"¦I give. iAefi jBaoi^i \foV: fhe fea^^ig if .a, 0i)^gi &ytKSMoJp!tyi ' Yi^IL]l«¥]MII¥IEI^Snr¥«' From the estate of Gen. E. E. Bradley 1917 THE CHURCHMAN'S REASONS FOE HIS FAITH AND PRACTICE. * Be roady alwaya to give an answer to every mau that asketh you a reason O thn tope that is in you." — I. Peteh, ilL, 15, BY REV. K S. RICHARDSOlsr, D. D., AtTTnon OF " nnABONS wnY i am a cmmcnMAN ;" " the sroN-tjoit'a gift ;" "the rASTOIt'S appeal;" " EVIDENOEG of NATUBAL AND lUiVEALED EEHQ10&'," ETC. AND EDITOH OF HIE " AilERIOAN QUABIEBLT ciiuncn E£.?[E\v." T n I R P EBITIOK. NEW TORK: PUBLISHED BY JAMES POTT, NO. 5, OOOPER UKION. 1866. Entered according to the Act of Congress, iu the year 1863, by N. S. RIOHAEDSON, in the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States, for the Southern District of New Tork. John W. Ameeman, Printer, No. 47 Cedar-street,- N. T. ~ CONTENTS. CHAPTER I. PASE iNTKODTJOTIOJr, , 11 CHAPTER II. THE CHUECtr A VISIBLE SOCIETY. I. Its visibility implied iu the very idea of a Church. — II, Affirmed ia Scripture. — III. Proved by the prerogatives, or dinances, and duties conceded to it. — IT. Proved by the general consent of Christians. — T. Its visibility enforced, ... 16 CHAPTER III. UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND THE SIN AND THE EVILS OP SCHISir. Importance of the subject. — T. Direct affirmation of Scripture. — II. Schism directly forbidden. — III. Unity object of our Sav iour's Prayer. — IT. Primitive Cli.uroli on Uuity. — T. Schism IV CONTENTS. a Sin. — ^TI. Evils of Schism ; exhausts resources of the Church, promotes unholy tempers, gives an argument to In fidels, impediment to Missionaries.— TIL No reason for Schism but worldly 26 CHAPTER IV. THE MINISTET CHEIST'S POSITIVE INSTITUTION. An opposite Theory noticed. — I. This truth obvious, from the design ofthe Mi'iiitry. — II. Prom the actual appointment of the Mimstry. — lit. From the language of the Sabred Writ ers. — ^IT. That Ministry a permanent Institution, 47 CHAPTER y. THE CHRISTIAN MINISTET EXISTING IN THEEE ORDERS. The Scriptural argument. — I. Two objections to this argument noticed. — II. Proof from the general order of the Divine economy. — III. From the actual institution by Christ. — IT. Apostles a distinct Order. — T. PreslDyters a distinct Order. — TL Deacons a distinct Order. — TII. Summary of the Argu ment, 6S CHAPTER VI. SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED. Historical Argument. — The value of this argument maintained. — I. Testimony of Clement of Rome. — II. Testimony of Igna tius. — ^III. Testimony of Polycarp. — IT. Review of Testi mony up to close of first century. — T. Testimony of writers of second century. — ^TI. Testimony of writers of third cen tury. — ^TII. Testimony of modern travellers. — ^TIII. Sum mary of Historical argument 96 CONTENTS. V CHAPTER VII. SAME SUBJECT CONTINUED. PAGE Admissions of opponents. — Real value of this argument. — I. Testimony of John Calvin. — IL Testimony of Beza. — III. Testimony of Philip Melancthon. — IT. Testimony of Hugo Grotius. — T. Review of this Testimony. — TI. Conclusion. — VII. Lists of the Apostolic Succession, 127 CHAPTER VIII. AMERICAN METHODISM 150 CHAPTER IX. PEUITS OP MODEEN SYSTEMS. Our own objections to this kind of argument. — I. Developments in Germany. — ^11. Developments in England. — III. Among American Presbyterians. — ^IT. Among Congregatioaalists. — T. King's Chapel noticed.— TI. Conclusion, 167 CHAPTER X. MODEEN THEOET OP DEVELOPMENT 215 CHAPTER XI. LITUEGIES. Inconsistent facts in use of Liturgies. — Arguments in favor of Liturgies. — I. Holy Scriptures sanction thera. — II. Our Sav iour's practice and precept. — III. Practice of tho Inspired VI CONTENTS. P.iGB. Apostles. — IT. Pi-actioe of the Primitive Cliurch. — T. Are adapted to our Spiritual wants. — TI. Promote symmetry of Christian character. — TII. Conservative of Cliristian Doc triae. — Till. Testimony of Non-Episcopalians in favor. — IX. Modern Liturgical developments. Objections to extemporaneous prayers in Public "Worship. — I. Not sanctioned by Scripture. — II. Lead to irreverence. — III. Are mere Forms. — IT. luflrmities of the speaker. — T. May be medium of private and offensive views. — TL Distract Public Devotion. American Liturgy. — I. It is comprehensive. — II. Particular. — III. Scriptural.— IT. Evangelical.— T. Catholic— TI. Its history.— TII. Its fruits.- Till. Tributes to its worth 226 CHAPTER XII. POPULAR OBJECTIONS AG.VINST THE CilUECH ANSWEEBD. I. First objection. — The Cliurch opposed to the spirit of free civil Institutions. — II. Second objection. — That the Church System does not tend to promote vital godliness. — Three specifications examined. — III. Third objection. — Opposed to the spirit of improvement, so called. — IT. Fourth objec tion. — That the Church is closely allied to the Church ot Rome, 276 PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION. The circumstances under which tho present work was commenced, are briefly as follows. About a year since, the Author was led to prepare a sraall work, " Eeasons why I am a Churchman," which, in a few months, passed into a fourth edition, and has been instrumental in guiding many an inquirer into the Chnrch of Christ. A portion of the religious press, however, and some judicious friends, advised to an enlargement of that pamphlet, by presenting tho ar guments in favor of the Church more fully, and by giving more at length the authorities there cited. To have done this, however, would have entirely changed the character of that work. He determined, therefore, to leave that pamph let in its original form, and to give the leading arguments for the Church, more at large, in a separate work, and if pos- sble, in a manner suited to the present state of the public wants. To do this, has been the object in preparing the pres ent volume ; and he now sends it abroad into the world, re lying for its usefulness and success only upon God's promise to bless the truth, and guide and guard His Church. He has not written in a spirit of controversy, or merely for the amusement of any class of readers. Human life is too short, and its final issues too momentous, for him to write, or them to read, for such an end. But if, amid the unsettled and changing religious opinions of this century, amid the throw- 8 PREFACE TO THE FIEST EDITION. ing down of old foundations, and the defacing of old land marks, any (and he believes that the number of such is rapid ly increasing) are earnestly searching after the eternal, un changing truths of God, -which lie has revealed, and as He has revealed thera, sucb persons are affectionately invited to study well the following pages. He alone has the key-note to the present volume, who is willing to receive the oracles of Heaven with the docility of a little child, even though they humble human pride, and break down that idolatrous SELF-WILL, which is the besetting and growing sin of the present age, among us ; while, at the same time, they exalt God, and, in Christ, restore fallen man to that oneness with the Father, which was lost at the first apostacy. Should this unpretending volume receive attention from any who differ frora the vie'ws contained in it, to such he would say that he will pay all due respect to any effort, made in manly and Christian honesty, to overthrow the main posi tions here laid down ; but he has nothing in store but silence, in return for that bitter spirit of acrimony which, in absence of argument, so often atterapts to heap ridicule upon the most awful truths of God, and upon the blood-bought Institutions of His only Son, Jesus Christ. The writer has written under the conviction that we live in an eventful day, and that both prophecy and providence point to the future as fraught with the deepest interest. He has written, therefore, in soberness, but yet with earnestness, and, as he trusts, under the chastening influence of the re sponsibility which he necessarily assumes, who, in the midst of a distracted world, claims to be a sure and safe guide IN THE WAY or THE Church, to a havcn of rest and peace. PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. This work having been long out of print, the Author has seized the first hours of comparative leisure to prepare a new Edition. Written originally in the midst of pastoral cares to meet the wants of his own people, his object was to pre sent, in a plain and direct style, the arguments for the Church in a manner to satisfy tliose who have no time for larger and more learned treatises. It has not been thought advisable to make any alteration in this respect. Still the work has been carefully revised; some inaccuracies and typographical errors have been corrected; considerable additions have been made ; a new Chapter on American Methodism, and another on the Modern Theory of Development has been inserted : the Chapter on tho Fruits of Modern Systems has been re written, and adapted to the present times ; nnmerous Notes have been added ; and the several Chapters of the work have been re-arranged in more natural order. It is not improba ble errors and mistakes may have escaped the eye of the Au thor, amidst constant interruptions and diversions. The work is so brief as to be read without fatigue : author ities are given sufficient, it is hoped, for the inquiring; and yet numerous references are made for those who wonld in vestigate more thoroughly. It is believed the volume will 10 PREFACE TO THE SECOND EDITION. be found better adapted than the preceding edition, to gener- al circulation, and especially to the wants of the parochial Clergy. Never was it more important than now that Church men should be thoroughly armed with Eeasons for the hope that is in thera. Into the deeper questions and mysteries of the Christian Life we have not entered. It is with the Cita del and not the Treasure, the Casket and not the Gem, the Form and not the Spirit, that we are now engaged. And yet, it is in respect to these very thing.s, tangible and visible, yet divinely connected with the spiritual and invisible, that the most imminent danger lies, in these our own perilous times. New York, Epiphant, 1863. CHAPTEE I. INTEODDCTION. The object of the following pages is to bring before the mind of the reader briefly, yet distinctly, a view of the Church of Christ, and also the leading arguments by which the more prominent features of the Church are defended. Church principles, distinctively as such, are assum ing a new and prominent place in the public mind. For about three hundred years, speculative religion, especially among Protestants, has been the one en grossing theme. A very large class of able writers have brought their best powers to bear upon scholastic theology. Effort after effort has been made, to arrange and re-arrange systems of religions truth according to fules and methods supplied by metaphysical reasoning. The theological writings of this country, for the last century, almost all bear marks of this prevailing tend ency. Hence have appeared treatise after treatise upon such topics as " Free Will," " Natural and Mo- 12 INTEODUCTION. ral Ability," " The power of the Lord over possible contingencies," " The existence of Moral Evil," &c., &c. We would not be understood as speaking otherwise than with respect of many of the efforts which this tendency of the age has called forth. And yet it has led to a lamentable waste of intellectual and moral vigor ; to a profitless " splitting of hairs," where man must believe on the authority of G-od's Word, but where entire unanimi ty of philosophical opinion is im possible ; and in too many instances, it has generated an irreverent, profane, and even impious habit of pry ing into the hidden Mysteries of God. At the present time, if we are not mistaken, the public mind is taking a different direction. The real value of metaphysical abstractions, in respect to Re vealed Truth, is beginning to be questioned. It is asked, what essential progress, in the search after truth, has been made by such efforts ? With this grow ing disinclination to pursue metaphysical inquiries, " Church principles," as they are usually termed, are assuming a promipent place. It begins to be deeply felt, that the visible forms of religion have been the object of most unnatural and injurious prejudice. The question, scarcely asked among a large portion of Pro testants for a centuiy and a half, is now awakening earn est attention, " What is the Church .?" and, "What are the prominent marks by which that Church may be known ?" The Nature, Unity, Yisibility, Organ ization, Ministry, Sacraments, and Worship of the Church, are becoming subjects of deep and growing at tention. And for ourselves, we anticipate the happiest results, from the new direction of popular inquiry. INTRODUCTION. 