IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET {MT-3) i!t> * ^ '^ l> t • V^s V. ( ^, BISHOPS ADDRESS. "^-M I TV) « Union of our Church with the Metho- ^wiiStn pk"^ ?TJ?' *^® P"^""!*!.^* Methodist Church of Canada, and the Bible Christian Church of Canada, met the corresponding Committees of those Churches in joint session, first m the city of Hamilton, in September hist, and subsequeX U the lh«ih«i^ ."{J^""?*?! •" rrr^^J*"^, DecemV for the purpose ol ascert^ ning whether a Basis of Union dould be found on which the Churches might with any pro- priety be called upon to deliberate and decide. All are further aware that these C^m- Z^J^"^^ upon a Basis which thev think worthy of the consideration of the 2?rti!nr°**'^*'^,'.7u'f^^'^ *^* °®''«" °^ y**""^ ^^^^^^l Conference entrusted with the power of call felt it incumbent on them to convene the General Conference under the authonty of the resolution cited above. And it was thought best to coS^ vene at as early a date m practicable that the General Conference might first pro- nounce upon the Basis of Union and thereby save the Church, well as might be.^ agitation and distraction. As Episcopal liethodists we hold as onHf our funX mental pnnciples the supremacy of the General Conference, especially in the settle- ment of questions of law ; and maintain that the unity and autVority of the Church are m the General Conference, while it remains plainly within the powers and prerog- atives given It m the Disciphne. Since important questions of constitution and law were likely to transpire an early call was all the more desirable In this case the General Conference had marked out for itself and for the Church a plain path clearly withm Its constitutional functions. It had confided an important interested suS to a Committee, which Committee was under instruction to report to the Qenerll Conference at the earliest practicable date, and fuU provision wm made for the^ sideration of the report and proper action upon it. It seems, therefore to me, beUevlng as I do in law and constitutional procedure as necessary and central to Epwcopal lUethodism, that it would be, towythe^^T S^ To!^ «rt "^«^^ i?5 '^l ^^^ or Quarterly Conference, orlny official person, organ or ody in tiie Church to step athwart the action of the General cSn- ference, or in any sense or degree hinder or biaa its deoiaions. "«u«nM v«n ^ \r r I*] TDK rULLIBT LIBSBTY MOST BS ALLOWED * •nd secured to private jodsment and personal opiniona, and proper disctiaaiod most not be fettered, but 6mciai men and bodies must act according to the mind and in- struction of the supreme official authority. Resignation is open to them, but not op- position, while they sustain their 'official relations : except, indeed, it be thatthe^ supreme authority has plainly tifansoended constitutional bounds ; and the supreme authority, the Supreme Court is the power to say where the constitutional bounds lie Suppose our Parliament to have appointed a Committee to examine certain interests ana report at once and directly to Parliament, with a view possibly to refer some matters to the constituencies or the Municipal Councils, what would be thought of the council or constituency or Parliamentary omcisr that would interfere and pronounce upon the merits of the case more or less distinctly before the committee under posit-, ive instructions had reported, or Parliament had decided whether there is anything for the consideration of the councils or the action of official bodies 7 Our OenenS Conference took a very plain and direct line of action with a very evident intention and desire. It had hoped and planned to preserve the Church from agitation, to keep the societies in unity and peace ; first, itself to pronounce upon the important issues of Methodist Union : then, if at all necessary or desirable, to submit the proper mea- sures to the authorized constituencies for their consideration and determination. In due time it was purposed, the Quarterly Conference, and if thought best, the societies should meet. On this line of action, so wisely pro-detenninea and so well marked out, we are now assembled in adjourned session. The fesolution cited above plainly gives us the scope of our operations, viz., " To receive the report of the Committee on Methodist Union and take such iMstion thereon as may be deemed necessary ; and, further, to atte/id to any unfinished business." And since it is an adjourned session, our organization is complete, and our Committees are in force and effect as these matters stood at the adjournment in Hamilton last September. It will simply devolve upon us to fill up the respective delegations as well as we may be able and proceed with our work. It is to be hoped we shall not have a protracted or wearisome ses- sion, but it is at the same time to be remembered that the most important interests of our Church, possibly the most tremendous issues of our life are upon us. It is the solemn dut^ of the hour to preserve the heritage given us of the fathers, to be true to Christ first and His cause ; and then to the principles ' we have so long cherished, the principles of our Episcopal Methodism. To this end we need well to discriminate what is of Christ and what is of our polity, lest we sacrifice Christ to polity, or maintain even the non-essentials of polity at the expense of the cause of Christ. We need in large measure the wisdom that cometh from above, and the mind of Christ, ^hat we may see where we must stand and what we can yield ; and then stand where w>3 must ; and yield as necessary where we may. •' If any man lack wisdom let him ask of God who giveth to all men liberally and upbraided not. But let him ask in faith, nothing wavering." Shall we not then upon the warrant of the promises through the merit of Christ draw nigh unto God with all the heart. " God is our refugb and defense, a very present help in trouble." If ever we needed divine aid and guidance, it is in this Conference and amid the perplexities of these times. We want to be right and do right. If so, we shall look unto God and He will help us do right. » It may aid us in being right, and doing right, to recall the present status of the question of Methodist Union, and review for a little its history. The desirability and the practicability of a Union of the Methodist Churches of this coimtry were long ago affirmed by our €(eneral Conference- and have been again and again re-ai- armed by the Geaeral Cunfereicc; aud by omcioi bodies in tno Church that con- sidered themselves (Competent to pronounce upon so important business. The Gen- eral Conference of 1870 affirmed the principle of Union, and appointed a Committee to meet the Committees of the other Methodist Churches, and formulate a Basis of Union. Their report to the General Conference of 1874 sets forth that their attempts were abortive. . The same