anglican divines, deny the doctrine of justification by faith
in order to establish that of justification by works. They
did hot, as Luther, in some unfortunate phrases and
expressions which were at variance with his real con
victions, deny the necessity of diligent striving after
holiness, and of reverence for ordinances. They did not
separate St. Paul from St. James as he did, when he called
the Epistle of James 'a right strawy epistle.' They
saw that St. Paul, whose writings are full of practical
exhortation, preached the same gospel that was advanced
by the ' twelve,' who preached Christ more especially to
the Jewish people. They therefore declared ' the whole
' ' To Mr. Wesley it was given by Christ, the Head of the Church, to
remove the theological odium under which Arminianism had long groaned'
(Centenary Sermon by l!ev. J. Anderson, Liverpool, 1839). On the history
of Arminianism, see Stevens' Hist, of Mithodism, ii., p. 54.

The Work of the Spirit. 35

counsel of God.' Methodism parts for ever from Eomanism
by its doctrine of justification by faith. ' It is endless,'
says Wesley, ' to attack one by one all the errors of that
Church. But salvation by faith strikes at the root, and
all fall at once where this is established.' 1 It quite as
decisively parts from the antinomian heresy. While it
carefully distinguishes between justification and sanctifi-
cation, which the Council of Trent and many Anglican
teachers confound, it yet insists upon personal holiness
as the 'mark of the new birth,' and essential to salvation.
The experience of Wesley and of his followers led him tot
make prominent the doctrine of conscious salvation. He
re-asserted a truth that the neglect of Scripture and the
reign of spiritual darkness had obscured the doctrine of
the Witness of the Spirit.2 But he not only insisted
that the reception of this benefit was the privilege of all
believers, but also taught that, associated with it, in every
case, was the ' indirect witness ' which issued from a
change of heart and life.3 We can therefore afford to
smile at the caricature (not intentional) of Methodist
teaching, which is given by Dr. Dollinger.4 'Their
preaching is, above all things, calculated to heat the
imagination and the bodily sensations ; its awakenings are
then regarded as inspirations and effects of the Spirit.
They have, hke a certain physician, only one medicine for
all ages, sexes, and classes, without any distinction. Their
uniform method is to frighten people to the brink of
insanity, and then to lead them to absolute certainty of
1 Serm. i. : 'Salvation by Faith.'
2 See the Fernley Lect. (1882), by Rev. R. N. Young.
3 See Serm. x., xi., xii.
4 Church and Churches, p. 182.

36 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
being in a state of grace. The effect of it is such that
in districts where Methodism is very prevalent an actual
change takes place in the physiognomy of the people, and
you find an unusual number of hard, coarse, gloomy faces.'1
It is quite true that the early Methodists were serious,
but they were also happy. They were led to include
in their conception of the religious life very wide
spheres of human feeling, just as in their theological
theory they comprised phases of spiritual truth which
had been before thought to be incompatible.
In this way, by successive steps, the theology of
Methodism came into clear outline. Within its limitations
at this day, the minds of twenty-five millions of professing
Christians are content to move, besides those of millions
more whose judgments are more or less influenced by them.
We claim for this system no divine authority, no credit of
absolute inspiration. It was not prepared by a council
of theological experts, of trained logicians, who scanned
every syllable and weighed every iota. It was not
hurriedly carried through the turbulence of a Concilium,
nor passed by the narrow vote of synods. It answers to
apostolic teaching, because it arose out of a similar history
and similar causes. It is scientific, because it is an
explanation of facts.2 It was formulated as an expression
1 It is a sufficient reply to this that the only authority quoted by Dr. D.
is the Quart. Rev., iv., 503, a.d. 1810.
2 ' I joined the Methodists because they were the instruments of my
salvation, and because all their principles and institutions, so far as I
understood them, agreed with that new nature which I received when I
believed in Christ, and felt "the love of God shed abroad " in my heart by
" the Holy Ghost given unto me " ' (Life of Rev. T. Jackson, p. 489).
' The point of unity from which both dogmatics and ethics start as their
immediate source of knowledge, is Christian experience or Christian faith
It may be pronounced to be the universal scientific conviction of the present

The Work of the Spirit. 37
of truths realized in the experience of multitudes. If not
philosophic, in the sense of the schools, it may yet help
the solution of some problems of religion, by suggesting
what aspects of theology best suit the unsophisticated
spiritual nature when consciousness is roused to its
intensest state.
But to the universal Church it must be of interest that
the theology which arose in connection with this burst of
religious life is that of the Early Church.1 This great
upheaval of the religious mind of the Anglo-Saxon race
during a century and a half has left untouched the pristine
doctrine. Some theories of Church order have been
almost subverted by the process which the evolution of
Methodism has involved ; but the truths of the New
Testament and of the first creeds shine out more clearly.
When so great a torrent has rushed down the valley, no
wonder that houses built upon the sand have been swept
away ; but that which was built on the rock remains, and is
yet more beautiful — clad in the rainbow which comes after
the storm. It has often been the subject of remark that
the various Methodist communities have retained their theo
logical unity. Notwithstanding the serious controversies
on questions of Church government, respecting which they
separated from the parent Church, and that since their
separation they have had perfect freedom of judgment,
there have been few signs of deviation in this sphere.2
day . . . that all knowledge — and with knowledge every science has to do
- — presupposes experience, external or internal' (Dorner's Hist. ofChr. Doct.
(Clark), i., 17).
1 ' Whatever doctrine is new must be wrong ; for the old religion is the
only true one ; and no new doctrine can be right unless it is the very same
which was from the beginning ' (Wesl. Serm. xiii. ).
2 Stevens, Hist, of Methodism, i., 58.

38 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Unity on this ground will, it is believed, secure their
practical unity in due time. But, meanwhile, this ought
to bring comfort and assurance to every lover of
Catholic theology. Christ has been preached among all
nations and classes, apart from the older Church order
which was once supposed to be essential to a true Chris
tianity. New churches have arisen, gathering milhons of
souls, which have originated independent forms — separate
and unheard-of customs of worship and evangelization, yet
they have not swerved at all from the theology of the
New Testament and the first Councils.1 They have
supplied able advocates of the authority of Scripture, and
of the doctrines of the Trinity and the Incarnation. The
millions who look to them for religious instruction are
taught that God is a Spirit, and that He is infinitely good
and wise. They proclaim, in no halting breath, the
awfulness and danger of sin, and that there is no Saviour
but Christ. They invite fetish-worshippers in Africa to
adore the living and true God, and the Brahmin of India
to trust in Jehovah, the true Father of all. They exhort
the Eomanist to forsake every mediator but Jesus, and the
Socinian to avail himself of the propitiation made by the
Son of God for us. They encourage their followers every
where to acquaint themselves with all that is written by
Moses, and the Prophets, and the original Apostles ; and,
1 The following words of Bp. Beveridge are instructive (Pandectce
Canonum, 2 vols. 1672, Pref.) : 'Nimirum novissimum hisce temporibus
nova jactantur lumina, nova ac majora Spiritus Sancti dona simulantur :
ideoque novaj credendi, novaa orandi, novoa prasdicandi, novae omnium
ecclesiasticarum administrationum peragendi formulas finguntur indies et
celebrantur. ' The venerable prelate was alarmed ; Nonconformity was cominc,
and ' Acts of Uniformity ' and ' Conventicle Acts ' were in vain. He died
in 1708. What would he have said of Methodism ?

The Work of the Spirit.

also, so far as they are able, with all that is written by
the edifying and scriptural teachers of after times. Cannot
members of other Churches rejoice with us in this matter ?
Because some theories of Church order are violated, is it
nothing to them that our societies are universally loyal
to Scripture doctrine ? Is it of no evidential value that
by the agency of this system millions from almost every
race have been awakened to concern about the deepest
interests of the soul, and, that nowhere have the truths
witnessed by apostles and the early confessors been
repudiated ? 1 Has not the old truth been again and again
sealed by the tears of penitents, by the ecstasy of be
lieving multitudes, by the sanctity of reformed lives, and
by the fresh virtues of converted pagans and reclaimed
nations ? Does the adaptation of the gospel to universal
man need further witness now that Fiji and Tonga are
evangelized ? Those who speak of Methodism as a
' heresy ' and a ' schism,' might discount their terror and
loathing so much as to recognise the fact, that this singular
apostasy from what they call ' catholic truth,' at least
bears its own testimony to the abiding verities of that
living gospel ' which abideth for ever.' 2
But we must now endeavour to show how the eccle
siastical framework of this system, as well as its theological
impress and tendency, grew up under the pressure of
providential necessity, but always with the aim of following
scriptural and apostolical models.

i The Wesley Memorial Vol. (New York, 1884), pp. 152, 153, gives an
admirable sketch of Wesleyan theology, by Dr. G. Douglas.
2 ' Churches, . . . not founded by apostolic men, yet are accounted
apostolic because they are akin in doctrine ' (Tert. De Prcescr., c. 32).

40 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER II— Cf. p. 31.
The Doctrine of Conversion.
The doctrine of ' Baptismal Regeneration ' was developed
by Augustine, who said, ' Baptisma .... contra originate
peccatum donatum est, ut quod generatione attractum est,
regeneratione detrahatur.' But this claims for a Church
rite what is the merit of the atonement of Christ.1 It
overlooks the fact that Christ ' lighteth every man coming
into the world.'
' What marks the best Methodist teaching here ? It,
still more than Arminianism, developes the doctrine of
prevenient grace, asserting that man is not to be found in
the fallen state of nature simply, but the very nature itself
¦ is grace.' 2 ' The truth lies between the error of the
Pelagians, who suppose that the unbaptized infants are
sinless,' like angels, and that of the Papists, who affirm that
1 they are graceless, like devils.'3
Infants then, who die, are saved, being ' in Christ,'
whether baptized or not. In Baptism and the Lord's
Supper, says Dr. Dale, 'the communicants receive something;
and what they receive is given to them by the authority of
Christ.'4 By this new term, ' something,' which Dr. Dale
imports into theological terminology, the defenders of
baptismal regeneration, transubstantiation, the ' Eeal
Presence,' and the like, will be able to bring in * anything.'
Dr. Dale himself urges that this 'something' is neither
justification nor regeneration. What blessing of the new
covenant is there which cannot be included under either
of these terms ?
The Scriptures teach that every one who becomes
¦ Bp. Har. Browne (XXXIX. Art., p. 250) says, not the ' taint,' but the
' condemnation,' of original sin is removed by baptism.
2 Pope's Higher Catechism cf Theology, p. 220.
3 Fletcher's Works, i., 134. " Congregational Principles, p. 124.

The Work of the Spirit. 41
personally possessed of conscious salvation, does so by a
believing reception of the word of God in Christ, by
the Holy Spirit. 'With the heart man believeth
unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is
made unto salvation : ' cf . John i. 1 2 ; Acts ii. 38; Eom.
vi. 4-7; Gal. hi. 26, 27; Eph. ii. 5; Col. i. 11, ii. 12;
Jas. i. 18.
Wesley certainly said that ' the Church supposed that
all who were baptized in their infancy are at the same
time born again.'1 But he distinguished between the two
parts of a sacrament, which did not always go together ;
and said further, ' Say not then in your hearts, " I was
once baptized, therefore I am now a child of God." Alas !
that consequence will by no means hold.'2 Whitefield said,
' I would as soon believe the doctrine of transubstantiation
as that of baptismal regeneration.'3 Fletcher denied that
1 material water could cleanse the soul.'4 Some evangelicals
yet hold distinctly by 'baptismal regeneration.' Of this
class was the venerable Archbishop Sumner. It was by
his book on Apostolical Preaching that J. H. Newman was
led to accept this doctrine. (See Diffic. of Anglicans,
p. 28.) It is instructive to trace the connection of ' Eegenera-
tion ' with baptism. Who ever heard of ' Baptismal
Creation,' or ' Baptismal Eesurrection ' ? Yet all these
figures stand on an equal footing in the New Testament.
The figure of ' the new birth ' was chiefly used by|
the Galilean apostles ; the others were as regularly ,
used by St. Paul. Two of them, at least, have the j
foundation of their use in the teaching of our Lord. :
Concerning ' Eegeneration,' see Matt, xviii. 3 ; John iii. 5 ; ;
Jas. i. 18 ; 1 Pet. i. 23 ; 1 John iii. 9, iv. 7. Concerning
the spiritual resurrection, see John v. 21, 24; Eom.
1 Wesley's Serm. xiv. 2 Wesley's Serm. xviii.
3 Whitefield's Sermon on the New Birth, Jan., 1750.
4 Fletcher's Works, vii., 464 ; also his Appeal in i., 134.

42 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
vi. 4-1 1 ; Col. iii. 1-4. The ' new creation ' is a figure
;' which is chiefly used by St. Paul, as 2 Cor. v. 17; Gal.
vi. 15. (But cf. Jas. i. 18; artrapyfiv riva rcov clvtov
KTLafiaToov.) St. Paul's language evidently echoes Ps. Ii. 1 0
(and that again Gen. i. 1, 2), ' Create (fna, LXX. ktlctov)
in me a clean heart, 0 God (O^K) ; and renew (iy/catvicrov)
a right spirit (pp) within me.' With 2 Cor. iv. 6 cf.
Gen. i. 3 ; Ep. Barn. vi.
Commentators usually assume that these figures represent
exactly the same aspects of ' Conversion ' (e.g. Weiss, Bib.
Theol. A". T., ii., 134; Dean Scott, Speakers Comm. in
Jas. i. 18 ; Meyer on 2 Cor. v. 17 ; Huther on Tit. iii. 5 ;
Lightfoot on Gal. vi, 15). Dr. Westcott on John i. 13
(Speakers Comm.) discriminates more precisely between
the use of Paul and that of the Galilean apostles.
Cremer (Lexicon N. T.) attempts to explain r) Kaivrj otmtis
by avwyevvav and iraXtyyeveaia, but the images are quite
distinct. Besides, the ' new creation ' includes something
more than 'the new birth.' The latter is little
more than the subjective spiritual change ; the former
includes something of the relative change, or justification.
The guilt and condemnation of sin are included in
the ap%ala = the old things which ' have passed away '
(2 Cor. v. 17).
St. Paul scarcely uses the figure of ' the new birth.'
He says, 1 Cor. iv. 15, 'For in Christ Jesus I begat you
through the gospel.' Mr. Beet1 remarks that here his
language is certainly ' an approach to the doctrine of the
new birth ; ' and adds that ' to this doctrine Paul's only
direct reference is Tit. iii. 5.' But the word there is
iraXiyyeveala. This word is used in Matt. xix. 28 to
represent the ' new beginning ' which will take place when
Christ comes. In Josephus, Ant., xi., 3, 9, it describes
the ' new beginning ' under Zerubbabel. Cicero (Attic, vi., 6)
describes his own restoration under this term. It seems
1 On Corinthians, in loc.

The Work of the Spirit. 43
probable that St. Paul used this word not so much to
exhibit the great change as a ' birth,' since this conception
was not usual with him; but to emphasize the fact of the
change or renewal.
It is worthy of remark that the Pauline figures — creation
and resurrection — are scarcely employed by the Apostolic
Fathers to represent the great inward change. Barnabas,
Ep., c. vi., says, ' When therefore He renewed (dvaicaiviaas)
us . . . as if He had formed us again (dvaTrXaaaofievo^).
For the Scripture speaks concerning us when He speaks to
the Son, " Let us make man in our image ..." He
has made a second fashioning (Bevripav ifKdauv) in these
days . . . Behold, there we have been re-fashioned (dva-
ireTrXda-fieOa) . . . we, by the faith of the promise, and
being made alive by the word (too \6<ya> ^atoTroiov/jbevoi.)
shall live.' Cf. the same in c. xi.
Hermas, in the Pastor, has this enigmatical remark :
' The seal, then, is the water ; they descend into the water
dead, and they rise alive.'
Justin Martyr not only uses the Galilean dvayevvav
(Ap., i., 66), but also expressions approximately Pauline :
e.g. KaivoTToirjOevTes (cf. dvaicaivovv, 2 Cor. iv. 16 ; Col.
iii. 1 0). Also in Dial. c. Tryph., c. xiv., he says : ' By
reason therefore of this laver (Bid t. Xovrpov) of repentance
and knowledge . . . this is the water of life.' This
passage certainly alleges that baptism ' purifies,' and that it
is ' the water of hfe : ' but (1) he limits its benefits to those
who have repented. (2) In the very next sentence he
adds — referring to Jewish baptisms : ' What is the use of
that baptism which cleanses the flesh and body alone ?
. . . You have understood all things in a carnal sense '
(Dial. c. T., xliii.). Again (Apol., lxi.) : ' As many as
. . . believe . . . and undertake to be able to live
accordingly, are instructed to pray and to entreat God
with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past
. . . Then they are brought by us where there is water,

44 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
and are regenerated (dvayevvwvTat), in the same manner in
which we ourselves were regenerated ... in order that we
may obtain in the water the remission of sins. There is
pronounced over him who chooses to be born again, and has
repented of his sins, the name of God the Father . . .'
These expressions are very striking ; but it must be
remembered — (1) That this was the baptism of adults.
(2) These benefits were attained by those who repented
and believed. (3) The other teaching of Justin is against
the notion that ' illumination ' and inward ' regeneration,' or
any other spiritual benefit, was conferred by the mere
mechanism of a rite. It also shows that the original
figure of ' regeneration ' was becoming familiar as a synonym
for baptism.
We cannot now attempt to describe the process by which
' regeneration ' became separated from the repentance and
faith in the divine word, originally held to be indispensable
to it, and was attributed to baptism alone. Tertullian
was unguarded ; Cyprian was no example of evangelical
clearness. The view of the latter was that baptism did
not give the Holy Spirit. That came only by the
imposition of hands — by confirmation. Eusebius (R. E.,
vi., 43) relates that Cornelius charged Novatian that he
had not received the Spirit, since he had never been con
firmed by the Bishop. In order to make dependence
on the Church secure, Augustine taught — (1) That original
sin could only be taken away in baptism. (2) That even
the baptized could not be certain that they were pre
destinated. Wickliffe and Calvin, on the other hand,
insisted that as salvation was the subject of predestination,
the Church could neither effect it nor prevent it. (See
Pfieiderer's Hibbert Led., p. 271.)
The Methodist doctrine goes back on Scripture. It
declares — (1) That the initial grace of general salvation
comes to all men through Jesus Christ: Eom. v. 16.
(2) That the individual, conscious of himself and his

The Work of the Spirit. 45
actions, and therefore responsible, receives the gift of the
Spirit on condition of repentance and faith. (3) The
experience of salvation, while it makes the believer
instinctively anxious for the means of grace, and the
fellowship of the Church, itself is not dependent upon any
of these.

CHAPTEE III.
THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE CHURCH.
' And the Lord added to them day by day those that were being
saved.' '
' The priest is either Christ or Antichrist.' 2
' Can any one carry High Church zeal higher ? And how well have I been
beaten with mine own staff ! ' 3
' The Apostle's writings are not altogether agreeable to the order of
things as now practised in the Church. ' 4
The affinity of Methodism to evangelical Christianity,
and the services it has rendered to it and is capable of
rendering, have not yet been fully recognised. It is yet
looked upon by some as the possible ally of clericalism,
or the not vain hope of a State Church.5 Yet it has
broken down the supposition that ministers alone are
the spiritual class. It recognises spiritual gifts in all
members of the Church. It has shattered the doctrine,
which has too much prevailed since the days of Cyprian,
that there are no gifts of teaching, of edification, of
1 Acts ii. 47. 2 Dr. Arnold. 3 J. Wesley. - Hilary the Deacon.
s The following remarks of Kahnis are worthy of consideration : ' The
moral substance of the State is the popular spirit; the moral substance of
the Church is the Holy Spirit. [This view of the Holy Spirit reduces the
third Person of the Trinity almost to the level of a quality or influence, as is
too common in Germany.] Both cannot prevail at the same time. When the
Church finds its moral world in the national spirit, it goes back to heathen
ism. When the Church takes the State up into itself, it goes back on the
standpoint of the Old Testament.' (Lehre vom H. Geiste, p. 153. )

The Development of the Church. 47
exhortation, to be recognised, except those which are
supposed to be conveyed by the imposition of hands,
and by a priestly succession.1 To some of us it will
always be difficult to understand how Christianity could
ever be regarded as a ceremonial religion.2 A develop
ment out of a system of rites and symbolical services
into the freedom of universal and independent access to
God, seems to contradict itself when it turns its own
accidents into inexorable essentials. We cannot be
astonished that the Judeo-Christian converts of the first
age were slow to accept the full theory of Christian
freedom. They never left the worship of the temple so
long as the sacred edifice remained.3 They continued in
all 'the ordinances of the law blameless.' Whether
Judaism could be forsaken or not, became ' a burning o
1 ' It is much to be desired that those who think [that apart from the
line of episcopal ordination there is no Church,] would take up the case of
Methodism and deal with it thoroughly . . . The conditions of this very
definite case preclude an evasive reply, such as this, " We cannot tell
whether Methodism is from heaven or of men. "... No one who is accus
tomed to pursue principles with logical severity into their consequences, will
deny that the Apostolic Succession theory . . . must either break itself
upon Methodism, or must consign Methodism and its millions of souls to
perdition, in as peremptory a manner as that in which the Church of Rome
fixes its anathema upon heretical nations.' (Wesley and Methodism, by
Isaac Taylor, London, 1851, p. 132.)
2 ' Christ's gospel is not a ceremonial law, as much of Moses' law was,
but it is a religion to serve God, not in bondage of the figure or shadow,
but in the freedom of the Spirit.' (Preface to the Book of Common
Prayer. )
8 Acts iii. 1, iv. 1, v. 12, xv. 1, xxi. 17-26. See Farrar's Early Days of
Christianity, i., 483, ii., 16 ; Lechler, Apost. Zeitalt., p. 281 ; Ritschl, Entste-
hung, p. 124.
It is supposed that this is why James, the brother of the Lord, the so-
called 'Bishop of Jerusalem,' was surnamed the 'Just,' and had such
influence among the people. (Hegesippus in Eus. H. E., ii., 23.)
This also accounts for the fact that the Christians were looked upon so long
as a Jewish sect. (Gfrbrer, Geschichte der Christ. Kirche, p. 222. )

48 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
question ; ' J about it even apostles contended.2 It was
the secret of a great part of the persecution directed
against St. Paul.3 In the form of Ebionitism, the Jewish
element continued to be a prolific source of heresy and
of mischief to the Church in after-days.4 When it was
found necessary to unite the Jewish Christians and the
Gentile Christians in one body, and, for this purpose, it
was determined to replace the temple worship and the
hierarchy of Judaism by analogous institutions, there
arose the so-called ' Catholic Church.' Its triple ministry,
its pretensions to the exclusive grace of salvation in
the sacraments, and eventually the investment of the
Bishop of Eome with the authority of Vicar of Jesus
Christ, and the pre-eminent successor of the apostles, all
descended, very naturally, from the Jewish ideas which
prevailed in the early Church, and which too effectually
withstood the more elevated and spiritual views of St. Paul.
1 Acts xxi. 20, ' Many thousands there are among the Jews of them which
have believed ; and they are all zealous of the law ' (»i trdmi Jrt»™ toZ
vopcotj uwccp%oucrtv).
2 Gal. ii. 11. 3 2 Cor. xi. 26 ; Acts xxi. 20 ; Rom. xv. 29.
4 The opinion of Schwegler (Nachapost. Zeil., p. 104), held by the
Tubingen school generally, that the original Christianity was Ebionitism,
cannot be allowed, yet there can be no doubt that though the Ebionites
followed a too-literal and narrow tradition of the doctrine of the Jewish
apostles, they could plead their example. The remark of Hegesippus (Ens.
H. E., iv., 22), that the Church was a virgin, untainted by heresy, until the
decease of Simeon, Bishop of Jerusalem, afier which came the Gnostic and
other heresies, has been a sore puzzle to historians and critics. If he were
an Ebionite (as Schwegler, Baur, etc., allege), how strange that he should
trace all error to the Jewish-Christian communities! If a Jewish-Christian
only, or, ' formally sharing the judgment of Ebionites ' (Westcott, Bible in
Church, p. 107 ; Lechler, Neander, Schaff, Milligan, Fisher), the difficulty
is almost as great, since he speaks so favourably of James. But there is
evidence that most of the early heresies can be traced to Jewish legalism and
literalism. (See also Note at the end of this chapter.)

The Development of the Church. 49
But when the Church had once attained its freedom,
how strange that it should so soon forfeit it ! Who could
have anticipated the conflicts necessary for its recovery ?
The struggle with the dominant system, always unequal,
has been embarrassed by the mistakes of the advocates
of freedom. Montanism might have become a vindication
of the truth, rather than a new error, if its first
followers had all understood Scripture as well as
Tertullian.1 Novatian and Novatus might have been the
regenerators of the Church in Cyprian's days, if they could
have anticipated the lessons of the next thousand years.2 We
know how the Waldenses maintained, during long ages, a
brave testimony for the rights of believers ; and how
John Wickliffe sent out preaching friars round many
counties, bearing witness to a new life. Luther shrank
from the logical results of his own principles, when he
found that poor and illiterate men began to preach the
gospel.3 Calvin, possibly, saw further into the genius of
the Christian scheme. The Puritans seemed generally
to imagine that spiritual functions could only be dis
charged by men in some way ordained and separated to
the ministry. England and the world owe a great debt
to the perception and zeal and self - sacrifice of the
1 Though this famous African was not above his times in many respects,
he was better acquainted with the sacred oracles than some of his con
temporaries. 2 Each, on different grounds, opposed Cyprian. Their character is much
abused by ecclesiastical historians.
* Hilary the Deacon says that ' in the early Church all taught and all
baptized ; but the Church began to be ruled by another order, because, if
every one could perform all functions, the offices would seem to be vul
garized and disparaged.' Luther's opposition to the ministry of unedu
cated men was partly justified by the excesses of the Anabaptists and other
visionaries.

50 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Baptists, Independents, and Quakers, who were among
the first to claim for every member of the Church the
right — not merely to hold his own faith, but to urge the
acceptance of it on other men.
When Wesley was first confronted with the pheno
menon of lay-preaching, he was perplexed indeed. ' This
was,' he says, ' to touch the apple of my eye.' But when
he was challenged by his own mother's assertion, 'These
men are as much called to preach as you are,' he was
silenced. Their ministry received the blessing of God :
'The Holy Ghost fell on them that believed.' He had
already appointed class-leaders ; and what are they ? They
are persons appointed to ' watch over the souls ' of their
fellow-believers ; and are expected to * advise, reprove,
comfort, or exhort, as occasion may require.' 1 Private
members of the Church — they are entrusted with spiritual
functions. Such a step, in systematic form, had not been
taken since the apostohc days. But in the apostolic days
this very principle was habitually recognised. Apollos
was instructed by Priscilla and Aquila. After the per
secution in Jerusalem, the scattered disciples ' went about
preaching the word.' Even in Jewish synagogues private
persons were allowed to give a ' word of exhortation.' 2
Of Christian assemblies in Corinth it is said, ' Each one
hath a psalm, a teaching, a revelation, a tongue, an inter
pretation,' and all could ' prophesy, one by one.' 3 The
' superintendent ' of a Christian congregation was not
1 Rules, 1739.
2 Our Lord regularly taught in the synagogues of Galilee (Luke iv. 15) ;
and in the temple at Jerusalem (Matt. xxi. 23, etc.). So Paul and
Barnabas in Pisidia and elsewhere.
3 1 Cor. xii. -xiv.

The Development of the Church. 5 r
always the only teacher. Those who had special gifts
for this duty gave instruction or exhortation. The ' elder,'
or ' overseer,' managed the business of the Church, attended
to its poor, visited its sick, sought out the feeble or
faltering, and was responsible for the order of the com
munity and the efficiency of its services. Nothing was
more foreign to the idea of the early Church than that
the gifts of the Spirit were confined to apostles and
elders. That delusion only became possible in darker
days.1 The true priesthood of all believers is affirmed every
where in the New Testament, and by no one more
emphatically than by St. Peter : ' Ye also as living stones
are built up a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to
offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God through
Jesus Christ ... Ye are an elect race, a royal priest
hood, a holy nation.' 2 It was not until after the
destruction of Jerusalem, and the consequent abolition of
the Levitieal system, that the Christian ministry began
to be spoken of as a priesthood.3 This terrible dispensa-
1 Pastor of Hermas (Ante-Nic. Lib., i., 368) speaks of the 'prophet'
as coming into the assembly. See Teaching of the Twelve Apostles on this,
subject. Here it is clear that the 'itinerant' ministry, commenced by)
apostles, went on into the next century at least. This itinerancy had al
great influence in preserving the connexionalism of the first Churches.
2 R.V. 'to be a holy priesthood.' The Text. Rec. omits us, but Alford
and Westcott, after A B C a, restore it. Christians enter into the privi
leges promised to, but not obtained by, Israel. The First Epistle of Peter
is full of the thought that believers are the true Israel, i. 18, 21, 23, ii.
25 ; cf. Gal. iii. 8, 14, 26-28, v. 6 ; Heb. iv. 3. See also Ignat. ad Eph.
9: 'Stones of the Temple of the Father,' 'God-bearers, temple-bearers.'
Yet he was among the first to subvert the truth of the priesthood of the
faithful. 2 Cf. Clem. Rom. Ep. ad Cor. 40-43. Tert. De Bapt. calls a Bishop
summus sacerdos. The Apost. Const, speak both of Upiis and &.p%iipius.