13 What has tended to bring about this change is of little consequence, except as it may throw light upon the future, and thus help to anticipate the coming wants of the age and of the Church. We think that the growing laxity of religious opinion which charac terizes large portions of the Protestant world, is among the causes silently at work, while the divided and di viding state of Protestantism is producing the same state of public feeling. Amidst the almost countless and nameless Sects springing up around us, each claim ing to be the true Church of God, to whom Jesus Christ left His last commission, the conviction is deep ening in many an honest mind, that surely all these heterogeneous bodies are not that " One Body of Christ" which the Saviour planted, which He still de fends, and against which the gates of hell shall not prevail ; surely, these mushroom bodies, which, like Jonah's gourd, spring up in an hour, and wither in an hour, cannot be that Church of the living God, which is planted on the Eock Clirist Jesus. Hence, the in quiry is oftener silently entertained than openly avow ed, " What is the Church, Wliere is the Church ?" And many thoughtful, many of the most powerful minds in the country are giving to this question the most careful attention. Principles are being discussed. Old opinions are being sifted. Old prejudices are thrown aside, and multitudes are eagerly grasping what they believe to be the revealed truths of God. Not that the public mind is settling down into the attitude of a calm and earnest inquirer after the truth. Would God it were so, for the good of the Church, and the salvation of men ! But this we neither es- 2 14 INTEODUCTION, pect nor scarcely hope. We have studied too well the past history of the Church, to anticipate any such qui et, peaceful searching after the truth of God as this. There will be the stern conflict of mind with mind. In the want of argument, there will be given the taunt and the sneer. The shaft of ridicule will be hurled, fiercely as ever, pointed with anything else than love. The same positions which have been overthrown a thousand times, will be advanced again and again as if they had borne the test of ages : prejudices will be aroused, angry feelings excited, and those peaceful, golden bonds of love, which ought to bind the hearts of all professing Christians together in one holy and harmonious brotherhood, will be rudely severed for years, perhaps for ages. Still we believe, we know, that there are many minds, far removed from the influence of this angry war of words, who are searching with Christian simpli city and earnestness, for the Truth of God. We pray that this number may be greatly increased ; and es pecially, that they who sit down to the perusal of these pages, will bring to the examination candid and prayerful hearts — hearts imbued with that noble mor al courage, which dare embrace and steadfastly cleave to the Truth of God, even though viewed hitherto through the veil of ignorance and prejudice. The subject before us, in the following pages, is the Church of God ; its Visibility, Unity, Ministry, and Worship. Conscious of our inability to do justice to a theme which has engaged and exhausted the re sources of the greatest and best minds, we yet lay our humble offering upon the Altar, knowing that even INTEODUCTION. 15 the simplest truths may become God's mighty instru ment of power ; and shall be grateful if this effort shall contribute, in some humble degree, " to the edi fying of that Body of Christ, which is the Church," the fullness of " Him that filleth all in all." Eph. i. 33 CHAPTEE II. THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETT. This characteristic of the Church, its Visibility, which in ancient times was never called in question, in modern days has become an important point. Indeed this conception of the Church of Christ as a Visible Organization is so vital and fundamental, that Modern Eiitionalism begins to join issue here. Its theory is in its own language a "SeUgioii of the spirit, disengaged from all sacerdotism, all cultus, all oh- serva'tice,'--' in a word absolute." It holds that in Christianity there are no positive visible Institutions of divine origin and perpetual obligation. In reason ing with an objector, therefore, to this test let him first be brought. Does he hold to any divinely estab lished Visible Institutions at all ? Even many, who would not really deny the Church's visibility, yet use language so indefinite as to indicate no clear and defi nite opinions on the subject. Thus the Church mili tant is sometimes spoken of as being not Visible, but invisible ; sometimes, as being at the same time both Visible and invisible. Sometimes language is employ ed, which implies that Christ established two Churches * M. Eenun's Pamphlet, Paris, 1862. the church a VISIBLE SOCIETY. 17 in the world, the one Visible, and the other invisible ; or, that the Church which Christ established, is Visi ble ; and yet that the trv,e Church oh earth, is invisible. Perhaps it is not surprising that, at the time of the Eeformation, when lamentable corruptions prevailed within the Church ; when anathemas fierce and un just, unauthorized by Scripture or Ecclesiastical Law, were hurled at the heads of those v/ho protested against the Church's errors ; when the true nature of, and relations between, the Visible and the Invisible in Christianity were little considered, we say, it is not surprising that men of the Ultra-Calvinistic School should sometimes have used language, indicating that unsettled opinion which marked their transition state. We make these remarks, in view of the names which are quoted as authorities for the idea of an invisible Church, and to show that that language can be ac counted for, by the state of the times in which they lived. At the present day, however, the condition of Protestantism demands that this feature of the Church, its Visibility, should be prominently presented. And it is to this characteristic that we now ask attention. I. The lowest conceivable idea of a Church must suppose it to be a Visible, and not an invisible Body. The word ecclesia in the Greek language, in its original meaning, signifies an assembly of men. Now this, the simplest idea of the meaning of the word, must suppose the existence of that which is visible. This definition of the word applies to all assemblies or associations of men, for whatever purpose they are gathered together. The English Parliament is an assembly of men, associated for a special object. The 18 THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. American Congress is an assembly of men convened also for a particular purpose. Hence we can, with as rauch propriety. Conceive or speak of the English Parliament, or the American Congress, as being invis ible, or a mere abstraction, as we can conceive of the Church of Christ as being invisible or a mere abstrac tion. While man remains a visible being, every Church or assembly, composed of such men, must in the very nature of things be visible. And when we speak of invisible bodies, and yet those bodies com posed of constituent parts which must, in the nature of things, be visible, we speak of that which is from the nature of the case an absurdity. The Church, therefore, as composed of visible men, must itself be a Visible Body. II. In the Holy Scriptures, the Church militant is spoken of not as au invisible, but a Visible Body. In the writings of the New Testament the Greek word ecclesia, translated in our version Church, occurs one hundred and fourteen times. In three instances only, that word retains its original secular meaning, and is translated assembly. In the remaining one hundred and eleven instances, where the word occurs, it refers to the Church of Christ, and is so translated. It is employed sometimes in the singular, sometimes in the plural number. It refers sometimes to the Church in a single house, as to the Church in the house of Priscilla and Aquilla. Eom. xvi. 5. Some times to the Church in a city and its neighborhood ; as " the Church of God which is at Corinth." I Cor. i. 2. Sometimes it refers to the Churches in a whole country ; as " John to the seven Churches which are THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. 19 in Asia." Eev. i. 4. And sometimes it refers to the Church of God on earth, as an unity, as one whole ; as " on this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of Hell shall not prevail against it." Matt. ivi. 18. But what is particularly noticeable is, that in the great majority of instances in which this word occurs in the New Testament, it must of necessity refer to the Church as a visible, and not an invisible body ; and what is equally deserving attention, not one sol itary instance can be found in the whole New Testa ment, where the Church of Christ on earth is referred to as necessarily an invisible Church. In several cases the Church is so referred to, as not to bear at all upon the question either of its visibility, or invisibility. The following are examples of Scriptural usage. In the case of the brother who hath trespassed, the final direction is, " Tell it unto the Church, but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and a publican." Matt, xviii. 18. We only ask, was the Church of God, to which, in all ages, appeal should be made in case of discipline, spoken of as visible or invisible ? Again, we are told that " Saul of Tarsus made havoc of the Church, entering into every house and haling men and women, committed them to prison." Acts viii. 3. Was the Church which Saul of Tarsus thus cruelly assailed visible or invisible ? And yet it was that same Church, which St. Paul afterwards spoke of as a whole, when he said, " I am not meet to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the Church of God." I Cor. XV. 9. 20 THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. Again we ask, is the Church spoken of in such pas sages as the following, visible or invisible ? "At that time there was a great persecution against the Church which was at Jerusalem." Acts viii. 1. " Then had the Churches rest throughout all Judea and Galilee." Acts ix. 31. " Tidings of these things came unto the ears of the Church which was in Jerusalem." Acts ii. 22. " Prayer was made without ceasing of the Church unto God for him." Acts xii. 5. " Being brought on their way by the Church." Acts. XV. 3. " Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders with the whole Church." Acts xv. 22. " Let not the Church be charged." 1 Tim. v. 15. "Let him call for the Elders of the Church." James v. 14. " I wrote unto the Church," &c., 3 John, ix. 5. The reader will at once perceive that, in all these instances, the Church of God is spoken of in such a manner as necessarily to imply its visibility. And yet these are only specimens of the general tenor of Scriptural testimony on the subject. This one fact, the authority of the Word of God, will of course have more weight with every pious and candid mind, than whole volumes of human opinions. Especially it will not be set aside by that careless use of lan guage which is so much in vogue in modern times. III. Another argument clearly proving the visibility of the Church is, that the prerogatives, duties and ordinances, universally conceded as belonging to the Church, assume the visibility of the Church as a Bottled point. It is one prerogative of the Churchy to THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. 21 inflict discipline upon its unworthy members. Must nott^ body which inflicts that discipline be a visible Bm^ It is one duty of the Church to go into all tfie world and preach the Gospel to every crea.ture, fctizing them im-the name of the Father, and of the Ton, and of the Holy Ghost. Must not the instru mentality by which such results are accomplished be a visible instrumentality ? One institution of the Church is its Ministry ; another, its Sacraments. Do not these necessarily imply the visibility of that body of which these are the appointed visible Institutions ? It is one office of the Church to offer up unto God the sacrifices of prayer, praise and thanksgiving. Do not these, as offered by creatures like ourselves, nec essarily suppose the visibility of the Church, upon whose Altars they ascend ? From this argument, which might be greatly ex tended ; from the prerogatives, duties, and ordinances of the Church, which are universally conceded as be longing to her, we necessarily infer the visibility of the Church of God. IV. Our final argument in favor of the visibility of the Church, is the general consent of Christians in modern times. In the language of a modern writer, who fortifies his statement by sufficient references and quotations.* " The Confession of Augsburg denies that all cere monies, all old institutions were abolished in their Churches, (Conf August., part i. xxii.,) evidently un derstanding visible societies. The Saxon Confession ?Palraer on the Church, Vol i., pp. 53, 4, 5. 22 THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. says that the Church may be seen aud flieard accord ing to that text, 'their sound went into all 'the ^|Q^, and that there is a visible Church in whiclH|md operates.* The Bohemian Confession, -approved Luther,f the Confession ofthe Eeformed of^trasburgj the Helvetic Confession, || that of BSsi^in 15^6(^-A xiv. XV.); the GaUican Confession (Gall, xxvii.',) a? speak repeatedly of the Church as essentially visible. This was also the doctrine of Calvin, who declares that out of the visible Church, there is no salvation. § So, also, the Presbyterian divines say : ' The visible Church, which is also Catholic or universal, under the Gospel, consists of all those throughout the world that profess the true religion, together with their children, and is the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ, the house and family of God, out of which there is no ordinary possibility of salvation.'