report, which was duly adopted, declares : — " We firmly i mAoA most ind and in- but not op- » thatthe^ le ■npreme bouyds lie n interests refer some ight of the pronounce nder posit-^ B anything ur (ienenu t intention >n, to keep tajit issues roper mea- lation. In e societies ell marked )ve plainly committee lary ; and, ed session, ct as these •ly devolve td proceed risome ses- b interests It is the to be true cherished, scriminate polity, or Christ. We of Christ, land where }m let him bim ask in 3 promises 3od is our divine aid imes. We ill help us itus of the iesirability mtry were gain re-af- I t/u&t con- The Oen- Dommittee a Basis of r attempts We firmly [5] oonsider a pure and godly uAifying of Methodittn highly desirable, and therefore recommend the General Conference to appoint a Committee to consider and formulate a Basis of Union with the Mathodists of the Dominion, or of the Continent, or any branch or section thereof, and to authorise the Bishop to unite in any joint call that may be made for such purpose." Here the desirability is emphasized, and the belief in the practicability more than implied, and means are devised to further it. The report adopted by the General Conference of 1878 declares as follows :— " That, con- cerning the subject of Methodist Union, your Committee in the present stage of the discussion upon the question and the present attitude of the Churches with regard to it, deem it sufficient to re-affirm the action of the Napanee General Conference of 1874 to this extent and effect, viz : " We consider TBB nNIFICATION OF METHODISM HIGHLY DBSIKABLB, and recommend this General Conference to appoint a committee of ten, to remain in force and effect till the next General Conference • • • ^j|.}, powers to correspond with other Methodist Bodies on the qtfbstion of Methodist Union," • * etc. The question, then, either as a matter of finesse and claptiap, or of earnestness and godly sincerity, has been before the Church, and Methodist Union has been cUstinctly favored. The Annual Conferences have had abundant time to protest, to declare against the expediency, the desirability, and the practicability of Union. So also have the Lay Electoral Conferences, the Quarterly Meeting Confer- ences, the Societies, the Classes, and all our constituencies. Which of them, how many of them, have spoken or affirmed against the desirability or the practicability of an Orj^nio Union of the Methodist Churches of this country ? Our Church has but one voice on this subject. We believe our General Conference to have been honest . when it said :— •• We firmly consider a pure and godly unifying of Methodism highly desirable, » * • ^^j appoint a committee to consider and formulate a Basis of Union with the Methodists of the Dominion." We believe the other Confer ences and Bodies that have spoken upon this subject to have been honest, and they have spoken as late as our last Electoral Conferences, which, in effect, said " that any Basis of Union to be acceptable to our Church must embrace the Itinerant General Superintendency." Our position, then, as a Church, on the desirability and practica- bility of Methodist Union has betm clear, unchanged, and unmistakable. Wherefore, the men that have advocated mei«ures looking toward a Union have been consistent with our Church action, and perfectly in order. To say the least r ' it, whatever our desires in the case, th^ have been as consistent with our Church a, ..- > as those of us who have been indifferent to Union or opposed to it. There was t time when the Quarterly Meeting Conferences, the District Conferences, the Annual Conferences, and the Lay Electoral Conferences might properly, in the exercise of their rights, have declared against the desirability, the feasibility, and the advisability of Methodist Union. But as constituencies and sub-constituencies they sent on their representatives to the General Conference, our Supreme Court and Legislature, which ^clared posi- tively and repeatedly for Methodist Union as to its advisability and feasibility. And so far as the constituencies and sub-constituencies spoke upon the subject they have spoken in confirmation of the mind and action of our great representative body, the General Conference, Wherefore, this General Conference, in its former sessions in Hamilton, was clearly within oar constitutional lines and along the cDurse of our declared policy in moving forward its Committee, with powers and privilege} to find, if possible, in consultatioir with the Committees of the other Methodist Churches of the country, a Basis of Union that might be worthy of the consideration and adoption of this Conference and of our Church and all the Churches concerned. The consider- stiou of the report c£ this Ccnmmittes is the chief business, of this adjourned session of the General Conference. The question that now arises is, " Is the Basis submitted by the Committee under all the circumstances acceptable ? Shall we approve the fiuis of Union now submitted, and be prepared to consummate a Union with all the Methodist Churches of the country upon it ? Or shall we reject the Basis and decline to unite upon it T The question of the advisability of Union in general is not before [6] iw, or ita desirability or practicability. To briag bacV any of theM qnnf tions it #111 Denecewary to move re-oouideration and enact much expunging and obUteration. ine aimple qaestion ia ~ too. THB ADVISABILITY 0» AOjppnNO THIS BAUB Of ONION. And it will be clear to every mind, since we are upon a line of negotiations with other parties, that It is not a question of mo<».ifloations, amendments, additions, or dimina tlons, but simply of accepting or declining this Basis of Union ""-^ ' ' th' future this is the issue tirst and now. Whatever may be in A temptation may arise for this General Conference to hand the provisions of the Jtosis on to the constituencies. Quarterly C!onferences, or Societies uncler the directiont of Discipline or otherwise without itself declaring decidedly as to acceptance or rejec- tion, and thu'< placing the respctosibility wholly over upon other bodies. All these bodies and all parties concerned must have the opportunity of full and fail discussion, Md must in their own place and time do their own work and bear their own responsi- bility : but from the very constitution of our Church and the line of action of our General Conferences, the primal responsibility rests upon this General Conference, lo send on the Basis for the adoption or rejection of the Quarterly Conferences with- out clearly making known its own mind with regard to it would, it seems to me, be unworthy of this General Conference. Who so capable of weighing its merits as this General Conference ? Who entitled to settle the legal and constitutional questions, but this General Conference ? Who eihpowered to arrange our relations