52 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
tion upon its city and people broke down the ancient
prestige of Judaism, and delivered the Christian Church
from a bondage into which it might have more deeply
fallen. But it opened the way for a new temple service,
and a fresh hierarchy, — ' worse than the first.' Eenan
describes in his own vivid manner the effects of this
catastrophe upon Judaism, but also shows how it enhanced
the prospects of Christianity : ' Jerusalem se vengera
de sa d^faite ; elle vaincra Eome par le christianisme.' 1
Of the subsequent history of the idea of the priest
hood among Christians we cannot now speak. In these
last days Methodism has, in its delegation of personal
dealing with men's souls to a lay-agency, raised up a
barrier to the sacerdotal system, which, we think, can
never be broken down. This practical re-assertion of the
true priesthood of every believer has rendered every
statement of the traditional theory of ' apostolical succes
sion,' and the like, a ludicrous anachronism. Now, all
Cyprian applies all the Old Testament sanctions of the priesthood to
Christian ministers, e.g., Ep. 54 (Ant.-Nic. Lib., viii., 162, 3). Cf. Neander,
Planting of Christianity, i., 269.
On the importance of the destruction of Jerusalem to the overthrow of
Judaism, the extension of Christianity, and the advance of the Church of
Rome, see Gfrorer, Ges. C. K., p. 253. He traces, with some probability,
the course of events in Rome to the powerful elements of Judaism, which
found refuge there. All the Jewish Christians did not fly to Pella.
Ritschl (Entsteh. d. A. K., p. 259) supposes that the refusal of the Chris
tians to join in the insurrection of Bar-cochba would tend to separate them
from the Jewish people : and, yet more, the decree which admitted Christians,
but excluded Jews from iElia-Capitolina. Baur and Schwegler (Nachap.
Zeit., ii., 193) did not choose to see the vast importance which the subver
sion of Judaism had for Christianity. But see Rothe, Anfiinge, p. 281 ;
Lechler, Ap. Zeit., p. 434; Farrar's Early Days of Christianity, p.'
490. 1 Renan, L'Antechrist, p. 534. Pfleiderer (Hibb. Led.) attributes the
change to the ' migration from Jerusalem to Rome. '

The Development of the Church. 53
the Churches are glad to employ lay-preachers and lay-
workers. Everybody owns that ' ministers ' are too few
and too feeble to gather in the world's harvest for Christ.
An army cannot be made up of officers only. In so great
a contest every Christian must be valiant for the truth.
But Methodism was the first to act upon this conviction
systematically. What the ' confessional ' has been in the
Bomish Church, the class-meeting and similar associations
are among evangelical Christians — but with this ineffable
and ineffaceable difference. The confession is an instru
ment of priestcraft.1 The class-meeting is a bulwark of
spiritual freedom. All history — all experience, shows that
the Church must have not only its public services and
means of instruction,, but also some method of reaching
individual minds. Troubled souls crave for help, and per
plexed minds long for direction. Men and women,
awaking to the awful peril of the soul without God, and
facing death with a conscience laden with guilty fear, will
seek relief wherever it can be found. A Church which
disregards these phenomena, failing to provide for anxious
souls, and treating these anxieties of the disquieted spirit
with supercilious disdain, has forgotten its mission. The
Eome-ward reaction in the English Church during the last
half - century has been largely owing to neglect at this
point. The Tractarian party has made no secret of its
employment of this powerful spiritual engine — the Con
fessional,, with all its sacerdotal accompaniments of penance
and absolution. The ' duly - qualified confessor ' is again
1 Joannis Dallei de Sacramentali sive Auriculari Latinorum Confessione
Disputatio, Geneva, 1761, p. 40, etc. The veteran French Protestant in this
book proves from Scripture that priests are not necessary to salvation. D.
was great on the ' Fathers,' but equally great on Scripture.

54 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
a functionary of educational establishments connected with
the Church of England. He is greatly in request for
' Missions ' and ' Retreats.' J But 150 years ago the con
fessional, which had been abolished, had not been replaced
by any other institution. There were no ' enquiry-rooms '
attached to churches, and the ' class - meeting ' had not
been born. If no substitute had been found, it is tolerably
certain that the Romish practice would have been back
again with all its evils.
The awakening among the Oxford students in the first
half of the eighteenth century was but one form of the
revolt against a merely nominal religion. There were
thousands in England beginning to feel that they had not
fulfilled the whole law of Christ by going to church once a
week ; by listening to a brief homily on moral conduct
from a minister who often knew little of the theory, and
less of the practice of religion ; by receiving the sacrament
three or four times a year. There was sure to be a spring
after a winter so long and dreary. Such books as Law's
Serious Gall would reach hundreds, even if prejudice would
not allow them to read the writings of Alleine and Baxter.
When the Church revival began among the Oxford
Methodists, it seemed likely to lead back to ceremonial
| restoration, to priestly reassertion, to a general retreat from
1 ' In one case we arc informed that a single priest of the Church of
England heard 1300 confessions in one year ; and his case was not an
exceptional one.' (Mellor on The Priesthood, p. 386.)
'The discipline adopted by them in their classes is simply a form of
pastoral superintendence ; and, though the class-meetings at which they
tell their experiences have often been made occasions for the display of
spiritual pride, their real object is that of confession— the unburdening of
conscience.' (Blunt's Dictionary of Heresies.) But Dr. Blunt's view of the
' real object ' of the class-meeting is too narrow. It is not so much the
'confessional,' as a 'communion of saints.'

The Development of the Church. 55
the merely theoretical Protestantism which was so much
at fault. But when it was attempted to put the new
wine into the old bottles, the predicted event took place.
However, the fresh hfe began to discover forms for its own
manifestation. We do not know what might have happened
if the Wesleys, on their way to America, had met with
some able and earnest Jesuits, instead of simple Moravians.1
They might have been led to seek rest in priestly absolution
rather than in justifying faith. The difference which such
a turn in their lives would have made to Britain, to America,
to Australia, to the world, cannot be told. The flood of
sacerdotalism which the Reformation compelled to retire,
and which is yet sinking down into the valleys, might have
risen once more to engulf the world. But the experience
of salvation by faith made all the difference. It was not
instruction in philosophy, nor the reading of ecclesiastical
history, which led to this victory. The fact is, that
ecclesiastical history has been spoiled by the hands through
which it has passed. The fountains of knowledge have been
corrupted ; and to this day the young student is in danger,
as many examples show, of ever-insidious and ever-active
influences of perversion. Popery and sacerdotalism have
been confounded by Scripture and by the work of the
Holy Spirit on men's hearts : the gracious but irresistible
providence of God, and not human learning or the testimony
of ' Fathers,' has gained this victory. ' Salvation belongeth
to the Lord.' It was this sure experience in his own heart
of the ' things of God,' which revealed to Wesley the way
of salvation for himself and for all men. He discovered
1 ' Certain elements were wanting which were actively at work in Oxford a
century later.' (Dublin Rev., July, 1874.)

56 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
that the gospel, though containing all mysteries of God and
man, was so simple that every believer might proclaim it
among his fellows. Behevers and enquirers meeting together,
as in the primitive Church, became confessors ' one to
another.' x By this providential expedient Christianity
was rescued from its complicity with priestcraft. One of
the mightiest transformations which the Church had ever
known took place when Wesley appointed private members
of it to watch over their fellow-members. The world which
did not know when Christ came, nor when the Divine Spirit
fell at Pentecost, and did not know what would result from
Luther's theses, or from the voyage of the ' Pilgrim Fathers,'
did not know what would come from the contemned
' societies ' and ' classes ' of the first Methodists. The
Church, which had been too long the plaything of
politicians, the sport of the profane, became in them what
it was in Jerusalem, in Corinth, and in Rome in the first
century, — the ' Communion of Saints.' 2 Instead of being
a ' synagogue of Satan,' as it had too often submitted to be,
it became a school for spiritual training, a home for the
weary, a refuge for the lost, an arena where every gift of
the manifold Spirit of God, operating on every faculty of
consecrated souls, may find freest exercise and most
abundant result. Louis XIV. could say, ' L'etat, c'est moi.'
1 Jas. V. 16 : \\oftoXoyuirh ouv iXXriXois Toes ocfiapTia.;, xa) it-^urh VTtp iXXvXal.
Though this text is referred to in modern Roman Catholic books as an
authority for auricular confession, the older interpreters of this school were
not agreed. Confession to a priest was not known to Tertullian or Cyprian ;
and even Chrysostom says, ' God commands that to Him alone . . . wo should
confess.' Private confession was instituted in the 5th century by Leo the
Great. It was not made obligatory until the Council of Lateran, a.d. 1215.
2 On this point we must refer to Dr. Gregory's Fernley Lecture, pp. 71-98,
and pp. 213-241.

The Development of the Church. 57
Cyprian and Hildebrand almost authorized the clergy to
say, ' The temple of the Lord are we.' Many attempts had
been made through centuries of Church history to regain
the full breadth of the apostolic foundation : but now,
when men scarcely looked for it, a Church, destined to a
world-wide extension, was formed of all that are beloved of
God, ' called saints.'
While we lay this stress upon the personal experience of
Wesley, as a principal factor in the direction given to his
system, and in his deliverance from ecclesiastical bondage,
we do not overlook his pre-eminent regard for Scripture as
the word of God. A verse of Scripture was more to him
than a volume of the ' Fathers.' He was deeply interested
in the records and monuments of the primitive Church.
Wherever he could, he followed a primitive custom, no
matter how long it had been out of use. But he seems
never to have yielded to the fatal delusion that ' the
Scriptures should only be interpreted according to the consent
of the Fathers.' x At one time the reading of Anglican
writers perplexed him by their varying interpretations, and
some one recommended to him the rule : Consensxts veterum ;
quod ah omnibus, quod ubique, quod semper creditum.
' Nor,' says he, ' was it long before I bent the bow too far
the other way, by making antiquity a co-ordinate rather
1 A recent Roman Catholic writer (Lehrbuch der Patrologie unci Patristik,
von Dr. J. Nirschl, Mainz, 1881, v. i., pp. 13, 17) allows that only a 'moral
unanimity ' of the Fathers can be expected iii some cases. He is careful to
show that the ' Fathers ' cannot be placed on a level with Scripture. He
urges that the limitation, by the Council of Trent, of the authority of the
Church to resfidei et morum, allows space (Spielraum und ungehindert freie
Bewegung) for criticism. This theological professor also allows that the
' Fathers ' have been corrupted by some who have had an ' excessive zeal for
true doctrine and the rights of the Church. '

58 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
than a subordinate rule with Scripture; by admitting several
doubtful writings, by extending antiquity too far, by
believing more practices to have been universal in the
ancient Church than ever were so.' x How many English
men have gone through this very process since his day !
How many sincere men, who might have served Protestant
Christianity as Wesley did, have been held fast by the
powerful spell of the ' Fathers ' ! Of Archbishop Laud it
is said by his biographer,2 that ' his studies in divinity he
had founded on the Holy Scriptures according to the glosses
and interpretations of the ancient Fathers.' Unfortunately,
it is not remembered by those who accept this rule that we
have not the same security for the integrity and genuineness
of patristic compositions, that we have for those which are
scriptural. Besides, at best, they stand on a much lower
level. Dr. Schaff says : ' I remember what great stress the
late Dr. Pusey, when I saw him at Oxford in 1844, laid
on the testimony of Irenasus for the doctrine of an unbroken
episcopal succession, as the indispensable mark of a genuine
catholic Church ; while he ignored the simultaneous growth
of the primacy, which a year afterwards carried Iris friend,
J. H. Newman, over to the Church of Rome.' 3 Newman
says: 'From Dr. Hawkins I learned another principle,
" Tradition." The Scripture was never intended to teach
doctrine, only to prove it ; and if we would learn doctrine,
we must have recourse to the formulas of the Church.' 4
1 Southey's Life of Wesley (1820), i., p. 108.
- Heylin's Life of Arch. Laud, ' Cyprianus Anglicus.'
:l Hist. ofCh. (100-325 a.d.), i., p. 149.
4 Apologia, p. 8. Newman remarks (Difficulties of Anglicans, p. 9) that
'the Fathers have catholicized the Protestant Churches at home,' and
(p. 151) that 'the Fathers ivould protect Romanists as well as extinguish

The Development of the Church. 5 9
That is, to put this most erroneous principle into plain
Enghsh, we must only use Scripture to prove doctrines
which we have already received.
But where Newman was weak, there, by the grace of
God, Wesley was ' made strong.' y He escaped from
Oxford, without being led to that final and fatal subordina
tion of Scripture to tradition, which has been the bane of
the High Church party to which he then belonged. He
felt all his life the powerful influence which the University
and its officers had exercised over him.2 But he was
enabled to shake off that influence so far as it led to any
depreciation of the word of God below Church authorities.
And soon his experience led him to another great principle
of the Christian faith, which had been almost wholly
obscured by ecclesiastical prejudice. He learned that the
Dissenters.' This of course applies only to those circles where Church
authority was raised above Scripture. It also suggests what has been one of
the motives actuating the Anglican revival. On this latter point Aug.
Hare said (Mission of the Comforter, p. 1010) : ' Some twenty years ago, when
difficulties were assailing our Church on every side, a knot of men took it
into their heads to assert that Episcopacy is an absolutely indispensable
condition of Christ's Church. . . . We who were raised above the Church of
Rome by . . . pure faith ... if we were in like manner raised above other
Protestant bodies by the possession of that form of government which is
indispensable to the Church, to what a pinnacle of glory should we be raised !
What a feather in our cap if we were the only pure branch of Christ's Church
on earth ! . . . "Where are the texts ? . . . They cannot produce one. This
monstrous error which would restrict the power of Christ's mediatorial
sacrifice and the efficacy of His sacraments within the limits of Episcopal
Churches is still confined, I trust, to some of our weaker brethren ... a
piece of pnYn.mnhir.al affectation. and_of uncharitable presumption. '
1 Heb. xi. 34 : io*viccfiutlri<roii ociro afffavu'ecs.
2 Potter was Bishop of Oxford (1715-1737), and Wesley received deacon's
orders from him in 1725. His views of Church matters are exhibited in his
volume on Church Government, which details the Anglican theory at length.
Gibson, who was Bishop of London (1723-1748), held such high views of
Church authority that some constitutional lawyers said he wanted ' n.
sacerdotal empire' (Biog. Diet.).

60 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Holy Spirit of God not only taught and moved upon
apostles and early saints, but is a living power in the
Church still. The Church theory to which he had been
attached not only disparaged Scripture, but limited the
Holy Spirit of God. But now he learned that this Divine
Person not only condescended to teach Barnabas, Tertullian,
Augustine, and Thomas a Kempis, but is teaching humble
souls in every age. Wherever the truth as it is in Jesus
is proclaimed and received, there the Holy Spirit acts
directly upon believing hearts.1 This blessed gift does
not belong alone to the Church in its corporate capacity,
but is secured to the individual soul. Therefore, every
believer may have a divine assurance of the truth of his
religion. ' He that believeth hath the witness in himself.'
Observe : this is not merely the same thing as the
Protestant doctrine of ' private judgment.' That insists
upon the right of every Christian to read Scripture, and
to examine authorities for himself — a privilege belonging
to the sociology of Protestantism. But there is no
security for the truth in having the right to read the
Bible, or to hold our own opinions. On the other hand,
the Quakers and others had asserted the capacity of every
believer to receive the Holy Spirit : but they had inclined
too much towards Montanism. Each man's ' spirit ' was
made an infallible authority. The promise that 'they shall
all be taught of God ' was grasped without its necessary
explanations and limitations. Our Lord gave the promise
1 On this point, as on many others, Wesley's teaching was a revival of
Paulinism. Usteri (Entwickelung des Paulinischen Lehrbegriffes, p. 283)
and Kahnis are defective at this point. See Weiss, Bib. Theol. N. T., i.,
458. The question is, whether the Holy Spirit comes to men by the law,
by 'man ' = 'the flesh,' or by faith ? Gal. iii. 1,5; Eph. i. 13, ii. 20-22.

The Development of the Church. 61
of the Holy Spirit, who should 'lead into all truth,' but
also said that ' He shall not speak of Himself.' That is,
He reveals no absolutely new doctrines either to the Churcli
or to individual believers. He unfolds and applies the old.
The Church of Eome has overlooked this limitation when
she has coined new dogmas. To avoid the extreme of the
mystic, who would make himself independent of all
external teaching, the Churchman tries to seclude the
Holy Spirit within the lines of Church ordinances.
Irengeus (Hcer., iii., 24) was the first to suggest that the
Spirit is treasured in the Church, and ' none are partakers
of it who do not come into the Church.' Only ' where
the Church is, there is the Spirit.' But Irenseus little
foresaw what use others would make of such words. He
had not so far advanced into the heresy of exclusiveness
as some who came after him. Besides, it is not fair to
take his words apart from the facts to which they referred.
It was in opposition to Gnostics and other heretics, who
subverted the very truth of Christianity, that he insisted
upon the apostolical tradition. He would have shrunk in
amazement from the theory that men could hold every
truth essential to Christianity, could experience the renew
ing grace of the Spirit, glorify Christ in life and labour,
and yet be denied a place in the Church itself. Therefore to
his memorable and much-abused statement — that ' Where
the Church is, there is the Spirit,' he adds the true antecedent
of that correlative — 'Where the Spirit is, there is the Church
and all grace.' But soon Cyprian distinctly laid it down
that the unity of life in the Holy Spirit was inseparably
dependent on connection with the Church and the Bishop.1
1 We may here refer to an article in the Lond. Qu. Rev., April,

62 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
It is upon these two principles that our claim to be
recognised as a part of the Church of Christ must repose —
First. We appeal to Scripture as the rule of faith and as
the standard of Church order. Any writer, how
ever ancient, or venerable, or worthy of our most
respectful and loving attention, whose writings are
not included in the sacred canon, we cannot
recognise as demanding our submission. Infalli
bility belongs to God alone.
Second. We appeal to the work of the Spirit of God upon
our own souls.
When Wesley announced the doctrine of the ' Witness
of the Spirit,' many accused him of novelty and presump
tion.1 But ' it is to be found, as every student of Church
history knows, not only in the Holy Scriptures, but in the
creeds and confessions of Christendom from the earliest
times.' 2 This doctrine, which belongs not to us but to
1873, on the 'Romanist Doctrine of the Holy Ghost:' 'It is a per
version of history to make the descent of the Holy Ghost a descent upon
the apostles alone, or upon the apostles pre-eminently. The Spirit Him
self declares the contrary. The foundation of the Church was not an
apostolate and clerical order. The Christian religion will never be truly
represented upon earth until that primal error and widespread delusion has
been altogether extirpated.' He also says : ' What is needed further is the
right adjustment in Christian theology of the relations of the administrating
Spirit to the means of grace, the word of Scripture, the sacraments and prayer. '
1 ' This extraordinary man hath, in fact, laid claim to every apostolic gift
and grace, and in as full a measure as they were possessed of old.' (The
Doctrine of Grace ; or, The Office and Operations of the Holy Spirit, by
Wm. (Warburton), Bishop of Gloucester, 1763, p. 119.) Bennett's Broken
Unity, p. 169, says : ' It is to suppose that every Christian of the present day
is to have an outpouring of the Holy Ghost identical with that of Pentecost.'
-' Fernley Lect. 1882, on The Witness of the Spirit, by Rev. R. N. Younc.
He proceeds to say : ' The great movement of the 18th century involved no
new doctrinal departure. It was a recovery and re-assertion of foro-otten
truths — it was a revival of expiring life.' See also the first Fernlcv Lecture
by the Rev. Dr. Osborn, on The Holy Spirit.

The Development of the Church. 63
evangelical Christianity everywhere, is ceasing to be our
peculiar boast, because there is so great an increase in
the number of those who have entered into the joy of
conscious salvation. The opinion that every believer might
hear and recognise the voice of God for himself, seemed
new and strange to some in Wesley's days, as it seems
strange to some now. Yet we do not pretend that because
the Spirit enters the humblest heart, thereby any man is
rendered infallible, or independent of instruction, or that
the means of grace are no longer necessary to him.1 Time
would fail to show how earnestly Wesley contended
against these possible exaggerations and perversions of
truth so important, and, as we think, succeeded. No one
dreaded more than he the irrational vacuities of mysticism.
But here, he and we find sure footing. ' The Spirit of God
beareth witness with our spirit, that we are the children
of God.' 'It is God that justifieth, who is he that shall
condemn ? ' ' Who art thou that judgest the servant of
another ? to his own lord he standeth or falleth.'
1 Kahnis (Die Lehre vom heiligen Geiste, p. 151) says : ' The Spirit of Christ,
which comes upon faith, since it is the actual token of the covenant with
Christ, is the security of the truth of the faith. The new life of the Holy
Spirit is a life of the consciousness. This consciousness has the word of
God as its fountain, and the Holy Spirit as its life-principle. It is there
fore an objective, divine factor in it. Only it is developed through the
human organ. So is it always subjectively human, and therefore capable
of an erroneous reproduction of the objective word of God in the Holy Spirit.
The expression of this Christian consciousness, of this inner word, is the
Creed.' Even Pfleiderer (Hibb. Lect. 1885, p. 125) can say that : ' To the
Jewish principle of authority and tradition Paul places in opposition the
evangelical principle of the immediate assurance of divine truth felt in the
soul through mysterious contact with the Divine Spirit which bears within
itself the seal of its truth.'

64 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
APPENDIX TO CHAPTEE III.— See p. 48.
The Early Heresies.
We have not space for full evidence of the fact that the
first heresies arose among the Jewish Christians. We may
remark, 1. That the Ebionitic and Gnostic systems had a
common origin.
2. That the point at which the Jewish Christians
left the faith was at the doctrine of the cross. St.
Paul gloried in the cross. The ' shame ' of the cross led
the Ebionites to the opinion that 'the Christ' did not
really suffer. They said that the divine principle came
upon Jesus at His baptism, but left Him at His crucifixion.
It was only an apparent humiliation of the Messiah
(Bo/crjcn's) : 1 John iv. 3, v. 6. This docetism, in various
forms, runs through all these heresies.
3. It is misleading to attribute Gnosticism, primarily, to
oriental dualism (as Beausobre, Matter, Mansel, etc.). The
weird forms, with which the ' fantastical genius of a
Gnostic'1 delighted to people the spiritual universe, have
undergone careful scrutiny by recent writers, as Neander,
Lipsius, Hilgenfeld, etc. Their full elucidation has not
yet come. Almost every authority differs about the exact
time and opinions of Cerinthus. The most satisfactory
view regards him as ' a connecting link between Judaism
and Gnosticism ' (Neander, Lightfoot, etc.). But Basilides
and Valentinus had a Jewish training. Marcion was the
first who attempted to connect Paulinism with Gnosticism.
The dualistic principle of the evil of matter was brought in
to assist the Jewish thinker to justify his notion of the
unreality both of the atonement and of the incarnation of
the Son of God. 1 Lechler, Ap. Zeit., p. 213.

The Development of the Church. 65
4. Consequently, those early writings which assert the
reality of the death of Christ, are conspicuously Pauline in
their impress. Such are the Epistles of Ignatius, Polycarp,
and Barnabas. They began to find many types of the
' cross ' in Scripture and in nature. The tree of life, Moses
and Hur praying, the plough, the Eoman insignia (Just.
Mart.), the brazen serpent (Barn.), aves vclantes, homo
nutans vel wans, navis antenna; (Jerome), were all referred
to. But in Hermas, the Clementines, the Teaching,
there is a singular reticence on the subject.
In Ignat. ad Rom. occurs the expression, 'O e'/io? epas
iardvpeaTai, my love has been crucified (see West. Hy., No.
28, 'My Lord, my Love is crucified'). The pseudo-Ignat.
Epistles are strongly anti-docetic.
5. The ' sign of the cross,' which was common in
baptism and on other occasions in Tertullian's time,
was not probably ever in use among Jewish Christians.
There are no proofs of its public use in Eome before the
time of Constantine : In hoc signo vinces. Minuc. Felix
(a.d. 250) said, Cruces etiam nee colimus, nee optamus: 'We
do not worship crosses, nor do we desire them.' L'Abbe
Martigny (Dictionnaire des AntiquiUs Chritiennes, 1877)
says : ' Les anciens Peres attestent que le signe de la croix
est de tradition apostolique.' But this cannot be proved.
Moreover, it is becoming more clear that among Jewish
believers in Christ no such sign would be adopted. Possibly,
it was accepted as the ' catholic ' sign or badge, when it
became ' sin to Judaize,' and when the ' Church ' took the
place of the 'synagogue.' Catholicism conquered formal
Judaism, but received its spirit into itself.

CHAPTEE IV.
APOSTOLICITY.
TlzpitrffaTzpoj; Z^viXajTris uordp^&iv tojv tfaTpixwv /xou rroipaooffiojv.'
' They are now at full liberty to follow the Scriptures and the primitive
Church. '2
' Upon reflection I saw how exactly we had copied after the primitive
Church.'3
' The Church of Christ is, by the admission of all parties,
apostolical, or, derived in some manner from the apostles.'4
All Christians — Eomanist, Protestant, Presbyterian, and
Congregational, believe that they are in the Apostolical
Succession.5 It is very important that we should examine
Methodism by this test ; and, whatever may be the result,
it will at least be seen that its earlier and later promoters
have made this the ideal towards which they have been
striving. Of course, we are met here by the question, What was
the Apostolical Church ? Or, even by a yet earlier
question, What is Christianity ? But to discuss these
1 Gal. i. 14.
2 Wesley's letter to Dr. Coke on American Methodism, Sept., 1784.
1 Wesley's Plain Account, 1749, p. 21.
" Palmer's Book of the Church, i., p. 172.
5 Dr. R. W. Dale, in his Congregational Principles, says that 'it is not
enough to prove that the Apostolic Churches were congregational,' but
proceeds to show that 'this is the highest and most natural organization.'
His principal instances are, however, from the apostolic age.
60

Apostolicity. 6j

questions in the briefest manner would be far beyond our
present limits. We must be content with noticing them
only as they are related to our theme.
The principal theories concerning the- apostohcity of the
Church, are, after all, only two. First, that which asserts
that all Churches, which follow the doctrine, and cultivate
the spirit of apostles, are apostolical.1 Second, that which
holds that apostohcity in the Church includes, not only
similarity of doctrine, and resemblance in spirit and hfe,
but also a formal, historical connection of direct descent,
securing a positive identity of Church government, usages
and offices.
We admit that it is quite incumbent upon us to decide
which of these two theories we accept. We do not
underrate the difficulties or the importance of the decision.
But has not the problem been solved for us, by the course
of events, and by the hand of Providence ? We have not
so much to justify our procedure as to show how we have
been led.
And we are reminded that such a position as ours is not
a novel one. History repeats itself. Similar circumstances
surrounded the first Protestants. Luther and Calvin
protested that they forsook nothing truly apostolical : their
opponents insisted that they had left everything. Nay,
the prototype of early Protestantism, and of early Method
ism, is in the early Church itself. Problems almost
exactly analogous to those which are involved under the
terms ' apostolical succession,' ' priestly ordination,' and the
' unity of the Church,' were, under other names, the topics
of the most fervent controversy. There are many most
1 This is Tertullian's view.

68 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
interesting points of correspondence in the histories of the
first Christians and of the Methodists, some of which have
often been noticed.
1. The original representatives of each system were, at
first, attached to an older form of piety, which claimed
divine authorization.1
2. By the ' logic of events ' both were compelled to
modify their respective systems — to recognise the demand
for more comprehensive freedom. Concessions had to be
made to Hellenists by the appointment of the ' Seven,' to
Gentiles in the case of Cornelius, and again at the Council
of Jerusalem. How far these concessions went may be
inferred from the fact that, in the extant writings of the
original twelve apostles, there is nothing said in favour of
the observance of the ancient law or ritual. In Wesley's
case progress was marked by his employment of class-
leaders and lay-preachers, in the building of separate places
for meeting and worship, in the establishment of the
Conference, and, finally, in the ordination of ministers for
America and Scotland.
3. Other Christians soon advanced beyond the position
which was held at first by the twelve apostles. Stephen
proclaimed the independence of Christianity, and Paul
established Churches entirely free from Judaism. Similarly
the Methodists have applied the principles handed down to

1 Some Episcopalians at least from the beginning have claimed divine
right for their system, from Ignatius (Ep. ad Trail., 'Apart from these
there is no Church ') — down to Canon Liddon. The latter says (Serm., April
' 25, 1885) : 'The Episcopate is organically necessary to the structure of the
I visible body of Christ — necessary, not merely to its bene esse, but to its esse.'
| But see Prof. Hatch's reply in the Contemp. Rev., June, 1885 ; Lightfoot on
'Phil., p. 189; Powell's Apostolical Succession.