^ "And Dr. Owen, the chief of English Indepen dents of the seventeenth century, believes in 'a visible Catholic Church ;'** and says also, 'that the union of the Catholic Church in all particular Churches is always the same, unchangeable, comprehending all the Churches in the world, at all times, nor to be prevailed against by the gates of hell.'ff " So also the English and American Churches de clare that 'the visible Church of Christ is a congre gation of faithful men, in which the Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be dulv adminis tered.' "XX Such is the opinion of the leading denominations of Christendom in modern times. Nor is it necessary to quote the sentiment of the Eomish and Oriental *Conf. Saxon., Art. sii. fConf. Bohemica, Gap. viii. JConf. Tetrap- olit., Cap. xvi. 16. IConf: Helv., Cap. xvii. ginst. iv. See. 4. IfPres. Con. of Faitli, ch. xxv., o. 2. **Oweu's " True Nature of a Gospel Clmroli," p. 50. fflbid., p 403. ;j::];Art. xix. THE CHURCH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. 23 OWHWies on this point, with whom this has never b^sn a matter of dispute.* V. While, however, the true Church of God on ej^th is a Visible Body, this does not prove, by any means, that all^he members of that Visible Cihurch are its^i-s^itig^-mismbers, or will attain salvation. On the contrary, the Holy Scriptures, and the experience of the Church in all ages, bear melancholy testimony that "they are not all Israel who are of Israel." Eom ix. 6. There may be dead branches even upon a liv ing vine. John sv. 5. There always have been and are now, " tares in the midst of the wheat." Matt. xiii. 26. The net which was cast into the sea and drawn ashore, contained both the good and the bad. Matt. xiii. 47. By such repeated illustrations did our Saviour teach that, in His Church, there will be both worthy and unworthy members. So it has been from the days of Judas and the eleven Apostles, and so it doubtless will be until the chaff shall be finally sep arated from the wheat. " Let both grow together until the harvest," said our Saviour, " lest while ye gather up the tares ye root up the wheat also." Matt. xiii. 29. Nor is this truth, the visibility of the Church, un important. By that visibility, a great object was to be gained in our world. As the profound Bishop Butler says, in that work which is his imperishable monument ; "A visible Church was established in order %q * Oq tlie Visibility of the Christian Church, see " law's Third Let ter to Bishop Hoadley," 24 THE CHUECH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. continue (Christianity) and carry it on successively throughout all ages. ' Had Moses and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, only taught, and by mir acles proved religion to their contemporaries, the benefit of their instructions would have reached but to a sraall part of raankind. Christianity must have been in a great degi'ee sank and forgot in a very few ages. To jirevent this, appears to have been one reason why a visible Church was instituted ; to be like a city upon a hill, a standing memorial to the world, of the duty which we owe our Maker ; to call men continually, both -by precept and instruction, to attend to it, and by tlie form of religion ever before their eyes, remind them of the reality ; to be the re pository of the oracles of God ; to hold up the light of revelation in aid of that of nature, and propagate it throughout all generations to the end of the world."* There is still another reason why the Visibility of the Church is an important truth : it is the blessings which that Church is made God's chosen instrument in conveying to the children of men. By this Church, God calls men out of that state in which all are by nature, into a state of visible covenant relationship with Himself By our membership in this Body, in tlie faithful use of appointed mea?is, we become par takers of the blessings of Him who is the " Head of the body," and " the fullness of Him that filleth all in all." " By one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free ; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. For the body is not one member but many." 1. Cor. xii. 13, 14. And again, " For as * Butler's Analogy, p. ii., oiu 1. THE CHURCH A VISIBLE SOCIETY. 25 many of you as have been baptized into Christ, have put on Christ." Gal. iii. 27. Hence, if such is one great object Avhich Jesus Christ had in view in establishing His Church, and such the blessings which it is the instrument of con veying, then the tendency of the doctrine af another and an invisible Church, must be to detract from the honor of that Visible Church, and to cherish the pre sumption in individuals, that if they are only members of the invisible, and as they deem it, the true Church, it is of little consequence whether they belong to any other. Such has been and now is the actual result of this Calvinistic theory of the Church ; to do away with all Visible Institutions, and even to treat them with scorn and contempt. Multitudes are living and dying all around us without deeming it of any serious moment whether they have, or have not, received Chris tian Baptism, or have membership in that Body of tvhich Christ is the Head. Thus Christ is dishonored, ind souls are deprived of the rich spiritual blessings which Christ has promised in and through His Church. Let the reader chCVish the inestimable privilege of membership in Christ. Though this Body is a Visi ble Body, it is also a living Body. If you would be a living member of it, maintain a close and intimate union and communion with Him, into whose Mystical Body you have been admitted. When the early Chris tians " continued steadfastly in the Apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in pray ers, then fear came upon every soul, and the Lord added to the Church daily, such as should be saved." Acts ii. 47. 3 CHAPTEE III, UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. The subject of the present chapter is one of great moment. It opens a wide field for discussion, and involves grave questions of a practical character. In what, really and essentially, does the Unity of the Church consist ? When and where is the point reached, that that Unity is destroyed ? There is not a subject of discussion at the jiresent day on which there is more indifference, ignorance, and error of opinion than on this. Even within our own branch of the Church, sentiment takes a wide range. AVe cannot of course discuss such a matter here. All that we can do is to present the grand features, to name the prominent marks of that Unity ; our leading object is to set forth the Idea of Unity, and the Sin and Evils of its violation. St. Paul has given the distinguishing marks of the Church's Unity : " There is One Body, and One Spirit, even as ye are called iu one hope of your calling ; One Lord ; One Faith ; One Baptism ; One God and Father of all. Who is above all and through all, and in you all." Eph. iv. 4-6. THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 27 The one Lord, one Faith, and one Baptism, then, are three essential marks of the Unity of the Church. The Church must recognize " One Lord," or Head of the Church ; and of necessity, also, that Ministry which He, as Lord, has appointed. The Church must have One Faith ; one positive unchangeable Doctrine to be believed ; and that One- Faith was embodied in the "Form of sound words," (2 Tim. i. 13,) before the New Testament Scriptures were written, and it has been perpetuated through the ages all along in the Apostles' and Primitive Creeds. The Church must have One Baptism ; which of necessity implies one communion and fellowship in that One Body into which her members are baptized. All this, and nothing short of this, is involved in those three marks of the Unity of the Church which the Apostle has named. How all this bears upon Papal additions and usurpations on the one hand ; and upon Ultra-Protestant subtractions, and negations, and intrusions, on the other, we have no room here to show ; but that it does bear in both these opposite directions in respect, 1st, to the Headship and Ministry of the Church ; 2d, to the Faith of the Church ; and 3rd, to the Baptism, the open visible communion and fellowship of the Church, is absolutely certain.* These marks or Notes of the Church which we have given agree with the definition of the Church in our Article XIX. * On the Unity of the Churcli, and that the admissiou of unworthy members does not destroy th.it Unity, and his refutation of the Puritan notion, see HooJcer^s Eccl. Pal. Booh. iii. 28 UNITY OF THE CHURCH^ AND " The Visible Church «f Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the Sacraments be duly ministered according to Christ's ordinance in all those things that of necessity are requisite to the same."* But, as we have before observed, our main object ia to present with distinctness, the idea of the Unity of the Church, without entering into all the details of the nature of that Unity. We wish to impress upon the raind of every reader of these pages the conviction, that there is such a doctrine as that of the Unity of the Church, that the preservation of that Unity is a solemn Christian duty, and that the violation of that Unity is an awful sin in the sight of God, and that the loss of Christian Unity is filling the world with untold and growing evils. If we shall awaken in the minds of any, a more just appreciation of the truth itself, of tiie Unity of the Church, and shall prompt to more fervent prayers, to more vigorous efforts for this object, we shall have accomplished, in some degree, the end desired. The presentation of this subject is imperiously de manded at the present day. Among the great major ity of those in this country, " who profess and call themselves Christians," we doubt if the subject now under discussion ever occupied their serious thoughts, or if they have any definite views respecting it. There is so little Unity, as a matter of fact, among those who profess to be Christians, that the actual co'ndition *For the Notes of the Church as given by divers writers goB Palmer on the Church, Vol. 1. ch. ii. THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 29 of the field, as it strikes the eye of the beholder, would naturally impress the mind with anj other idea than that of the Unity of the Church. Besides, and the remark deserves special remem brance at the present day, as corruptions and errors have obtained within the Church during the long progress of her history, touching each of the three great marks of the Church's Unity mentioned above, so, in the heat of controversy, even good men have written of that Unity ignoring or undervaluing one or the other of those marks or notes of Unity. An ingenious collator of such opinions of religious con- trovertists might destroy every one of the marks which St. Paul has laid down. And thus it has come to pass that divisions, and such divisions as are de structive of all Unity, are not only tolerated but boldly defended. " Divisions among Christians are, on the whole, a good thing," says one. " They lea.d more people to go to meeting," cries a second. " Competi tion is the very life of business," echoes a third. And thus, that divided state of the Body of Christ, which ought to be mourned over and prayed over by all good Christians, is not only apologised for, but actually justified as ou the whole desirable. Of so little ira portance is this subject viewed in the public mind, that the formation of a new Sect among nominal Christians is regarded as a very small matter, and as of the same general character with the organization of a Voluntary society, for secular, benevolent, or raoral ends. Nay, even some who profess to be good Chris tians, and even good Churchmen, seem tf) suppose, that the joining, or encouraging, on the part of them- 3* 30 UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND selves or their children, this, that, or the other Sect, is a small matter, so that they only " go somewhere," and treat the matter with as little apparent serious ness or conscience, as the husbandman would remove his flocks to one or another division of his fields. We hear all sorts of illustrations employed to defend the position, that if men only get to Heaven at last, it is of little consequence what they are called, or how they get there, whether through the door which Christ has opened, or whether they climb up some other way.