to other Churches tout this General Conference ? . Who should so well understand or so carefully guard our toterests, honor and rights ; who has such authority and influence with our people as * this General Conference ? I am persuaded that this Conference will weigh carefully ail the interests and issues, and will recommend to our beloved people a cleor and decisive course of action. While we would not fetter or prejudice the constituencies that must declare upon this all-important question, we must bear in mind that the Enmal responsibility is upon us, and here, and to-day. By our constitution we are put 1 tins place of authority and responsibility, and we must do our duty. In a good sense leaders and rulers of the people, we are accountable to God for our care of His Church. If the whole aspects of the Union question have changed since their pre- sentation by former General Conferences, or since the former session of this Conference m Hamilton, it is for us to say so. If we have beeu ourselves deceived, or liavo been deceiving others ; if we have ourselves been misun- derstoofl or have misunderstood others ; if we have misjudged in the premises or have changed our mind and intent, let us now declare it. It is for this body to pronounce first, and do what it can to quiet agitation in the Societies. We can hardly suppose that in the present state of feeling and action in the various Churches we shall reverse our long declared policy on the Union Question. So, unless we repudiate the decisions of former General Conferences as to the desirability and practicability of Methodist Union— M-hich would be at once dishonorable to ourselves and dishonest to the other Churches, and therefore not for a moment to be thought of by any one— there is before us a well defined route of proceedings. It will devolve upon us first to determine whether Ve accept or decline Union upon this Basis ; that is, whether we think sufficiently well of the Basis to send the proper provisions on to the Quarterly Conferences. If we reject the Basis, there would aeem to be littlp nInA t^ <1n Tf nro a«r.<>n4^ if ..^ fo. «« ^^ «« - n^^t concerned, then it is necessary that we determine what matters shall under discipline go on to the Quarterly Meeting Conferences, and how and when they shall be p. e- ^ aeuted. And herein arises at once an important question which this General Con- ference must determine. If any of the articles of the Basis of Union infringe any of the five main limitations and restrictions upon the powers of the General Conference tioni it #U1 tblitemtion. with otRor or diminu- r may be in lions of tlie e direction! ce or rejec- All these discussion, n responsi- !tion of our Conference. Buces with- 8 to me, be frits as this istions, but >r Churches yguardour J r people as 1 carefully El clear and istituencies id that the we are put In a good »re of His I their pre- n of this ourselves m misun- e premises is for this I Societies, ihe various So, unless ability and ) ourselves thought of line Union o send the asis, there sr€sss srs discipline all be p.a- aeral Con- age any of Conference . [n -^M, for instanoe. if the General Roles of the united societies be cbanoed, Artiolei of Ksligion or Doctrines of the Church), the privileges of trial and appeal done away, the plan of the Itinerant General Huperiiitendency destroyed, or the Episcopacy done •way, a certain vote and maiority are required in the Quarteriy Conferenees that •re not necessary under discipline unless these restrictions are infringed. -* J?*** ^^n*"*! Confefence, not its officers, not the Quarteriy Meeting Conferences, not the Annual Conferences, not irresponsible individuals, not private 'and personid opinion, no- Conventions, not meetings here and there, but this General Conference. AKD THl niNBRAI. OONFEKKNCK ALONK, ' is the proper authority to decide whether the constitutional limkations are broken . through, whether our Episcopacy is done away, and the plan of our Itinerant General Bupenntendency 18 destroyed. This question of constitution and law nieetH us at the the very threshold of our proceedings. And it is a very important question ; because it affects the very initiation and the motle of legal proceeding, and may affect the property rights in case of i?nion. If the Union is effected, it must be the Methodist Episcopal Church in Canada that coes into the Union ; and in order to carry its pro- perty with It, It inu8t«o in with the consent of its Societies, under the provisions of its constitution. We do not want, we are persuaded none of the negotiating Churches want strife and division. If there be a Union, LET IT BE AS UNANIMOUS as can be expected in the ordinary condition of human affairs. To this end we must proceed upon our constitution, allow the fullest discussion and freest exercise of all .constitutional powers. , As to the question whether the plan of the Itinerant General Superintendcnty is destroyed, and the other question, Whether the Episcopacy is abolished or done away in the Basis of Union, possibly some observations are m place here. It is presumed .the articles of religion, the doctrines of the Church, the rules of society, the rishts of ministry a^ membership, and the use of the profits of the Book Concern remain in- tact in the Basis of Union as proposed. If this be the case the only other matters that could require three-fourths of the Quarterly Conferences in their favor by three- ^rths majority in such Conference would be the General Superintendency and the Episcopacy, as intimated above. Tf the plan of the Itinerant General Superinten- dency IB not destroyed in the R s proposed, and if the Episcopacy is not abolished or done away with, then these . ir.tters, important as they are, need not go to Quar- terlv Meeting Conferences at all, and the Quarteriy Conferences need not move m them. And it is for this General Confc.-ence to say whether the plan of the Itinerant General Supenntendency is destroyed. It is for this General Conference to say whether the Episcopacy !s abolished. Let as look at these points. And they must be tooked at in the light of ^ OUK DISCIPLINE jlS JT IS TO-DAY, f and not as itww ten years ago, or even as it was six months ago j and certainly not as our beloved Episcopal Methodism exiets in its unfettered consolidation and mtuid perfection m the United States of America, and in the high ideal set forth in theit historic statements and ecclesiastical formulas. What thev have and what we have TO-as«r are two diilereut things. What they gave ns in 1828 and what we have since ourGeneralConferenceof last autumn, in Hamilton, are two very different things; 'They can say that the Presiding Elders are appointed by the Bishops, are Bishope' assistants, are a part of the plan of the Itinerant General Superirftendency. Socoifld our Church a year ago, md. always in the past till the session of this Geneiul Conference hut autumn in Hamijton. Our General Conference then distinctly affirmed [8] Si'nCn^' ™l!i"« ^"»!'