Apostolicity. 69

them. They have ceased to look for instruction to the
ministry of the older Church, and the ' temple worship,'
which their fathers observed, they no longer need, because
they have ordinances of their own.
4. We scarcely wish to delay over the parallel between
the exclusiveness which in the first age drove Christians
from the synagogues, precipitating the final separation of
Christianity from Judaism, and that which thrust out
Wesley and his people from the churches of this country.
We need not pursue this parallelism further, nor carry
it to lengths of affectation. Other features of it will occur
as we proceed. But we have been compelled to inquire
whether the ground we occupy is ' covenant ground ; ' and
it is no little consolation to us, in the face of reproach,
that the same things have happened to those who have
gone before us. Besides, our Church theory has been with
us only a matter of secondary consideration. It has been
evolved out of history and life. We have not very
diligently studied ' Church principles.' We have never
boasted a single ' ecclesiastical chair.' Occasionally, stern
necessity has constrained us to enquiry or to controversy.1
But perhaps few Wesleyan ministers have studied Church
questions so carefully as Wesley himself did.
In the surviving traces of Wesley's studies in Church
1 We refer again to the Rev. T. Powell's book on Apostolical Succession
(1840) — a reply to Dr. Hook's assumptions. This book deserves to be better
known. See also Jackson's Letter to Dr. Pusey, 1842. Pusey, in a letter to
the Archbishop of Canterbury, had charged Methodists with teaching
'justification by feeling.' It was in this letter that Pusey repeated the
libel upon Dr. Coke. Mr. Jackson, in his Centenary Sermon (1839), says :
' The true apostolical succession is a succession to u ministry which is
characterized by apostolic truth and faithfulness, by apostolical efficiency
and power, by apostolical labour and self-denial, and by apostolical success.'

Jo Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
history we can discern a strong desire to discover not
only the doctrine of the apostles, but also their spirit
and practice. It was on this account that the Oxford
Methodists resorted to frequent communion and fasting,
and to united prayer and Scripture reading.1 They also
diligently read the writings of the ' Fathers.' In Frederica
(Nov., 1736), Wesley read among his friends extracts from
Ephrem Syrus, whom he calls ' the most awakening writer
of all the ancients.' Again, in England (March, 1746),
he says : ' I spent some hours in reading the Exhortations
of Eph. Syrus. Surely never did any man since David
give such a picture of a broken and contrite heart.' 2 He
also notices Ignatius, Eusebius, and others. Turretin's
History of the Church he thought to be a ' dry, heavy,
barren treatise.' Of Dr. Cave's History of the Primitive
Church he said : ' What pity that so great learning and
piety should be accompanied with so little judgment ! ' £
The reading, A.D. 1730, of The Character of a Perfect
Christian, by Clement of Alexandria, excited for it so
much admiration, that in after days he tried to draw such
a picture in The Character of a Methodist.4"
One of Wesley's most serious efforts in ecclesiastical read
ing was a thorough examination of Beveridge's Pandectcc
Canonum Conciliorum. His final verdict was, ' Nothing
could so convince us that both general and particular
1 Acts ii. 42.
2 So Roediger in Herzog, Real-Enkyk. : ' His words reach the heart. '
3 'The sketches of Cave, while characterized by the marked individuality
of the writer, by an earnest desire for truth, and by extraordinary erudition,
contain such a curious jumble of stories, credible and incredible, that no
dependence can bo placed on them.' (Donaldson, Apost. Fathers, p. 40.)
4 Newman relates (Apolog., p. 26) how he was himself charmed with the
philosophical mysticism of the Alexandrian Clement.

Apostolicity. 7 1

Councils may err and have erred.' x He further admits that
of that extraordinary document called the Apostolical
Canons he had ' once thought more highly than he ought.'
Bishop Beveridge, an editor and defender of these com
positions, was one of the most learned and spiritual bishops
of the English Church, but unfortunately devoted to the
doctrine of the Apostolical Succession.2 His eager passion for
' catholic unity,' based upon episcopacy and sacerdotalism,
led him to maintain the essential integrity of the Apostolical
Constitutions and Canons. In his day it was known that
the writings of Church fathers had been extensively
corrupted in the interests of the Papacy. The Isidore
Decretals had been forged in the ninth century, pretend
ing to have come down from the early popes. They were
denounced by Wickliffe as apocryphal ; and were so
thoroughly exposed at length, that even Bellarmine and
Baronius ceased to defend them.3 Upon forgeries of this
kind sacerdotalism raised its triumphant head in the
Middle Ages. Dr. Pusey only mentions a melancholy
fact when he says, 'The system built on the forgery
abides still.'4 Wesley himself remarks on the Eomish
controversy : ' I cannot trust any of their quotations
without consulting every sentence in the original, and the
originals themselves can very hardly be trusted.'5 Here
1 Journal, Sept., 1736.
2 It was to him that Bishop Tillotson addressed the often quoted words :
'Doctor, charity is above rubrics.' (Abbey and Overton, Eng. Ch., i., 126.)
It ought to be said in excuse for these errors in pious men of that time, like
Beveridge, that they had not before them the things which belong to the
subsequent history of the Church of Christ.
3 So Nirschl (Rom. Cath.), Lehrbuch, p. 17. We are glad to refer to Dr.
Littledale's Plain Reasons, p. 123. See Gieseler, Ecc. Hist., ii., 335.
4 Eirenicon, i., 255.

72 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
he refers particularly to passages in Cyprian ; but it is
well known that passages in Ignatius, Irenteus, and
Tertullian had been introduced with the same object.
Even St. Augustine was made to say what he never did
say : ' Eoma locuta est ; causa finita est.' With the
detection and exposure of these dreadful falsehoods, many
of the bulwarks of Episcopacy had gone down also. But the
Apostolical Canons remained ; and they exalted episcopacy
without any complicity with Eome. Beveridge thought
them exactly suited to the Anglican theory.
The Bishop indicates his Protestantism by replying to
the Jesuit Turrian, who had alleged that ' the Canons
had all been made at the Council of Jerusalem by the
apostles.' He also defends Episcopacy by replying to
the French Protestant Daille, who attributed the Canons
to a forger in the fifth century. In his preface, addressed
to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Beveridge says that his
work is to prove the English Church to be the same as
the primitive Church.1 ' They differ only in time. They
have the same faith, the same number of sacraments, the
same laws, rites, feasts, and fasts ; and indeed the Anglican
Church is the primitive Church revived.' The enemies
of the Church were, however, intent on despoiling it of its
honours as the apostolic system. This they would never
do so long as ' the genuine monuments of the primitive
martyrs and Fathers were preserved intact.' Among these
infallible witnesses he reckons the Canons. He says
that the apostles were inspired to form the Church.
They left it to their successors, by whom the uncorrupted
1 See the Codex Canonum Ecclesice Primitives, vindicatus et illustratus.
Lond., 1679. (Ang. Cath. Lib. : Bev. Works, vol. xii.)

Apostolicity. 73

faith and discipline have been handed down. This
discipline is contained in the Canons, which ' no one
doubted before our age, and which were sanctioned and
edited before the Council of Nice.' Yet he is compelled to
allow that they were not written by the apostles, in whose
names they speak.1
The Church of Eome does not think very highly of
these Canons, because they say nothing of the Papacy.
On this very account they have been prized by the
Eastern Church, and by Anglicans. It is doubtful whether
they were known to the Ante-Nicene Church, or to the
Council of Nice. The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles,
recently brought into notice, contains the essence of the
seventh book of the Constitutions. s It is probable that
references in Eusebius and other writers to Teachings
and Ordinances of apostles were really made to these
singular and more ancient documents ; though Church
writers have claimed such references for the Constitutions
and Canons.41 The Constitutions are indeed less trust
worthy than the Canons, if that were possible. Even
Dr. Hook allows that ' the advancement of episcopal
dignity and power appears to have been the chief design of
the forgery.' 5 Bishop Wordsworth, as with a sigh, allows
that they are not authentic.6 Bishop Pearson places them in
1 'Their apostolicalness is by the learned Daille everlastingly shattered
and broken.' (Cave, Prim. Ch. : Pref.)
2 Romish writers do not rely so much upon the authority of bishops as
the Anglicans. Their interest concentres on the Papacy.
3 See articles in the Meth. Mag., April and May, 1885, by the Rev. J. R.
Gregory. Also this Lecture, infra.
4 Canon Westcott thinks the 'original elements of the Clementines, the
Apost. Canons and Const' existed before the middle of the 2nd century.
(Canon, p. 11.)
5 Church Dictionary. 6 Ch. Hist., i., 413.

74 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
the fifth century, and Archbishop Usher places them in the
sixth ; while both suspect from the use of similar language
that ' the same falsifier has been at work on them who
expanded the shorter Ignatian Epistles into the longer.' :
But what shall we say of the Lucasian Professor of
Mathematics at Cambridge, W. Whiston, who in a.d. 1711
published five volumes on Primitive Christianity ? In
his preface to this work, addressed to Queen Anne, he says
of the ' Constitutions of the Holy Apostles ' that ' they are
the unerring rule of that Christian faith whereof Her
Majesty is the glorious defender ; ' and in the third volume
of the same work he declares that ' these are the most
canonical books of the New Testament, delivered on
Mount Zion, whence the new law was to issue, according
to prophecy.' Afterwards, however, he is said to have
changed his opinion of them.2
We are not surprised, therefore, that Wesley attentively
studied documents so pretentious, nor that he arose dis
satisfied with the results. His early High Church proclivities
gradually yielded to a very wide eclecticism on ecclesias
tical questions. He saw what uncertainty prevailed on
critical points, through the corruption of the very sources
of the history, and through the perversion of the best of
men by party interest. Even of the saintly Bishop of
Hippo he says : ' When Augustine's passions were heated,
his word was not worth a rush.' 3 He began to doubt
many things which had been said against Montanus,
Pelagius, and other heretics. Since he found no ecclesias-
1 Smith and Cheetham, Dirt, of Ch. Ant., i., 119.
Whiston might have been drawn to them on account of their un-
evangelical character. He was an Arian.
1 Sermons, No. 68.

Apostolicity . 75

tical history in England except that of Archdeacon
Echard — which was ' so exceedingly dull that any one
can hardly read it without falling asleep,' he was not
ashamed, for the benefit of his people, to adapt the history
of Mosheim.1 This book, published within ten years of
Wesley's death, may be supposed to contain his riper views
on Church questions.
He had not much patience with Mosheim's careful
discussion of the ancient heresies — the best up to his time,
because he thought these were the ' whims and absurdities
of senseless and conceited men . . . not worth our while
to collect into one heap all the rubbish of 1700 years.'
This was not, perhaps, philosophic impartiality, but it was
in harmony with his practical earnestness. He criticises
Mosheim's carefulness in tracing the history of rites and
customs and in overlooking the 'internal state of the
Church.' But Neander was not born until two years
before the death of Wesley. Wesley helped to prepare
the Church for a higher conception of Church history than
Mosheim possessed. Yet he says : ' I do not find proof
that Dr. M., though learned, was acquainted with inward
religion, — but he is on the whole one of the best 'writers
upon the subject.'
It is an effectual reply to any who speak of Wesley's
1 A Concise Ecclesiastical History from the Birth of Christ to the Present
Century, 4 vols., by J. Wesley. (Published by Paramore, at the Foundry,
1781.) Among other great obligations which the Methodists owe to the
wisdom and learning of Wesley, was his Notes on the New Testament, in
which he embodied the criticism and exegesis of Bengel's Gnomon, the best
book in hermeneutics of that age, and not yet superseded. Mosheim's was
also the best book on its subject in Wesley's day, and has not yet lost its
value. Protestantism owes much to the accurate learning and studious
moderation of this Presbyterian writer.

y6 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
' ritualism ' and the like, that he accepts Mosheim's state
ment, that ' neither Christ nor apostles command^any tiling
expressly concerning the external form of the Church.'
The first Christians, he says, were in a position of perfect
equality, saluted each other as brethren and sisters. A
presbyter ruled each congregation, who was sometimes
called the ' Angel,' but was afterwards distinguished by the
name of Bishop. On these points he seldom departs from
the statements of the Lutheran author.
In this work, also, Wesley expresses a doubt whether
Montanus deserved the name of heretic, and whether
the accusations usually made against him are correct.
Suspicions which he had before entertained upon this point
were confirmed by reading ' an old book, The General
Delusion of Christians with regard to Prophecy.' 1 Thirty
years later he says in the History (p. 114): 'I have
frequently been in doubt whether he [Montanus] was not
one of the wisest and holiest men who was then in the
Christian Church.'
Later enquiry does not confirm Wesley's conjectures
respecting Montanus. But, except the Philosophoumcna
of Hippolytus, we have only the testimonies of Tertullian,
of Eusebius (H. E., vi., 16—20), of Epiphanius (Cont. Hceret.
48) on the subject, and these Wesley had. It is allowed
that the Montanists were not, technically, heretics, since
they did not deny any article of the creed. Their errors
inclined them to spiritual excesses, and in this way they
present the antithesis to the Gnostics who bore Christianity
away in high intellectual notions. Montanism also was
opposed to sacerdotal theories, and maintained the claim of
1 Joum., Aug., 1750.

Apostolicity. 77

the spiritual man to ascendency in the Church. It was a
reaction in favour of the charismata of the primitive age,
which were now lost in the mechanism of a Church
system. Possibly it deserves the censure of Pressense,
that it ' refused to recognise any other type of Christianity
than that of the upper chamber at Jerusalem.' x It
certainly wandered if it asserted ' that the economy of the
Paraclete which began at Pentecost culminated in the
prophetesses of Phrygia.' Its exhortations to fasting
and martyrdom, with its severe views of life and its claim
to special ' gifts of the Spirit,' were as offensive to Church
men as were the pretensions of the Methodists. Bishop
Warburton, in his Doctrine of Grace, might have been
writing against a Montanist.
Mr. Urlin states that Wesley fixed upon the time of
Cyprian as presenting the best picture of the undivided
and primitive Church, and ' took this as the model for
imitation whenever he judged it necessary to supplement
the system of his own Church.' But we see no proof of
this. Wesley, especially in the later part of his career,
looked higher than the Bishop of Carthage for his example
of apostolicity. He was forty-two years of ageJWnrpj^
became satisfied that modern Episcopacy was not an
apostolical institution.2 In his early life in America his
ritualistic austerities made his life miserable, and his
ministry powerless. In 1756 he republished a tract on
Baptism which his father had written, and which plainly
1 Early Years of Christianity, iii., 107.
* By reading An Enquiry into the Constitution and Discipline, Unity and
Worship of the Primitive Church, that flourished within the first three
hundred Years after Christ, faithfully collected out of the extant Writings
of those Ages by an impartial Hand [Lord Chancellor King], 1713.

78 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
taught baptismal regeneration. Through life, as we know,
he declined to leave the Church, or to permit his preachers
to administer the sacraments.
The traces of this regard for" Church order, and for the
primitive forms especially, are impressed upon every part
of our system. The 'Agapae,' or love-feasts, which gradu
ally ceased in the post-apostolic Church, and were replaced
by the more formal participation of the Lord's Supper, he
recommenced. Here there burst forth a stream of testi
mony to the work of the Spirit of God upon the hearts of
living men which we may believe and pray will never
cease. Who can estimate the loss to the Church in past
ages, through the absence of opportunities for the free and
mutual declaration of religious conviction and feehng ?
Who can doubt that the modern quickening of spiritual
hfe in all the Churches is largely owing to the revival of
this primitive custom of ' fellowship ' among believers ? A
reference to commentators will show that something had
been lost out of the Church which had made it impossible
to understand what the apostolic noivwvla or fellowship
was.1 The original members of the Church were instructed
that they were under obligation to edify and encourage one
another in frequent mutual intercourse. They were to
' exhort one another day by day.' 2 The ' whole Church '
1 ' Am schwierigsten ist y-onaiix,' says Lechler, Apost. Zeit. (p. 285) : but
he is not content to limit it to mere breaking of bread, or to community of
goods. Wordsworth only sees in it ' visible communion with the Apostles ; '
Meyer (on Acts ii. 42), 'mutual brotherly association.' The Vulgate,
' perseverantes in doctrina apostolorum, et communicatione fractionis panis,
et orationibus,' changed the face of the original. Bengel has, 'in the com
munion of all good things external and internal, of actions and counsels.'
For fuller exposition see Dr. Gregory's Lecture, p. 74 f., who also elucidates
the history of the love-feast.
- Heb. iii. 13. ' The first disciples apparently united every day the Agape

Apostolicity. 79

should be ' assembled together ' for this purpose. ' Each
one hath a psalm, hath a teaching, hath a revelation, hath
a tongue, hath an interpretation ; ' but ' all things are done
unto edifying.' x In what other way can the gifts bestowed
upon every member of the Church be more effectively
exercised to the glory of God ? ' To each one is given the?
manifestation of the Spirit [in order] to profit withal.' 2
There were also other forms and services which Wesley
observed to have been in use in the early Church, but
long suspended, which he brought back for the benefit
of his people. The ancient vigils, or watch-nights, had
been observed among the Moravians. The ' quarterly
tickets ' of membership in the Society were intended to be
certificates of character : ' These tickets (the SvfifioXa or
Tessarse), as the ancients called them, being of just the
same force with eTrcarokal crvcrTaTiicat, or commendatory
epistles, mentioned by the apostle.' 3

with the Eucharist. ' (Dr. Plumptre in Smith's Bib. Diet, on ' Lord's Supper. ')
Cf. 1 Thess. v. 11, ' Exhort (¦zxpa.xxXuTt) one another, and build each other
up, even as ye do ' (*«<« xxi ^oiuti).' Liinemann misses the force of the
present, when he interprets : ' a laudatory recognition that the edification
had already begun with the readers. ' The same duty is urged in Eph. iv.
1-16 ; Col. iii. 16. Heb. x. 24, 25 reminds us of the connection between
the ' love, ' which gave its name to the 'Agape,' and 'good works,' xxtx-
vouift.ii xXXriXovs us irxpo\v0 poi xyxTt'/is ?.. xxXui '(pyoii, and the gathering of
Christians. The iaievixyuiyii, Bengel remarks, means that they should not
only ' attend the synagogue as Jews, but also the additional synagogue as
Christians. Nor is this simply gathering into one place, but mutual and
loving aggregation.'
' Perhaps their mode of life, in its form and habit, was not very unlike the
Unitas Fratrum, or the modern Methodists.' — Paley's Evidences, i., 1.
1 1 Cor. xiv. 26.
2 1 Cor. xii. 7. That is, not for the ' profit ' of the recipient only, but for i
the profit of the whole Church. On ¦>rpos=in order to, comp. 1 Cor. vi. 5, j
vii. 35, x. 11.
3 Plain Account, 1749 (p. 27).

80 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
But though Wesley was so deeply attached to the forms
of the ancient Church, and desired so earnestly to reproduce
and perpetuate them among his followers, he never imagined
that by external forms or practices a Church could be made
truly apostolical. After middle life he never held the view
that the Holy Spirit of God was confined to Church ordi
nances, or to a ministry descended by episcopal succession
from the apostles. But this is the Eomish and high Anglican
theory ; x and we must give it a moment's consideration.
As we have already said, all Christian Churches are, in
some sense, ' descended from the apostles.' Dr. Gregory
says : ' There is not a Nonconformist Church in this country
but can trace historically back to the ministry of St. Peter.'3
But the episcopalian claim is that the apostolical Church
was handed over by the apostles to bishops, and by them to
their successors, who alone had the power to convey Chris
tian grace to the members thereof. This grace is conveyed
by the sacraments.
We need not say that this is the confessed teaching of
Eome. Dr. J. A. Mohler, a distinguished Eoman Catholic
of Germany, says: ' The unity of believers is realized in the
Lord's Supper. There they are made one body . . . The
true faith, the true Christian confession is also conditioned,
according to the teaching of the oldest Church, through the
Holy Spirit and the impartation of the same through the
connection with the Church.' 3
1 ' None but the Bishop can unite us to the Father and the Son,' said
Dodwcll in his One Altar, etc., p. 387. 'The only ministrations to which
Christ has promised His presence is to those of the Bishops and the other
clergy acting under their sanction,' said Dr. Hook, Two Sermons.
2 Fernley Lecture, p. 164.
a Die Einheit in der Kirche, von J. A. Mohler, 1825 (pp. 3 and 11).

Apostolicity. 8 1

' You wish to know,' says Dr. J. H. Newman, 'whether the
establishment is what you began by assuming it to be, —
the grace-giving Church of God.' 1 ' The very idea of a
catholic Church, as an instrument of supernatural grace, is
that of an institution which innovates or rather superadds
to nature.' 2 Potter, the Bishop of Oxford, from whom
Wesley received Deacon's and Priest's orders (afterwards
Archbishop of Canterbury), puts the case most plainly in
his book, A Discourse on Church Government? He says of
Paul that ' in opposition to schismatics he proves himself
to be an apostle, both in the general sense of that name,
and particularly as he had been sent to preach the gospel to
them : " Am I not an apostle ? If I be not an apostle to
others, yet doubtless I am to you whom I have converted
and on whom I have conferred the gifts of the Holy
Spirit." ' Again : ' And thus he seems to have done at
Ephesus, where his preaching to twelve disciples who had
received John's baptism, and his conferring on them the
gifts of the Spirit, are expressly mentioned.' Yet more
exphcitly he adds : ' This naturally leads us to another
prerogative which belonged to our Lord, and afterwards to
the apostles, namely, the power of giving the Holy Ghost.'4
Pearson, on The Creed, says : ' Catholicism consisteth in

1 Difficulties of Anglicans, i., 166. 3 Ibid., i., 300.
3 Third edition, 1724, pp. 69, 72. C. Wesley thought highly of this
work in his earlier life: 'April, 1739. — I began Potter on Church Govern
ment . . . a seasonable antidote against the growing spirit of delusion.'
(Journal. )
4 Bishop Jeremy Taylor had said in his Episcopacy Asserted: 'To the
apostles he gave a plenitude of power ... by virtue of it, they received a,
power of giving the Holy Ghost in confirmation, and of giving His grace in
the collation of holy orders. . . . Episcopacy is not only a divine institu
tion, but the only order that derives immediately from Christ.'
F

82 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
universality — as curing all diseases, and planting all graces
in the souls of men.' We can only wonder that with such
instructors the Wesleys became evangelical at all. It is
hard for us to estimate the difficulties which lay in their
way to freedom.
Cyprian and Augustine were the authorities who finally
set up this unscriptural theory. They asserted, as Dr.
Gregory says, that the Church had the Holy Spirit in her
hands. But their way was prepared by some who had
gone before. Lgnatius had said : ' Except a man be within
the altar, he cannot have the bread of God.' The distinc
tion between the clergy and the laity made by Clement,
and the saying of Irenseus that ' where the Church of God
is, there is the Spirit,' 1 were soon reduced to the narrowest
meaning possible. By_ the end of the second century there
were_few who would not receive the doctrine attributed to
Ignatius, 'Without these [Bishop, Presbyter and Deacon]
the Church is not called.' " Soon it was orthodox to say
with Origen, Extra hone domum, id est, extra ecclcsiam,
nemo salvatur ; or, with Cyprian, Extra ecclcsiam nulla
salus. We have only space for one or two testimonies that the
same doctrines are now held and taught in the Church of
England. We need not add that the tenacity with which
these views are held, is the chief hindrance to a closer
unity among the English Churches. The Nonconformist
Churches, while claiming liberty for their own forms of
worship and Church order, do not unchristianize one
another. It is the Episcopalian alone who insists that
his ' orders ' have the sanction of Christ and the apostles,
1 Ilcvr., iii., 24. - Ad Trail, c. 3.

Apostolicity. 83

and that there is no grace of salvation promised to any
other. The question between the Churchman and the
Nonconformist differs specifically from any separating
Protestant Nonconformists from each other. The latter
are such as may be solved in practice : the former
lies too deep for this process.
Dr. Browne.1 Bishop of Winchester, — who is not regarded
as a man of extreme views, — thus speaks of the ' notes of
the Church : ' 'Its unity depends on unity of foundation,
unity of faith, unity of baptism, unity of discipline, unity
of communion. Its holiness springs from the presence of
Christ, the sanctification of the Holy Spirit, the graces
conferred upon its members by partaking of its sacraments,
and living in its communion. Its apostolicity results from
its being built on the foundation of the apostles and pro
phets, continuing in the doctrine and fellowship of the
apostles, holding the faith of the apostles, governed and
ministered to by a clergy deriving their succession from
the apostles.' There is scarcely any of these qualifications
which any true Nonconformist minister could not fully
accept. But it is clear from Dr. Browne's explanations
of them that he intends to exclude their application
to any Churches not under episcopalian direction. He
would not deny their application to the Eomish Church ;
but in the English Nonconformist Churches he would
decline to recognise them.
The famous Dr. Hook said : ' The apostolical succession
of the ministry is essential to the right administration of
1 Thirty-Nine Articles, 1878, p. 449. Dr. Browne quotes Cyprian and
others on ' Unity,' without a word of caution. His statements on Baptism,
p. 614, are very confused.

84 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
the Holy Sacraments.' That is : No other persons but those
in this ' succession ' can secure grace in the Sacraments ; no
others have the Holy Spirit. The Holy Spirit was a gift
bestowed upon the apostles. As Bishop Potter says, the
apostles ' conferred it ' upon their converts, and then
handed it down to their successors in the ministry. And
those who are in this ' succession ' alone have the Holy
Spirit to dispense in baptism, to impart in confirmation,
and in ordination. As Canon Liddon . has it, ' the apostles
had the power to transmit the ministry! l This is a claim
not merely to an authority to call men out to preach, or
to serve the Church, but to convey to them the spiritual
gifts which will alone make their ministry and priesthood
effective. Therefore, Dr. Hook is careful to say that ' the
clergy of the Church of England can trace their connexion
with the apostles by links not one of which is wanting
from the times of St. Paul and St. Peter to our own.' It
is of course important to be secure of the ' succession,' if
only those who can trace it from the apostles to themselves
possess true ministerial power, or, in other words, have the
Holy Spirit. Of what use would the ' succession ' be
without the spiritual endowment ? The Vice-President of
Cuddesdon College says : ' The gift of the Spirit is the
unifying principle, but the gift of the Spirit is dependent
on the laying on of apostolic hands, and therefore can
exist in its covenanted fulness only where the apostolic
organization abides. The Spirit has its " body of earth,"
nor where the body is not, can the Spirit be expected.' 2
1 Liddon's Sermon on the Consecration of the Bishops of Lincoln and
Exeter, April, 1885.
¦ Gore's Reply to Hatch's Bampton Lecture, 1882. It is worthy of

Apostolicity.

On this theory of sacramental grace, and ministerial right,
and exclusive spiritual prerogatives, so stubbornly main
tained, yet, as we think, so unscriptural in its character,
and so injurious to true Catholicism, we must say a few
words. 1. How degrading is this view of God's Holy Spirit!
Is not the Holy Spirit divine ? Is He not God ? Is He
not the third Person in the ever-blessed Trinity ? And,
can man give God to man ? Does God put Himself into
the hands of a human priest, that He may be distributed
among men ? x There are those who believe that the
prayers of a priest can ' extend the Incarnation ' — can
transmute sacramental bread and wine into the very Body
and Blood of Christ. They hold this, although the Scrip
tures teach that the humiliation of our Lord is at an end, and
that His Body is in heaven. They may also imagine that
the Holy Ghost, in all His personal dignity and glory, has
placed Himself at the disposal of a human priesthood.
But will not some be convinced that thus to think of the
Divine Spirit — as a grace or influence which men may
transmit — is to degrade a great truth ?
remark that the sentence, ' Receive ye the Holy Ghost, ' was not used in the
ordination service of the Church for many centuries after the apostles.
1 See an excellent article in the London Quarterly Review, April, 1869, on
Bishop Moberly's Bampton Lecture on The Holy Spirit. Bishop Moberly's
work is saturated with the doctrine that the Church (apostles and their
successors) distributes the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Only the ' twelve '
received the gift at Pentecost. By this theory, the writer of the article well
shows ' the Personality of the Holy Ghost is lost.'
No appeal can be'made to the linguistic rule of the New Testament, which
generally uses the article when the Holy Spirit is spoken of as a Person :
to mufi.x to xyioi. See Acts viii. 18 (R. V., not Westc), x. 44, xix. 6,
where the gift of the Spirit is connected with the prayers and iustrument-
ality of the apostles.