* It is against this loose, this erroneous view of the Unity of the Church, that we utter our protest ; and we ask a candid consideration of what we have to say from all who have a heart to sympathize with the great Head of the Church, over the sad spectacle of His wounded, bleeding, dishonored Body. Again : Another introductory remark we desire to make, before proceeding to the raain subject of the present chapter. An indifference to the idea, and to the importance of the Unity of the Church, is not the only evil which deserves notice. With many persons, there exists a strong attachment to a mere sect, as a sect, and not because it is the Body of Christ. Which of the two is the greater evil, we care not to discuss — an entire indifference to the idea of the Unity of the Church, or a bhnd, bigoted attachment * John "Wesley, iu a Sermon oa Schism, says, many persons who "profess much religion "—^' have not tlie least conception of thia matter, neither imagine such a separation to be any sin at all. They leave a Christian Society with as mueh unconcern as tliey go out of one room into another. They give occasion to all this complicated vaisehief, and wipe their mouths and say, they have done no evil " THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHI-SM. 31 to a mere Sect as such. An honest, warm-hearted zeal in the cause of the Church is truly commendable. That Church, which Christ planted ; which is identi fied with the true felicity of men on earth, and with their most rational and glorious hopes hereafter ; that Church, which God has so honored with His care, power and love, deserves the homage and energies of the noblest minds. " My God and my country," has been the motto of the true and false philanthropist, as a cause deserving the greatest sacrifice ; but " My God and His Church," is a nobler object still, for which men should be more willing to live and to die. And yet it is too obvious to admit denial, that much, perhaps most, of that intemperate warmth with which denominational peculiarities at the present day are defended, is not a love of the Church, because it is the Church of Christ, but is little else than a blind devotion to a mere party, rendered more virulent by that strongest of all incitements, the religious prin ciple. Attachment- to mere party is always a most de grading principle ; it never seizes possession of a heart without benumbing eveiy noble and generous feeling ; but no slavish subservience to party is so destructive to Christian graces and excellences as a bitter secta rian spirit in matters of religion. In loving and honoring the Church, therefore, let us remember that we do not love it because it is a Sect or a party ; not because it is " our Church," to use the language of the times ; we love it because it is Mie Body of Christ, that One Holy Catholic Church of God, which embraces the saints and martyrs of all 32 UNITY OF THE CHURCH, AND ages and all climes ; and our souls, so far from being chained down by a mere love of party, glow and ex pand with the generous thought that we are associat ed in holy communion and fellowship, of thought, feel ing, action, and purpose, with a glorious throng, "a great multitude, which no man can number, of all nations, and kindreds, and people, and tongues."- "I wear the name of Christ, my God; So name me not from man ! And my broad country catholic, Hn !i neither tribe nor clan: Its Tl.'. jrs are an endless line. Through all the v.rorld they went, Commissioned from the Holy Hill Of Christ's sublime ascent."* With these introductory remarks on the Unity of the Church, let us now proceed to consider the Scrip tural proof that the Church is One, and then examine the sin and evil of the destruction of that Unity. I. The Holy Scriptures distinctly teach the doc trine of the Unity of the Church, by direct affirmation. The Inspired Apostle says : " By one Spirit are we all baptized into One Body." 1 Cor. xii. 13. And again : " There is One Body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling : one Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, one God, and Father of all." Ejih. iv. 4, 0. Again : " As we have many members in one body, and all merabers have not the same office, so toe being many, are One Body in Christ." Eom. xii. 4 5. Again : " That He might reconcile both unto God in one Body, by the Gross," Eph. ii. 16. *iSet). A. C. Coxe, D. D. THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 33 Neither is this one Body a mass of isolated, dis jointed, disconnected fragments. For St. Paul speaks of the Church as a " building fitly framed togeth er." And he describes the coherence or connection of the parts of this Body still more particularly, when he says : " When He (Christ) ascended up on high. He led captivity captive, and gave gifts unto raen. . . . And He gave some Apostles ; and some prophets ; and some Evangelists ; and some pastors and teachers ; for the perfecting of the saints ; for the work of the min istry ; for the edifying of the Body of Christ." And he also speaks of the office which these "gifts" of Christ sustain, in binding His Body together. For he says ; " Speaking the truth in love, may grow up into Him in all things, which is the Head, even Christ, frora Whom the whole Body, fitly joined together, and compacted by that, which every joint supplieth, according to the effectual working in the measure of every part, maketh increase of the Body, unto the edifying of itself in love." Eph. iv. 8 ; 11, 12 ; 15, 16. Thus the "gifts" of God before enumerated, are the ligaments, the joints and bands which bind this one Body compactly and strongly together. Again : This one Body thus knit compactly to gether, has many members, and these members sustain different relations to each other. Thus the Apostle says : " God hath set some in the Church, first. Apostles; secondarily, prophets ; thirdly, teachers ; after that miracles ; then gifts of healing, helps, government*, diversities of tongues." 1 Cor. xii. 28. 34 UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND And yet, these parts are members one of another, are necessary to each other, and share in each other's prosperity. " If the foot shall say, because I am not the hand, I am not of the body ; is it therefore not of the body? And if the ear shall say, because I am not the eye, I am not of the body ; is it therefore not of the body ? If the whole body were an eye, where were the hear ing ? If the wliole were hearing, where were the smelling ? But now God hath set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him. . . . And the eye cannot say unto the hand I have no need of thee ; nor again, the head to the foot, I have no need of thee. . . And whether one member suffer, all the members suffer with it ; or one member be honored, all the members rejoice with it." 1 Cor. xii. 15-18 ; 21-26. These Scriptures teach in the plainest manner, declaratively, the Unity, compactness, and complete ness of the Body of Christ, which is His Church. II. The Unity of the Church is taught in those Scriptures, where divisions and schisms are expressly forbidden. Thus, the Apostle, writing to the Church at Co rinth, found cause for rebuke in their divisions, which he thus reproves : " Now, I beseech you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing ; and that there be no divisions (or schisms) among you, but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, ' I am of Paul, and I of Apollos, and I of Cephas, and I of Christ.' "Is Christ divided ? was Paul crucified for you ? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul ?" I Cor. i. 10-12 13 THE SIN AND SHE EVILS OF SCHISM. 35 And again he says, "that there should be no schism in the Body." 1 Cor. xii. 25. Now the question is not, whether there may not be more or less of Christian charity and love among those now so unhappily divided ; the question is plainly this : Do not these inspired words of St. Paul point edly and unqualifiedly condemn those very divisions, into which professed Christians are divided at the present day ? We cannot doubt as to the only an swer to this question. He says, " Jjet tliere be no divisions among you,," and then he specifies the divid ing off into party names and sects, each saying, I am of Paul — or I am of Apollos — or I am of this per suasion — or I am of that denomination. It cannot be doubted, that his language does most positively condemn and forbid the rival separate ministries, and rival separate altars, such as we see around us, so that there is no longer " one Faith, one Baptism." We know there are those, upon whose hearts the language which we have quoted will be powerless. They are those, who sneer at miracles of healing by the shadow of one Apostle, and by garments touched by another ; who hold up to contempt the mighty power of God, displayed in these men, whom they would brand with obloquy, and would destroy all credence in their word as a company of " illiterate fishermen," as "weak, Jewish, fallible, prejudiced, mistaken men." But to those who recognize in the writings of the Apostles, God speaking through thera, we commend the Scriptural view, above presented, of the divisions which exist among the professed followers of Christ. 36 UNITY OP THE CHUECH, AND III. Another Scriptural argument, perhaps the strongest of any, may be found in the Prayer of our blessed Saviour in behalf of His Church. Even in St. John's day, it seeras, sorae had arisen who sinned against the Unity of the Church. There was one Diotrephes, who " loved to have the pre eminence," who would not submit to Apostolic Gov ernment, who prated against the Apostles with mali cious words, who would not receive the brethren, and forbade them that would. 3 John, 9, 10. The Church of Ephesus, also, it appears, had those in it who said they were Apostles, and were not, whom the Bishop of that Church had " tried," and found them to be liars. Eev. ii. 2. This was the Apostle who was spared until these errors began to assail the Church, and who was prompted to record, for the perpetual use of the Church, that beautiful Prayer of our adorable Eedeemer unto the Father : " And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one as we are. "_ Neither pray I for these alone ; but for them also which shall believe on me through their word, that they all may be one. "As thou. Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us : that the world may be lieve that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me, I have given them ; that ?hey may be one, even as we are one ; I in them, and thou in me that they may be made perfect in one ; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me and hast loved thera as thou hast loved me." St John wii 11, 20-23. ¦ ^^"- THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 37 What that Unity was, for which the Saviour so earnestly prayed in behalf of His Church, we have already seen from another Apostle, who spake by the Holy Ghost. Neither does it need an argument to prove, that that Unity for which the Incarnate God prayed was the Unity which God the Holy Ghost commanded by the mouth of His servant the Apostle St. Paul. Our Saviour, in Whose all-seeing eye the future wants and woes of His Church, till the end of time, were spread out, shows how He regards the divi sions and schisms of Christians, in the language above quoted. And He prayed for the Unity of the Church, in view of an end to be accomplished by it, when He says " that the world may know that thou hast sent me." On these portions of God's Word, we are willing to rely in proof of the Unity of the Church of Christ. Other strong passages might be cited ; some of them declaring the truth ; some of them incidentally allud ing to it ; but, as an argument may be weakened by uselessly protracting it, so enough has been said to prove as an unquestionable truth of God, the Unity of the Church of Christ. IV. There is another important branch of this ar gument ; the testimony of the Primitive Church. The following beautiful quotation from St. Cyprian must suffice as a specimen. He says : " The Church is one which, by the growth of its fruitfulness, is spread widely into a multitude. Ari there are many rays of the sun, but one light ; and many branches of a tree, but one trunk planted in the clinging root ; and though from one fountain, 4 38 UNITY OF THE CHURCH, AND many rivers flow, so that there seem to be raany several streams, by reason of the fullness of the abundant flood, yet is the oneness maintained in the original spring. 'Take off a ray from the body of the sun, the unity of light admits no division ; cut off a stream from the fountain, and that which is cut ofl: dries up ; so, the Church filled throughout with the light of the Lord, spreads its rays through the whole world, yet it is only one light which is everywhere diffused. Nor is the Unity of the Body broken."* V. We here close the argument for the Unity of the Church. The considerations already urged, are sufficient to settle the point in the minds of candid readers. And hence it follows, as a matter of course, that if the Unity of the Church is both a fact recog nized and affirmed, and a duty enjoined by the Holy Scriptures, then the violation of that Unity is wTong. In other words. Schism is a Sin ; for it breaks up that which God established ; it disobeys that which Christ coramands ; it sunders those joints and ligaments which God hath appointed ; it arrays itself against both the letter and the spirit of our Saviour's Prayer ; it frustrates one great object which our Saviour teaches us He would accomplish in that Unity, the victory of the truth itself over an unbelievinc: world. For all these reasons, we say it legitimately and inevitably follows, that that principle of division among Christians which some apologize for and de fend, is positively sinful in the sight of God. VI. We enter now upon another division of this subject. The violation of Unity by the division of *Cypr. de Unit. Eoch THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 39 Christians into different Sects is attended loith pro~ digious evils. So far from Sehisni heing on the whole a good thing, it is one of the darkest clouds which overhang the prospects of the Church in'time to come. To some of these evils we will now allude. 1. The violation of the Unity of the Church by divisions among Christians, unnecessarily exhausts the resources of the Church, and thus weakens her power of usefulness abroad. Not that there are not vast treasures in the Church now laying waste, or worse than waste ; but we do mean to say, that the divisions of which we speak, exhaust available re sources which ought to flow, and which might be made to flow into the common treasury of the Lord. How often is it true that in village after village, scattered over the older, and more particularly over the newer sections of our country, instead of all pro fessing believers in Christ meeting in one temple to His praise, and surrounding one common altar, and combining their efforts to uphold the religion of Jesus, and then spread its knowledge abroad, they are di vided and subdivided once and again, into four, five, six, seven, and more weak and pow^erless bands, who, after straining every nerve to support their own order in an inviting form, are obliged to rely upon the charity of others.