*!»« KW«"hiP !■ no P4rt of th« Jtlnenuit 0«ner»l Super- th?^;2i ^h P^??'**" , for -tofionlng tW Pr«ilding Elder., and reduW ^vTJif^' *»''«^•PP«^*■ the Pre.i(flng Elder.. Thl. i. of oouree • complete Elde^ALurp^'f "'"'''*""" ''^•^ °' Bfoboopel Methodiem. nmklng the Pre-fii^ S th. .SLr,! •«^*^^'^^^w'"?^^''**•■^*■'^«*■••"d • wonderful limiUtTea 2 fir *.*?!« u/k*^ ^"^''R *^ ''^ "^^^''y •• ^°"'*» Superintendent. Bui !?«/«[* lithe General Ck)nferenoe 1im the power and right to aooept. con- the I«;.i3S!f^:."i*^ "r" '''J!*'" ''''I*'" re.triotion. to abolUh the Epi-oopioy and the Itinerant Superintendency, it mu.t have the power and right to »y WHAT KIND or tPISOOFAOT AWD ICPIRINTIlfDBNdT ilv''what*IhTi'''"' '!:^ wP°.r"J' •'^^ ^ «''<>**'•«*• I* "n"** h*^« *»>e powerto SLThmL* aij kT "*!•' V,^**" Superintehdenoy and what not : what .h^l be an Wet7h« ).w ^r*"'* *"^*- ,i' \"^Y'' ''»• ^''^ "»•* *he«. i« no court above It to in- of thJ .iiLmv'if i!""'***^*#f ''.^^J;* ™**" ^ »*• •nactment.. and by the pri..3iple. the oZ^?q.^^* ^f establbhed. The Mme Gfeneral (Conference limited the^wer of him W ™1«^ ?**°'^*°,* to -tation preacher. «> as in an important .euM tTreduce to inw!^!^SM7°*f **' ***" Stationing Committee, and ^rtainly mo.t wriouely mS* J 1 "**" ^»*hout the expreu consent of the Pre«iding Elder, bv a C?EL«tLfT1'^n°" mo«on..'^owi«heto know when he lifte Kim from one SSerS « ^^^o^'^l Superintendency of the Baeia of where n'l'^o^ T'^" T^" . ^"^"'^ '* ^^ °°* difficult te maintein that within the SnionthL ?nT^xr*u*T!'iS*»*™"^^^ Superintendency in the Basis of S of .nn.l?f ! -^ Methodut Epwcopar Church in Canada a. we are now. For by SSsira-iSin^n,?"'* consequent Discipline, the Oei^eral Superintendent of thj ^s not hv Inl nf " ^'""'•™' Conference Boards and Committees, which is a right he does not by any means enjoy under the mere provisions of Discipline among usf • eating Union''lT^''ii' *°** ^\?^^ ''^'^.«^ '**«° ^'^''K^^* »^"* oy '^e men advo- cat ng Union, some perhaps would have said they were designedly breaking down our polity m order to break up our Church and dissqlve us into tJnion. But so fa7 aJ" ^Z^aTI^' •?'•" ""^ P'^«f«''»«dly other viaws as to the proposed Union, of especUUy Et foJitTr"' ^' V^' Kpiscopacv and strong Attachment to it haveC 2 least as forward as any m these radical and almost revolutionary chances. Possiblv h^lhrTJ'.mtf ^/r'^"'?" '""t^ r "'g*'* ^ P"?»"d for eUntrtT come t5 Mr!^ r^Z^ notknowmg whither they went. It may be their eyes wereholden! b^twe«^i« af^Ti'y concerned, I do not see that there is enough diffcrenc^ tenScv of thfTLt^ fPTr"*'"."^^^^^ ^-^^I ^"''^"g ""• *»<* *•»« CJ^^^ral Superin- i^lT^ *u ^"'- "^ VJ".°" ^ '"*'^« * "'"^d "Pon agaitist Union. . Were it what aSIr th« r.lln nf r° ^^^ ^fV^^ **" °^^*^« T"'^"^ *^* *he Basis locpaoy and M power to shall be an ave it to in- e pru.3iples he power of e to reduce ■t aeriously For if he aiders b> a 1 from one From the >he Basis of within the le Baaia of w. For by lent of the a right he >gua. • men advo- ; down our far as I ' especially ive Deen at Possibly ome. The ere holden. difference . Etl Snperin- ire it what at we now materially to use the So much piscopacy. actioe dia- ler having e Church : 1 the Holy, [9] , IS TH« innoorACT dokb awat? II may be greatl v modified ; bat what we want to know to ouide our conatitu> tlonal action ia, la it aboliahed 1 * Methodiat fCpiaoopaoy ia not Roman Epfaoopaoy, or High Ohuroh Anglican Epiaoopacy, boaating itaelt to come down from 8t. Peter, and bring down aoma wonderful charm with it. It makea no pretenalona to carry with it a aaoramenUl • efficacy indiapenKable to aalvation, or an exoluaive right to government by divine authority. No Church on earth more than the M-'thodist Epiaoopal Church Mnudiatea prelacy , papacy, hierarchy, saoerdotaliam and e\ rything that savors of them. We utterly reject prelacy because when it says that Episcopacy is that form of Church Government in which one order of Ministers is superior to another, it plants Mniathing in our Episcopacy that neither Paul tl)e Apostle, nor John Wesley the Revivalist, nor Coke the Missionary, nor Asbury the Bishop ever claimed or allowed : that very thing which Paul oalls the •' mystery of iniquity "—the man of sin, and which grows into the Archiepiscopate the Patriarchate and the PaJMUsy. We have no sym- Sathv either in belief, practice or ^scipline with them that teach the clergy are ivided into three general orders, Biahopa Prieata and Deacons ; much less with them that proceed to say there are other orders subordinate to Bishops, aa Deans m rch deaoona} prebendariea, oanona, Ac, and aome go down to the acolyte. ODB ■PIHOOPAOY haa no kfnahip to auch a prelacy, even at h\i beginninga. Nor in the mind of its Tottnder and the spirit of his true followers, does it savor in the least of sacerdotalism that it should convey in its own restricted line an efficacy of sacrifices and sacraments, and a viri;ue of ordinations necessary thereto, traceable under magic touch from hand to head and head to hand, back through we know not what labyrinths to the Holy Apostles themselves, and owing all merit and power to the security of tho descent. Others may hold such an Episcopacy : but Methodists, never. If I understand the mind of John Wesley and our own Book of Discipline we hold first that the sacred Ministrr is called out of the laity to be a special order, to secure the preaching of a mire Pjspel, and especially the orderiy administration of the Holy Sacraments. We hol^ further that in thU order of the Holy Ministry there is the probationary, graduating and transition order of of the diaconato; and that when i candidate is ordained Elder or Presbyter he has all the functions the ministry can give him. These are the orders. There may be offices in these orders, but the Presbyter is is complete in orders. He can baptize, solemnize matrimonv, bury the dead, and preach the word which we make the functions in the order of Deacon ; and he can consecrate the elements, administer the Holy Sacraments, assist to ordain and set apart ministers, govern in the Church of God, and if necessary consecrate a Bishop, which we make t|e additional functions in the order of Presbyter or Elder. Or the tody of Eiders may delegate ordaining and governing functions to overseers whom we caU Bishops. This 18 our Bishop ; THIS IS OUR KPISCOPCAY, , wid this ordaining power in behalf of the presbyters and this governing power as the Presbyters may direct are certainly in the General Superintendancy of 'the Basis. It 18 not so much a question through what grades, offices or or4er8 the msai has «)me, as what are his authority, functions and powers ? The two orders Deacon and Elder or Presbvter an WA hnld t.hnm omulnafa t'.ha nn« Snf^x t'ko »4.l.