86 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Down to Wesley's days, and even to our own, there has
been very little attention paid by theologians to the doctrine
of the Holy Spirit. This neglect has been the cause of
enormous errors in the English and German Churches, as
well as in the older Church of Eome. An Anglican writer
has recently said that ' The theology of the third Person is
a department of sacred science in which the Church of
England is confessedly weak.' 1 Dr. Pope says : .' Indistinct
ness has prevailed on this subject in much of the theology of
earlier and later times. The offices of the Holy Ghost have

1 Rev. A. Gurney in The Church the Habitation of the Holy Ghost
(Rivingtons, 1882).
A small book is published by the C. K. Society, entitled The Nature
a)id Office of the Holy Ghost, by the Rev. S. C. Austen, M.A. It is chiefly
occupied with the exhibition of the Deity and Personality of the Spirit.
Mr. A. limits the Pentecostal gift to the ' twelve. ' The following gives his
view of sanctification : — ' He (the Holy Spirit) joins us to the human nature
of God the Word, that through it as by a ladder we may have access unto
the Father.' 'Our first reception, therefore, of the Holy Spirit is in
Baptism,' and 'the Eucharist is the great means by which we are most
closely united to the holy and pure humanity of our Blessed Lord.' 'It is
by the present existence of Christ's holy humanity, in personal union with
Deity, that man's sanctification is effected.' Such a view agrees better with
the Romish view of sanctification through sacraments, than with the evan
gelical and scriptural view of sanctification through the Word received by
intelligent fuith. The sacraments exhibit that Word, but cannot displace it.
We are reminded of Wesley's remark in a letter to his mother : ' We cannot
allow Christ's human nature to be present in the sacrament without transub-
stantiation, or something like it.' (Tyerman's Life of Rev. J. Wesley, i., 82.)
Of the clergy Mr. Austen says (p. 93) : ' They have also given to them
power to put in motion certain supernatural influences in the Church.
Whence the absolution pronounced by the priest is effectual, for God is
working by him . . . But, above all, he has received power to consecrate
/ the Holy Eucharist. By general consent of the Church this has ever been
confined to priestly hands. This was a point on which J. Wesley strongly
insisted, although in this as in many matters his followers differ greatly
from their master. '
Mr. Austen also states that ' the Wesleyan notion of the Spirit's working
makes His presence to depend too often upon the physical constitution and
natural temperament of the man. ' Verb. sap. suff.

Apostolicity. 8 7

been obscured by exaggerations of sacramental efficacy; and
His personal relation to the believer has been undervalued
in many systems.' 1 One of the few English writers on the
' Doctrine of the Holy Spirit'2 bears the following testimony:
' Germany seems to have abandoned this whole field, as if
it were no longer worthy of cultivation. There is not a
single work in the whole compass of German literature on
the office and work of the Holy Spirit, if we except the
unfinished work of Kahnis.' 3 This neglect he traces to the
dominant Sabellianism, to ' the utterly misplaced importance
attached to the sacraments, which has produced scarcely less
calamitous results, notwithstanding the evangehcal preaching
which prevails in Germany, than the same error has caused
in the Church of Eome.' 4 Here is evidently a weak
place in Protestant theology. Many of the Churches have
not even been able to interpret the mighty signs of this
century which have displayed the action of the Spirit of
God in all parts of the world. No Peter has stood up
amongst them to point to the Pentecostal tokens visible
on every side, and to say : ' This is that which hath been
spoken by the prophet Joel ; And it shall be in the last
1 Compendium, ii., 325 : also notes xvii., xviii. in his Fernl. Lect. See
remarks in Wesl. Serm. xi. on the paucity of writings on ' The Witness of
the Spirit. '
2 Smeaton on The Holy Spirit, p. 356.
3 Die Lehre vom heiligen Geiste, von R. A. Kahnis, erster Theil, 1847.
The second volume was never published. Kahnis was brought from
rationalism to orthodoxy. But he follows the Lutheran doctrine of the
sacraments. * Smeaton further says that ' The Lutheran Church, to maintain her
peculiar views of the Lord's Supper, is compelled to lay emphasis on the
alleged ubiquity of Christ's humanity. But by so doing they evacuate the
Spirit's work in that proportion. ' The Germans seem to regard the Holy
Spirit as the 'Spirit of the Church.' This accounts for the falling off in
other respects of the Church which Luther founded.

88 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
days, saith God, I will pour forth of My Spirit upon all
flesh : and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy,
and your young men shall see visions, and your old men
shall dream dreams : yea, and on My servants and on My
handmaidens in those days will I pour forth of My Spirit, and
they shall prophesy. ' 1 They have imagined that the free and
universal Spirit of God could be contained in institutions,
creeds, formulas, and rites. They have ' changed the glory of
the incorruptible God' the Spirit into the property of man.
Some have even dreamed, like Simon Magus, that this ' gift
of God ' could be gained by money.
2. This theory that the apostles, and their alleged
successors the bishops, had alone the power to ' transmit
the ministry,' confuses two things which differ. Authority
to call out ministers, to appoint elders to churches, is one
thing: the spiritual endowment by which men are qualified
to fulfil the ministry is another. No one disputes that
apostles had, within proper limits, the first. But what
we deny is that they could, by laying on of hands,
communicate the second. But Church writers regularly
confound these two things. Bishop Pearson, whose article on
the Holy Ghost, in his book on The Creed, is full of
argument on the Personality and Divinity of the Spirit,
fails at this point : ' The same Spirit which illuminated
the apostles, and endued them with power from above to
perform personally their apostolical functions, fitted them
also for the ordination of others, and the committing of a
1 ' Dr. Gibson, late Lord Bishop of London, in one of his charges, flatly
denies that God has wrought any " extraordinary work " in our nation ; nay,
affirms that to imagine any such thing is no better than downright
enthusiasm.' (Wesl. Serm. on laying the foundation of City Road Chapel,
April 21, 1777.)

Apostolicity. 89

standing power to a successive ministry unto the end of
the world.' This ' standing power ' means, of course, both
authority to employ others in the ministry, and to convey
to them the gift of the Spirit. The Spirit, which came
directly upon the first believers, now only comes indirectly
through bishops.1
3. The Scriptures do not support the view that men,
however holy or dignified, can confer the Holy Spirit
upon their fellow-men. The gift of the Spirit is always
spoken of as the act of God. The Old Testament tells us
that men were set apart for special duties, because the
Spirit of God was found in them.2 John the Baptist
was ' filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's
womb.' The Spirit descended at Pentecost, without human
mediation, in answer to prayer. ' All ' the disciples, male
and female, as well as apostles, were filled with the Holy
Spirit. What can be further from the genius of the New
Testament than to make the Holy Spirit, now freed from
the ritual formalities of Judaism, dependent upon new rites
or on a new priesthood ? Is this the freedom of which
our Lord spoke to Nicodemus, when He said of this breath
of heaven — no more to be controlled by man than the
grand movements of the physical atmosphere : ' The wind
bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the voice thereof,
but knowest not whence it cometh and whither it goeth ' ?
Of the Galatians (iii. 2) Paul asks : ' This only would I
learn from you, Eeceived ye the Spirit by the works of the
law, or by the hearing of faith ? ' Stephen and his six
brethren were chosen to attend to the ministration of the
1 Cf. John iv. 14 ; Rom. v. 5 ; Gal. iii. 2.
2 Joseph, Gen. xii. 38 ; Bezaleel, Ex. xxxi. 3.

90 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
poor, because they were ' full of the Spirit and of wisdom.'
The_'_lajing:pn of hands ' (Acts vi. 6) was, as is all true ordi-
nation, the Church's recognition of a divine gift, including
prayer for its confirmation and increase. The case of the
Samaritans (Acts viii. 18), which is usually cited in proof
that the apostles ' conferred the Holy Ghost,' does not
prove anything of the kind. Peter and John went down to
examine into the alleged conversions. The Church at
Jerusalem had not heretofore been in favour of preaching
the gospel among the Samaritans. It was a great step
when the Hellenistic Philip ventured to evangelize this
people. When the apostles found that the work was real,
but that they had not received the fuller gifts of the Holy
Spirit, they ' prayed for them, that they might receive the
Holy Ghost.' ' Then laid they their hands on them, and
they received the Holy Ghost.' But we cannot believe
that Peter and John would pretend that they had ' con
ferred the Holy Ghost ' upon them.2 In answer to their
prayer, and as a confirmation of the faith of the Samaritans,
the blessing descended. If any had suggested that they
had done this thing, would they not have said, as Peter
said about the miracle of the cripple, ' Why fasten ye your
eyes on us, as though by our own power or godliness we
had ' done it ? Was not this the folly of Simon Magus,
who imagined the Spirit to be a power somehow in the
possession of the apostles, and at their disposal ? That
i Acts vi. 3.
2 ' Neque enim aliquis discipulorum ejus dedit Spiritum Sanctum. Orabant
quippe, ut veniret in eos, quibus manus imponebant, non ipsi eum dabant.
Quem morem in suis praipositis etiam nunc servat ecclesia. ' (Augustine, De
Trin., lib. xv., 26.) In another place (De Bapt., iii., 16) Augustine says
that the gift is only bestowed in the Catholic Church.

Apostolicity. 9 1

which was the ' gift of God,' he, in his ignorance, supposed
might be bought with money and handled of men. More
over, if this power of the Spirit was something given to
apostles only, how was it that Ananias, who was only an
ord i n ary . Tnfym bp.r of the Church CHv Be Tt? /jlcjOwtiis), was
Sfint_to_lay. his hands upon the humbled Saul ? Does not
the ' ordination service ' proceed upon the supposition that
the gift of the Spirit has already been bestowed upon the
candidate ? Is he not asked whether he has been ' moved
by the Holy Ghost to take upon him ' this ' office and
ministration ' ? The call and the endowment are from
God ; the recognition and the employment of the gift are
with the Church.
The true account of the gift of the Holy Ghost is
supplied in the ' Acts ' and Epistles. By the apostles
it is attributed to the exaltation and priesthood of the
risen Lord. ' This Jesus did God raise up, whereof we all
are witnesses. Being therefore by the right hand of God
exalted, and having received of the Father the promise
of the Holy Ghost, He hath poured forth this which ye
now see and hear.' 1 When this apostle preached in the
house of Cornelius, the divine power did not wait for the
imposition of hands. Somewhat to his surprise it descended
as he ' began to speak.'
We cannot here attempt a full exhibition of the process
by which the apostolical doctrine on this point became
obscured. One indication of the error is given in the
disposition to exalt men, which appeared in Corinth2 and
Galatia,3 Successive phases of the eclipse of scriptural
1 Acts ii. 32, 33, xi. 15 ; cf. Eph. iv. 8-16. 2 1 Cor. i. 10-17, ii. 5.
3 Gal. iii. 5, etc.

92 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
and apostolical truth may be traced in Clement, Ignatius,
Irenseus, Cyprian, and Augustine. At length it ceased to
be recognised that justification was received through faith
in Jesus Christ, and regeneration by the word. Priests
had ' power and commandment ' to confer both on uncon
scious babes in baptism. The rcductio ad absurdum became
complete when it was reckoned a veritable enthusiasm for
any one to pretend that he had received the Holy Spirit ;
when it was concluded that not living, conscious men could
be the subjects of His direct action, but only the unknowing
infant.1 Adult believers were to be purified by penance, and
' edified ' by the mysterious grace of the Eucharist. Without
authority from a bishop neither of these could be effected.
Such dreams must surely vanish now that candid episco
palians like Bishop Lightfoot, Dr. Hatch, — and even some
Eomish writers,— ^admit that episcopacy was not absolutely
apostolical.2 The New Testament remains to confute the
1 ' In the desk the clergy prayed to God to cleanse the thoughts of their
hearts by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit ; in the pulpit they said there was
no such thing as inspiration since the time of the apostles.' (Wesley's Letters.)
2 Dr. Hayman, in the Dublin Review, Jan., 1S85, allows that Presbyterian-
ism was more apostolical than Episcopacy. The Rev. 0. Gore (Cuddesdon)
says that Prof. Hatch's 'theory is novel.' It may be to him; but the
position was asserted long ago by Jerome. It has only been reasserted by
Calvin, Daiilt;, Neander, Rothe, etc. Some one has said of the Tractarian
movement : 'Everything would have been different if Newman had known
German.' Canon Liddon refers, in support of his high theories, to
Beveridge's Canones, and to Pearson's Yindicite Ignatiance, as 'classical
authorities.' Mr. Gore says, in his reply to Dr. Hatch (p. 32): 'Perhaps
the best commentary on St. Clement's conception of the relations of the
bishop to the congregation in this matter [the Eucharist] will be found in
the apparently early account of the bishop's office in the Apostolical
Constitutions.' But is it well to make a 'forgery' (Dr. Hook's term) of the
4th or 5th century the interpreter of a sub-apostolic writer like Clement ?
We hope the science of Cuddesdon is more advanced than its theology ; but
there are symptoms that the best learning and sacerdotalism no longer keep
company.

Apostolicity.

pretension that the three cords of the ' Catholic ' ministry
existed in separate distinctness in the apostolic age, and
much more that they were then twisted into their final
firmness. Some would like to prove, if it were possible,
that the process was advancing under apostolic sanction.
' It is certain,' says Mr. Simcox, ' that the churches founded
by the apostles were originally presbyterian. It appears
that they became episcopalian without any revolution at
all. The system seems to have been introduced by St.
John in Asia.' 1 There is no real foundation for this
statement, though it is favoured by Bishop Lightfoot; who,
however, does not think that the ' Angels ' of the apocalyptic
churches were bishops.2 How then can episcopacy be a
mark of ' apostolicity ' ? If churches were presbyterian
in the beginning, and then thought so little of ' orders ' and
Church government that ' without a revolution' they became
episcopalian, what is the lesson ? 3
1 Beginnings of the Chr. Ch., p. 214.
2 Kostlin (Herzog, Real-Enk., ' Kirche ') and others object to this inter
pretation. Rothe (Anfdnge, p. 423), who holds the apostolic origin of
episcopacy, says of these 'Angels': 'In diesen Gemeinde-engeln glauben
wir eine Prolepsis der Bischof'e in der Idee zu erblicken. ' It would be a
daring 'prolepsis' indeed which could find monaichical bishops at the date
of the Apocalypse: see Lightf., Phil., p. 198. Most moderns regard the
' Angel ' as a personification of the Church : der personificirte Gemeinegeist
(Diisterdieck, Offenbarung, p. 138): 'the genius of the Church' (Farrar's
Early Days, etc., p. 439). This was Origen's view. Buddseus (Eccles.
Apost., p. 749) regards them as 'ruling elders.' Powell (Apost. Succ,
p. 59) takes 'Angel' 'in a collective sense.'
St. John, who is thus credited with the establishment of episcopacy,
calls himself in his later writings (2 Ep. 1 ; 3 Ep. 1), 'the elder,' —
o irpte-fiuTipo; : cf. 1 Pet. v. 1. The title 'describes not age simply but
official position ' (Westcott on 2 John 1).
* Mr. J. Brownbill (Naden student of St. John's College, Cambridge) says,
in his Principles of English Canon Law (p. 4), that ' The unit of the visible
Church is the diocese of which the chief ruler is called a bishop.' Also
(p. 7) : ' The constitution of the visible Church at the present day is

94 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
The ' logic of facts ' made its own impression upon the
clear understanding of John Wesley. Thousands of baptized
persons had evidently no effectual gift of the Spirit, but
were ' practically unregenerate.' r Hundreds of ordained
men neither preached the gospel nor obeyed it. The
Church which professed to have the Holy Spirit as its
peculiar and inalienable treasure, failed to recognise the
operations of the Spirit. But, apart from these Church
ordinances, in which he once trusted, he beheld a manifest
working of God upon men's souls. The power, which
attended the utterances of the Galilean fishermen on the
day of Pentecost, was present when humble and untrained
men lifted up their voices in village streets, in the upper
rooms of cities, in the dales of Yorkshire, on the pit-heaps
of Kingswood and Newcastle, or ' in the long galleries where,
in the pauses of his labour, the Cornish miner listens to
the sobbing of the sea.' 3 Men were regenerate who had
not been baptized. They, on whose heads no episcopal hand
had ever been laid, spoke God's word to their neighbours,
' not in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy
Ghost, and in much assurance.' 3 From all this, though
essentially the same as on the day of Pentecost.' Were the apostles, then,
all bishops, and had they dioceses 1
1 Browne on Thirty-Nine Art., p. 616.
2 Green's Hist, of the English People, iv., 146.
3 ' Our meetings for preaching and public worship were mostly held in
the kitchens of farm-houses and the cottages of labouring men. The preacher
usually stood behind a chair, the back of which supported a moveable desk,
upon which lay his Bible and Hymn-book ; the people standing or sitting
upon chairs, tables, stools, or chests of drawers, as the case might be. In
these humble sanctuaries the people worshipped God in spirit and in truth, as
their entire behaviour indicated. The sermons to which they listened
contained no elaborate phraseology, no disquisitions on dark and doubtful
questions, and no hard technical terms ; their substance being the essential
truths of Christ's gospel, and their garb pure Saxon English, which even the

Apostolicity. 95

he never despised Divine ordinances, he learned that God's
word was not bound by the hmitations of a human priest
hood. The Holy Ghost, freed of old from the limitations
of Judaism, was no more ' entangled by any yoke of
bondage,' which man's ignorance and sin had made necessary
in previous ages. He did not perfectly enter into this
spiritual freedom, which, however, he saw was at hand ; —
like Moses, who only came to Nebo and saw the goodly
land. But when he was ' gathered to his fathers,' our
Israel came into their inheritance.
These, then, are matters of history. In the course of a
century and a half, millions of men of almost every nation
have been evangelized, and gathered under the banners of
the Lord Jesus Christ. Time would fail to speak of the
' work of faith and labour of love ' accomplished in this
period. What zeal among the neglected populations of our
own land, what devotion among the heathen abroad ! Was
there ever more unworldly ' enthusiasm of humanity '
engaged in the service of the Church, a freer use of wealth
and talent for the benefit of the lowliest, or a more
abounding and incontrollable outpouring of charity toward
all men ? The fresh demonstration of the converting
power of the gospel has revived the faith of the Church in
its mission, and in the persuasion that God' will yet in our
world ' make all things new.' Millions of the selfish have
become beneficent and consecrated. Debased and degraded
populations have been at times simultaneously elevated
and transformed. Cannibals have forsaken and forgotten
their hellish longings ; idolaters, with one consent, have
children understood, delivered with a broad Yorkshire accent' (Life of
Rev. T. Jackson, p. 65).

96 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
broken the spell of their fathers' enchantments. Back
woodsmen, so far out in the forest or the prairie, that no
circle of civilization has included them, have been reached
by these lines which have ' gone out to the end of the
world.' Eed Indians, Tongese, Fijians, Kaffirs, Ceylonese,
Bengali, Chinese, Italians, Germans, Swedes, are at this
hour preaching the gospel which they have received
through us. How have these marvels been wrought ? If
the Church governed by bishops alone has grace, and can
alone dispense the Spirit, as Cyprian and Augustine, as
Laud and Beveridge, as Potter and Pusey and Liddon
affirm, by what power has this work been done ? Is Satan
at last divided against himself ? Does Beelzebub now cast
out devils ? We dare not believe this. Is there no danger
of committing the sin which our Lord said was 'unpardonable'
if we attribute these spiritual marvels to any power but that
of God ? We will not ' blaspheme against the Holy Ghost '
by ascribing these results — ' wide as the world,' which
glorify Christ in the salvation of men, to the evil power.
But those who trace their ' succession ' through a some
times half -mythical, and not always venerable, list of Popes
and Bishops, suggest that these gospel results may be of
God, but they are ' uncovenanted.' Or they say, they are
not called to ' judge them that are without.' ' If Dissenters
enjoy communion with Christ (and I rejoice in believing
that many do enjoy it),' says Mr. Ward, ' it is not through
their Church . . . but our Church is a channel of sacra
mental grace. A religious person . . . will fix his affec
tions immediately on the Church. . . . The English Church
will be to him the visible embodiment and channel of the
Lord's presence. . . . The creeds and Prayer-book have all

Apostolicity. 97

that the sinful soul can need ; all, that is, except supernatural
grace, and that our Church is also privileged to dispense.' 1
But when was this ' covenant ' made which ordained
that the Church when administered by a priesthood of three
grades should have supernatural grace in its sacraments
and services, but that none besides should claim it ? There
is not a word of this in Scripture. To any ' covenant of
grace' not mentioned there, the Eomanist and the
Eomanizer are welcome. But we cannot but think with
how much more countenance and verisimilitude the Jew
could have appealed to the Christian. He had a ' covenant '
which had stood for ' a thousand generations.' It had
come through Abraham, and Moses, and Prophets. How
could there be salvation without circumcision and the
keeping of the law ? 2 Was the believer going to break
with the past ? Would he forsake ' the congregation of
the Lord's people ' ? Could another temple be built as
sacred as that at Jerusalem ? Would the ' Eeal Presence '
be manifest at other altars ? Could any priesthood be
valid except that of the race of Levi ? How much more
real in cogency and pathos would be such appeals to tradi
tion, to authority, to Scripture even, than in the lips of
Gentile Christians, whose place in the Church has only been
won by the doctrine of the Cross,— a doctrine which implies
the surrender of the traditional principle ! Yet as these
were the arguments used against Paul and his converts,
and used against Luther and the Eeformers, so were they
used against Wesley and his people. They are used still.
1 Ideal of a Christian Church, 1844.
¦ 'Take heed, be not like some who say, "The covenant is ours"' (Ep.
Bam., c. 4). The Lat. vers, has ' dicunt : quia testamentum iilorum et
nostrum.' But the Greek, as above, is preferable.
G

98 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Finally, upon this point, let us ask, What have the
' Catholics,' who boast of their ' succession from the
apostles — not one link of which is missing,' more than
other Christians ? Have they the word of God ? So have
we. Have they the grace of the Holy Spirit when the
word is preached, convincing men ' of sin, of righteousness,
and of judgment ' ? So have we. Have they the forgive
ness of sins ? So have we, by the boundless mercy of God:
and not assured to us by the authority of priests, but ' the
Spirit Himself beareth witness with our spirit, that we are
children of God.' Do they find the throne of grace acces
sible in public and in private, and do they receive the
things for which they ask ? So do we ; though we are far
too unthankful for this condescension of God. When ' two
or three are gathered together' in Christ's name, is He 'in
the midst of them ' ? We can testify to the universal
Church that, in the fulfilment of this promise, the Lord of
glory has especially favoured us beyond ' all we could ask
or think.' Have they the sacraments of Baptism and the
Lord's Supper, by which admission to the Church, and
every benefit of salvation, is signified and attested ? Have
they a living ministry, a godly order and holy lives ? So
have we. Have they the ' fruits of the Spirit,' and do they
abound in faith, hope and love ? Have they zeal and self-
sacrifice ? Have they gifts of utterance, of demonstrative
speech, of exhortation and consolation, of counsel and know
ledge ? Do they ' rejoice in tribulation,' endure tempta
tion, ' fight the good fight of faith,' and do they triumph in
death ? Do they ' rejoice in hope of the glory of the Lord,'
and ' wait for the coming of the Son of man ' 1 All these
are ours. ' Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord

Apostolicity. 99

Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with every spiritual
blessing in the heavenly places in Christ.' x
Moreover, have we no place in the Church of Christ,
because, in the Providence of God, we are not formally
interwoven into the broken and riven unity, the history of
whose formation is associated with many a fraud, and
which is now fatally separated into three knotted and
tangled strands ? Do we break from Clemens Eomanus,
from Barnabas, from Irenaeus, from Justin the philosopher
' Dr. J. H. Newman (Anglican Difficulties, p. 88) says that, if he wished
to match the principal saints of his Church, he would go to the Wesleyans
rather than to the English Church. ' If you wish to find the shadow and
suggestion of the supernatural qualities which make up the notion of a,
Catholic saint, to WTesley you must go and such as him. Personally, I do;
not like him [alas !], if it were merely for his deep self-reliance and self-
conceit ; still I am bound in justice to ask, and you in consistency to answer, \
what historical person in the Establishnientj_during the whole three centuries,'
has approximated, in force, and splendour of achievements, toone who began;
by innovating^n_j^our_rules. and ended by contemning your authorities ?
He and his companions, starting amid ridicule at Oxford, with fasting and1
praying in the cold night air, then going about preaching, reviled by the!
rich and educated, pelted and dragged to prison by the populace, and con
verting their thousands from sin to God's service — were it not for their pride
and eccentricity, their fanatical doctrine and untranquil devotion, they
would startle us, as if the times of St. Vincent or St. Francis Xavierwere,
come again in a Protestant land.'
Both Dr. Newman and Dr. Manning would allow that the Spirit of God.
was in the spiritual results of Methodism. The latter, in his letter to Dr.
Pusey (Working of the Holy Spirit in the Ch. of Eng., 1865), and in his.'
Internal Mission of the Holy Ghost, argues that the Spirit is given to every
man. The Spirit in the Church dates from Pentecost : the Spirit in all men
dates from creation. It is con-ect to say with Irenaeus, ' Where the Church
is, there is the Spirit,' but it would not be true to say, ' Where the Church is
not, neither is the Spirit there.' This doctrine is elastic and convenient.
Another testimony from a writer of the same school is the following :
' Something of the Divine Spirit [was] in a work which issued in universal
progress. ... To see the progress of Methodism in every country where
the English Church has a place or name, must make us confess that if God
be not present in every single stage, nor in every positive act which was
necessary to be done in that progress, .still He could not have been altogether
absent.' (Bennett's Broken Unity, iii., 111.)

ioo Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
of Samaria, because we do not accept their interpretation
as infallible ? On the contrary, we believe these earliest
Christian writers to be really on our side.1 They have
been searched through and through for statements and
expressions which would justify sacerdotal and sacramental
theories. But their substance and the major part of what
they say are in favour of simple, spiritual religion. We
are ready to confess that their testimony on this supreme
topic has not been so amply used as it ought to have been.
But we do not despise, or intentionally separate from any of
these early fathers, — and, certainly, we do not wish so to
do in the least commandment of the kingdom of God.
Where are they who absolutely follow any of the ' Fathers ' ?
Do we not venerate the names of Tertullian and Oricen
yea, even of Cyprian and Augustine ? But we do not
feel that we are bound to accept the severity of the
¦Carthaginian ascetic, or the vagaries of the Alexandrian
exegete, or the Leviticalism of the Bishop of Carthage, or
the fatalism of the Bishop of Hippo.2 We are charmed
with the eloquence of Chrysostom as with that of Jeremy
Taylor, and have some appreciation for the learning of
i Wesley's Sermon at the Foundation of City Road Chapel.
- Tertullian magnified the ' apostolical succession,' but only in the interests
of pure doctrine. He said (De Pud., c. 21) that it is 'the Spirit which com
bines the Church,' and that ' the Lord has made the Church to consist in
three;' [Matt, xviii. 20]. The Church consists of 'a spiritual man and not
of a number of bishops : ' ecclesia spiritus per spiritualem homi,iem, non
ecclesia numerus episeoporum. The ' spiritual man ' was not always a cleric
before that time ; but subsequently the principle which Montanism hnd
contained was assimilated by the Church in its view of ordination. Cyprian
also can say : ' There is a brief way ... to put away error and to elicit
truth. For, if we return to the head and source of divine tradition, human
error ceases . . . if in any respect the truth have wavered . . . we should
return to our Lord and origin, and the evangelical tradition ' (Ep. lxxiii. 10).
Then, straightway, he begins to speak of the 'sacrament of unity.'

Apostolicity. 1 o I

Jerome as for that of Hammond and Beveridge. Thomas
a Kempis may teach us, as he taught Wesley, how we may
aspire to the ' Imitation of Christ.' Anselm and Thomas
Aquinas have yet lessons for us in the deep things of God.
Neither Hooker, Pearson, nor Butler, Andrewes, Hopkins,
nor Stillingtleet, nor yet Bossuet or Fenelon, is without
edification for us. Luther and Calvin are among our
instructors but not absolute dictators. We profit by
the calm, clear investigations of Dr. Lightfoot, by the
' picturesque wisdom ' of the lamented Dean Stanley, by
the ardent rhetoric of Canon Farrar; and we ask Ellicott,
Westcott, and others of their communion, to help us in the
study of the New Testament. Our want of learning and
want of leisure compel us to dependence upon them at
many points. And are we not indebted to such men as
Arminius, Grotius, Bengel ; to Neander, Meyer, Dorner,
Chalmers, Pressense, and Schaff? 'All are yours; whether
Paul or Apollos or Cephas. For ye are Christ's, and Christ
is God's.' Have not many of these whom we have men
tioned been thankful that God has set them free from the
intolerable bondage of Eome — that they have had the
privilege of seeking a deeper and broader catholicity than
Eome allowed ? We share their joy in this respect ; but
we think we have a yet greater gift of God than many of
them seem to have received. We seek spiritual unity of
Christ, than which we believe there is no other ' catholicity.'
For in Christ Jesus, ' neither circumcision, nor uncircum-
cision ' — and therefore, we think, neither Episcopalianism,
nor Presbyterianism, nor Methodism — ' availeth anything,
but a new creation.'

CHAP TEE V.