* *It has been said that in one town in this country, numbering about eleven hundred inhabitants, there are as many different denom inations as there are hundreds of people. , In how many villages of our country in all the States, several houses of worship are found all thinly attended, and each of them adequate, or nearly so, to con tain all who might attend 1 40 UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND Thus in various ways raillions on millions of money are spent annually in sustaining these separate organ izations at home, which might be sent abroad. Thou sands and tens of thousands of men who might go to heathen lands, are staying at home, the organs and centres of rival if not opposing bands, which must for centuries, probably always, remain in a weak state while these organizations continue. And j'et the Macedonian cry is heard. The fields are already white for the harvest. This, then, is the evil which we first present, that Schism exhausts and wastes resources which the Church imperiously needs for other pur poses. 2. Another evil of Schism. It awakens and keeps alive unholy tempers. It is a sad picture of human nature, but yet never theless true to the life, that of all causes which divide society, none is so fruitful in merciless hatred and bit ter words and deeds, as the spirit of Sectarianism in religion. It certainly cannot be said of Sectarians as sueh, " see how they love one another." And yet by this fruit, men are to know that we love God, when we have love one to another. The secret of this un common virulence we are not in search after. The fact itself is beyond dispute. It would be a melan choly, humiliating task, to go back and see the fruits of this spirit of sectarian bitterness, in the history of the world for the last thousand years. It has slain its thousands and hundreds of thousands amid the hor rors, groans and woes of the battle-field. It has plunged countless numbers of the aged and the fair into cold damp dungeons, to pine away and die in THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 41 darkness alone, with none to pity, to pray for, to mourn, none to close the eye of death. It has in vented the untold fiendish malignity of the Inquisi tion, that masterpiece of Satan's cruelty. It has erected the gallows, kindled the fires, and raised the axe, for the martyrdom of myriads. It has enacted bloodthirsty laws of religious proscription. And then, when these grosser forms have been softened some what, it has gone, in these modern times, into the retirement of social and private life, to stir up unholy passions, to emit the poisonous breath of slander ; to look with green-eyed jealousy upon the pious acts of those who have presumed to differ in religion. It has seized the pen and the press to make science and art contribute their aid, in the unholy work of inflicting insult and injury upon those who claim to be children of God and inheritors of the Kingdom of Heaven. To elucidate fairly the evils under this head would re quire volumes. The picture, to be perfect, should be painted in blood. The sketch which we have given, as would be shown were there room, has not been overdrawn. 3. Another evil, which springs from the divisions among nominal Christians, is the objection against Christianity, which those divisions place in the mouths of intelligent Jews, Infidels, and Heathens. Suppose, for example, that an intelligent Jew re solves to enter seriously upon an examination of the Christian Eeligion. He sympathizes with no religious Sect. He is willing candidly to examine the claims of all. Year after year is before him, before he can thoroughly master the standard works wdiich these 42 UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND bodies pile up before him. And between the wide extreme of Eomanism, with its ponderous tomes on the one hand, and the very latest theological develop ment of Transcendentalism on the other, and the numerous grades and schools of philosophy old and new, which fill up the intervening distance, all which the Jew is told must be thoroughly weighed, who will be responsible for the life of the poor Jew, while he is thus seeking for the pearl of great price ? or who will say that he shall be able to grasp, even if found, the truth to be evolved in all these systems ? Tliis is by no means an imaginary objection. It is really one of the very strongest objections against Christianity, felt and urged by the Jew at the present day. It points the keenest dart of the Infidel, and gives the finishing touch to the airy bubble which he blows up against the religion of the Nazarene. Nor, is it without some show of reason, that the shrewd Brahmin addresses Missionaries as they appear before him, each with their own system of religion — " First go home and settle among yourselves what Christianity is, and then come and teach us." To perceive more fully the force of the objection, look over even our own countiy, and see what an army of Sects is marshalled under the banner of Christ. Pass by those now almost forgotten names of parties which were once alive and busy conflicting for some form of error, as if it were a fundamental verity,* and see what a prospect is now presented to * A modern writer says ; " Out of nearly one hundred sects which were flourishing in the days of Charles I., and whose names are re- THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 43 the scoffer, or to one who is a searcher after truth. Oh ! who does not feel the moral force of the senti ment contained in our Saviour's Prayer, " That they may all be one, as Thou, Father, art in Me, and I in in Thee, that they also may be one in Us, that the ivorld inay believe that Thou hast se7it Me." John xviii. 21. Perhaps some will say it is impolitic, unwise, thus to acknowledge a weakness in the argument for Chris tianity, arising from the divisions of its friends. But no ; let us rather cease to apologize for that on which objection itself is based. Let us confess that divi sions — such divisions as now distract nominal Chris tians and separate them at the Altar of God — not only mar the glory of the Church, and weaken her moral power, but are also positively wrong, wholly sinful. Let us labor and pray for the essential Unity of the Church of Christ. Then, and we fear not till then, will the world believe that Jesus Christ was sent of the Father. When this elenient of power shall again be restored to the Church as it was in ancient times, then may we look for primitive success.* corded on tho page of history, bat two or three are now in existence, and these so altered, that they oould not at present be recognized by their own founders." So also Edwards states that there were eleven " different religions in one Parish iu London, and he mentions a family consisting of four persons, every one of whom professed a distinct form of belief." — Edwards' Gang., Part. II. * That we have not stated the objection too strongly from the mul titude of Sects in religion at the present day, we give tlie list of Sects as they have met our eye. It is not by auy means complete. Calvinistic B.aptists. Free Will Baptists. Free Communion Bap- 44 UNITY OF THE CHUECH, AND 4. Another evil from the loss of Unity among nominal Christians, is the impediments involved in it, in the work of Missions. Painful as is the spectacle of jarring Christian Sects at horae, little as it breathes of the spirit of our holy religion, yet even those per sons who justify and defend it here, are forced to ac knowledge its folly when these divisions are carried to heathen lands. But yet this is a necessary consequence of the existence of such divisions. If these various Sects are conscientious in maintaining separate organ izations at home, then they are bound not only to obey the Saviour in carrying the Gospel to the igno rant, but they are bound to carry that Gospel in what they believe to be its integrity. Such things as Christian principles do not change with geographical boundaries. They are not one thing here and another there ; one thing in America, but another in Africa or Asia. tists. Seventh Day Baptists. Six Principle Baptists. Emancipation Baptists. Unitarian Baptists. Campbellite Baptists. Particular Baptists. Episcopal Methodi.sts. Protestant Methodists. Primitive Methodists. Independent Metliodists. "Welsh Methodists Calvinistic, "Wesleyan Methodists. Associate Methodists. Old School Presbyte rians. New School Presbyterians. Cumberland Presbyterians Associate Presbyterians. Dutch Eeformed Presbyterian.s. Reformed Presbyterians. Orthodox Congregationalists. Unitarian Congregation- alists. Transcendental Congregationalists. Universalist Congregation alists. Romanists. Moravians. Second Adventists. New Jerusalem ites. Christians. Primitive Christiaus. Christian Unionists. Friends Hicksites. Shakers. Sandemanians. Daleites. Come-Outers. Millena- rians. MiUerites. Mormonites. Svvedenborgians. Bereans. Tunkers Reformed Tunkers. Wilkinsonians. Christian Israelites. Wilburiteg Gurneyites. Apostolic Church. THE SIN AND THE EVILS OF SCHISM. 45 But see what a train of evils necessarily follows the carrying ont such a principle. The Papist, the Pres byterian, the Baptist, and the Unitarian, without ex tending the list further, meet each other on heathen shores in Africa, China, or the Sandwich Islands, to publish the Faith of Christ crucified. These profess ing Christians cannot and will not surrender their own tenets, or acknowledge those of the others. The Papist will not yield one jot or tittle of his claims. The Baptist will not give up his immersion. The Presbyterian will not give up his " Confession," or his Presbyterj', while the Unitarians will stand aloof from them as a whole, and will teach the folly of all Creeds and Confessions, and that the poor heathen must be saved by the Christ that is within them. Now it needs but little sagacity to perceive what the necessary effect of all this must be upon the work of missions. The very same points which have been the occasion of controversy and acrimony at home, will produce the same results there. Human nature is not changed by crossing the waters of the ocean. Nor would it be at all surprising, to see these Mission aries to the heathen lose sight of their primary object, in wasting their strength upon each other. And then, to carry out the principle fairly, let these fifty or more Sects, whose names we have given, each go forth in the same work, and what will the heathen think of the system of Christianity !* * We have an illustration of the effect of Sectarianism in the work of Missions, in the recent events conneoted with the Oriental Chris tians ; where delegates from Sects of two or three hundred years old, 46 UNITY OF THE CHURCH. VII. We have now noticed a few only of the more glaring evils, resulting from the violation of the Unity of the Church, and from the sin of Schism. To counterbalance all these evils, what considerations can be urged of an opposite nature .^ We answer, no consideration was ever urged whicli deserves the name of a Christian motive. The principle of Schism is sinful in its nature, and evil and only evil in all its tendencies. May every reader cherish in his heart the precious doctrine of the Unity of the Church, and cease not to labor and pray for it as essential to the peace and prosperity of the Church at home, and as an essential element of moral power to the Church abroad. And let us never cease to protest against a principle, which, if it were suffered to prevail, would divide and subdivide the army of the living God, until its strength was gone ; which would present a specta cle to Angels and men, over which the Saviour might weeji, and wicked men and Devils alone exult ; where the Saviour's garment, seamless in itself, would hang only in tattered shreds ; where His One Body should be torn, until one heart could no longer beat through its scattered members, and one system of nerves and sinews, all flowing from one coinmon centre, could no longer control its operations. to those ancient Churches, were absolutely obliged to lose sight of the distinction of Scots somewhat, and take their stand on broad Catholic ground. Tet this was done only from au underhanded policy, and to gain a foothold, .is has since beeu proved. CHAPTEE IV. THE MINISTEY CHEIST'S POSITIVE INSTITUTION. The theme which forms the subject of the present chapter, though almost a self-evident truth, and nominally admitted by the great majority of Chris tians, is yet practically ignored, and has given place to one of the most dangerous and popular errors of the day. This important truth is, that the Christian Ministry is a positive institution of Jesus Christ — that the Commission by which His ministers act officially in His name, was derived immediately and directly from Him, and is handed down in and by that Ministry which He himself established. It is obvious that it is a question of fact, whether Jesus Christ did or did not establish a Ministry in His Church. Mere theoiy, expediency, speculation, anal ogy between hunia,n and Divine institutions, have nothing to do with the question. These other points, may be useful in tracing the nature of the Cliristian Ministry, in seeing where human and Divine institu tions begin to agree with, and to diverge from each other, but they do not reach the main question, whether, 48 the MINISTEY as a matter of fact, Jesus Christ did establish a Min- istiy in His Chnrch. Before proceeding to the proofs on this point, we notice briefly another theory which is prevailing ex tensively in this country. It is, strictly speaking, the Congregational or Independent system, and yet we observe that it has found its way into the ranks of Presbyterianism ; it is endorsed and defended by some of their writers, though it is most radically opposed to their "whole system of doctrine and discipline, as contained in their standards ; and should it be suffer ed to prevail, must eventually, yet inevitably, rev olutionize their whole sj'stem of ecclesiastical organ ization and government. It has been one main cause at work in rending that body into its present divided state. That theoiy is, that the Christian Ministry is not a positive Institution of Jesus Christ, but that it originates immediately and directly from the people, in whom primarily this power is supposed to be lodged. In other words, startling as the position ap pears, the question really is, whether the people, or Jesus Christ, are the source of ecclesiastical and min isterial power ? Still another feature of this theory has respect to the nature of the Ministry itself It is maintained that the Christian Ministry is not a distinct Order of men ; and hence, strictly speaking, there is no such thing as a Christian Ministry in distinction from the people at large. Such is the theory held by large numbers of the Congregationalists and Presbyterians at the present day. That we have stated this theory correctly, we quote cheist's positive institution. 