«- 4.k» 1 L.:-- included in the greater. To talk of a Bishop being an order over the others ia rampant preUicy : is what I never was taught, learned or accepted. The Ministerial SUCCKSSIOK 18 IS THESE PRESBTTERS. Here is the succession in all its powers, offices and functions. These Presbyters may [10] over the derEK^f KvSL^ ?rtZl'' ^""^**'^ monarchy of Episcopacy and Svnodfl that i« P«,aK, 7 • • ^ ^.^^^^ govern and ordain by Presbyteries weak If thev Jovitn^nH^^""-""!!'™' *°^ **»« connexional bond II comparitively GenemI ConSeS S which J^id/ 1^ "^^ '^'?f ^^ *?^ '^"*h°"«'* '>y thSpSJ these overseers iSnK t^e 1 Jnts of thltT ^ ""? authority of the entire Church. united Church. tharifEpfsco&thS™^'"'™' ^"°''''°'^' ^^ '""''''^'^ '^^ *»^« THE CONNEXIONAL BOND IS STRONG, METHODIST BISHOP IS FIRST AMONG EQUALS ; TO tne people the purity Of the doctnnes and nernetiiifv «nrl r^r,„i„^u„ „* *i.jr „ " to theVople the p„rit/„rfrd„^S.;S";e'^^^^^^^ ments, proposed Basis, I am free to express my conviction that the Methodist Episcopacy irf* BY NO MEANS DONE AWAY Its principle, spirit and m-?thod are there in a very good in the Basis of Union, sense preserved. ind answer "iTbv ^tf P»««°Pf 7 « very clearly set forth in the folbwing question wiai purpose, snail orclam him accordmat to our form of orclinn.«nn " w..^™ t-u:^ n. • ?n tK?^'^^ the succession and authoritf are not inTp^^cy ortv?„ an Ep[rcopacy but in the Elders, and they can erect an Episcopate out of the Presbvterv • th^vT«n ^ii^ * and ordam, or, as the Discipline otherwise^uts it, consecrate a Sop Ku ±J etf Th" nVth^dtt^ES^^^^^^ """J "^*' *^ ^"*^«"*y of ^hSjeneml CoS* aLZu, * r ^^?*"odist Episcopacy does not come down from above bv a sunerior r.r irL^"* ^'IT *^' ?r'*y '■ *^'« Presbyters and theiraction. Andyetto show us th^ f^I !w" ""^ f^u P?;"*y °r ^'^"^^'^y *^« °°'''"*1 "»«thod of constitutWaBishris " bv the elojtion of the General Conferennfi an/l f.J,« ia«j„ * *u„ u" i ° . .. ^°*'P .^^. ''y or 1 .S8 to greater. It is, as I understand it, the election by the General CoBfer«npJ thp presby* r number to [ess; t&atis Episcopacy Presbyteries mparatively ;he Supreme ire Church, ifore of the lone vifdi- jommended deuounced eminent in reby secure the sacra- its author- ured in the iscopacy iaT very good ions of the it business IS it stands g (question maining in hop ; and ference for m this it is lopacy, but ' can elect it all must •al Confer- iperior or- low us the lop is " by B Bishops, »rick ? Is possession er to less, anference, n powers* I that the I of conse- l a Bishop >f a Presi- ing Elders excepted. . [11] • From all this it is clear that we make ordination the special duty of a Bishop, that the Eld- ers can ordain even a Bishop htmself,and that if the two words, "ordination excepted," were omitted, which the General Conference is competent to do, the Presiding Elder, though unordained as a bishop, might, besides performing all the other duties of a Bishop, ordain candidates tc the sacred ministry. Whence it would appear that special consecration is not indispensable to the spirit, essence, power, purpose and effect of our Episcopacy. It is the Elder's seal to their election and appointment, and not the communication of a spiritual and divine efficacy. x The question is. Is the Episcopacy done away ? IT MAY BE GREATLY MODIFIED, ^ but is it abolished ? If it is the election that carries the Episcopacy, then Episcopacy is in the Basis of Union, at least in some degree. If it is the consecration to the office that carries the Methodist Episcopacy, then our Episcopacy is not necessarily in the Basis of Union, and may be said to be done away. If the Episcopacy stands upon both the election and the special consecration, then at least one of its supports is left, and that likely the stronger support, the Biahop-elect being already an ordained elder. But if, as our authorities maintain, the Methodist Episcopacy is not an order, but an office in the Presbytery, and if, as John V ley clearly understood it, the end and aim of that office is to perpetuate in the Presiv eery and in their behalf the line of ordina- tions, and the ministerial office in the Holy Sacraments, conducting these ordinations and authorizing these Sacraments under the sanction and direction of the entire body of the Presbytery, and in the name or the whole Church, then the Methodist Episco- pacy is not done away in the Basis. Its gist, aim, purpose, and results are secured and preserved in the Basis, though there be n6 stipulation that there be any special consecration or ritual induction to this office. It will be for this General Conference to say whether in its opinion the Episcopacy is done away by the Basis, for that decis- ion will affect the vote to be taken in the Quarterly Meeting Conferences. But for myself, though neither the name Bishop, nor the life term of tlie office, nor the special •eremonial consecration to the office is found in the Basis of Union, while these aro evidently important modifications of our Episcopacy, holding as I do that the Bishop is in orders but a Presbyter, and is by office considered apart from the General Snper- intendency, the agent of the Geneeal Conference, that is, ol the Church, in the preser- vation of the line of ordinations, and of ti>e purity, efficiency, and sufficiency of ttie Holy Sacraments, I do not consider that our Methodist Episcopacy is by any means in constitution, nature, force, and effect done away in the Basis of Union. If I thought that the General Superintendency jvas gone, and no vestige of the Episcopacy left, I couid not raise, I would not raise either hand or voice in favor of the Basis of Union now submitted to this body, and possibly to the Church for approval. And I am per- suaded there are many more of my mind in this General Conference. ^lethodist Union may be desirable for many reasons, but it might be secured at too great a cost. .Once it is settled, if it should be so settled that the plan of our Superintendency is not destroyed; that our Episcopacy is not done away, ^d the other restrictive rules are not infringed, the vote in the Quarterly Meeting Conferences may je made less ex- acting ; but still great practical difficulties remain, and questions of vast importance for the Quarterly Conferences to consider, should this General Conference deem it wise to se"d those questions on to those subordinate Conferences. This General Confer- ence will no doubt consider the Basis article by article and item by item, ai!d "iv* its deliverance thereupon. And should the General Conference decide that therestrict ive rules are infringed, and so virtually declare against the Basis, it is competent for the Quarterly Conferences to initiate measures and make recommendations in due course. But we will all agree, and no doubt ourQuarterly Meeting Conferences will heart- ily coincide with us, that if the General Conference find anything in the Basis fatal to Union and beyond the reach of this Conference, so far as practicable the agitation on [12] ?n,5«™**°*'*i^**®'' *^*~-, Wherefore this General Conference before riaing will. ihl^nT' '"/m* ^Tt^t'"? of »*«b«»* wisdom make provision for either alternative JeZSr^d 'ist """" "^° ''' ^"' *'''^' ''^^ ^•'"^^ •"'^y ^« preserveS 4J,« £>^r*-°f ***. ?