UNITY AND CATHOLICITY.
* I pray . . . that they may all be one. ' J
' Be studious of union — to which nothing is superior.'2
' Christ hath never appointed two ways to heaven.' 3
The noun ' unity ' is nowhere used in the New Testament
of the Church. It only occurs twice, and in one chapter —
Eph. iv. 3, 13. In the first we read of the ' unity of the
Spirit,' 4 which we are exhorted to keep ' in the bond of
peace.' In the second the 'unity of the faith' is mentioned.5
But it is not said of this, as of the former, that it is to be
kept (rvpelv). It is something for the Church to aim at,
and eventually to arrive at.G The ' one faith,' says Dr.
Dale, ' is not a common creed, but a common trust in
Christ for eternal righteousness and eternal glory. . . . The
1 John xvii. 21.
2 t*s iieio-ius tpp'ovriZ'-, ns aSSiv xfiuioi (Ignat. Ad Polyc). Dr. Hatch (Org. of
Early Ch., p. 188) says thatHegesippus (ap. Eus. H. E., iv., 22) is the first
to mention unity, a 'iioims ns ixxXno-txs, referring to heretics who spoke against
God and Christ. But was not Ignatius earlier than Hegesippus, whose date
is 120-180 ? Sec Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biog.
3 Bp. Pearson.
4 7\ llOTnS TOV WVSUfCUTOS. k IvOTftS TT,; TlffTSOJS.
*¦ po'ixpi xxrxvTwojfj.iv sis x.t.x. Kxrxirxo), only Acts and Epistles of Paul.
Phil. iii. 11, si iro>s xxtxitmoi us v. H-xvxtrTxtru ; ' If so be I might attain,' etc.
(Lightfoot). Oj' irxins (Eph. iv. 13) includes Jews and Gentiles. Meyer
and Alford quote Chrysostom : to miufcx tovs yUu xxi Tpovrois ^ixQopot; ^tur-
rtixirxs ivoi = The Spirit unites those who differ in race and customs.

Unity and Catholicity. 103
unity of the Church, according to Paul's conception of it, is
a unity of Spirit, not of external statesmanship. It actually
exists, notwithstanding differences of polity and differences
of creed. . . . The unity does not merely exist ... it has
been manifested — is manifested in a remarkable unity of
doctrine, in a common ideal of ethical perfection ... in a
new and original type of the religious life.' J
It was because the ' unity ' of the Church was of the
' Spirit ' that it could comprise into ' one body ' men of
different races and of different opinions, who worshipped
God under a great diversity of religious observances.
Between the Jew and the heathen usually there was deep
and unconcealed dislike.2 A Jew ' would not so much as
eat with ' a Gentile. Peter told Cornelius ' how that it is
an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to join himself
or come unto one of another nation' (Acts x. 28). On his
return to Jerusalem ' they that were of the circumcision
contended ' with him upon this point. Hitherto the Church
had consisted entirely of Jews. A great step towards
universality was gained when the Italian Cornelius- — -a
proselyte of the gate — was admitted by baptism into the
Church. Subsequently, at the great Council of Jerusalem,
the ' necessary things,' imposed by decree upon the Gentile
Christians, were only those which had been required from
this class of proselytes.3 Even then the original Christians
did not think it possible for any to be admitted to the
1 Lect. on Ephes., p. 290. Cf. Farrar, E. Days ofCy., p. 136.
2 Tiberius banished Jews with other oriental religionists — nisi certam ante
diem prof anos ritus exuissent (Tac. Ann., ii., p. 85). Juvenal (Sat. xiv., 96)
derides the Jews who observe Sabbaths and nil prceter nubes et cmli numen
adorant ; who eat no pork, practise circumcision, and are impatient under
Roman laws : Odio humani generis eonvieti sunt (Tacit. Ann., xv. , p. 44).
3 Ritschl, Entstehung, p. 129.

104 Methodism in the Light of the Early Chtirch.
Church without some recognition of the ancient law. The
apostles themselves, who had been sent to ' disciple all
nations,'1 did not know at first how any one could become
a Christian who had not submitted to Jewish rites.
But St. Paul was entrusted with another ' dispensation
of the grace of God.' 2 It announced that the Gentiles,
without being Judaized, should be ' fellow-heirs and fellow-
members of the body.' This dispensation had been ' from
all ages hid in God, who created all things,' and who now
' remembered the work of His own hands.' The nations
that had been ' alienated from the commonwealth of Israel,'
were ' made nigh in the blood of Christ,' and admitted
into the citizenship of the heavenly Jerusalem. Through
Christ the middle wall of partition was broken down ; the
enmity, which was produced and sustained by 'the law of
commandments contained in ordinances,' was abolished ;
and both the Gentiles who had been far off from God, and
the Jews who had been nigh, now had ' access,' without the
ancient ceremonies — ready to pass away, ' in one Spirit
unto the Father.'
This was the ' unity of the faith ' — the unity which faith
implied and indicated, and to which Paul desired that all
believers should come. They did not ' come to ' this visible
unity in his day, nor have they in ours. The forced unity
of Eome was but a transient counterfeit of it. During the
apostolic age some believers retained the observance of
every Jewish rite. Some persisted, no doubt, in the
observance of the decrees of Jerusalem.3 Most Gentiles
1 fixQriTtvaxTt TtxiTx -x 'itlin. 2 Eph. iii. 2.
3 It is singular that the ' decrees ' are never referred to in the writings of
St. Paul. No reference to them occurs in the subsequent controversies.

Unity and Catholicity. 105
ceased from attempting to conform to Jewish practices. So
there was diversity in unity. One man had faith to eat all
things, esteemed every day alike, while another ate only
herbs lest he should be defiled, and observed days and
months, seasons and years. But the ' unity of the Spirit '
was not broken by these distinctions. We must not
confound the ' one faith ' which all must of necessity have
— both Jews and Gentiles — with the ' unity of the faith,'
to the realization of which in the time to come all may
look. The ' one faith ' 1 was the common, subjective trust
in Jesus as Messiah and Saviour, which made its possessor
a Christian. At this point unity existed, and exists still.
This is the unity in the Church which the men of this
world have detected. On account of it ' the disciples were
first called Christians at Antioch ' 2 by men outside the
1 ' To make of Tims the doctrine of the faith, is at variance with linguistic
usage' (Meyer). 'To assume a meaning doetrina fidei is everywhere
superfluous' (Cremer, Lex.). Such a passage as 'the faith,' Gal. i. 23, does
not make it = Christianity, the objective gospel. Those Christians who
denied the apostleship of Paul and the Church position of his followers,
would scarcely receive his views of justification, or even of the Person of
Christ. The following from the Canon of Muratori (a.d. 170) is worthy of notice :
' Though various ideas (varia principia) are taught in each of the Gospels, it
makes no difference to the faith of believers, since in all of them all things
are declared by one sovereign Spirit (uno ae prlncipali Spiritu), concerning
the nativity, the passion, the resurrection,' etc. As long as the Creed referred
only to the facts of Christianity, there was substantial unity ; when the creeds
began to include theories upon the facts, division began. On some of these
points the Lecturer may be allowed to refer to a paper read before a ' Ministers'
United Meeting ' in Newcastle, and published in the Methodist Magazine,
Dec, 1861, entitled ' An Apology for Sects.'
2 The hearers of our Lord and the earliest of the apostles were called
' disciples.' One of the last seems to have been ' Mnason of Cyprus, an early
disciple.' The name ' Christians ' was not likely to have been given by Jews.
Amongst themselves, believeis were called brethren, faithful, saints. The
R. V. suggests that thus early (circ. a.d. 43) this Roman name was applied.
This would account for the fact that soon afterwards Christians were

106 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Church. The world still calls every one a Christian who
professes the faith of Christ; and thus conveniently classifies
these in distinction from all who may call Confucius, or
Buddha, or Mahomet, their master.1 But this is a secular
conception of the unity of Christians. Yet it is the only
' visible unity.' The Eomanist contends that there is a
visible unity, and that it is in his Church. But apart from
every other objection — and several which appeal to Scripture
and authority are fatal to such a notion — we can appeal to
the judgment of the Eomanist himself. Does he allege
that every one who professes to be a Eoman Catholic is a
real Christian ? He is compelled to admit that there may
be hypocrites in his communion. But these persons are
part of the ' visible Church.' Therefore the visible Church
is one thing, and the true Church is another. If he says
that he means only good Eomanists, he is speaking of a
unity which is not visible.2
distinguished from other Jews by the Roman authorities (Ewald). Gieseler
(Ch. Hist., i., p. 73) and others think it was given in ridicule. If so, its
origin was like that of 'Methodist' Certainly this was the name which
persecution aimed at : Tacit. Ann., xv., 44 ; 1 Pet. iv. 16 ; Tert. Apol, 3 ;
Eus. H. E., v., 1. The pseudo-Ignatius (Ad Magn., x., and Ad Antioch.)
and other unfounded Church tradition, which Bishop Wordsworth follows,
suggest that the name was given by the Lord. Ignatius, Ad Rom., c. iii.,
is the first to use the term ^.pnrrix>io-/xos. ' This new name likewise comes
from Antioch ' (Westcott, On Canon, p. 33), as well as that of ' the Catholic
Church' : ' Wherever Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church ' (Ignat.,
Ad Smyrn., c. viii.).
1 ' The \xxXwrlx is the company called out from the mass by the preaching
of the completed redemption of the Incarnate Mediation. It is the Church
as gathered from the world ; it is the congregation as assembled together ;
it is the fellowship as replenished with common gifts' (Pope's Compendium,
iii., p. 263).
2 It would be difficult for the first disciples to think that the ' one flock '
would be anything but a Jewish unity (Farrar's St. Paul, p. 78). In after
days, the text, John x. 16, was wrested, like many others, to the service of
Eome. The old Latin vnvs grex, one flock, was supplanted by unum ovile,

Unity and Catholicity. 107
The Anglican pretension that theirs is the only true
Church in these islands, is denied by the Church of Eome
as well as by others. The wholesale perversions of the last
half-century show how feeble are the Anglican arguments
against the subtleties and zeal of Eome, which can urge
the plea of the ' twofold ground of safety.' The Anglican
admits that Eome is a branch of the true Church of Christ.
He who goes to Eome has the assurance of Anglican
opinion on his side. He who remains in the Anglican
fellowship has the disadvantage of being under the ban of
Eome, which at the same time he is taught to regard as a
veritable branch of the Catholic Church.
It may be said that Nonconformists allow that Eomanists
can be saved, and that therefore the same reasoning ought
to lead them to Eomanism. But there is this difference.
The Nonconformists do not hold that membership in any
Church of itself secures salvation. The Eomish and Anglican
doctrine is that only members of their Church are certain
of salvation. Where families and congregations, candidates
for confirmation and ordination, are sedulously taught that
they must either be in the Eomish or in the Anglican
Church to obtain salvation, no wonder that Eome is often
chosen, since her fold is recommended on both sides.
one fold : ' a disastrous translation, which invested unity in the outward
enclosure, instead of in the common attachment to one shepherd ' (Westcott).
It was easy to make the Pope, rather than Christ, the unus pastor.
1 A typical case, one among hundreds, is that of the Rev. J. K. Stone
(formerly President of the Kenyon College, Ohio), an American Episcopalian.
The French edition of his work, L'Invitalion aceeptie, Motifs d'un Retour a
V Unite' Catholique, has an introduction from M. Mermillod. The several
steps of the easy process from Anglicanism to Romanism are naively described.
When the Church is set above Scripture, it is not difficult to demand
subjectio ad legilimum pastorem, Romanum pontiflcem (Bellarm. De Eccles.
Milit., iii., 2).

108 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.

Methodists and Nonconformists have furnished few acces
sions to the older Catholics during the last fifty years.
Those who have passed over from them have usually been
prepared by some experience of Anglicanism.
The ' outward and visible ' unity of the Church, then,
consists of ' all who profess and call themselves Christians.'
The value of the expression is that of a simple, general
term, by which the observer formulates his conception of
the Christian community, which he finds among other
phenomena of time and space. No one can point to any
' visible unity ' and say : ' These make up the true Church ;
every one within this number is a member of Christ's
body — all without it have no part in Him.' This would be
to apply to the phenomenal the predicates of the real.1
Further, such a doctrine of unity ignores the fact of human
responsibility. ' Not every one that saith unto me, Lord,
Lord, shall enter into the kingdom.' 2 But they are all in
the ' visible Church.' The gospel is sent out with the
sanction, ' He that believeth shall be saved,' and not ' every
one called a Christian shall be saved.' 3 ' The unity of the
Church has but one ground, that of a common union with
Christ.' 4
The real Church, or the real unity, like the real universe,
1 ' Katholicismus von seiner empirischen Kirche behaupt was nur der
idealem zukomme' (Kiisttin: Herzog, R.-E. 1880, art. Kirche).
2 The Rev. A. Barrett, in his Ministry and Polity of the New Testament,
1854, p. 40, distinguishes between the Church and the Kingdom. The
former is outward and visible ; the latter is ' The company of Christ's faithful
disciples and subjects. ' But in Matt. xiii. the Kingdom seems to be more
comprehensive than the Church. Cf. Dr. Gregory's Lecture, pp. 112-121.
3 ' If by external profession they be Christians, then they are of the visible
Church' (Hooker, Eec. Pol., iii., 1).
* Pope's Compendium, iii., 26S.

Unity and Catholicity. 109
is that which is known to God only. He searches all
hearts, and ' knoweth them that are His.' The Good
Shepherd ' calleth His own sheep by name, and leadeth
them out.' To this higher unity, as St. Paul teaches, the
Church hopes to come. He foresaw that in Christ's own
future the Church should attain this perfection, and be
presented to Him ' a glorious Church, without spot or
wrinkle, or any such thing.' In it the divisions caused by
the bias of education, by antagonisms of race, by antipathies
of history, would cease. But this can only be in the Church
when it answers to the purpose of God — in that ' new man,
which is being renewed unto knowledge after the image of
Him that created him : where there cannot be Greek and
Jew, circumcision and uncircumcision, barbarian, Scythian,
bondman, freeman, but Christ is all, and in all.' (Col. iii.
10, 11.)
Catholicity is not the same as unity. They may be
correlative ideas, but they are somewhat independent.
Unity endeavours to subjugate all particulars to the
general ^catholicity or universality seeks to apply the
general to particular cases. Unity was the watchword of
the Jerusalem Church under Peter and James ; universality
was that of the catholic-spirited Paul, who sought 'to
gather into one ' all nations. No one disputes that the
primitive Church had unity ; but full catholicity it had
not, nor has it yet attained it.
When we hear Eomish and Anglican authors speaking so
boastfully of the oneness of their belief and practice as
distinguished from the uncertainty and contradictoriness
which belong to Dissenters, we cannot but ask how it was
in this respect with the primitive Church ? Did they

no Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
' sweetly think and speak the same ' ? What are the facts ?
For the first ten years after Pentecost, the only Christians
were Jews. Even among these there arose at length a
difference between native Jews and foreign Jews, which
issued in the appointment of Hellenistic Church officers,
and by no very remote connection in the martyrdom of
Stephen.1 Then Philip went to Samaria, where he preached
the gospel, and many believed, who would never come to
Jerusalem to worship, but would, most likely, continue to
follow Samaritan rites. About a.d. 41, Cornelius, an Italian
proselyte, was added to the Church ; and, ten years later
still, the Jerusalem Council agreed to impose upon Gentile
converts only the usual observances required from ' prose
lytes of the gate.' By this time Paul was proclaiming to
Galatians, Ephesians, and Corinthians, the free gospel. He
was bold enough to say that it was retrogression in Gentiles
to adopt Jewish ceremonies. ' Ye are severed from Christ,
ye who would be justified by the law ; ye are fallen from
grace.' 2 In a.d. 64, it is believed, Peter and Paul laid
down their lives for Christ. What was the condition of
the Church at their death ? Did Christians all meet in one
place ? Was there one elder over every Church ? Was
there one presiding elder or bishop over every group of
Churches ? No one can make such an assertion. All that
can be ventured is that ' Episcopacy was beginning to make

1 Farrar's St. Paul, p. 82, who, with Conybeare and Howson, refers to the
fact that Stephen, himself a Hellenist, had come into collision with members
of several synagogues, particularly that of Cilicia, of which Saul of Tarsus
would probably be a member. ' Neander has rightly followed Baur in
regarding Stephen as the predecessor of St. Paul' (Lechler, p. 334). See
Neander, Planting, etc. ,1, pp. 48-54.
2 Gal. v. 4 ; Col. ii. 16, 17.

Unity and Catholicity. in
an appearance.' x Bishop Lightfoot also defers the fuller
recognition of it to St. John, who lived to a later time in
Asia. But if episcopacy, in the modern sense of the word,
is not apostolic, how can it prove apostolicity, or how can
it be the sovereign sign of Christian unity?
We see then that, when the chief apostles died, —
1. The Christians did not all hold the same opinions
in matters of doctrine.
2. They did not all worship with the same rites.
Some were Jews, who still worshipped at Jeru
salem, and insisted on every Mosaic or even
traditional enactment. Others were ' proselytes
of righteousness,' who were very zealous for the
law which they had adopted, and whose principal
sign, ' circumcision,' they had received. Others
were ' proselytes of the gate,' who ate no meat
1 ' At the close of the apostolic age the two lower orders of the threefold I
ministry were firmly and widely established ; but traces of the third and J
highest order, the Episcopate properly so called, are few and indistinct.'
(Lightfoot, Phil., p. 193.) Dr. Jacob (Eccles. Pol., p. 75) opposes the view,
borrowed from Tertullian, that St. John appointed bishops. On page 47 he
shows how the original ' ministry of gifts ' was gradually displaced by the
' ministry of orders.' Dr. Curteis (Church and Dissent, p. 27) cleaves to the
other theory : ' From amid the chaos of Gnostic sects there had sprung up,
under the inspired guidance of St. John and his immediate disciples, the
Episcopal system of that Church, which was destined to be the unbroken
bond of union and guarantee of freedom amid the storms of a thousand
years.' He refers to Tert. Contra Marc, iv. , 5 : Ordo Episcoporum ad
orirjinem recensus in Johannem stabit auctorem : ' The order of [Asiatic]
bishops, when traced to its origin, will rest on John as its author.' But (1)
this is a mere supposition of Tertullian, who gives no proof; (2) all that
Tertullian asserts is that these Churches had received the gospel from
apostolic men ; (3) the presbyters in John's time were called bishops
also. Episcopacy cannot claim an inspired origin in this way. (4) Who
can prove that there was a ' chaos of Gnostic sects ' so early as this would
imply ?

1 12 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
sold in heathen shambles, and attended the syna
gogue for instruction in the law. But an in
creasing number had entered into free and
spiritual Christianity. They did not keep the
Jewish sabbaths or feast - days : to them ' all
things were pure.' 1 As the number of Christians
increased, and tlieir divergence from ordinary
Jewish opinion became manifest, new synagogues,
predominantly Christian, would be opened. In
these first Christian assemblies, no doubt, Gentile
influence would soon, in many countries, be
supreme.
3. In the larger churches, the convention of persons
holding different opinions caused frequent con
fusion. This was the case at Eome.2 At Corinth,
the whole Churcli was divided.3 There is no
clear or satisfactory history yet of these strifes
between the various parties in the early Church.
But to deny them is absurd.
Yet all these opposed sections of the first Christian
society, with their differing proclivities and habitudes,
were held together by tlieir common allegiance to the
Lord Jesus Christ. His name was yet ' above every
name.' At His name, all bowed in submission. Paul anil
Peter and Apollos were but ' ministers ' by whom the
hearers of the gospel had believed. The Petrinists would
1 Tit. i. 15 : txutx xatiapx t. xxQapois. 2 Rom. xi. 13, xiv.
3 1 Cor. i. 12: '(xxo-tos l>f*.ui xiyti : 'each one of you saith.' Chrysost.
says: 'The corruption has spread over the whole Church.' The same
Church, according to Clement, Ep., i. 47, at a later period had been the
scene of a ' sedition against its presbyters.'

Unity and Catholicity. 1 1 3
have liked to exclude the Paulinists as ' unauthorized,'
' Dissenters,' and the like. When Paul began to hold
meetings in the ' school of one Tyrannus ' at Ephesus,
it would be sneered at as a ' conventicle ; ' and when ' for
two whole years in his own hired dwelling ' at Eome he
' received all that went unto him, preaching the kingdom
of God, . . . none forbidding him,' some would doubt
less look upon it as a dreadfully schismatic proceeding.
Were there not synagogues ? 1
The idea of the Church and of its worship which was
most favoured by the ' Fathers ' and Church leaders from
the second century onwards was that of the temple with
its hierarchy. St. Paul had already drawn an analogy
between the priests of the temple and the ministers of
Christian congregations.2 ' Know ye not that they which
minister about sacred things eat of the things of the
temple, and they which wait upon the altar have their
portion with the altar ? Even so did the Lord ordain that
they which proclaim the gospel should live of the gospel.'
But while the two classes had a resemblance at one point,
viz. that they ministered to the people, and therefore had
a right to be maintained by the people, how careful he is
to show the distinction in their duties ! The one serve ' the
altar,' 3 for it had not yet been abolished. If the ' table
of the Lord ' had been regarded as an altar upon which the
' daily sacrifice ' was offered, such an expression would
1 Acts ii. 46: xxt oTxoi. Strauss thought this incompatible with 'continu
ing stedfastly with one accord in the temple. ' There were churches in houses
everywhere ; see Rom. xvi. 5 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 23, xvi. 19 ; Col. iv. 15 ; Philem. 2.
Lechler (Nachap. Zeit., p. 282) supposes that the house-to-house ' fellowship '
first began to distinguish the Christians from other Jews.
2 1 Cor. ix. 13, 14. J « rS lusixHTnpif irx^piionss.
II

1 14 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
have been wholly out of place. But the calling of the
minister was ' to preach the gospel.' Since all the people
of God were now ' priests,' the only office to which he
could have pretended was to be high priest. But ' no
man taketh the honour unto himself, but when he is called
of God, even as was Aaron.' The High Priest of the
Christian had entered the true sanctuary in heaven.
During the period in which the temple and its ritual
survived, the Christian ' elders ' could take no part in its
services except as worshippers. The synagogues of the
holy city, and those in other cities where they happened
to be, were open to them. It is very probable that the
Christian meetings in private houses were conducted
upon the plan of the worship of the synagogues.1
Among Gentile Christians the free and informal style of
worship would be usually followed.2 It is not until the
end of the first century that any regulations with regard
'to Christian worship were laid down : that is, so far as
(our information goes.
When Clement made his famous comparison between
the Jewish priests and Christian ministers, he was pro
bably as far from ascribing any sacerdotal prerogatives to
the latter as St. Paul was. But, as we have shown else
where, his language has been interpreted in favour of
those prerogatives. However, he did plead that Christian
services should be observed at stated times and places ;
and he speaks of the ' elders ' and ' bishops ' as those who

1 Jas. ii. 2, o-aixyoiyri = Christian assembly (Alford ; Huther ; Bengel,
Nomen Judceis ad Christianos traeluctum).
2 1 Cor. xiv. ; Pliny's letter to Trajan, x., 27 ; Schaff, Hist, of Ch., i.,
458-460.

Unity and Catholicity. 115
' offer the gifts.' 1 In the Epistles of Ignatius we read of
' the altar.' The temple at Jerusalem was now no more,
but the new worship had come in its place. Irenaeus
speaks of ' the oblation of the Church,' but he only means
the free-will offerings of the people, and adds that 'the
altar is in heaven.' 2 Justin^ Martyr 3 says that thei
Eucharist was consecrated with praise and prayer by
' the president of the brethren,' but handed round by
' those who are called by us deacons.' This is a remark
able testimony from the middle of the second century.
It shows that in the Churches with which Justin was
acquainted there were no ' priests,' and, so far as he relates,
only two orders of ministers. When we come to the false
writings which passed under the name of Lgnatius, sacer
dotalism is more plainly expressed. 'Do nothing with
out the bishops, for they are priests. They baptize,
perform priestly office, ordain and lay on hands.
Bjj^abas, while speaking of the abolition of the Jewish
temple and sacrifices, says that God now requires a
spiritual temple within us, and ' a human oblation.' 5 That
singular but interesting book, the Pastor of Hermas,
could not have been written by the person mentioned by
St. Paul,6 for he speaks of there being ' bishops, teachers
and deacons' in the Church.
1 The use of the present in Ep. Clem., 40 et al., e.g. Xt'ixuitxi, is sufficient
to raise a doubt about genuineness. It professes to have been written
while the temple was standing. But see Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biog. ,t, 556.
2 a.d. 170 (Cont. Hozr., iv., 18). '¦' a.d. 150 (Apol., i., 65).
4 Ep., to Hero, ch. iii. s Ep., ch. xvi.
6 Rom. xvi. 14. The Tubingen writers generally claim Hermas as an
Ebionite, but this cannot be maintained. The older writers regarded him as
the friend of St. Paul. Zahn, Dr. Salmon (Smith's Diet, of Christ. Biog.),
and others, hold that he lived in Clement's time. But the Muratorian
Canon says he was brother of Pius, Bishop of Rome, a.d. 140.

4

1 1 6 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
The account given by Tertullian1 of the Christian
worship in his day is so striking that we will reproduce it
here in an abridged form. ' We are a body knit together
as such by a common religious profession, by unity of
discipline, and by a common hope. We congregate that,
offering up prayer to God unitedly, we may wrestle with
Him. . . . We assemble to read our sacred writings. . . .
In the same place also exhortations are made, rebukes and
sacred censures are administered. . . . The tried men of
our elders preside over us, obtaining that honour not by
purchase, but by character. . . . On the monthly collection
day, if he likes, each puts in a small donation, but all is
voluntary. . . . They are wroth with us because we call
each other brethren. . . . Yet about the modest supper-
room ' of the Christians alone, a great ado is made. Our
feast explains itself by its name. The Greeks call it love."*
Whatever it costs, our outlay in the name of piety is gain,
since with the good things of the feast we benefit the needy.
. . . Before sitting down, we pray. . . . After partaking and
washing of hands, lights are brought in [for reading]. Each
is asked to stand forth and sing, as he can, a hymn to God,
either one from the Holy Scriptures or of private composition.
As the feast commenced with prayer, so with prayer it is
closed.' Such was the worship of Christians in North Africa
towards the end of the second century. Certainly, Tj^rtallian f
speaks of the ' three orders,' and forbids the layman to '
1 Apolog., c. 39 (a.d. 200).
- Could he have said this if the ritual of the Eucharist had approached
the character it assumed in after days ?
3 Tertullian wrote in Latin. He here refers to the Greek name of the
'love-feast,' i.e., 'Ayxorn.

Unity and Catholicity. 1 1 7
usurp the duties of the bishop.1 He calls the bishop the
summus sacerdos or chief priest. But this only seems
to be in reference to the fact that all Christians are priests.
If all were priests, then the presiding elder, or overseer
of the Church, was ' chief priest.' 2 Such expressions,
torn away from their context, have served the purpose of
centuries of sacerdotalists.
In his treatise on ' Prayer,' 3 Tertullian uses language
which shows that the later notions of a ' sacrifice ' in the
Eucharist, with its associated superstitions, had not yet
been dreamed of. 'Every institution is excellent which,
for the extolling and honouring of God, aims unitedly to
bring Him enriched prayer as a choice victim. This is the
spiritual victim which has abolished sacrifices. God is a
spirit, and requires His adorers to be such. We are the
true adorers and the true priests (veri sacerdotes), who,
praying in spirit, sacrifice in spirit, the victim being prayer
to God. This [offering] devoted from the whole heart, fed
on faith, tended by truth, entire in innocence, pure in
chastity, garlanded with love, we ought to escort with the
procession of good works, amid psalms and hymns, unto
God's altar, to obtain for us all things from God.' This is
only imagery, borrowed partly from Jewish and partly
from heathen worship. But the advocates of externalism
have found it convenient to give it a literal significance.
It is said that Cyprian, was a professed disciple of
Tertullian. ' Give me the Master,' he said, when asking
for one of his books. He was a bishop in the same
1 De Bapt., c. xvii.
2 De Ex. Cast., c. vii. : ' Nonne et laici sacerdotes sumus ? '
J Tert. De Orat., xxvii., xxviii.

1 1 8 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
country, but lived half a century later. During that
period great changes took place in the political and
religious world. The number of believers was greatly
multiplied, and the rich and learned were beginning to
join the Church. It was necessary to adapt the forms of
worship to the taste of the cultured class, and to bring
Church government into systematic order. Cyprian, who
had native genius, cultivated ability as a rhetorician, and
distinguished social position, though he only joined the
Church in middle life, was at once placed in the highest
office. Being fifty years old when he commenced the
Christian profession and ministry, he could not, during the
few remaining years of his troubled life, adequately acquaint
himself with the history, literature, and best traditions of
Christianity. But he has become the ' guide, philosopher,
and friend ' of the sacerdotal party in the ' catholic Church.'
He happened to be caught with the idea that the Christian
ministry is the natural successor of the Jewish priesthood.
Whatever is said in the Old Testament of the Levitical
priests, he concluded to have a further application to
Christian priests. Since the priests of Israel were chosen
in sight of all the people, so ought bishops.1 They who
resist the priest, or who attend the services of a bishop
under censure,' are liable to the charge of Korah and his
company.2 ' The bishop is in the Church, and the Church
is in the bishop ; if any one be not with the bishop, he is
not in the Church. . . . The Church is catholic and one,
1 Epistle Ixvii. (Ant.-N. Lib., viii., 23S).
2 Epistle lxvii., i (Ant.-N. Lib., viii., 239). The influence of this opinion,
that the priests should be governed by Levitical regulations, is stamped
upon the Apostolical Constitutions and Canons ; e.g. Canon 63 forbids the
presbyter to cat flesh with blood.