49 from the " Congregational Catechism, ' the modern text-book of the system. Thus : Ques. 13. " Where does all ecclesiastical power and authority reside ?" Ans. " Primarily in the individual communities or local Churches."* Ques. 14. " Whence does a local Church derive all its power ?" Ans. " From the good pleasure of God, authorizing and requiring Christians to form them selves into Churches, and to regulate all their pro ceedings according to their discretion, in conformity with the laws of God.""j" Ques. 16. " What is it that imparts official power to the officers of a Church ?" Ans. " Their election or appointment by the Church, according to its by laws, and their formal induction into office agreeablj' to the same laws."J Ques. 54. " Did ordination convey to the person official powers luMch he could not otherwise possess ?" Ans. " No. The ordination was rather a recognition of him as one already clothed with official powers by virtue of his previous election or appointment to office."§ Ques. 56. " Who had the power of ordaining officers in the primitive Churcli ?" Ans. " Those, doubtless, who had the power of electing or appoint ing such officers, provided they were competent to conduct the solemn exercises in a proper manner ;" that is, the people. || Ques. 57. " Did the officers of the primitive Cluirch, by virtue of their ordination, become a distinct order of men from the people, dec?" Ans. "No! They did not become a distinct order of men," &c.^ The above quotations leave us no room to doubt what this modern theory is, in respect to the origin and nature of the Christian Ministry. And whatevei * Cong. Cat., p. 12. flbid., p. 13. flhid., p. 13. §lbid., p. 4T. [Ibid., p. 48. tlbid., pp. 48, 49. 50 the ministry may be thought of the weakness of its Scriptural argument, it certainly has the full force of the " ad captandum" to recommend it. It accords with the sentiment of the day to tell "the people" that they are the source of all power ; and that not only all civil, but ecclesiastical authority, comes directly from them.* And thus, the private Christian is made to feel that every argument to prove that the Ministry was an Institution of Christ is an attempt to wrest from him a natural and unalienable right. This modern sophistry, however, has one radical mistake. It forgets one essential and important truth. It overlooks the grand, the vital distinction, between the " Kingdom of Christ " and the " kingdoms of this world." Over these latter kingdoms Jesus Christ never claimed authority as their King, On the con trary, He recognized their authoritj' — He paid tribute to them : Mark xii. 17 ; and commanded to render all their due. But to them, He never gave Officers or Ministers. To them, He never appointed Sacraments or Ordinances. To them, He never sent the Holy Ghost. Hence, they who reason from civil to ecclesias tical Institutions, overlook the one radical distinction between them, which deprives their reasoning of all its force. This theorjr, which we have presented above, is not the theoiy of the Church. It is not the system taught in the Word of God. It is not the system found in the standards of some of these denominations them- * See Dr. Pott's letter viii., in his Controversy with Bishop Wain wright, for the u.5e of this argument. cheist's positive institution. 51 selves.* We now ask the attention of the reader to the proof that the Christian Ministry is an Institution of Jesus Christ, and hence not of man. I. The great object or design of the Ministry must take for granted as a first principle, that that Ministry is of Christ's special appointment. The Ministry is a Ministry of reconciliation. It supposes that there are parties at variance. In this case, those parties are an offended God on the one hand, and offending man on the other. The only party, therefore, in this case at all competent to pro pose terms of reconciliation is God, and not man. Terms of reconciliation from any other source are un worthy of confidence. But tenns'have been proposed : God, in the person of His Son Jesus Christ, hath pre pared the Gospel, and now proposes the way by which offending man may be reconciled to his offended God. As, therefore, the Gospel is Christ's gift, and not man's, so the offer of that gift is Christ's offer and not man's, and the embassador through whom it is proposed to the acceptance of sinners, onust be Christ's embassador. The power by which he acts officially must be derived, not from the people to whom he is sent, but from Jesus Christ, Who and Who alone is competent to send him. It is not too much to say, that he who professes to act as Christ's ambassador, * The recent controversy between a distinguished Presbyterian divine and an able Presbyter of the Church, has developed one fact with distinctness, that those Standards and Confessions whioh, at their ordination, the most solemn event of their life, they profess truly to beheve, and steadfastly to defend, are yet iu fact often held so loosely as virtually to be set aside. 52 the MINISTEY on such an errand must, in the nature of the case, be able to show that he bears a commission not from offending man, but fi'om an offended God. The very object or design of the Christian Ministry supposes, therefore, that that Ministry is of Christ's own special appointment. II. The Ministry, as a matter of fact, was actually instituted by Jesus Christ's own immediate appoint ment. This fact is the turning point of the whole ques tion ; the fact that He did establish a Ministry in His Church, personally and immediately ; that to them He gave the Ministerial Commission, and His promise to be with that Ministry to the end of the world. It was after our Saviour's triumphant resurrection from the grave, having burst the chains of death and hell, and proved Himself victor over both, that He then established, or rather gave full commission, to the Ministry, whom in jierson He had previously chosen. His passion and death was the purchase of His me diatorial power ; His resurrection was the full asser tion of that power. As St. Paul says, _ " Being found in fashion as a man. He humbled himself, and became obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, ivherefore God also hath highly exalted Him, and given Him a name, which is above every name, that at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, and that every tongue sbould confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father." Phil. ii. 8-11. Little as is recorded in the sacred volume of our Saviour between His Eesurrection and Ascension, yet cheist's positive INSTITUTION. 53 St. Luke has given us in a few words the key to that eventful part of His histoiy. He says. He gave " Commandment unto the Apostles whom He had chosen ; to whom also He showed Himself alive after His passion, by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertain ing to the Kingdom of God." Acts i. 2, 3. It appears, then, that He was, during this interval, giving Commandment to the Apostles whom He had chosen ; He was speaking to them, and thus instruct ing them, concerning the Kingdom or the Church of God ; He was thus preparing them for that moment ous work which He was to entrust to them. And as the context states, He commanded them not to depart from Jerusalem, but " wait for the promise of the Father ;" saying unto thera, " Ye shall receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you," And just before His ascension to Heaven, He gave this last solemn commission : "All POWER is given unto me, in heaven and ON EAETH. Go YE, THEEEFOEE, AND TEACH ALL NATIONS, BAPTIZING THEM IN THE NAME OF THE FA THER, AND OF THE SoN, AND OF THE HoLY GhOST, TEACHING THEM TO OBSERVE ALL THINGS WHATSOEVEE I HAVE COMMANDED TOU, AND LO, I AM WITH YOU, ALWAYS, EVEN UNTO THE END OF THE WOELD." Matt. xxviii. 18-20. "And when he had said this, he breathed on THEM, AND SAITH UNTO THEM, EeCEIVE YE THE Holy Ghost. Whosesoever sins ye remit they aee remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins YE EETAIN THEY AEE RETAINED." Johu XX. 22, 23. 54 THE MINISTEY Here, then, was the great Commission of our Saviour to His Apostles ; proceeding from Jesus Christ imraediately and directly ; and given to the Apostles, authorizing and empowering them to go into all the world ; commissioning them to preach the Gospel to every creature, and to baptize them into the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; a commission to teach them to observe all those things which Christ had commanded ; with the distinct promise, to be with them, in the persons of their successors, always, unto the end of the world. It will be in vain to search, in all human language, for a more distinct appointment of particular men to a given Office, or for a more distinct conveyance of authority and power for the responsible duties of that Office, than is found in this language of the Great Head of the Church to these His Apostles. III. With these two independent arguments to prove that the Ministry of Christ is His own special Institution, we observe that the sacred writers them selves, in speaking of the Christian Ministry, always speak of it as the gift of God, and not derived from the people. St. Paul says, '¦' Neither count I my life dear, so that I might finish my course with joy, and the Min istry which I have received of the Lord Jesus." Acts XX. 24. Again : God hath given to us the Ministry of reconciliation : " Now, then, we are ambassadors for Christ, as though God did beseech you by us : we pray you in Christ's stead, be ye reconciled to God " 2 Cor. V. 20. Again : " And He gave some, Apostles ; and some, cheist's POSITIVE INSTITUTION. 55 prophets ; and some, evangelists ; and some, pastors and teacbers ; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the Ministry, for the edifying of the Body of Christ." Eph. iv. 11, 12. And, that this Ministry is no human Institution, the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews declares, " No man taketh this honor upon himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron ;" and he also added, " So also Christ glorified not himself to be made a high priest, but He that said unto him, Thou art my Son, to-day have I begotten thee." Heb. v. 4,5. So also St. Jude expressly declares, that the sin of Korah raay be committed in Christian times ; a sin impossible in the nature of the case, if the Minis try be not a Divine Institution. He says : " These despise dominion and speak evil of digni ties ; they have gone in the way of Cain, and perished in the gainsaying of Core.'" Jude 8, 11. The above are specimens of the manner in which the sacred writers everywhere speak of the Christian Ministry ; all agreeing in declaring that the Ministry is an ordinance not of man, but of God, and institut ed by Him Who said : " All power is given unto Me in heaven and on earth." IV. Having seen that the Christian Ministry was Christ's own special Institution, we observe that the commission belonged not only to the Apostles origin ally chosen, but also to their successors till the end of time. 1. Considering the design of the Ministry, its per manence is sufficiently evident, to throw the burden of proof upon them who deny it. For if the Gospel 53 THE MINISTEY was designed to be a permanent gift ; if the Holy Scriptures were given not to one age but to every age; if the Sacraments were meant to be a permanent in stitution ; nay, if the Church of God itself was de signed to be permanent, withstanding all shocks, out living all revolution and change, so it is a necessary inference, that the Ministry, so instrumental in the work of the Church, should also be permanent. The preaching of the Gospel, the evident duty of every age, and the administration of the Sacraments limited to no century or countiy, both demand that the Chris tian Ministry should also be handed down from age to age. So that, were there no intimation on the subject in the letter of the Ministerial commission, we should J'et take it for granted, as a matter of course, that the Ministry was designed as a permanent gift to the Church. If any, therefore, will deny that the Minis try which Christ planted was designed to be handed down from age to age, let them be called upon to show why the Bible, and the Sacraments, and the Church itself, are uot, equally with the Ministry, con fined to ajDOstolic times. 