°i°° °'V*^® ^*^" *" ^^^^^ observed, have come up freely from all tiv«^nf- °^"''*^'*''T*^?.^^*"°"»I~'°*»°f ^'«^- Twoof theBSdiessiy, -You th J vlrl ^^•^'l f *""" ^*^ Delegation, excluding it from the Stationing Committee, the very point of power and the very place we desire its action. The liy Delegatten Iw ^f^w^t^^^ "V *"?.* ? *"^?« *°^ * f^'^^'^-" The other two, the larglr bodfes re foJirht 2^ h^^w^ ^y^^/.T*i°"i° *^«, ^°?"*^ Conferences, nor have we desired or wrL^ A^ ^"^ conceded this for the sake of Union," The largest body says, " You «nl. K J^f "* ^°" • P"f ^^''^^ "S^** """^ destroyed the autonomy of our Annual Confer- J^O^L "?«'*"'"'-8>yr" '^^ *^\«'^« 1»*°<1 ^-^d imposing upon us the Presidency of SL^?? ™^ Superintendency on the other." The other locJies reply, some of them, forn ^^ D«!«gat»on is with them a settled principle, and must in some effS^ L no TIn?nn"^°'^i* 'a ^^^ '^°"."*^ Conferences ; efse so far as they are concerned there iJiv of thTft«ni:!l p'^^ reply„80far as we are concerned, that with us the suprem- oi^«rii n r*°^"'^ Conference and the unity of the Church and its authority in that General Conference are settled principles, and that to secure these things we . MUST HAVE A GENERAL SUPERINTENDENCT, nr^ina^fo ^"^^^^^i^ °^ that Superinteudency in the Annual Conferences ; and that ?tv nf tr^*""** fl ^T^*"^ °®?'*' *«*« of authority must be done under the author fS ^ w« tT'^^ Conference, that i,. of the entire Church, and in its name. Else so esL anothrfnr ?r°''^ J*""? "^ ^ no Union. One contends for the laical inter- ests, another for the pastoral, and another for the connexional and governmental. ?rnvf ^.' ""' have invested funds in pastoral and personal interests. The others sTy ChZlJ - 'P^'''*^ investments, and we ask no share of them unless we or oS V^Ztt^ raise amounts proportional to yours. Albeit in Connexional funds, as the on rh^?r^r fissions, wo are not behind you, and we have no idea that our debts telks of rl^r.^^^ ^ proportionally exceed yours. One pushes on the Alabama claims, talks of constructive damages, and boasts a giving power. The others say, " From S^r^notes ''^ tr/ofTh^^^' ^T-^* !f*«* T "^^°'^*« ^°»- We arereaSy to cS^ 5t^f t^i ^- 1 Vu *hem say It IS a degradation of the Annual Conference Presi- seTwhir f'^^r^^y,. *l^« General Superintendent. We answer, we would li?e to itia an Annna^^r***?'''" '°«'' -5' ana which is the officer degraded, if degradation Vn^™! Annual Conference President that yields to a General Superintendent, or the General Superintendent that yields to the Conference President ? Who does the InlT/l f ".^^T^, *^y «^y. The essential points of our Church polity are gone ; ?h«frn h f?^*^*\??'?"''P**=y" sacrificed, others as stoutly maintaining^ that ^omi affiS .h^^T of Episcopacy is all but crushing out their vitality and ifberty. trf h,t^ ^^ ^**,^*^ delegation is all given up, and others complaining that they Our ZtZlt """"^ »l™?«t.«nrio*^?red with lay delegation. Some are fairly shouting. Our finances are well-nigh ruined; others cry aloud. If Union is a money spe?' u ation, we want nothing of it, but we are ready for justice in all things. Some insfnu- ate, Uur people cannot bear your preachers; the others as tartly reply. We prefer our ?.^AiJrVAi^li''rr ^'^^ congregations, and shouk^ be very glad had you left us ««..?!}■'* \l^'' ^"'°° agitation. And thus you would think these Methodist people have nothing m common ; no common ground of doctrine or usages ; no com- ITmnnfT ° °'* ^^^"^ ' "*? co'nmon heritage or hopes ; no commoa feelhigs, desires. sympathies, purposes or aims ; diversity afl, all antagonism. But if we ao nati«nti; hSii^ff"?® omectioiisou the one side or the other we will find most of them balanced off closely enough for Christian men, agreeing in doctrine, desiring organic S;Z'.ri^ preferring Christ and His cause to worldly honor and ;molumeft, T thJ ZSShtnflniir.t'^'^J'T'^ T"'^*'* power for good, to strike the balance to the l^r S of «Pf*'^f» and, eternal profit, unite their energies, affections and resource. for God, and trust Him to make up all their lack out of His fulness in Christ ) risbg will, alternative, (served' from !ely from all Bsay, ♦•You Committee, ' Delegation !r bodies re- e desired or says, " You lual Confer- 'esidenoy of nae of them, me effective erned there ;he suprem- >rity in that we B ; and that the author- e. Else so aical inter- ernmental. others say, we or our ids, as the t our debts ma claims^ y, "From dy to com- ence Presi- )uld like to egradation ent, or the ) does the are gone ; ining that ad liberty, that they shouting, oney spec- >rae insinu- prefer our TOM left us Methodist ; no com- B, desires, » patiently it of them ig organic int, in the ace to the resources It. • [13] Though this be all so, <&nd though lam firmly persuaded that the organic union of the Methodisms of this land is one of the duties of the hour, I am as firmly per- suaded that, humanly speaking, Methodist un^on is utterly impracticable. Men can- not be driven into it ; they cunnet be coaxed into it ; they cannot be bought into it, they cannot be flatterred into it ; they cannot be deceived or hoodwinked into it ; they cannot be excited into it, and they cannot be reasoned or convinced into it. No art, device, power, or wisdom of man can accomplish this work. If it is ever done with unanimity and success — and if not so done it is better not done at all — it will be because all partake more df the mind of Christ, are filled with His Spirit, and are led by Him in simplicity and humility into all truth. While we do not for a second im- agine that the superior part of the intelligence of the Churches or the higher piety was assembled in the Joint Committee in session in Toronto, we are confident that if that spirit, and knowledge in subjection to that spirit could be brought to bear upon this important question in all our assemblies throughout all grades in all the Churches there would not be much trouble about Union. * i It is not a question of superior intelligence or acumen, or of firmer adhesion Ijo matters of secondary importance ; but it is a question of christian love, justice, and truth, and of knowledge obedient to love, justice and truth. If Methodist Union be according to these things we • ought to have it. If it be not according to these things we had better let it alone. If it be for mere worldly honoc, that we may be a " great Church," or have a place in