Unity and Catholicity. 119
is not cut nor divided, but is indeed connected and bound
together by the cement of priests who cohere with one
another.' This is Cyprianism — not Christianity. It is not the
theology either of Paul or of Peter ; of the Apostle John,
or of Barnabas, or of Clement. But it has ministered to
the intolerance and exclusiveness of Eomanism and
Episcopalianism through all their fateful history. The
teachings of Christ have been kept in the background ; the
doctrines of Paul have been discouraged ; and this half-
instructed, dogmatic bishop of Carthage has been made
ecclesiastical dictator to the heritage of the Lord. When the
Christian world really awakes to understand the impositions
which have been inflicted upon it, the homage paid to the
word of Cyprian, through so many ages, will seem to have
been one of the most astonishing and mournful facts of the
history.1 Though the Anglicans are careful to point out
the passages which have been tampered with in the
interests of Eome, yet his writings are a two-edged sword
in their hand. The ' unity ' upon which he insists has its
centre on the banks of the Tiber.
1 A very clear account of Cyprian and his writings is given by Dr. Benson
(now Archbishop of Canterbury) in Smith's Diet. C. Biog., but we wish more
had been said in correction of his errors.

CHAPTEE VI.
UNITY AND CATHOLICITY  (continued).
' Whoever he may be, and whatever he may be, he who is not in the Church
of Christ, is not a Christian. ' 1
' I believe in one Catholic and Apostolic Church.' 2
It has not been without some reason that Protestants, and
especially the more evangelical sections of the Protestant
Church, have been charged with the neglect of Christian
antiquity. With the New Testament in our hands, and
the presence of the ever-gracious Spirit of God in our hearts
and assemblies, we have been content to know but little
of the bygone experience of the Church. Besides, since
the Eomanist set up the ' Fathers ' on a level with, or even
higher than Scripture, the Protestant has been in danger of
disparaging the testimony of the ancient ecclesiastical
writers.3 In our own case, God had set before our fathers ' a great
door and effectual ' in many lands, and they could not
spare time for curious investigations into patristic literature,
or for unnecessary controversy. Wesley, by his preposses
sions and circumstances, was constrained to acquaint himself
1 Cyprian, Ep. Ii., 24. 2 Nicene Creed.
3 Dr. Donaldson (Apostolic Fathers, p. 73) says that ' the Evangelical
tchool in this country has not produced one first-rate work on early Christian
literature,' nor advanced a step beyond Daille" (De Usu Patrum), and Milton
(Prelatical Episcopacy). 120

Unity and Catholicity. 121
largely with the facts of Christian history, and with the
views of the early writers. But the practical demands of
his situation prevented him from being wholly absorbed in
the study of antiquity. He did what he could, by the
publication of his Ecclesiastical History, to make his
people acquainted with the facts. In his Christian Library
he furnished a magnificent contribution to their instruction
in the views of the most pious and earnest writers of the
Church in every age.1 But, since his day, our ecclesiastical
disquisitions have not multiplied very much.2 But, since
we have entered into an entirely independent position as a
Church, we cannot evade the claim to a more thorough
examination of our case in comparison with that of the first
ages of the Church. ' The Philistines are upon ' us. They
seek to reap our harvests — to pull down that which we have
builded. They seek to distract the members of our churches
by telling them that ' except ' they observe their ' custom '
(to e#o?), they ' cannot be saved.' It is necessary, therefore,
that we should enquire what foundation our view of Chris
tianity really has. If we have ' neglected antiquity,' let us
amend the fault, if we can. And at any rate, there may be
1 The Christian Library, 50 vols., by J. Wesley, A;M., Bristol, 1749.
The preface is appropriately dated from Kingswood. The first volume contains
extracts from the Apost. Father*. Several of these, he says, 'lived in
apostolic times, and were chosen by apostles to preside in their several sees.'
' Their writings are not of equal authority with the Holy Scriptures, yet are
worthy of a much greater respect than any compositions which have been
made since.' Vols. 2 and 3 are occupied with Arndt's True Christianity,
and with Foxe's Martyrs. A second edition, with Wesley's emendations,
was published by the Rev. T. Jackson, a.d. 1820. (See Tyerman's Life of
J. Wesley, ii., 65.)
2 We do not overlook the important works of Benson, Watson, Clarke,
and Moulton, in biblical and theological scholarship ; nor such as those of
Dr. Etheridge, in Syriac literature, and of Rich. Treffry on The Eternal
Sonship, and many others.

122 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
lessons of warning, or of inspiration, which will repay us
for our toil.1
On the further consideration of this question of ' unity,'
our enquiries must be brief. If we go back to the beginning,
we find the Church in Jerusalem, immediately after the
clays of Peter, under the care of St. James. Tradition says
that he held the position of President until the eve of the
destruction of the city.2 Probably all Jewish Christians
looked to him as their head.3 The only account left of him
intimates that he continued to be a strict observer of the
Jewish law.4 As such, could he eat with a Gentile ? Could
any Gentile Christians in Jerusalem or Palestine have
received any countenance from him ? But before 7 0 a.d.
James died a martyr's death. Then came the destruction
of Jerusalem and its temple. Sacrifices have not been
offered since, and the priesthood became obsolete. For
many years after the destruction of Jerusalem no Jew was
allowed to come near to it. Even when the city was
•partially restored by Hadrian, the Jews were excluded.
When, once more, the Christian Church reappeared in iElia-
Capitolina, a Gentile, named Marcus, is said to have been
bishop. But this Church in Jerusalem was always feeble
and unproductive. Church writers have not cared to repro-
1 ' Die Kunde der Vergangenheit der Kirche wird dem Christen zur
Erbauung sein.' (Die Lehre v. h. Geiste, von K. A. Kahnis, 1817.)
2 This may be the atom of truth contained in the Epistles of Peter and
Clement to James, prefixed to the Clementines. Wordsworth (Bp. of St.
Andrews), in his Remarks on Dr. Lightfoot 's Essay, refers to Epiphanius and
Chrysostom to prove that our Lord's appearance to James (1 Cor. xv. 7) was to
make him Bishop of Jerusalem ! He thinks that Eusebius and Apostolical
Constitutions prove him to have been bishop. Wordsworth had been alarmed
by Dean Stanley's statement that ' all the bishops of the second century
must have been created by the presbyters of the first.'
3 Gal. ii. 12. * Hegesipp. in Euseb., ii., 23. ,

Unity and Catholicity.

duce its traditions. ' The Christians of Jerusalem contribute
nothing to this written portraiture of the age. The pecu
liarities of their belief were borrowed from a conventional
system destined to pass away, and did not embody the
permanent characteristics of any particular type of apostolic
doctrine. The Jewish Church at Pella was an accommo
dation, if we may use the word, and not a form of Chris
tianity.' 1 This is rather a sad account to give of Jerusalem
Christians who had had James for 'bishop,' and who owed
their lives to Christian prophecy. But history shows how
they adhered to their Jewish tenets on the shores of the
Dead Sea, and how their communities became the seed-plots
of Ebionitism, of the earlier Gnosticism, and of many anti-
christian theories. If apostolical succession could have
saved any, it would have saved them.2
For nearly thirty years after the destruction of Jerusalem,;
as we have said, there are no documents to give us lightj
on the formation of the Church, except the Epistle of
Clement of Eome, usually dated from 94-100 a.d.3 Itj
is a letter addressed by the Church of Eome to the Church I
at Corinth.4 Clement does not say that he is the Bishop ',
1 "Westcott, on Canon, p. 59.
2 It will be remembered that in Irenaeus and Tertullian the chief value of
the ' Apostolical Succession ' is that it ensures correct doctrine. This is the
boast of infallibilists and their imitators still.
3 ' A few letters of consolation and warning, two or three epistles addressed
to the heathen, a controversy with a Jew, a vision and a scanty gleaning of
fragments of lost works, comprise all Christian literature up to the middle
of the second century ' (Westcott, on Canon, p. 11).
4 The Tubingen writers generally question the genuineness of the Epistle
of Clement, because ' dieser Name in zweiten Jahrhundert die Bedeutung
einer Vermittlerrolle zwischen Judcnchristenthum und Heidenchristenthum
bekommen hat' (Schwegler, Nachap., ii., 125). EvenRenan does not accept
this view ; yet ' traditions which belong to very different men were soon
united to confirm the dignity of the successor of St. Peter ' (Westcott, on

124 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
of Eome, nor does he address a bishop in Corinth. He
speaks of two classes of ministers who had been appointed
by the apostles, bishops = presbyters, and deacons. He
says that the Church had displaced some presbyters or
bishops without reason. Yet, if we read between the lines,
we may just discern what the offence of these bishops,
against whose rule the Corinthian Church had revolted,
had been. There had evidently been a straining of
ministerial prerogative, and the Church had rebelled. In
his notice of the matter, Clement uses language which, by
unfair manipulation, is made the earliest warrant for the
doctrine of 'Apostolic Succession.' Any Eomish or
Anglican author will show how Clement's sketch can be
extended to mediaeval proportions.1 He says:2 'Our
apostles also knew through our Lord Jesus Christ that
there would be strife on account of the office of the
episcopate.3 For this reason, therefore, inasmuch as they

Canon, p. 22). For the literary history of the Epistle, see Schaff, Hist.
of Ch. (100-325), p. 636, and Lightfoot's St. Clement. The uncertainty
which attaches to ' Apostolical Succession ' is illustrated in the case of
Clement. According to some (the Clementines, Tertullian, Jerome, etc.),
he was appointed Bishop of Eome by Peter, and was his immediate successor.
According to others (Iren. Ha>r., iii., 3 ; Euseb. iii. 2, 13, 31), Linus and
Cletus preceded him, and Clement was not bishop until circ. A.D. 100. Is
it likely that a presbyter appointed by Peter, who died A.D. 64, would write
an epistle to Corinth in a.d. 94? Dr. Salmon (Smith's Diet, of Ch. Biog.)
discredits the 'tale of Clement's ordination by Peter,' but refers to the
mention of his name in the Romish Canon of the Mass, which recites the
names ' Linus, Cletus, Clemens ' to this day. This is anything but
'authentic proof.' It certainly weighs in favour of the Jewish origin of
Clement, that the Homilies, Recognitions, and the Constitutions were ascribed
to him. This will account also for his supposed ordination by Peter. See
Ritschl, Entstehung, pp. 261, 263 — who regards his views as Pauline, or
rather a coalition of the two schools.
i E.g. Nirschl, Patrologie. 2 Ep. Clem., c. 44.
3 Literally, ' about the name of the oversight ; ' "pis io-txi \ti tcu IvipxTos t/,s

Unity and Catholicity. 125
had obtained a perfect foreknowledge of this, they appointed
these [ministers] already mentioned, and afterwards gave
instructions1 that when these should fall asleep, other
approved men should succeed them in the ministry.2 We
are of opinion, therefore, that these appointed by them, or
afterward by other eminent men, with the consent of the
whole Church, and who have blamelessly served the flock
of Christ, in a humble, peaceable and disinterested spirit,
and have for a long time possessed the good opinion of all,
cannot be justly dismissed from the ministry. For our sin
will not be small if we eject from the episcopate those
who have blamelessly and holily fulfilled its duties.3
Blessed are those presbyters who, having finished their
course, have obtained a fruitful and perfect departure ; for
they have no fear lest any one deprive them of the place
now appointed them. But we see that ye have removed
some men of excellent behaviour from the ministry which
they fulfilled blamelessly and with honour.'
From all this, it seems to be very clear that by
' Apostolic Succession,' according to Clement, is only
meant that all ministers, called of God, anointed, by the
Holy Spirit, and approved of the Church, succeeded the
'tTirxoTr.s. The reference is clearly to the disputes about pre-eminence,
Matt, xviii. 1, etc.
1 Cf. Ep. Clem., 42 : 'They appointed the first-fruits [of their labour],
having first proved them by the Spirit, to be bishops and deacons.'
2 XitTovpyix — service.
3 It is literally ' those who have offered the gifts : ' TpoimiyxoiTxs tx
tupx. The idea of ' sacrifice ' in the Eucharist began with the presents made
by the richer members of the Church, for the benefit of the poor, at the Aga|x-.
The collection at the 'love-feast' and at the 'Lord's Supper' still com
memorates these offerings. By those who write in the sacerdotal interest
the expression is supposed to favour the doctrine of a ' sacrifice ' in the IX
Eucharist. But ' the idea of sacrifice in the Lord's Supper was added in the 1 1
third century furtively' (Pope's Compendium, iii., 329).

126 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
apostles. The presbyter or elder is evidently the same
officer as the bishop or overseer. He does not absolutely
challenge the right of the Church of Corinth to dismiss
their minister, though he condemns their doing so for
insufficient causes. In other places he makes a reference
to the Jewish priesthood, comparing the Christian ministry
with it. These passages also have become famous in the
controversy with sacerdotalism. In c. 43, he says that
Moses appointed the tribe of Levi to priestly office, in
order to prevent 'sedition in Israel.' He says (c. 40),
' It behoves us to do all things in order, which the Lord
has commanded us to perform at stated times. He has
enjoined offerings and service to be performed, and that
not thoughtlessly or irregularly, but at the appointed times
and hours. Where and by whom He desires these things
to be done, He Himself has fixed by His own supreme will,
in order that all things being piously done according to
His good pleasure, may be acceptable unto Him. Those,
therefore, who present their offerings at the . appointed
times are accepted and blessed ; for inasmuch as they
follow the laws of the Lord, they sin not. For his own
peculiar services are assigned to the high priest, and their
own proper place is ascribed to the priests, and their own
special ministrations devolve on the Levites. The layman
(o \aiKos:) is bound by the laws that pertain to laymen.'1
This passage, undoubtedly, is a declaration in favour of
Church order. Christian worship, like the temple worship,
should be orderly and at stated times. Under the law of
1 The Bishop of Winchester thinks it 'a most happy circumstance that the
very earliest of the Fathers, Clem. Rom., the companion of St. Paul, has left
us clear testimony on this head ' (Thirty-Nine Articles, p. 542).

U7iity and Catholicity. 127
Moses there were Priests and Levites ; under Christ's law
there are bishop-presbyters and deacons. Yet we are not
to infer that he attributes sacerdotal functions to Christian
ministers. He does not identify the priests of the new
dispensation with the priests of the old. This is an
extravagance for which we must look centuries later. There
are many explanations needed in order that we may arrive
at the exact meaning of these statements. He says there
are ' appointed times ' for Christian service. Were these
the same as the Jewish ? or does he refer to the ' Lord's day,'
or to the morning or evening Eucharist ? He speaks of
the 'laws of the Lord' which the true presbyters follow.
What and where are these laws ? Moreover, in reading-
such a document as this, we must always remember that
the authority is not of the highest. We cannot give full
credit to everything under the name of Clement that it
belongs to the first Christian century.
Over the writings which come next in order there
has been great controversy. Of the Epistles of St.
Ignatius, fifteen were first printed as his genuine com
positions. Very soon eight of them were rejected by the
learned as manifest forgeries, and especially because they
had not been mentioned by Eusebius. The remaining
seven were known in two versions. The longer of these
recensions was again dishonoured in favour of the shorter
(Vossian) version. This shorter version of the seven, in
Greek, still retains its credit ; but even of this, every
Church writer of any position speaks with some hesitation.
Dr. Lightfoot, evidently impressed by the learned and
laborious researches of Zahn x and others, has changed his
1 Ignatius von Antiochen, von Theod. Zahn, Gotha, 1873.

1 28 Methodism in the flight of the Early Church.
opinion during the last few years. In 1873, when the
third edition of his work on the Philippians was published,
he regarded the Syriac ' three ' as the original form of the
Epistles. Now he accepts the shorter Greek version of
the ' seven.' x It is by these documents that Episcopacy
will stand or fall. If we ask how it was that for so many
ages it was supposed that episcopacy was the only Church
government which was lawful in the Church of Christ —
the answer would be, Because of the Epistles of Ignatius.
Why has the Church governed by bishops claimed,
throughout its history, the right to dictate the faith of the
Church, and to persecute those who expressed an opposite
opinion ? Because of Ignatius. Why did the Anglican
divines of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries
repudiate presbyterian Christianity, and encourage acts
of intolerance against Nonconformists ? Because they
could appeal to Ignatius. Why did Samuel Wesley and
Susanna Annesley leave Nonconformity and return to the
Church of England ? 3 Why did John and Charles Wesley,
to the last, retain so strong a veneration for the Episco
palian Church ? How is it that in England the Tractarian
and Puseyite movement acquired so much influence, and
produced so much effect ; and that so many educated
1 See Lightfoot, Philip., pp. 232-237 ; Dale's Congreg. Princ, pp. 216-
239 ; Harnack, Die Zeit des Ignat. (summary, p. 66), who shows how
uncertain the traditions of Ignatius are. Hausrath (Kleine Schriflen, p. 28),
with other rationalists, holds that the pastoral epistles look at the same
heresies as the epistles of Ignatius. Pfieiderer (Hibbert Lect., p. 256) calls
thum 'deutcro-Pauline.' But such an argument might serve to show the
antiquity of tho Ignatian writings rather than the lateness of tho pastoral
epistles. Criticism is nothing if not critical. Dr. Lightfoot's new book on
Ignatius is announced as this goes to the press.
- Life and Times of Rev. S. Wesley, M.A., by Rev. L. Tyerman, London,
1866, p. 77.

Unity and Catholicity. 129
persons have been led back to Eome during this genera
tion? Why did the Bishop of Lincoln refuse the title of
' Eeverend ' to a Methodist preacher, and why are Dissent
ing ministers usually spoken of as ' unauthorized ' and
' schismatic ' ? It is not too much to say that all this can
be traced to the existence of the letters of St. Ignatius. If
a companion and disciple of apostles, writing to Christian
Churches in the very first years of the second century, could
say with authority, that no Church was a Church without
three distinct orders of ministers, who had received their
authorization and appointment and heavenly anointing
from the apostles,1 then we are all wrong. But, in this
case, so was St. Paul.2
Ignatius says : ' Let us be careful, then, not to set our
selves in opposition to the bishop, in order that we may be
subject to God.' 3 ' We should look upon the bishop even
as we look upon the Lord Himself.' 4 ' Let all reverence
the deacons as an appointment of Jesus Christ, and the
bishop as Jesus Christ, who is the Son of the Father, and
the presbyters as the sanhedrim of God, and assembly
of the apostles. Apart from these there is no Church.' 5
1 Dr. Haddan (Smith's Diet, of Christ. Antiq., art. ' Bishop ') shows how
much is made of this authority : ' The bishop came in room of apostles,
having presbyters and deacons and laity under him . . . possessing exclu
sive powers of ordination . . . from the earliest years of the second century,
from Ignatius downwards. '
- The influence which the Epistles of Ignatius have had in the Church, has
been greatly owing to the strong individuality of the writer. See Kothe,
Anfange, p. 4 ; Zahn's Ignal. v. Antioch., Pref., vii ; Burton's Eccl. Hist.,
p. 311, etc.
3 Ad Eplves., c. 5. l Ibid., c. 6.
b Ad Trail., c. 3. Ignatius regarded the presbyters as the successors of
the apostles, the bishops were in the place of the Master. Fairly inter
preted, there is little in these extracts which is inconsistent with a true
evangelical system. I

130 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
' Continue in intimate union with Jesus Christ our God
and the bishop, and the enactments of the apostles.
He that is within the altar is pure, but he that is without
is not pure : that is, he who does anything apart from the
bishop and presbyters and deacons is not pure in his
conscience.' 1 If such utterances as these were authorita
tive over Christians, there would be an end of controversy.
If they are not authoritative, why are they yet employed
as if their doctrine was of God ?
It was Daille, a French Protestant, who first challenged
these fateful documents. He was replied to by Bishop
Pearson ; and Anglican writers generally assume that
Pearson's reply in favour of the shorter Greek recension
was final ; but adhuc lis sub judiceJ Bishop Lightfoot 3
allows that in the New Testament ' bishop ' and ' pres
byter ' are convertible, and that this is the case with
1 Ad Trail., 7. The expression xx\ t. o^ixTxypixTui t. xtoctoXui savours of
a later time — perhaps that of the Constitutions of Apostles.
3 Dr. Cureton (see Killen, Anc. Chu., p. 14) said that he never met with
any one who had read Pearson's work through. We do not pretend to have
waded through the voluminous Latin essay which Pearson was six years in
writing, but will here translate its first sentences — ex ungue leonem : ' The
controversy respecting the distinction of the episcopal order from the
presbyterate, or, respecting the origin of that distinction, is celebrated,
especially in our age. In its discussion the authority of St. Ignatius, an
apostolic man and a martyr, is worthy of great weight ; so, in short, it has
come to pass that they who cannot in any other way maintain a hostile
opinion of episcopacy, wrench away all the epistles of Ignatius, deny them
to have been written by the holy martyr, pronounce them to have been
feigned and false, since by their eloquent testimony the episcopal cause is
supported, and the antiquity of presbyterian parity falls.' (Vindiciat
Epistolarum S. Ignatii, in the work of Cotelerius, S. S. Patrum qui
temporibus apostolicisfloruerunt, 1698.) Killen quotes from Usher's disserta
tion prefixed to Polycarp and Ignatius, this sentence : ' Concludimus . . .
nullas omni ex parte sinceras esse habendas et genuinas.' This refers to the
shorter text.
3 Ep. to Philip., p. 96.

Unity and Catholicity.

Clement, who wrote at the end of the first century. But in
Ignatius, Dr. Lightfoot says, ' " bishop " is used in the
modern sense.' That is, down to the end of the first
Christian century the government of the Church was pres
byterian. That was the unity. But early in the second
century a new ' unity ' was initiated, that of government
by ' bishops in the modern sense.' 1
But further, these epistles of Ignatius assert that it was
' a sin to Judaize.' ' It is absurd to profess Christ Jesus
and to Judaize.' 2 ' If we still live according to the Jewish
law, we acknowledge that we have not received grace.' s
' If any one preach the Jewish law unto you, listen not to
him.' It is somewhat difficult to believe that a bishop
of Antioch would so speak at the beginning of the second
century. Peter had a following there as well as Paul,
and Euodius, the first bishop, is said to have been appointed
1 Canon Westcott says : ' The epistle of St. Paul to the Ephesians, his
pastoral epistles, and the epistles of Clement and Ignatius, when taken
together, mark a harmonious progression in the development of the idea of a
Church.' But does not this go too far ? There is ' progression ' historically
connected between Paul and Ignatius. But Paul's idea of unity is that
which Dr. Westcott here describes it : ' the body of Christ in virtue of the
one life which it derives from Him who is its Head.' If in John x. 16 (see
Speaker's Commentary) it is objected to the Roman unity that personal
fellowship with Christ is that which places us in His flock, and not submis
sion to any earthly authority ; so here we may contend for the same truth.
Every believer in Christ, having life in the Head of the Church, is in the
Church. Ignatius says, on the contrary, that he who is not with the bishop
is not with Christ. Though many Anglicans shrink from the conclusion,
there are those who do not hesitate to say that ' life ' in Christ only comes
through the Church, i.e. through the bishops. Paul's doctrine of a Church,
therefore, and that of Ignatius, are not 'harmonious.' The one makes
fellowship with Christ only necessary to membership in His Church ; the
other makes membership in a society governed by bishops to be necessary
to (1) life in Christ, (2) membership in the Church. This is the TpwToi
¦tyiiybos of Ignatius : facilis descensus Averni.
2 Ad Magn., c. 10. 3 Ibid., c. 8. 4 Ad Philad., c. 6.

132 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
by him. If Ignatius only represented the Gentile
Christians, it would explain very much. But in this case
what would become of his ' catholicity ' ? He is the first
to use that expression about which all Christendom is
still contending. He says : ' Where Jesus Christ is, there
is the catholic Church.' Did catholicity begin then by
the exclusion of Jews from the Christian community ?
Is ' Catholicism ' after all a lucus a non lucendo ? Did
this form of Christianity, which then and ever since has
claimed the attribute of ' universality,' begin its extra
ordinary career by shutting out from the Church of Christ
the countrymen and fellow-religionists of Jesus and His
apostles ? It may be said that the Jewish believers were
exorbitant in their demands, and exclusive on tlieir side,
so that it was necessary to suppress them.1 It seemed to
have become desirable that all Christians should cease to
be dependent upon the synagogues where ' Moses was read
every Sabbath day,' and that they should meet together
on the ' Lord's day.' 2 But the Church forfeited its Pauline
' catholicity ' when these expedient regulations were insisted
upon. It is one of the most difficult questions in Church
history, and one which urgently needs further investiga
tion, of the most serious kind, how and when the Church,
1 ' The Judaizing party naturally made a last effort to retain their original
power. . . . The struggle was not for independence, but for dominion.
The Gentile Christians no longer claimed tolerance, but supremacy.'
< Westcott, on Canon, p. 67. ) The Jews cursed Christians in their synagogues
in the time of Justin (Dial. c. T., 16), though they had lost the power to
lay hands on them, he says. Persecutors do not lose their spirit always with
their power.
- ' No longer observing the Sabbath, but living in the observance of the
Lord's day.' (Ignat. ad Magn., c. 9.) Cf. Heb. x. 25 ; Ep. Barnab., c. 15:
bio xxi uyifj.11 Tnv riftipai rhi oySoriv.

Unity and Catholicity. 133

which had consisted of Jewish and Gentile believers, was
dispossessed of its Judaistic elements.1 As long as the
old ideas of catholicity prevailed, there was little chance
of making progress with such an enquiry. Everything must
be sacrificed to the idea of the infallibility and the unity
of the Church. The voices of the Fathers must be regarded
as a perfect harmony. They always spoke with a scnsus
communis in which even Scripture must be interpreted.
It was deemed almost profane when it was proposed to
study the life of a Father like Justin or Irenaeus, to
examine all the circumstances of his life and times, in
order to judge what he was likely to say, to be able to
interpret what he had said, and to decide whether sayings
attributed to him were genuine or not. It is only within
1 'No one can possibly ignore the demands which this the most important
period of the history of the Christian Church still puts forward for historical
investigation. It is confessed on all hands that a great task still confronts
us here, and that many questions still await a more satisfactory solution
than has hitherto been found for them. Even if we take the best and most
accepted works on the history of primitive Christianity, and examine them
with a view to see how far they succeed in combining the historical materials,
which are of so heterogeneous nature, and have to be collected from such
different quarters, to the unity of a whole, how isolated, fragmentary, how
destitute of minor principles and motives, how vague and dim do they appear
in many respects ! ' (Church Hist, of First Three Centuries, by Dr. F. C.
Baur; Pref., p. xi., date 1853. Transl. by Menzies, 1878.) Baur's views
were first propounded in a paper in 1831, on The Origin of the Ebionites
from the Essenes. Then followed one on The Christ Party in the Corinthian
Congregation ; in 1835 an essay on the Pastoral Epistles, one on Romans
in 1836. All his views were represented in his Paulus in 1845. Schwegler,
his coadjutor, produced his Nachapostolische Zeitalter in 1846. This work
attempts to give the correct account of the origin of every early Christian
writing from the earliest Gospel down to the latest. The last, he says, was
St. John's, marking the final combination of apostolic doctrine. Lechler
(Das Apostolische und das Nachapostolische Zeitalter, 1857) has furnished
the standard reply of German orthodoxy to the vain speculation of Baur and
Schwegler. A new edition of Lechler's valuable work (in German) has been
published this year ; and Messrs. Clark have also announced a translation.

134 Methodism in the Light of the Early Churcli.
recent years that the great schism in primitive Christianity
between Jewish and Gentile believers, out of which the
Catholic Church arose, has been clearly recognised and
studied. The Tubingen school of Baur, Schwegler, and
others have distinguished themselves by their assertion
that they had discovered the true history of the Church
on this point. They contended that the original apostles
were Ebionites and only followed the Jewish religion ;
that the tendency to universalism appeared first in
Stephen, but was most thoroughly developed in St. Paul.
Between the Petrine and the Pauline parties in the
Christian Church they say there was ' a permanent cleft,'
which in a later day, through the mediation of Gnosticism
and Montanism, reached reconciliation in the Catholic
Church. Gnosticism, which exaggerated the value of
knowledge, and Montanism, which exaggerated that of
feeling in religion, worked out the sober harmony of
Catholicism between them. In all this, every one allows,
there are elements of truth. But the original apostles
did not differ on the essential points of Christian belief.
' They all preached one and the same Saviour, and therefore
one and the same gospel.' 1 The attempt of the Tubingen
critics to form a fresh genesis of the books of the New
Testament, and even of the sub-apostolic literature, is now
regarded as a failure.2 The whole scheme has been
vitiated by its philosophic aim, which has been to eliminate
1 Donaldson, The Apostolical Fathers, p. 57.
" Notwithstanding the collapse of many German 'reconstructions,' they
are still made. Hausrath (Kleine Schriften) relates that an Erlangen professor
told his students that if they wanted to know in wdiat street of Jerusalem,
or at what hour of the morning or afternoon, any psalm was composed, they
must go to Hitz:g !