2. But we have more direct proof upon this subject. The very letter of the commission itself under which the Apostles went forth to the work of the Ministry, asserts that that Ministry should not cease till the end of time. For our Saviour said, " Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world." But how " with them always ?" Not personally ; for their earthly career was soon to be cut short by death — but luith them, in being loith the Ministry which He had constituted, and in which they were now to labor, Christ's positive institution. 57 and with all who should also share the labors and duties of that Ministry till the end of time. An eminent Presbyterian clergyman thus states the argument : " Our Lord Jesus Christ delivered their commission to his Apostles, in terms which necessarily imply a perpetual and regular successive ministry. ' Go ye and teach all nations,' &c. That this command and promise, though immediately addressed, were not limited to the Apostles, is so obvious, as almost to shame an argument. But since we are sometimes re quired to prove that two and two make four we remark : — First, that as the command is to teach all nations, it must spread as far and last as long as na tions shall be found, &c. Secondly, that as the Apostles were to ' put off their tabernacles,' the com mand could not possibly be fulfilled by them. It runs parallel with the existence of nations. It must there fore be executed by others in every age, &c. Thirdly, that the promise, ' I am with you ahoay, even unto the end of the world,' cannot, without paljiable ab surdity, be restricted to the persons, or to the days of the Apostles," &c.* And another distinguished divine of the same de nomination saj's : " The ambassador of Christ does not receive his official power from the men of the world, .... nor even from professing Christians in the Church, but from Jesus Christ himself .... Before he can be their pastor in particular, he must have received the minis terial office according to the established order, from those who already possess it themselves And we found the claim to this ministerial succession, .... not on any historical documents of man's invention, * See Eev. Dr. Mason's " Church of God." .58 THE MINISTEY for none such are to be trusted, but directly on the promise of Jesus Christ, appended to the ministerial commission, ' Lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world.' "* 1 Cor. v. 20. 3. That Apostolic Ministry, as a matter of fact, has been perpetuated from their times to the present day. After our Saviour's Ascension, the Apostles proceeded to add to their own number. Matthias was numbered with the eleven Apostles. Acts i. 26. And others also are recorded by the inspired penmen, as belonging to the same rank and office, as Barnabas and Paul. While the utmost care was taken by the Apostles, tbat the Ministry -n'hich they had received should be perjietuated in the Church. In the language of Pres. Stiles, a Congregation alist : " The ministry is not of men but of Christ. The Christian priesthood, as well as that of Moses, was from heaven, and this not only in their first institu tion, but ill their subsequent tran,smission This succession has thus actually taken place in the Chris tian Church in general, from the Apostolic age to this day."t As one of our own Bishops says : " I know not that the man, or the herb, is any the less a man or an herb, or any the less descended from the miraculous beginnings of the creation, because the la-\vs of growth were but ordinary, and the inter mediate agency of production was but human. And so, I know not that a minister of the gospel is any the less a successor of the first Apostles, because, instead of receiving his authority, like them, immediately * Dr. McLeod's Ordination Sermon. f Ordination Sermon, N. L., p. 5. cheist's positive INSTITUTION. 59 fiom Jhrist, it has come to him by the intermediate communication of a chain fastened at its beginning, upon the throne of God, and preserved as inviolate as the line of the descent of Adam, or the succession of seed-time and harvest, of day and night, of summer and winter."* .. It has been the object of the present chapter to show that the Ministry of Christ is His own special Institution. From the nature of the case ; from the letter of the ministerial commission ; from the record ed statements of the inspired writers ; and, we may add, from the opinion of the great mass of Christen dom, we come to the conclusion that the Christian Ministry is a Divine Institution. As such, we bring the subject before the reader. If, in respect to worldly possessions, he would be careful that every provision of the law be complied with, we put it to his con science if he dare be less solicitous, when the prize at stake, offered in Christ's name and authority, is, not thrones, and dominions, and principalities and powers of earth, but, what is infinitely more valuable than all these, an immortal crown of glory in the Heavens. * Bp. Mcllvaine's Sermon, Cons. Bp. Polk, p. 17. The reader will flnd this subject beautifully and most forcibly illustrated in the Sermon from which an extract is here made. CHAPTEE V. THE CHEISTIAN MINISTRY EXISTING IN THREE OEDEES. THE SCEIPTUEAL AEGUMENT. Having shown the Christian Mimstry to be a pos itive Institution of Christ, we now proceed to point out the manner in which that Ministry was consti tuted. Inthe present chapter we shall offer the Scrip tural argument, in proof that the Ministry consists of three Orders, now known as Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. I. First, however, let us notice two or three objec tions which are usually urged against the Scriptural argument. The first objection against this argument, and we doubt not, felt to be a real objection by many persons, is that there is no express command or direction in Holy Scripture, that the Christian Ministry shall consist of precisely three Orders, no more and no less. A second objection is, that the practice of the Apostles, even though in favor of a three-fold Minis try, has not the force of absolute authority, and amounts, at most, only to the argument of expediency. The first objection is, the absence of any express THE MINISTEY IN THEEE OEDEES. 61 command on the subject. We fully admit that there is no express command in the New Testament, that the Christian Ministry shall consist of precisely three Orders, and that these shall be called Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. It is a sufficient answer to this objection that, in the circumstances under which the New Testament was written, an express command, on this point, is not to be expected ; that, if the objection proves anything, it proves too much ; and, that we have other Scrip tural evidence on the subject, which is entitled to the consideration of an express command, and which is binding on the consciences of all Christians to the end of time. 1st. An explicit direction on this subject was not to have been anticipated. Jesus Christ, having by His resurrection from the grave, purchased mediatorial power to establish His Church, committed the planting and organizing of that Church to His inspired Apostles, who were to follow the commandments which He had given them. Acts i. 2. He did not, in His own person, after His resurrection, go forth to preach, or baptize, or plant a single Church. He left this entirely to His Apostles. Neither did He commit to writing a single syllable of the doctrines of His Gospel. Not a word did He Himself leave on record, while there were many other things which Jesus did, which were never recorded by the Evangelists or Apostles. John xxi. 25. Now, the fact which is particularly important in its bearing upon this point, is, that the wiitings of the New Testament were wholly written several years 6 62 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY after the Ascension of our Lord, and consequently after the Church had become already well established ; while the Canon of the New Testaraent was a point not settled until the fourth century. This very im portant, and too often forgotten historical fact, throws great light upon the subject before us. The writings of the New Testament were addressed to Churches al ready established and organized. While, therefore, there could have been no occasion for an express com mand of that which already existed, we might have anticipated that these Scriptures would recognize a Ministry as already existing, and so it is. Is it said in reply, that on such an important sub ject more ought to have been revealed, ahd that one explicit direction "would have put to flight the dis putes and controversies of centuries ? Let us not o.ttempt to' be luiser than God. He has chosen His own way to reveal His will. Doubtless there are great uses in wdiat are termed " moral uncertainties." Had everything been defined in Scripture with rigid mathematical precision, there could have been less occasion for the graces of patient investigation, and of a childlike, docile disposition ; and while infidelity would have put on less show of reason, j'et truth could not have rewarded its votaries with so bright a crown. But again. The objection, if it prove anything proves too much. It is surprising that they who press this objection so strongly against the Ministry, do not perceive to what extremities the objection "will drive them, if they will act consistently with them selves. Is it so, that we are to receive no doctrine of EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 63 the Gospel, no ordinance of the Church, which is not taught explicitly, by a well defined proposition, and enforced by the authority of an express command, "Thus saith the Lord.?" And yet, the objection amounts to all this. On what explicit command then, do we believe the doctrine of the Holy and Adorable Trinity ? or of the procession of the Holy Ghost from the Father and the Son ? On what ex press command of God, do we receive and observe the Lord's Day as a Divine Institution ? Where is there an explicit direction in the Holy Scriptures to admin ister the Sacrament of Baptism to Infants ? And yet each of these doctrines, of the Holy Trinity, of the procession of the Spirit from- the Father and the Son, of the Lord's Day, and of Infant Baptism, is incorporated into the standards of these objectors, as vital doctrines in the Christiaa system. We are rea soning with those who reject a three-fold Ministry, on the ground of the want of an explicit command ; and we say to them most confidently, that they must withdraw that objection, on the ground of its invalid ity, or else they must abandon the doctrine of the Trinity, and the doctrine of the procession of the Holy Spirit from the Father and the Son, and the doctrine of the Lord's Daj--, and the doctrine of In fant Baptism. The objection, therefore, if it prove anything, proves too much. Again. We notice, next, the other, objection, that the practice of Inspired Apostles, even if ascertained, does not give to the Institutions by them established, the bindi.ng force of authority on the Church in time to come. 64 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY There is an important principle involved here, of wdiich we must not lose sight. The question is simply this : What claim have Institutions, established by the Inspired Apostles, upon the Church, in future ages .? Were they establishing Institutions peculiar to their own age, and of course temporary and local in their character ; or were they establishing Institu tions for the universal Church of God, for the Church, in all ages, and under all circumstances ? The an swer to this important question is, that the Apostles were called, appointed, qualified, and sent forth, to lay the foundations of the Church of God — founda tions which can never be overturned — foundations firm as the everlasting hills, established on the Eock of Ages, and against which the gates of Hell shall not prevail. This is a broad question, and does not apply simply to the Ministry of Christ, but equally also to the Doctrines which they preached, to the Scriptures which they wrote, or had the care of writ ing, and to all the other Ordinances, and Institutions, which distinguish Christianity. In regard to all these points, we receive the testimony of the Word of God — that " the Church is built upon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets, Jesus Chiist Himself being the chief corner-stone." Eph. ii. 20. These were the men, to whom the Great Head of the Church said, " As my Father hath sent me, even so send I you." John xx. 21. It was to them dis tinctively, that this commission -was given ; for St. Luke says, " Until the day in which he was taken up, after that He, through the Holy Ghost, had given commandments unto the Apostles whoin He had EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 65 chosen." Acts i. 2. These were the men, who were to receive power after that the Holy Ghost was come upon them — and who were to be witnesses unto Christ in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Sama ria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. — v. 8. These were the men, the Apostles, specially appoint ed by Jesus Clirist, specially qualified by His insti-uc- tions, commandments, and presence, and by the mi raculous power of the Holy Ghost, who loent forth, the Lord ivorhing with them, to lay the foundations of the Church of God. We come, therefore, to the unavoidable conclusion, that these Apostles, thus acting under the special commandment of Jesus Christ ; acting, too, under the immediate miraculous guidance and direction of the Holy Ghost ; acting under the constant presence of their Saviour, "confirming the word with signs follow ing ;" we say the conclusion is natural, unavoidable, that those Apostles, when they laid the foundations of the Church under these miraculous interpositions, when they gave to the Church the writings of the New Testament, when they established the Lord's Day, when they authorized Infant Baptism, and when they planted a three-fold Ministry, did not act merely as meu. It was God acting in them, and through them, God in the Third Person of the Trin ity, yet nevertheless, verily and truly God ; and hence on this ground, and on this ground alone, we are to receive their Institutions as of Divine, and not human authority. An English writer thus forcibly states this argu ment : 6S THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY " Unless all moral certainty be banished from the world, what the primitive Church, with one consent, professed to have received from the Apostles, coul not but have been taught to the primitive Church by the Apostles ; and what was taught to the primi tive Church by the Apostles, could not but have set forth the o-eal mind of that inspired volume, _ the whole second portion of which was written either by the Apostles themselves, or by individuals under their immediate inspection and superintendence."