a "great Church;" that there may be larger emoluiAents to men already well-sustained ; that there may be less contributions by those already doing too little ; that there may be ease to those already too little employed ; that we may obtain an undue advantage over others or resist thenk in the acquisition of their rights ; if there prevail the secular, sinister, or selfish motives, we want to have noting to do with it. But if it be ior the glory of Christ, for the economy of men and means for His service, for the removal of occasions of irritation and strife, for the cul- tivation of the spirit of unity, for the improvement of Discipline and a stricter con- formity to Methodist usages, ^or the better care of our children and youth, and the more effective organization and operation of our circuit work, the better direction of oul- energies in missions and Church extension, and general furtherance of the cause of the Redeemer, we need at least to consider the matter very carefully, honestly, and in the fear of God. We may not surrender Scriptural, primary, and fundamental Srinciples, and we shall not be asked by genuine Christian men to make such surren- er. But we may be righteously asked closely and conijcientiously to examine which are Scriptural and indispensable, and which may be conceded in the interests of love, unity. Christian progress and the advancement of our common Methodism. Surely in such an issue and such an hour we shall not take counsel of bigotry, narrow- ness or prejudice. Nor shall we take counsel of envy, suspicion and fear. We shall pray to be saved from arrogant assumption on the one hand, and from the weakness of too pliant and ready concession on the other. We shall seek the single eye that the whole body may be full of light. In Toronto there was keen apprehension and full comprehension of important principles, strong contention for them in love, and a Christian surrender of cherished usages, and an intelligent reconciliation of diverse polities under the baptism of the Holy Ghost. It was the glow and fervor of that baptism that' brought men and systems together in reconcilitition and peace. While on the one hand principles were tenaciously held, on the other the men assembled were evidently strongly desirous of carrying out, if practicable, the in- structions of their various Churches, and ascertaining whether a Basis ot Union could be found worthy of the consideration of the Churches. This was not an easy thing to \t\}i OEitlx iu rrtto iivu uOiic muiiviiL-Eivi iiutxi aiDuvc .nixt-t i/iicitr 1:3 iiOu lux: iil'3L uuu.xixicci'' tion here or elsewhere for weighing these grave issues without this baptism of light and love. Without it we fau, with it we reach the right conclusion, be that for Union or against it. Oh that now the Holy Spirit might come upon us in power, and upon all the assemblies, members, and meetings of our Church, that shall have to do with this important business ; and upon all the brethren and assemblies of the breth- ren of the Methodist Churches of tbvt lountry that are in the midst of similar perplex- [14] i til? **i L"**^ **"' "*• ^ '^*°* i* i° no other wV- When I look at the wavrS'thi SiTwhl T *« \'™?;u'^ cherished opinion., an*,! the reluctTS^ith wLhwey^ S!^^'™„r 5'S'' ?' "■? ".»•?'«'»■> ""1 fear with which we are apt reuard otK S. »- t:n zriranTwtnt^-jri^zrxSS 1 diente and faith. Ana ao they proved the will and owned the power of (kS! |:f "ortSc? tL'°ise'.!s"atz"'^°thief^' "ire tli tZ SE7°l°.°t^ -^TPP?" ?'u'*'' Oj'P'' ministry and thie ba. KMbi;ved §Se 2m EniFcomirL^K J n ^ coi^tuiiing. m her separate existence aa the Methodist trffShe D "oiSSr^^^^ ^^ "^^^^f? '^^^^ *^« otherMethodistbodiesof the coun- ends of the earth to carry our principles thithes ? Untn'lSn^S^^5!rh°S=ri*^'!te.'f£i'!'-'-'''™- declared for »if or^;n^E^^te»£^^^^^ • Union. And when f review what the other' l«>d£rhave ySded of their^SSh':^' I I, and we are 1. In all our lia is my'only bhia way. I ways of the 1 worldliness party spirit, uid in Ohris- t, the obstin- hichwe yield d others' ad- ike our own ; a and stir us irhen I think ence of this minion, hu> bccompliahed dance of the it the great ation that it God in obe- }od, lapp no one Ne seem to uned of her table princi- lis country, ght for the 8he fought She fought to perform have been e, and they Fered in the 3h govern- ided to the lel ministry the people, )d. These w the ques- »ly religion, liberty and Methodist >i the coun- same prin- > and prov- ' Shall we >, seek the Bolared for erhaps not i a rational prepare for ' cherished luren of the irit of love [15] accepted the compromise and co-operated with us in the formation of the Basis' I am convinced the Spint of our God was with us, and that a work was accomplished that never could have been accomplished except under His guidance and iniuence. And BO X am persuaded that, even as occurs in the conversion of every sinner to God, while 15*^ " ? Tu .^**?*. absolutely cannot be done without God's Spirit, it can very easily te done by the Spirit of the Lord when the man or men submit to His direction and But we must also remember that while God's special works, like the conversion 01 men, are impossible to us, it is not impossible to us to hinder or reject God's cpecial worKs, as many a man rejects his ewn conversion and plunges into darkness. My only anxiety m the maiter is, that we know the will of God and do it. And to thta end we must walk in humility and purity before Him, with the eye single to His glory, and m all things submit ourselves to the teaching of His Word and the Snr wT^ ^t^K 2?°'*- ^^.' ^" ^^ "^'^^S "P°° *»»" Conference, and in all Ghost^ Whether we unite or remain separate as now, we all need the Holy Fron» all these considerations this Conference, our Quarterly Conferences, and our Uliurcb can easily gather my spirit and convictions in this important business. Per- sonally I had been^etter satisfied had this agitation not arisen, but I dare not speak ammst what may be the providence of God. Whether of good or evil, or for good or 111, a mighty movement for the unification of our Methodisms is upon us, and we must meet Its issues. Let us prepare to meet them with intelligence, calmness, and broth- erly love, Md m the love and fear of God. If our Church constitutionally aays *u- T°' , ! "^ *'^ ^y ^* *"<* «**•»<* together. If our Church constitutionally reject this Basis, let us remain loyally together and prosecute the work of God. If the Church constitutionally reject the Basis and say " No " to Union, my voice then would be to brace up our polity, rebuild the broken walls and give our people that to which they will loyally adhere. But for the present hour, when I look at the inter- ests of the Church of Chnst to be advanced by a united Methodism, the economy of men and means here, and the better direction of our energies in the North-West of our JJominion, Mid in remote parts of the earth, the removal of the occasions of friction and contention betwixt rival denominations fioldingthe same doctrines, occupyiny the same fields aod often the same homes, the incitements to brotheriy love and peace, the improved enforcement of discipline, the better systematizing of our claims, our societies and Sabbath-schools, the greater vigor of ou? educational inti- tutions, and Publishing Concerns, and wider dissemination of a harmoni- ?"