Unity and Catholicity. 135
the supernatural from Christianity, and to subjugate this
glorious work of the living God to the doctrine of Hegelian
evolution. No one accepts the theory now — not even
Eenan nor Hilgenf eld. Eitschl J and others, who were at
first enamoured of a theory which promised to explain
everything on the easy terms of natural causes, have been
compelled to relinquish it. But what a demonstration of
the condition of ecclesiastical science in Christendom it
furnishes, that such a theory could be advanced in the
name of the learning and discovery of the nineteenth
century ! Into what a night of shadows and groping had
tradition and prescription brought the Church, when it
was possible to produce such a picture of its origin ! But
is there not a cause ? Eome had all the sources of the
history in her hands for more than a thousand years.
During that time, the ignorance of some, and the bigotry
of others, weeded out of the libraries of Christendom much
that would militate against her claims. We must not
make needless or thoughtless accusations of ' corruption '
of writings, but there is no doubt much to be known upon
this subject yet.2 But the progress of Protestant enquiry

1 Albrecht Ritschl, Doctor Philos. and Theol. Professor in the University
of Bonn, author of Die Entstehung der Altkatholischen Kirche. The first
edition in 1851 evinced much sympathy with the main theory of Baur and
Schwegler. In his second edition, 1857, he opposes it at most points. See
Dr. Lightfoot's note on the value of his work, Ep. to Philip. , p. 186. Dr.
0. Pfleiderer, in his Hibbert Lecture, 1885, admits that Schwegler's extreme
adhesion to preconceived views vitiated his criticism. Dr. Pfleiderer,
however, is thoroughly rationalistic in his own principles, though at some
points he comes nearer to evangelical sentiments.
2 'The spirit of falsehood which has so long been at work in the dark
precincts of the Romish Curia has not yet fulfilled its course, nor have all its
shameful secrets even yet been brought out into the open light of day.'
(Curteis, Church and' Dissent, 1872, p. 160.) 'The Roman Church is

136 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
into the real circumstances of the primitive Church has
been so seriously embarrassed by false theories of ' unity,'
of sacramental efficacy, of episcopal authority, that the
work of the Eeformation in Europe has to be recommenced.1
We need not be surprised that the Jesuits have been able
to recover so much ground in Germany, in Bavaria, in
France, or even in England. The work of perversion, by
which a son of Charles Wesley was drawn into the Eomish
Church, and which yet proceeds among youths at our
Universities, has been only too easy. Newman, Wilber-
force, Manning, and hundreds more of the English clergy
and gentry, have betrayed the power which the old dream
of ' Catholic Unity ' yet exercises upon the classes which
represent the principle of reaction against modern progress.
But the spirit of the Eeformation has not failed, though at
times it has slumbered and slept. The Tubingen school
did but temporarily represent, and in a somewhat grotesque
manner, enquiries which must arise. These questions have
arisen ; and the result will in time make it impossible that
an instructed man should be a Eomanist, or else that he
should not be a Eomanist. History and common sense
must decide between those who say that ' the Episcopate is
not only necessary to the bene esse of the Church, but to
its esse,' ' and those who say that ' Christians have a free
honeycombed through and through with accumulated falsehood.' (Little-
dale's Plain Reasons, etc. )
1 ' Historians have long been familiar with the literary forgeries which
have been undertaken in the interests of the Papacy ; but a collateral
depravation of historical records in the interests of Episcopacy has been
almost, if not entirely, overlooked.' (Mossnian's Hist, cf the Cath. Ch.,
1873.) - Canon Liddon. So Sherlock (Vindic. of Eccles. Authority, p. 442):
' I will never value those men's judgments . . . who can be contented to
change the apostolical order of bishops for a presbyterian parity.'

Unity and Catholicity. 1 3 7

right of association in the name of Christ.' 1 No authority
can settle that question now. The result we do not fear ;
though it will either place the Episcopal ' unity ' on
unassailable foundations, or will prove it to be an imprac
ticable anachronism.
Meanwhile, the Methodists bear their own witness to
the great principle of unity by their connexionalism. As
soon as societies were formed in London, Bristol and
Newcastle, they were called ' United Societies.' Like the
early Christians they called one another ' Brethren.' 2
Christians of other Churches still wonder at the solidarity
and cohesion of our fellowship. Methodists, everywhere,
easily fraternize, and promptly find mutual understanding.
Though now the great family of Wesley's spiritual
descendants is divided into branches, which are placed
under separate and independent Conferences, this bond of
fellowship is not broken. A variation from the usual
type of Church government, like that of the episcopacy of
1 Dr. Hatch in Contemp. Rev., June, 1885. Compare Dr. Liddon's
statement, 'Upon a true Episcopalian succession the validity of our chief
means of communion with our Lord depends,' with Dr. Lightfoot's
statement (Ep. to Philip., p. 180), 'The Kingdom of Christ ... is free.
It has no sacred days or seasons, no special sanctuaries, because every time
and place are holy. Above all it has no sacerdotal system. It interposes
no sacrificial tribe or class between God and man, by whose intervention
alone God is reconciled and man forgiven. Each individual member holds
personal communion with the Divine Head.' We do not doubt the sincerity
of either of these learned and pious men, of whom all Christians are proud.
But to claim the submission of Dissenters to the Anglican unity while such
fundamental differences exist between different sections of the Churcli, would
be hypocrisy. To yield such submission on our part would be little less.
2 Just. Mart. Apiol., i., 65 : 'There is then brought to that one of the
brethren who presides (tu tpouttSiti t. xhxtp&i) bread, and a cup of water
and wine.' Tertull. Apol., 39 : 'They are wroth with us because we call
each other brethren.' CI. Alex. Strom., ii., 9 : 'We call those brethren who
are regenerated by the same word. '

138 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Methodism in the United States, does not spoil our unity.
Even the formation of separate connexions, such as that
of the 'Primitive Methodists,' or of the 'Methodist Free
Church,' has not wrecked it. To those who say 'that the
Congregational polity is at once the highest and the most
natural organization of the life of the Christian Church,' 1
we can but reply that we do not so understand the original
records. Those who insist upon some external authority
which should govern all Churches, we have already
endeavoured to answer. But towards the final ' unity ' of
all the Churches, which the Lord shall establish in His
own way and time, we look with all the faithful ; and
humbly think that our ' connexionalism ' may be no
unimportant element in realizing this great consummation.

APPENDIX TO CHAPTEE VI.
'The Teaching of the Twelve Apostles.'
A work under the above title was published in the year
1883, by Bryennius, Patriarch of Nicomedia. It had been
found by him in a library in Constantinople. This copy
was written in Jerusalem by Leo, ' Notary and Sinner,'
a.d. 1056. Along with it were MSS. of the epistles of
Barnabas, Clement, Ignatius, etc. Some parts of this
treatise are found word for word in the epistles of
Barnabas, in Hermas, and especially in the Apost. Constit.,
bk. 7. The critics have generally decided that it is earlier
than any of these.2 Bishop Lightfoot assigns it to an
1 Dale's Manual of Cong. Princ, p. 8. Cf. Dr. Rigg's Connexional
Economy of Methodism (1879), p. 6.
2 See Romestin, Canon Spence, Hitchcock and Brown, Zahn, Harnack,
and Hilgenfeld, who have published treatises or articles upon it.

Unity and Catholicity. 139
Alexandrian Christian who lived before a.d. 112. He
does this —
1. Because it speaks of two orders only, bishops and
deacons. He holds that Asiatic Christians already
recognised three orders of ministers ; but in Alexandria
the transition from presbyterianism to episcopacy was
later. For two hundred years after Christ, the bishops of
Alexandria were elected and ordained by presbyters.
Eomestin, with others, thinks that there are traces of
Asiatic or Syriac opinion in it. But this would raise a
difficulty. It would imply that some Syrian Christians
held with Ignatius to three orders, while others followed
the Teaching with two. Harnack, etc., find other traces
of the Alexandrian impress.
2. This treatise does not distinguish between the Agape
and the Eucharist. This is the case also in the epistles of
Ignatius. ' It is not lawful without the bishop either to
baptize or to celebrate the love-feast ' (dyaTrvv iroielv, Ign.
ad Sm., viii). ' It were better to observe the love-feast '
(dycnrav — where the A.-N. Lib. strangely translates, 'to
treat it with respect ') ' that they may rise again.' The
Const, of the Apostles does distinguish between the two
observances. The seventh chapter of that work contains
the greater part of the Teaching, with many alterations.
Where the latter says : ' After ye are filled give thanks,'
the former has: 'After ye have partaken give thanks' (for to
ifnr\r]cT0f)vai iii the Teaching, the A. C. has ttjv pteTaKri^nv).
The one refers to a meal, the other to a ceremonial. The
Eucharist was the concluding act of worship at the simple,
sacred meal in which the Christians joined at the close of
the clay. The bread and wine were passed round in
memory of the death of Christ, in token of their fellowship
in Him, until He came again. Bishop Lightfoot thinks
that the two began to be separated about the time of the
Bithynian persecution under Trajan. But the Agape
survived for a century after this. It is described in

140 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
Tertullian, and even in the Apost. Constit. This relic of
apostolicity, by a singular ' irony of fate,' has been bequeathed
to the Moravians and Methodists. Churches which boast
of their antiquity celebrate their Eucharist with wonderful
pomp, but have little that would remind a Christian of
the catacombs of the primitive Kotvavta. Bulhnger (De
Originc Erroris, 1539) refers to a survival in the Eomish
ritual of one of the original customs : ' Hinc fortassis ad
nos ritus ille nianavit qui etiam hodie in usu est ut finitis
Missarum solennibus panes dividantur pauperibus.'

CHAPTEE VII.
ORDER and PROGRESS.
'Methodist: one who lives according to the method laid down in the
Bible.' 1 ' See how great a flame aspires,
Kindled by a spark of grace.'2
It has been said by one of the most thoughtful of the
critics of Methodism, that this system ' did not so much
violate as it rendered an homage to the principle of
Church order. It stood forth ... an eminent example
of the prevalence and supremacy of rules . . . Methodism,
in a word, was Law, written upon the " fleshly tables "
of thousands and thousands again of heretofore lawless
hearts.' 3 ' To live by rule ' was the distinguishing mark
of the first Methodists. The strict monotony of their
primitive devoutness gave them their name. These people
did not live without an aim, waiting for whatever occupation
or amusement the day might bring forth. They had a
business in life ; and laid out each hour that they might
attend to it. ' One only thing resolved to know,
And square their useful lives below
By reason and by grace.'
1 Wesley's English Dictionary. 2 Hymn 218.
8 Taylor's Wesley and Methodism. 141

142 Methodism hi the Light of the Early Church.
They learned how to live in the world, yet not to be of
it. Theirs was not the monastic form of piety. This had
prompted the penitent — anxious to escape the sinfulness
over which he mourned ; the believer — who desired to
meditate on the glories of his new-found faith ; the saint —
who longed to rise higher on the ascending path of piety,
to forsake the temptation and degradation and tumult of
common society. But this people dared to return to the
example of Christ and His apostles. They believed that
' entire sanctification ' was attainable in a sinful world ;
and that ' perfect love ' could prevail over everyday
selfishness. Before Keble had said —
1 We need not bid for cloistered cell
Our neighbours and our friends farewell ; '
the Methodists had been singing for a century —
'Not in the tombs we pine to dwell,
Not in the dark monastic cell,
By vows and grates confined ;
Freely to all ourselves we give,
Constrained by Jesu's love to live
The servants of mankind.'
It was not until the third century of the Christian era
that the Church became enamoured of that old-world,
oriental, and ascetic form of piety, which pretended to
transcend common experience, and demanded solitude for
its realization. Monasticism descended from Essenism,
into which Pharisaic elements largely entered, from Gnostic
and Manichean contempt of matter, and from the unevan-
gelical views of the merit of good works. It could only
arise when the example of Him ' who went about doing
good' had been partially eclipsed by inferior types.1 It
1 rin; 'iiixx.ns, Rom. vi. 17.

Order and Progress. 1 43
was entirely contrary to the teaching of St. Paul. He had
taught Christians, while they ' set their affection on things
above — where Christ was seated at the right hand of God,'
that they must translate their heavenly contemplations
and sympathies into the details of common hfe.1 Husbands,
parents, slaves, masters, must exhibit the ' resurrection-
power ' in the elevation of ordinary duties and relationships.
There were, therefore, neither monks nor nuns for the first
two centuries of Christian history. The first followers of
Jesus of Nazareth were not hermits ; the first apostles
were not celibate monks. A bishop usually had ' one
wife,' and the elder was expected to rule well his own
house. Moreover, the first Christians were chiefly persons of
humble life. ' Not many wise, not many noble, not many
mighty,' were called. The fishermen and publicans of
Galilee were succeeded by the artisans, soldiers, labourers,
and slaves of the Eoman Empire. ' The Christian converts
belonged mostly to the middle and lower classes of society,
such as fishermen, peasants, mechanics, traders, freedmen,
slaves. . . . And yet these poor illiterate Churches were
the recipients of the noblest gifts, and alive to the deepest
problems and highest thoughts which can challenge the
attention of an immortal mind. Christianity built from
the foundation upward. From the lower ranks come the
rising men of the future, who constantly reinforce the
higher ranks and prevent their decay.' 2 In that mass of
corruption which filled Eome at the dawn of Christianity,
the lower classes had no mission except to minister to the
pride or lust of their masters. What a benign operation
1 Col. iii. 2 Schaff's Hist, of the Ch. (1-100 a.d.), p. 197.

144 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
commenced when the abject and outcast began to realize
that he was a responsible being, a son of God, an heir of
life ! 1 How soon the effect was felt upon society when
soldiers began to be honest and peaceful, women clothed
themselves in stainless modesty, when God raised up
' children unto Abraham out of the stones ' of Paganism !
Heathen masters began to reckon on the fidelity of Christian
servants, generals began to rely upon Christian legions,
employers found labourers patient under reproof, diligent
in toil, honest in stewardship. ' These Christians,' says
Pliny, ' bound themselves by an oath not to steal, to
commit adultery, or any other crime.' Though they were
1 obstinate ' in their creed, yet they were gentle under
persecution, and were loyal to governors.
The mission of Methodism among the masses of our
countrymen has been not dissimilar to that which the
early Church had in the decaying Eoman world. It is
freely confessed how much it has done for the moral
renewal of the people, and therefore for the social
invigoration of the country. We need not refer to the
numerous authorities who speak of the moral deterioration
of the nation at the beginning of the last century. William
Law, in his Serious Call, says that in his day two out of
every three Englishmen were habitual swearers. ' It was
just at the time when we wanted little of filling up the
measure of our iniquities that two or three clergymen of
the Church of England began vehemently to call sinners
to repentance.' 2 Then, and since, our mission has been
principally among the lower classes of society. Our chief
constituency is among the toiling multitudes. And what
1 Storr, The Divine Orig. of Ch., p. 84. 2 Wesley's Appeal, Pt. ii.

Order and Progress. 145
have we taught them ? To be discontented, and litigious ;
to despise authorities, to resist ' the Power ' ? If we had
been intent upon political and social influence, none can
deny our opportunity of obtaining it. Some wonder why
we have allowed this opportunity to lapse. Why have we
not in times of disaffection incited the people to avenge
their miseries upon their superiors ? J Why have we not,
at any time, plied the popular feeling, which has been at
our command, against rulers and dignities, who have showed
us little sympathy and sometimes damaging opposition ? 2
England to - day might have been worse than Ireland,
if Methodism had sought to be a political agency, and
had yielded itself to the spirit of faction. And if we
are asked why we have not done so, we answer : Because
we had before us the example of the primitive Christians.
We have been followers of the early Church. We intend
to follow them still — ' to fear God, to honour the king ; '
to make 'supplications, prayers, intercessions, thanksgivings,
for all men ; for kings and all that are in high places ;
that we may lead a tranquil and quiet life in all godliness
and gravity. This is good and acceptable in the sight of
God our Saviour.' 3
We yet bear the reproach that our form of Christianity
is seldom found except among the lower classes. ' It is a
1 'I lived from 1818 to 1825 at Chester, which is on the border of a
district where the Wesleyans are very numerous ; and I was no stranger to
the exemplary and loyal conduct of many of their ministers at the tnnc
when gTeat distress and agitation prevailed in the manufacturing districts. '
(Letter from Rev. Geo. Pearson, B.D., Christian Advocate, University of
Cambridge, to Rev. T. Jackson, 1834 : see Jackson's Life, p. 272.)
2 It would be interesting to trace out the part which Methodism has
taken in the abolition of slavery in the West Indies, and in tho United
States. 3 1 Tim. ii. 1-3. K

146 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
religion of shopkeepers and servants.' J Notwithstanding
our undoubted progress in wealth and standing and cultiva
tion, which has been slower, however, than some suppose,
we gather few from the higher ranks of English society.2
We have not a single representative in the House of Lords,
where the highest wealth and attainments of our country
congregate,3 or on the whole bench of the judges. We
have only a small, though not undistinguished, band in the
House of Commons. We are sparsely represented in the
county magistracy, somewhat more abundantly in muni
cipalities; but the professional and educated classes of our
country, generally, behold us afar off. The progress made
by means of our own institutions has been necessarily
1 The Times newspaper.
2 Mr. Abbey says : ' Methodism can never make any deep impression upon
the cultivated classes. It can, at best, be only the Church of the poor and
of the lower middle classes ; — a great evil in itself, seeing that it is not the
least considerable function of a Christian Church to cement together into one
union and fellowship all classes of society. But, with very few exceptions,
men of high education and social standing will necessarily stand aloof from
a society in which religion is presented to them in what they think a crude
and unattractive form, and in which learning and culture are generally, and
perhaps unavoidably, neglected.' (Abbey and Overton, Eng. Ch., i., 422.)
The very same things could have been said against early Christianity.
' Dr. Mitchell enumerates a population of 5000 souls with 30 beer-shops,
but without a church or chapel save the meeting-house of the indefatigable
Wesleyan, who has been in those regions the only Protestant missionary . . .
Our Protestant system has been defective in its machinery . . and moreover
the upper classes of Englishmen have scarcely dared to be the companions of
the poorer orders of society, however meritorious their claims as distributors
of charity . . The Wesleyan has followed them in every village, and gone
from cottage to cottage, to leave in person his tract and his discipline.
Hence, tho English colliers, where they have any religion at all, are
Methodists.' (Quart. Rev., June, 1842.)
3 ' Cowper consecrated the example of Lord Dartmouth, the only nobleman
who represented Methodism at the Court, — the " one who wore a coronet
and prayed." ' (Stevons' Hist, of Meth., ii., p. 96.) But other members of
the aristocracy evinced close sympathy with Methodism, as the Countess of
Huntingdon, Lady Maxwell, etc.

Order and Progress. 147
slow ; and until recent years we have been denied any
share in the advantages of the national universities. But
what then ? Are we thereby become unapostolical ?
Was it not thus with early Christianity itself ? Only
individuals belonging to the upper classes of Eoman society
joined the Christian Church during the first three cen
turies of its progress. The aristocracy came in when it
became a great popular power, and emperors began to
recognise it. The training and habits of these classes
usually unfit them for buffeting, reproach, ' the loss of all
things ;' they cannot endure that close sympathetic contact
with the multitude of a suffering world, to which Christ
has called His people. As long as an opinion or profession
is opposed to custom and social prestige, it must be content
with the suffrages of the lowly. Methodism has reall}-
grown in social recognition quite as rapidly as did the
original Church. Perhaps it would not be so well with us
if the sons and daughters of fashion counted it no
dishonour to bear our name.
But it would be a serious matter if Methodism had
shown no capacity for association with higher thought
and advancing science, or for the highest modes of social
refinement. We cannot take sides with the infallibility
which says to all demands of modern inquiry, Non
possitmus, and which anathematizes mental progress.
There would be something in this reproach of native mean
ness and ignominy, if Methodism had never evinced any
sympathy with intellectual and social elevation. But a
development of religious life which began among the
advanced students of the University of Oxford — and had
for its first representative a Fellow of Lincoln and a

148 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
scholar of Christ Church — can scarcely be charged with an
inalienable association with ignorance. It was not until
the clergy deliberately refused to co-operate with Wesley
that he called his assistants to the ' Conference,' and made
them an inseparable part of it. Amongst these he found
men who were better taught in Scripture than many
ordained men. Among them was that remarkable genius
Thomas Walsh, the poet Olivers, the orator Bradburn ; and,
in later days, Benson, the commentator, and Adam Clarke,
the universal scholar. Wesley himself was the pioneer
and model of all educators, popular publishers, and
philanthropists. What modern enterprise in the form of
missionary, tract, Bible, benevolent, or temperance society
has not derived some elements of its genesis from his
example ?
But the secret of all this power lay in the original
aim of Methodism — which was indeed the primary object
of Christianity, viz. the redemption of the individual man.
Its keynote is found in St. Paul's dictum : ' If any man
is in Christ, he is a new creature.' He who turns to
Christ is bound henceforth to live for that which is
highest. Whether he be a student at the university, a
merchant in the city, a labourer in the fields, a miner
in the dark earth-chamber, this law, requiring immediate
consecration to life's best purpose, becomes imperative. If
the man cannot read, he must learn. If he cannot utter
his thoughts in ordered speech, so that he may give a
reason for the hope that is in him, he is put into the
way of acquiring this simple art. He must begin to
teach in a Sunday school, to preach in kitchens and village
chapels, or to be a visitor of the sick. He is immedi-

Order and Progress. 1 49

ately taught that the one indispensable condition of real
elevation — the one secret by which he may prevail with
God and men — is to become good and holy. During
this century and a half how many thousands, who might
never have heard a call to rise from degradation and
despair, have received a summons to awake ' from nature's
guilty sleep,' to seek mental improvement, moral strength,
and true nobility before God and man ! This call has been
heard in every part of the earth.
Though Methodism is a standing barrier and witness
against priestcraft, yet, from the first, it has taken its
place as a monument to the value of discipline in the
Church. It has not attempted to dispense with a separate
ministry, or with the sacraments, because these are in
stitutions of the Lord Himself. Providential necessity
constrained Mr. Wesley to call his ' assistants ' into the
Conference, and to consign to them the management and
care of his societies at his decease.1 Out of them he
selected a hundred to form the legal Conference. He did
not formally give their ministerial position full recognition.
But this was more out of economic and practical con
siderations than out of deference to any rigid ecclesi
astical theory. He did not wish, if it were possible to
avoid it, to make the breach between his people and the
Established Church irreparable. It was not because he
believed that ministers ordained by bishops could alone
preach the gospel with saving power, or administer the
sacraments with full efficacy. He held the validity of
1 They bear the name of 'assistants' in the Min. of Conf. 1791, the
year of Wesley's death ; but in the Min. of 1792 they are called ' superin
tendents.'

150 MetJiodism in the Light of the Early Church.
presbyterian ordination, and exercised it himself in several
cases. The conviction of the importance of discipline has led
to some serious struggles in our history. It was because
the sense of ministerial responsibility had been strongly
realized by our fathers — the preachers of Wesley's own
time — that they could not be content so long as their
people flocked to the altars of an unfriendly clergy. The
same conviction, again, has determined them to resist
attempts to communize the Church, and to reduce the
ministers below the scriptural standards.1 There is no
space here to discuss the merits of the first, or of the
subsequent divisions which have occurred in the century
since the death of Wesley. We have no wish to analyse
former misunderstandings or to appraise the judgments
or acts of our predecessors on either side. We rejoice
to have come upon better times. All the families of
Methodism at this day confess their oneness. We are
none of us certain that, for the present, the separate
organizations do not accomplish a wider usefulness than one
confederation could. But even these ' schisms ' have helped
to assimilate our experience with that of the early Churcli.
There were ' divisions ' then.2 There were ' jealousy and
strife.' Like them we have given proof that we are some
times ' carnal ' and ' walk after the manner of men.' That
our progress has been interrupted and our influence
checked by these divisions, no one can doubt ; though we
may believe that God will overrule them to His glory.
But this loyalty to the law of order, which has marked
1 Bcecham, Constit. of Meth., p. 99, refers to Min. of Conf . 1768.
2 1 Cor. i. 10-12, iii. 3, 4 ; Jas. iv. 1, 2. Cf. also Ep. Clem., i.-iii.

Order and Progress. 151
our connexional spirit and history, may also be observed
as a characteristic of our idea of personal Christian hfe.
We do not wear a garb like that which once distinguished
a Methodist in the streets. We do not now separate men
from women in the public services. The early preaching
has ceased ; we do not meet in ' Bands.' In the hurry of
our age, with its frequent assemblies for moral or bene
volent objects, and with its social, political, and literary
activity, we do not see so many at week-night services, or at
meetings for fellowship and prayer. But, by the grace
of God, we still retain, in our class system, a security
against the evils of a promiscuous Church membership.
The older forms of the class meeting — which are not an
essential part of this institution, intended to promote the
' communion of saints ' and the highest spiritual advance
ment of every member- — may be undergoing modification.
We have no uniform standard with regard to the minimum of
attendance which should be demanded. But the principle
of a vital association with the fellowship of the Church,
and of submission to a scriptural rule of life in the case
of all who join us, we do not yield.1
If, also, there is any question of ' gifts,' we can in this
matter humbly rejoice. We have not been favoured with
a renewal of the miraculous powers which were so wonder
ful a part of the endowment bestowed upon the early
Church. But in charismata of teaching, exhortation,
administration, and evangelism, God has greatly favoured
us. He who raised up John Wesley with his commanding
1 Dr. Gregory makes some valuable 'suggestions' at the close of his
History of Christian Fellowship, on this subject. He says : ' The mode of
fellowship is not " sacred from revision," but I hope the fact of fellowship
is.' See also Dr. Rigg's Connexional Economy, p. 186.

152 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
personal influence and untiring energy in labour ; Charles
Wesley to send out streams of Christian poetry which yet
water richly our inheritance, as they refresh the universal
Church ; and John Fletcher to expound the way of the
Lord more perfectly to our people, afterwards called out
Hopper and Bradburn, Coke and Asbury. The modest
learning of Joseph Benson, the legislative genius of Jabez
Bunting, the intellectual breadth and stately eloquence of
Eichard Watson, secured an ample and generous develop
ment of our theology and ecclesiasticism. There are those
still living who remember the serene countenance of Joseph
Entwisle, ' fit index to his heavenly temper ; ' the pene
trating intelligence and ' winning sweetness ' of Eichard
Treffry, jun. ; the saintly fervour of Bramwell, Smith and
Stoner ; the pulpit energy of Lessey and Newton.1 We
have not forgotten those who were all with us at the last
Newcastle Conference, Dr. Waddy, L. H. Wiseman, G. T.
Perks, S. Coley, Dr. Jobson, J. Eattenbury, Dr. Punshon,
Dr. Smith, and W. 0. Simpson. Every one of these names
represents gifts of God to His creatures and to His Church
of the highest import, and the value of which we do not
seem to discern until they have been withdrawn. And,
amongst the laity, how well gifts of wealth have been
employed by such men as Thomas Farmer and Sir Francis
Lycett ! How well spiritual power has been exercised by
such laymen as Benjamin Carvosso and William Dawson,
and by such women as Mrs. Cryer, Mrs. Gibson, and Miss
Button !
The numerical progress of Methodism, however, is
1 Our missionary heroes should not be overlooked : such as Leigh,
Squancc, Lawry, Hunt, B. and W. Shaw, Gogerly, and many others.