? '^^ homogeneous literature, the increased spiritual momentum of such a body It It abide m unity, humility and love, when on the other hand I consider that it cannot oe that the Methodists of this Dominion are for ever to remain divided and at cross purposes. If not in conflict, that the longer Union is delayed the more difficult practic- auy. If not constitutionally, it becomes ; that our own Conference has brought our pol- ity nearly to the Union line in the Basis ; that though important concessions are made, yet upon honwt conviction our sacred interests are guarded and our central and fund- "J^fuv §?.?,*• " * 8ood degree maintained ; that there is no likelihood that any Of the bodies will ever be in a better fraternal spirit or make larger concessions, seeing each has conceded, according to its convictions of duty and honor ; that if there be no union now there is great danger of even fiercer strife ; that though there maybe objec- tions to the Basis foreach Church from its own point of view, and practical difficulties in w, yet forbearance and love under light from above can make them temporary and transient; and the Spirit of the Lord and true Christian feith and works which we may reasonably pray for and expect can in properliime remove all difficultiesi html aU bribes, and lead to success ; when I look on this side and then on that I am con- fJ^t t^J- ***** ™ "y judgment the time has come for the union of the Methodist onurches of this country : the timefor risingabove old contentions, chronic irritation, per- ^ ^^**'' .^f^'' V^^"' and every impulse, feeling, and consideration, but the cause of God and the settled principles of religion, honor and truth. Wherefore I would say deliberately and in the fear of God that as for me I would accept the union, and I ^uld accept It upon the proposed Basis. And I humbly advise our Conferenws and J^ 'a^u^^V?^ *" ***® mterests involved, to accept it, and to prepare in the love of God and the brethren to meet its issues. Nevertheless I am, as I trust we all are, with our people in their constitutional procedure, and am resolved with them to maintain Episcotjal Methodism separate and distinct, or to carry its fundamental and central principles into the united Church, under solemn leafi:ue and covenant in constitutional action there to be perpetuated. t^«^!i i« objected we are giving up everything : we are giving up the General Superin- wn(len,cy. 1 reply, the Basis preserves as solid, though not so extended a General »uperintendency as our own. Again, that we are giving up tjbe Episcopacy. I reolv. that we are preserving it, except the life tenure and the special consecration to the of! i^A «,,?K T ™a**e"J^e are preserving the unity of the Church, and the supremacy and authority of the General Conference, in some regards even above* what we have now ; we are preserving the supervision of the work and the agency of 'the General Con- ference in all connexional and general work, and the power of the Ueneral Conference lor tne Ohurch to conduct the ordinations and preserve the sacraments, which ia the pith and core, the meaning and extent of our Episcopacy ; and all of which, are the ^rdmal pnnciples of Episcopal Methodism. Again, that we are giving up our TraveUna Rresidmg Eldership, t reply that the General Conference in Hamilton left that witJ the Annual Conferences, to station the Presiding Elders, just where the Basis wiU likely J*ave it. Indeed the General Conference in Hamilton brought down our Epis- copacy, our Itmerant General Superintendency, and our traveling Presiding Elderstip ' very nearly to the level of the Basis, of Union. So that we in these retards havS neither very much to boast of, to give up, nor to defend. Again, that we are civinff * "P o«r diaconate. I reply, that is about the only distinctly constitutional possession TZrT lu **» «^y«."P- , .The disciplinary "divers orders" of ministers, Ld as we are to-day, the admission of laymen in equal numbers to the Annual Conferences, pre- sent the two mam difficulties to my mind, and the two main objections to Union— the former constitutional, the latter practical. Yet the Holy Scriptures allow large range for variety in Church government, and Methodism has wonderful powers of adapto- tion. Again, that we are giving up the ordination of our local preachers. I reply this 18 a provision of former times, not how necessary, the propriety of which amonc us IS gravely doubled ; and which, wifi. or without Union, may not be long retained. Again, that we are giving up our veto puwer in the Quarterly Conferences. I reply that we are substituting a better veto power in the General conference, and more, ac- cording to the genius of Episcopal Methodism in establishing undoubted the Buprem-acy of the General Conference, and enabling it withio itself to com- plete Its legislation. Again, that we are giving up our • enificent pro- f^ I' • u ^u?^?' ,***** '° '?" honorable and honest Unio. a«cording to theBasis by which only can we be bound, we are keeping all our property, and get- ting besides three dollars to every one we liow own. Again, that we Ixe dishononrig B,,ff«riTli ^i^^y^S ^f^f «J "» giving up the polity and principles for which they sulfered, toUed, and contended. I reply, that we are paying them the highest honor, preserving most effectively their energy and life work, andTerecting to their sacred memory the grandest monument by can-ying their principles into the United Church, ard planting the essential constitutents of their polity in the richer soil and large^ faelas of the one humblo, earnest Methodism of the wide Dominion. And all the Churches ean make the same 6r similar replies and allegations in their proper degree and sphere. Wherefore, as we stand to-day I see no reasonable way b 1 1 toadopt'the proposed basis of Union, let the other Churches do as they will. If they adopt it in gouiy sisceiity lot us do ready in godly sincerity to unite with them. If they reject xt, It will bring relief to many of our minds, but I had rather they reject it than we. with the eyes of this Dominion upon us, and of the -vholc continent, and of both hemisphere^, and of Christian and godly men of all ages, and of the angels, and of «od. And^nay the God of all grace and peace by His Holy Spirit guide us to the wisest, soundest, and safest conclusions, to the praise of His Holy Name