Order and Progress. 1 5 3
possibly the phenomenon which some persons will regard
as the most striking feature in its short history, — as the
most perfect repetition of the early successes of Christianity.
Tacitus is our first external witness to the spread of
Christianity.1 He tells us that Nero, anxious to avoid the
rumour that he had destroyed the city, charged it upon the
Christians. He says that the leader of this sect had
suffered capital punishment under Pontius Pilate ; that
this execrable superstition was for a time subdued by the
death of its leader, but broke out again, not only in
Judea (origo ejus mali), but in Eome, into which every
abomination flowed. Several having confessed, led to
others being arrested, and a great multitude (multitudo
ingcns) perished. These were convicted, not of the burn
ing of the city, but of hatred to the human race (oclio
humani generis). They were covered with the skins of
beasts, exposed in public shows, nailed to crosses, torn by
clogs, or, when night came, their flaming bodies supplied
the place of torches. The people pitied them, because
they died, not for the public good, but through the cruelty
of one man. Yet the historian blames them for their con
tumacy. In this scene of diabolical cruelty, it is believed
that Peter and Paul lost their lives, as did many of the
first members of the Church of Eome.
But, notwithstanding this baptism of fire and blood, the
Church began again to flourish. Thirty years later, Pliny,
governor of Bithynia, wrote to the emperor Trajan to ask
' what he should do with the Christians, for they abounded
in every age, rank, and sex.2 This contagious superstition
1 Annates, xv., 44.
2 Cf. Pliny, Ep,, x., 97. The Romans hoped by the destruction of Jeru-

154 Met/wdism in the Light of the Early Church.
had seized not only cities, but villages and mere hamlets.
It had spread so rapidly that the temples began to be
desolate, the solemnities to be disregarded, the supply of
sacrifices to fall away.' x Fifty years later, Justin Martyr
says : ' There is not a single race of men, whether barbarians
or Greeks, or whatever they may be called, nomads, or
vagrants, or herdsmen living in tents, among whom prayers
and giving of thanks are not offered through the name of
the crucified Jesus.' 2 As Pliny speaks of Asia Minor and
Justin of Syria, so a little later Tertullian bears witness
from Northern Africa. ' We are but of yesterday, but we
have filled every place — cities, islands, forts, town councils,
camps ; we possess the masses, the decurire, the palace, the
senate, the bar — the temples alone are left to Paganism.' "
Again: ' Not only Parthians, Medes,and other eastern nations,
but Africans, Moors, Gauls, even the British are subdued
to Christ.' i The name of Christ was everywhere received.
In accounting for this success we do not question that
the conditions necessary for it were in existence. But this
salem to humble the Jews everywhere. The grievance broke out in a new
form in Christianity ; yet now, the Romans clearly distinguished between
Jews and Christians : see Gfrorer, Ges. d. c. K., p. 253.
1 Plir.y says that he extorted much of his iuformation from two servant
girls who were called ' ministers : ' ' Ex duabus ancillis qua? ministee dice-
bantur. ' From this it appears that females, some of whom were of the humbler
class, ' handmaids, ' were engaged in Christian work. Though the torturer did
his worst, nothing could be elicited from them to justify accusation, and the
governor could only brand their faith as ' a wicked and unseemly super
stition : ' 'Nihil aliud inveni, quam superstitionem pravam et immodicam.'
* Dial. c. Tryph., u. 117. 3 Apol., c. 37 : ' Hesterni sumus,' etc.
4 Ad". Jud., c. 7: ' Brittanorum inaccessa Romanis loca, Christo vero
subdita.' Schaff (Hist, of Ch., 1-100 a.d., p. 197) conjectures that in the fourth
century the Christians formed one-tenth of the population of the Roman
Empire. This is about the proportion of Methodists in England. In
America they are yet more numerous.

Order and Progress. 1 5 5
does not lessen the marvel of Providence. Gibbon thought
he could account for it by referring to the social condition of
the Eoman world, and to the peculiar qualities of the new
religion.1 The zeal of the new religionists, their austere
morality, their assertion of supernatural power in miracles
and in the fulfilment of prophecy, the promise of a future
life, and the advantage of a strict discipline, made their
success certain. Moreover, every one agrees with the philo
sophic historian, that ' Providence frequently condescends to
use the passions of the human heart and the general circum
stances of mankind as instruments to execute its purpose.'
Therefore we can reckon among the factors in the rapid
extension of the Methodist form of Christianity, the zeal
of its professors, their strict rule of life, the vividness of
tlieir faith, their solidarity of fellowship, and their singular
but efficient organization with its universal discipline. In
Wesley's days, also, the Churches were inactive, and there
was no such competition in Christian aggression as that
with which we are familiar. The Anglo-Saxon race had
already commenced that colossal work of colonization,
which has simultaneously extended the British Empire
and the kingdom of Christ over the earth. But the
national Church was too feeble to keep pace with emigra
tion and political extension. A new system of religious
life, with its fresh adaptations, had a suitability to the
wants and ways of scattered settlers, backwoods-wanderers,
and bush-rangers, which the older Churches could not
exhibit. The growing freedom of states and peoples ; the
impulses of the Eeformation — extending far beyond the
inclinations of the lovers of ecclesiastical authority ; the
1 Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, c. xv. See also this Lect., p. 20.

156 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
decay of old-world governments and the failure of their
policy ; the freedom and development of the press ; the
collection of multitudes in manufacturing and commercial
centres, for whom the Church could make no provision,
have all afforded a grand opportunity for a system of evan
gelism, freed from the restraints of tradition, but baptized
with the primitive spirit, and appealing to primitive and
typical models. We are thankful that this splendid
opportunity has been, to some extent at least, improved.
Or, rather, we adore the great Head of the Church, who
has employed such instrumentalities for the accomplish
ment of so great a work. ' What hath God wrought ! '
Without His supernatural aid and guidance these results
would not have existed at all. We have but to look at
the difficulties which lay in the path of progress to be
convinced of this. How could a few people, without
wealth, without institutions, without social position or
power, withstood by prejudice of the most violent sort,
by persecution often extending to the loss of all things,
have undertaken a cosmopolitan labour like this, and
have carried it to a successful issue ? x But ' the little one
has become a thousand, the small one a strong nation.'
The society of ' eight or ten persons ' which met in London
in 1738 has expanded until it has gathered twenty-five
millions of the race under its influence. In America it
has become the largest Protestant Church, and commands
the suffrages of the leading citizens. The wealth and
culture of the United States are now contributing to its
1 ' The Wesleyan Methodists are the only denomination which has
retained the secret of primitive success.' (Rev. Mr. Ward, Serampore,
quoted in Anderson's Centenary Sermon. ) This is not so true now.

Order and Progress. 1 5 7

prosperity. Under separate Conferences in Canada, —
where all Methodists now happily join, — in Australia
with New Zealand and Polynesia, in South Africa and the
West Indies, it numbers its followers by millions ; and
there is no nation under heaven among whom the
messengers of this Church have not already gained some
triumphs for the gospel.
But we do not assume that our mission is exhausted
and the history closed. Problems as solemn as those which
met the gaze of our fathers yet await solution. The lost
thousands of our towns and cities — degraded by a false
civilization, trampled down by the fierce competitions of
commercial life, victimized by intemperance, by popular
infidehty, and by the evil example of their superiors — need
immediate help. Myriads of the heathen, whose neces
sities a century of missionary experience has revealed, and
whose religious systems our testimony has destroyed, wait
for clearer light, for Christian education, for social eleva
tion. The higher classes of our own nation, who are in
such danger from fanaticism, from social reaction, and
from the Eomeward tendencies in the national Church,
demand the prayerful attention of all evangelical Christians.
The scepticism of France and Germany, the religious
degeneracy of Spain and Italy, — as of all Eoman Catholic
countries, — and the stubborn resistance of the entire
Mohammedan world to Christ, present fields for spiritual
enterprise so vast that only the enthusiasm of faith can
dare to look upon them.
Within the sphere of our own Church life we have many
occasions of solicitude. How can we discharge the full
responsibilities of the pastorate, with its demands for higher

158 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
instruction and personal supervision of the multitude that
have followed us out of Egypt, and yet carry on the
unceasing evangelism that the state of the world without
demands ? At first, Methodism was a ' society ' within a
Church, — depending upon that Church at many points of
its spiritual and ecclesiastical constitution. But now we
stand apart, as a Church with its own institutions ; and
more may be needed to adjust terms of membership which
were suitable enough to a ' society,' but may require adapta
tion now that we are a fully separate Church. Especially
do we need to learn what is the true ' relation of baptized
children ' to the Church which has received them ; and
how we may obtain the sympathy, cohesion, and co-opera
tion of our educated young people, lest they should be
betrayed into the forsaking of Christ. On the other hand,
there are to be met the aspirations of those who desire ' to
go on to perfection.' Sometimes these are impatient with
the lower standard of devotion above which many members
of the Church seem to be incapable of rising.
But the chief lesson which we have to learn from the
triumph of the past is how we may conquer again. We
do learn from this incontestable evidence that the old
power of the gospel remains. Eighteen centuries after
Pentecost, our fathers and we are witnesses that ' the Son
of man hath power on earth to forgive sins,' and that ' the
residue of the Spirit ' is with Him. There are those who
doubt whether this work be of God or whether it be of
man. Like Bishop Gibson, they cannot see that ' any great
work of God has been going on.' One great triumph of
Methodism is, that its methods of doing good are now
adopted by all Churches. The successors of those who

Order and Progress. 159
persecuted Wesley for preaching out of doors, for holding
services in unconsecrated places, for teaching the doctrine
of conscious conversion, and of the ' highest life,' now do
these very things as earnestly, if not more earnestly, than
ourselves. But they still allege that it is not ' lawful ' for
us to do them. They yet denounce us as ' schismatics.' x
They still declare that ' Dissent is sin.' 2 That which we
believe to be the work of God, some will seek to destroy as
the work of Satan. Only, our history assures us that such
opposition, however crafty or powerful, cannot overthrow
us so Ions as we are doing the work of the Lord. When
we cease to attend to that, it will be time for us to come to
nought. If this ' wild olive ' has been ' grafted into a good
olive tree,' it takes its place among the branches. With
them it has become ' partaker of the fatness of the root of
the olive tree.' We glory not over the other branches.
But we do not mourn because we are not grafted in to any
of them. The life is not in the branch, but in the root.
' If the root is holy, so are the branches.' But we ' rejoice
with trembling.' To us it is said: ' Be not high-minded, but
fear . . . Behold the severity and goodness of God . . .
Thou standest by faith.'
It may be said, perhaps, that in this lecture we have
been exalting our sect, and with much conceit and narrow
ness. We shall be reminded that ours is but, after all, a
portion, — a small portion of the professing Church. To this
1 ' Those who live according to the Word are Christians even though they
have been thought atheists, as among the Greeks, Socrates and Herodotus,
and Abraham and Elias among barbarians.' (Just. Mart. Apol., i., 146.)
2 On the Sunday evening after the delivery of this lecture, the Vicar of
Newcastle, the Rev. Canon Lloyd, in St. Nicholas' Church, spoke of
Dissenters as the successors of Jeroboam, 'who made Israel to sin.'

160 Methodism in the Light of the Early Church.
we can but plead in reply that we all have a right to the
occasional statement of our views. Evangelical Christians
will generally feel that really our cause is theirs, and that
any defence we can put forth for ourselves, may, to some
extent, advantage them. For they all are occasionally
liable to the reproach of being ' Methodists.' And our
adversaries may not be the worse for being told what our
views upon the main points, which divide us from them,
really are.
But we are sometimes reminded that we bear the name
of a sect, — ' Methodists ; ' and even the name of a man, as
' Wesleyans.' If Paul and Apollos and Cephas were but
ministers by whom the Corinthians believed, and these
apostles refused to allow converts to be baptized in their
name, can we consistently allow ourselves to be called by
a party name ?
We answer that the name ' Methodist ' did not originate
with us.1 It was first given in contempt, as was probably
the title ' Christian.' ' No name of a crime stands against
us, but only the crime of a name.' 2 We retain it as a
•convenient designation. Providence has permitted this
name to fasten upon us lest we should choose one for our
selves. And is it not better to have this name and its
reproach rather than some designation which we could not
fairly claim, or which, if we claimed it, might cast an implicit
reproach upon other Christians ? As it is, no one envies
us. Let us therefore be content to be known in the world
by the name men have chosen for us. Except for the
1 Dr. Blunt (Diet, of Heresies, p. 313) says ' it was first appropriated to
"Wesley and his friends as a piece of Oxford undergraduate banter in the
year 1728.'
2 Tert. Ad Nat., c. iii.

Order and Progress. 1 6 1
purpose of denomination, a name is, like an idol, ' nothing
in the world.' Only when we find that our name has
impinged upon the glory of Christ should we resolve to
forego it. No Methodist on earth sings hymns to John
Wesley. We have no shrines in our churches for patron
saints : no inferior cultus has its votaries outnumbering the
worshippers of the Son of God. We sing, from Japan to
California, from Labrador to Fiji —
'Jesus, the Name high over all
In heR or earth or sky. '
We say, in the most solemn moments of existence —
' Lo, from sin and grief and shame
I hide me, Jesus, in Thy Name.'
Our religion is Christianity, or it is nothing ; but we do
not call ourselves the ' Church ' or ' Christians,' lest we
should exclude, even by implication, those who ' are not
of this fold ' from the ' flock.' No name that men give
or refuse can disguise the fact that Christ's Name is upon
us. ' One is ' our ' Master, the Christ,' and ' all ' we ' are
brethren.' We are ' Cathohcs,' for we pray that ' grace
may be on aE them that love our Lord Jesus Christ in
sincerity.' We are ' Protestants,' for we deny that there
is any authority in Christ's Church higher than His word.
We are ' Methodists,' for we desire to be —
' THE FRIENDS OF ALL,
THE ENEMIES OF NONE.'

INDEX
TO AUTHOES AND SUBJECTS.

Abbey and Overton, 71, 146.
Alford, Dean, 102, 114.
Apocryphal writings, 11, 71.
Apostles, Twelve, 24.
Apostolical Canons, etc., 51, 70, 72-
74, 92, 119.
Apostolical Succession, 27, 52, 58, 71,
84, 123, 124, 125.
Apostolicity, 66.
Arminianism, 34, 35.
Arnobius, 13.
Arnold, Dr. T., 46.
Augustine, Bp. of Hippo, 13, 40, 74,
100.
Austen, Rev. S. C, 86.
Baptismal Regeneration, 40.
Barnabas, 28, 43, 97, 132.
Barrett, Rev. A., 108.
Baur, Dr. F. C, 48, 133.
Beda, 134.
Beecham, Dr., 26, 150.
Beet, Rev. J. A., 42.
Bengel, 30, 33, 75, 79 114.
Bennett, Dr., 62, 99.
Beveridge, Bp., 70-73, 92.
Beza, 28.
Blunt, Dr., 54, 160.
Boehmer, 26.
Browne, Bp. Har., 40, 83, 94, 126.
Buddieus, J. F., 93.
Bullinger, 140.
Burton, Dr., 129.
Butler, Bp., 30.

Calvinism, 32.
Catholicity, 82, 109, 110, 161.
Cave, Dr. W., 70, 73.
Cerinthus, 64.
Charismata, 28, 77.
Christ, Person of, 23.
Christianity, increase of, 153.
,, and evolution, 20.
Christians, early, poverty of, 12, 145.
Christian Library, 121.
Chrysostom, 112.
Church, nature of, 17, 81.
,, diversity in, 110-112.
Class-leaders, 50, 56.
Clement of Alexandria, 70, 137.
Clement of Rome, 12, 28, 51, 112,
114, 115, 123-127, 151.
Clementines, the, 122, 124.
Confessional, the, 53-56.
Conversion, doctrine of, 40.
Conybeare and Howson, 11, 26.
Cornelius, 103.
Cremer, Lexicon, 42, 105.
Cross, the, 64, 65, 97.
Curteis, Dr., 15, 31, 111, 135.
Cyprian, 52, 82, 100, 117-119, 120.
Dailbi, 11, 53, 72, 92, 130.
Dale, Dr. R. W., 40, 66, 102, 138.
Deacons, 26, 28, 115.
Dissent, sin of, 159.
Docetism, 64.
Dodwell, Dr. H. , 80.
Dollinger, Dr., 33.

164

Lndex.

Donaldson, Dr. J., 70, 120, 135.

Herzog, 93, 108.

Dorner, Dr. J. A., 22, 37.

Hilary, 46, 49.

Douglas, Dr. G., 39.

Hippolytus, 76.

Dusterdieck, F., 93.

Hook, Dr. W. F., 69, 73, 83.

Hooker, 108.

Ebionitism, 48, 64.

Houses, churches in, 113, 114.

Ecclesiastical history, 121.

Huther, Dr. J. E., 42, 114.

Edersheim, Dr., 18.

Elders, 51, 114, 115, 126.

Ignatius, 12, 26, 51, 65, 82, 102,

Ellicott, Bp.,33.

106, 115, 127, 129.

Epiphanius, 76.

Irenseus, 18, 61, 115.

Episcopacy, 71, 76, 92, 93, 111, 139.

Itinerancy, 51.

Erasmus, 15.

Eucharist, the, 117, 125, 139.

Jackson, Rev. T., 36, 69, 95, 145.

Eusebius, 12, 13, 26, 44, 76, 106.

Jacob, Dr., 111.

Jerome, 65.
Farrar, Dr. F. W., 47, 52, 93, 103,
Jerusalem, church of, 122.
106, 110.
,, destruction of, 52, 122.
Fathers, the, 32, 58, 100, 121.
Jewish Christians, the, 122, 123.
Fellowship, 9, 78.
„ and heresy, 64, 123.
Fletcher, Rev. J., 34, 40, 41.
Josephus, 29, 42.
Freedom, spiritual, 49, 68, 95.
Jowett, Rev. Dr., 13.
Judaism, 23, 47, 97.
Gentile Christians, 103, 104, 114.
Justification by faith, 34, 35.
Gfrorer, A. F., 46, 52, 154.
Justin Martyr, 26, 43, 65, 115, 132,
Gibbon, 20, 155.
137, 154.
Gibson, Bp., 59, 89.
Juvenal, 103.
Gieseler, 26, 71, 106.
Gnostics, the, 64, 134.
Kahnis, K. A., 46, 60, 63, 87, 122.
Goodwin, Dr. J., 30.
Killen, Dr., 130.
Gore, Rev. O., 84, 92.
King, Lord, 77.
Gould, Rev. S. B., 11.
Grace, sacramental, 96.
Lactantius, 9.
Green's History, 94.
Law, Rev. W., 54, 144.
Gregory, Rev. Dr. B., 9, 25, 56, 78,
Lay preachers, 52, 53.
80, 82, 108, 151.
Lechler, Dr., 22, 26, 28, 47, 52, 78,
Gregory, Rev. J. R., 73.
113, 133.
Gurney, Rev. A., 86.
Liddon, Dr., 15, 68, 84, 136.
Lightfoot, Bp., 26, 64, 68, 93, 102,
Hare, Rev. A., 59.
111, 124, 127, 130, 138.
Harnack, 120.
Literature, loss of early, 12.
Hatch, Prof., 20, 27, 29, 68, 92,
Littledale, Dr., 15, 71.
102, 137.
Love-feast, the, 78, 79, 116, 125,
Hausrath, 134.
139.
Hayman, Dr., 92.
Luther, Dr. M., 49.
Hegesippus, 47, 48, 102, 122.
Hermas, 43, 51, 115.
Macdonald, Rov. F. W., 31.
Index.

165

Manning, Card., 99.

Potter, Bp., 59, 81.

Marcion, 64.

Powell, Rev. T., 68.

Mellor, Dr., 54.

Pressense^ Dr. E., 77.

Methodism, a church, 69, 158.

Priesthood, 51, 52, 113, 117, 126.

„ discipline of, 141, 149.

Pusey, Dr., 15, 58, 69, 71.

,, divisions of, 137, 150.
,, future of, 157.
Quakers, the, 60.
,, in America, 145, 156.
,, its fellowship, 151.
Renan, 29, 52.
results of, 95, 155.
Review, Quart., 36, 145.
social position of, 145.
,, Lond Quart., 61, 85.
Methodist, name, 30, 107, 160.
Rigg, Rev. Dr., 31, 139, 151.
Methodists, at Oxford, 30.
Ritschl, A., 26, 28, 29, 47, 52,
103
catholicity of, 101, 161.
124, 135.
„ doctrine of, 32, 33.
Rothe, Prof., 25, 28, 52, 93, 129
p
,, in the church, 99.
Meyer, Dr. H. A. W., 10, 42, 79,
Sacerdotalism, 55, 71, 114.
102, 105.
Sacraments, 84, 85.
Middleton, Dr. Conyers, 11.
Schaff, Dr., 12, 26, 58, 114,
124,
Ministry, the Christian, 150.
143, 154.
Moberly, Bp., 85.
Schwegler, Dr. A., 19, 48, 123,
133.
Mohler, J. A., 80.
Simcox, Rev. W. H, 93.
Montanism, 49, 60, 75, 76, 134.
Simon Magus, 91.
Moravianism , 32.
Smeaton, Prof., 87.
Mosheim, 75.
Smith's Diet, of Christ. Anliq. ,
129.
Muratori, Canon of, 105, 115.
,, „ Biog.,
13, 102, 115, 119, 124.
12,
Name, Christian, 105.
Spirit, the Holy, 60, 62, 81, 85
86,
Neander, 52, 75, 110.
92, 96, 98.
Newman, Card., 9, 41, 58, 70, 81, 99.
Spirit, the Holy, gifts of, 89, 98
Nirschl, Dr. J., 57, 71, 124.
,, ,, witness of, 35.
Stanley, Dean, 22, 26.
Order, Church, 126.
Stevens' Hist, of Meth., 34,
37,
Ordination, 27, 28, 90.
146.
Origen, 82, 100.
Stone, Rev. J. K., 107.
Osborn, Dr. G., 62.
Suetonius, 29.
Paley, Dr., 79.
Tacitus, 29, 103, 106, 153.
Palmer, Dr. W"., 66.
Taylor, Isaac, 46, 141.
Paul, St., ordination of, 27, 91.
„ Bp., 81.
Paulinism, 65.
Teaching of Twelve Apostles, 12
28,
Pearson, Bp., 73, 81, 88, 130.
51, 73, 138.
Pfleiderer, Dr., 44, 52, 63, 135.
Temple, old and new, 21.
Pliny, 29, 114, 153, 154.
Tertullian, 11, 39, 51, 67, 76,
100,
Plumptre, Dr., 79.
106, 111, 116, 137, 154, 160.
Pope, Dr., 18, 21, 2 40, 86, 87,
Theology, Christian, 22.
106, 108, 12*
„ Methodist, 36, 37, 38.
1 66

Index.

Tractarians, 15.

Weiss, Dr., 42, 60.

Transubstantiation, 85, 86.

Wesley, Rev. C, 23, 81, 152.

Tubingen School, 14, 48,
115, 123,
Rev. J., 23, 31, 32, 35
46,
134.
57, 59, 66, 70, 74, 77, 80,
121,
Tyerman, Rev. L., 86, 121
128.
149.
Unity of Church, 102-140.
Westcott, Dr., 12, 42, 73, 93,
106,
,, visible, 106.
123, 131, 132.
Urlin, Mr., 77.
Whiston, Rev. W., 74.
Usteri, L., 60.
Whitefield, Rev. G., 41.
Wordsworth, Bp. C, 25, 73,
78,
Valentinus, 29.
106.
Vitringa, 29.
Wordsworth, Bp. St. And., 122.
Warburton, Bp., 62, 77.
Young, Rev. Dr., 35, 62.
Ward, Dr., 96.
Wedgwood, Miss, 31.
Zahn, Theod., 115, 127, 129.
MORRTSON AND GIBB, EDINRtlROH,
PRINTERS TO HER MAJESTY'S STATIONERY OFFICE.
THE FERNLEY LECTURES.

THE HOLY SPIRIT : HIS WORK AND MISSION. By G. Osborn, D.D.
Demy 8vo, paper covers, 6d.
THE PERSON OF CHRIST: DOGMATIC, SCRIPTURAL, HISTORICAL.
With T wo additional Essays on the Biblical and Ecclesiastical Develop
ment of the Doctrine, and Illustrative Notes. By the Rev. W. B. Pope,
D.D. Demy 8vo, cloth, 7s.
JESUS CHRIST, THE PROPITIATION FOR OUR SLNS. By the Rev.
John Lomas. Demy 8vo, paper covers, 6d.
THE HOLY CATHOLIC CHURCH, THE COMMUNION OF SAINTS.
With Notes and Essays on the History of Christian Fellowship, and on
the Origin of ' High Church ' and ' Broad Church ' Theories. By the
Rev. Benjamin Gregory. Demy 8vo, 290 pages, cloth, 4s. 6d.
THE DOCTRINE OF A FUTURE LIFE AS CONTAINED IN THE OLD
TESTAMENT SCRIPTURES. By the Rev. John Dury Geden.
Second Edition. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is. ; cloth, 2s.
THE PRIESTHOOD OF CHRIST. With Notes. By the Rev. Henry
W. Williams, D.D. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is. ; cloth, 2s.
MODERN ATHEISM: ITS POSITION AND PROMISE. By the Rev.
Ebenezer E. Jenkins, M.A. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is.; cloth, 2s.
LIFE AND DEATH, THE SANCTIONS OF THE LAW OF LOVE. By
G. W. Olver, B.A. (Published for the Author.) Demy 8vo, paper
covers, Is. ; cloth, 2s.
LIFE, LIGHT, AND LOVE: THE PRINCIPLES OF HOLINESS. By
Alfred J. French, B.A. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is. ; cloth, 2s.
CHRISTIANITY AND THE SCIENCE OF RELIGION. By the Rev.
John Shaw Banks. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is.; cloth, 2s.
THE DOGMATIC PRINCIPLE IN RELATION TO CHRISTIAN BELIEF.
By the Rev. F. W. Macdonald. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is. ;
cloth, 2s.
THE WITNESS OF THE SPIRIT. By the Rev. Robert Newton Young.
Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is.; cloth, 2s.
ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PHYSICAL 'AND MORAL LAW.
By the Rev. William Arthur, M.A. Demy 8vo, paper covers, 2s. ;
cloth, 3s.
THE UNIVERSAL MISSION OF THE CHURCH OF CHRIST. By the
Rev. B. Hellier. Demy 8vo, paper covers, Is. ; cloth, 2s.

LONDON: T. WOOLMER 2, CASTLE STREET, CITY ROAD, E.C.
And 66, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.

NEW AND RECENT BOOKS.

THE REV. WM. ARTHUR'S NEW WORK.
POSITIVISM AND MR. FREDERIC HARRISON. Crown 8vo, paper
covers, price 2s.
Contents :— The General Position of Comte — The Polity of Comte — The
Philosophy of Comte — The Religion of Humanity.
ON THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN PHYSICAL AND MORAL LAW.
The Fernley Lecture for 1883. By the Rev. W. Arthur, M.A. Fifth
Thousand. Demy 8vo, 208 pp., sewed, 2s. ; cloth, 3s.
1 A singularly able and thoughtful book.' — Church of England Quarterly.
' A suggestive book, full of eloquent passages and pregnant remarks.' — The
Spectator.CONSECRATED CULTURE. Memorials of Benjamin Alfred Gregory,
M.A. By the Rev. B. Gregory, D.D. Crown 8vo, with Portrait, 5s.
' The book is throughout one of the deepest interest. ... It is as admirable
in taste as it ia excellent in style.' — London Quarterly Review.
:This is a remarkably interesting record of a life which was full of promise,
and indeed, short as it was, of performance. . . . He died in his twenty- seventh
year, and he had already done more work than many men even of active habits
accomplish by forty.' — The Spectator.
' A finer instance of consecration and culture has not occurred since the days
of Clarke and Wesley. Let our readers instantly secure the book.' — Methodist
Times.
INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HISTORY. Civil, Ecclesiastical,
and Literary. By W. B. Boyce, Author of ' The Higher Criticism and
the Bible.' Demy 8vo, 672 pp., 7s. 6d.
' It exhibits the leading events of the world contemporaneously as far as
possible; . . . and is the well-written outcome of much careful reading and
thought.' — Eastern Morning News.
EXPOSITORY LECTURES ON ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.
By the Rev. William Tyson. Demy 8vo, 7s. 6d.
' Mr. Tyson grapples with the scope, argument, and spirit of the Epistle in a
very masterly way. ... It is a wise, strong book.' — British Quarterly Review.
A HIGHER CATECHISM OF THEOLOGY. By the Rev. W. Burt Pope,
D.D. Crown 8vo, 5s. ; half morocco, 8s.
' AH our theological students, young and old, would do well to procure and
make diligent use of this excellent book.' — Primitive Methodist Magazine.
TALES AND POEMS OF SOUTH INDIA. By the Rev. E. J. Robinson.
Crown 8vo, 5s.
lA perfect jewel-house, enriched with the"! most luminous illustrations for
sermons and speeches.' — The Methodist Recorder.
'Merits earnest attention; much to iaterest.' — The Literary World.
MODERN ANGLICAN THEOLOGY. Chapters on Coleridge, Hare,
Maurice, Kingsley, and Jowett; aud on the Doctrine of Sacrifice and
Atonement. By James H. Rigg, D.D. Third Edition, to which is prefixed
a Memoir of Canon Kingsley, with Personal Reminiscences. Crown 8vo,
7s. 6d.
1 Exceedingly cultured essays on the various aspects of Anglican Theology.
. . . Dr. Rigg has added an extremely interesting and valuable Memoir of
Canon Kingsley.' — Nonconformist and Independent.
THE RELIGIOUS OPPORTUNITIES OF THE HEATHEN BEFORE
CHRIST. By the Rev. W. P. Slater, M.A. Fcap. 8vo, 2s. 6d.

LONDON: T. WOOLMER, 2, CASTLE STREET, CITY ROAD, E.C;
And 66, PATERNOSTER ROW, E.C.

t>4

YALE UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

3 9002 08844 2489

',<»•:

JfW'i

Ti -

H