* A modern Presbyterian writer also maintains : " That certain external model of government, which was originaUy adopted, for the preservation of the Evangelical doctrine and institutions, and for the transmission of them to after ages, is~of Divine au- thority."-\ Having, therefore, established the principle of Apostolic authoritj', we observe that we are carefully to distinguish between those practices and customs of the Apostles, wdiich were evidently local and tem porary in their character, and those Institutions of the Gospel, which belong to the Church of God in all places and at all tinies. We make this distinction in order to meet the cavils which are sometimes foolishly urged upon this point. It was the same Paul, who left his cloak at Troas, who also determined to know nothing else save Jesus Christ and Him crucified ; yet the wilful caviller might fail to see that the one was an accidental circumstance of no general importance, * Faber's Apos. of Trin,, i. 4. f Mc. Leod's Catechism, p. 102. The Westminster Assembly of Di vines also maintain against the Independents, the Divine rigid of Presbytery to'xi.S::ripiural Example and Apostolical Practice. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 67 while the other involved a principle of universal moment. Because, therefore, in Apostolic times, for example, the early Christians were obliged to meet secretly, or because they baptized in common brooks and rivers, or because they administered the Holy Eucharist after meat, or because they made no provision for the stated Ministry, it surely will not be urged that we are, of necessity, to follow the Apostolic practice in these accidental and local circumstances. The principle of authoiity applies to those things which cannot vary with the age, but which belong to the Church in all ages and under all circumstances ; nor can we doubt whether, under this head, we should class the Holy Sacraments, the Sacred Scriptures, and the Christian Ministry. Surely, if these are liable to change, the Church of God hath nothing in it that is abiding. Such being the value of the Scriptural argument and the authoritj'' of Apostolic practice, we come now to consider the argument itself, that the Christiaa Ministry was established in Three Orders. II. 1st. Our first argument is of a general nature. When we find an important fact uniformly pervading all those works and operations of God which are brought within our knowledge, the conviction fastens itself upon our minds that this is a principle of the Divine econ omy; in other words, that this is one of those gen eral principles founded not in capriciousness or mere self-will, but in the infinite wisdom and goodness of the Supreme Being. We do find a certain fact or principle, pervading and controlling the various kingdoms of the physical, moral, and intellectual 68 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTET world ; and we offer this as a strong argument for different degrees of Order in the Ministry of Christ, because we find the principle of order pervading all the different works of God. " Order is Heaven's first law, and this confessed, Some are, and must be, greater than the rest." Even in the Godhead there appears conspicuous the principle of order. There is a sense, and a very im portant sense, in which the Father is the First Per son, the Son the Second, and the Holy Ghost the Third, in that mysterious union of Three in One. And thus, by this important law, which prevails in the councils of Heaven, harmony pervades the Uni verse subject to the Divine control. What pen can describe, what pencil paint, the ruin which must inevitably ensue, if this law of order were for one moment interrupted ? So also among the angelic hosts above, the same principle of order prevails. Among them " one star differeth from another star in glory," and yet, by the prevalence of this necessary law, "each in their proper station move." Thus we not only read of " the angels that excel in strength " (Ps. ciii. 20,) but the Apostle St. Jude, speaking by the Holy Ghost, makes mention of Michael the Archangel, or, as the word signifies, " Euler among the Angels," who, when contending with the devil, " disputed about the body of Moses." Jude ix. 5. And St. John, in the Isle of Patmos, in vision beheld and " there was war in heaven, Michael and his angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 69 fought and his angels," and "the great dragon was cast out, that old Serpent called the Devil, and Satan which deceiveth the whole world, he was cast out into the earth, and his angels were cast out with him." Eev. xii. 7-9. These words, indited by the Spirit of God, clearlj' show that there are different degrees of order among the heavenly hosts above, while they also prove that so necessary is this prin ciple, it also prevails among the fallen angels in Hell beneath. In the Jewish Church, in which everything pertain ing to its organization, rites, and worship, was pre scribed by God with the minutest accuracy, we find there the prevalence of this same principle of order iu the establishment of the Ministry of that Church. There was the High Priest, the Priest, and the Levite, the duties of each distinctly defined, and the province of each firmly guarded. Now as Jewish ordinances were the shadow of good things to come ; as the Sacrifices under the Law were a type of the one great Sacrifice on the Cross under the Gospel ; as Circumcision points us forward to Holy Baptism, the Passover to the Lord's Supper, the Jewish Temple to the Christian Church, so also the Jewish Priesthood, in its three-fold Order, points us forward to the three-fold Ministry under the Chris tian Dispensation, even as the type bids us look for ward to its antitype. There is still another interval of time, during which we recognize this same principle of order. It was during our Saviour's Personal Ministry on earth. As has been before observed. He did not establish His 70 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY Ministry, and give to it its full commission, until after His resurrection from the grave. Still, during His own personal labors, while giving proof of His Messiahship by His miracles and mighty works, as also by the heavenly doctrines which He taught. He continually presented before His followers the idea of the three-fold Order of the Christian Ministry. He Himself was the great High Priest (Heb. v. 10,) next after Him Avere the twelve Apostles (Luke vi. 13,) and then, finally, there were the Seventy. Luke x. 1. The different circumstances, under which " the Twelve" and " the Seventy " were chosen, the great care with which they are continually distinguished by the writers of the four Gospels, the special commissions which were given to these separate classes of persons by the Saviour, are insuperable obstacles in the way of parity ; and they are intimations, that in the Christian Church there should be different classes of officers, some charged with higher and more responsi ble duties than others. Such are the general arguments on the subject ; all furnishing strong presumptive proof, that that Ministry wdiich Christ, through His Inspired Apos tles, established in His Church, consisted of different degrees of Order. III. We corae now to the direct Scriptural proof, that Christ, through His Inspired Apostles, did actually establish a Ministry in three Orders, at that time more usually known as Apostles, Elders or Presbyters, and Deacons ; and at the present time, distinguished by the names Bishop, Priest, and Deacon. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 71 We are met, however, in the outset, by two objec tions against the Scriptural argument, which we will first notice. One is, that the office of an Apostle was extraor dinary in its nature, and temporaiy in duration. The other is, that there is an indiscriminate use of names in the New Testament, which forbids our deriving an argument for permanently distinct Orders. As to the first objection, it is alleged that the office of an Apostle was extraordinary and temporary, be cause the qualifications which distinguished an Apos tle were such as could not be possessed by successors ; and of these qualifications there are mentioned the power to work rairacles, and the fact of having seen the Lord after His resurrection. It is sufficient to reply to this objection, that neither of these was a distinguishing qualification of an Apostle. For the power of working miracles was common in the Church at that day. Philip the Deacon wrought miracles of healing (Acts viii. 6, 7 ;) and many private Christians appear to have possessed the gift of tongues (Acts x. 46.) Neither was the fact of their having seen the Lord a distinguishing proof of an Apostle, for " He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once " (1 Cor. xv. 6,) and also " certain women who followed him from Galilee, min istering unto him." Matt, xxviii. 55. There is a certain sense in which the position of the Apostles was extraordinary, in that they were the links which united this long chain of Apostolic Succession to Jesus Christ ; just as, to borrow the illustration once before quoted, the first t'-ee or flower which was 72 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY created may be viewed as extraordinary, while every subsequent tree or flower derived in uninterrupted succession, may be viewed as ordinary. No, that which mainly distinguished the Apostles was, as we shall soon perceive, the important offices and duties to which they were called, which are essential offices and duties of the Church in all ages, and which have been shared by their successors down to the present day. In respect to the other objection, that the name Bishop is often given to the second Order, or Presby ters, in the New Testament ; we reply, what every Churchman is supposed to know, that there is a some what indiscriminate use of names in the New Testa ment. Presbyters were called Episcopoi, as overseers of particular congregations ; but this does not prove Ihat they were Bishops in the ordinary sense of that word. Our Saviour, in St. Paul's Epistle to the Roraans, is called a Deacon or diaconos (Eom. xv. S,) but this does not prove that our Saviour was only ^i Deacon. The word Deacon, in its original form, signifies one who ministers or serves ; and in this sense it was most applicable to our Saviour. So also the Apostles, St. Peter and St. John, style themselves Elders or Presbyters (1 Pet. v. 1 ; 2 John 1,) and the Apostle Paul declared that himself and Apollos were Deacons (1 Cor. iii. 5,) as the original word is diaconoi ; and yet this use of the word Elder and Deacon, on the part of these Apostles, does not prove that they were not Apostfes, really and truly. This indiscrim inate use of terms appears to have been confined to the sacred writings ; for directly after, the name of EXli .TWO IN THIIEE ORDERS. 73 Apostles was gi-v ta only to those known as such in the sacred writiugE), and the name of Bishop waa given to their successors in Office. As Theodoret, an early writer, says : " The same persons were anciently called Bishops and Presbyters, and they, whom we now call Bishops, were then called Apostles. But, in process of time, the name of Apostles was appropriated to them who were Apostles in the strict sense ; and the rest, who had formerly the name of Apostles, were styled Bishops."* St. Jerome asserts, " Bishops occupy the place of Apostles ;"f and, " They are all the succes sors of the Apostles."jI It is not for names that we contend, but for things. What we intend to prove is, that there was, as re corded in the sacred writings, an Order of men usually styled Apostles, clothed with special ministerial pow ers : that, next to them, there was another Order of men, ordinarily styled Presbyters and Bishops, per forming also certain distinct and peculiar offices ; and that there was still another Order of men, usually styled Deacons, who also performed certain ministe rial duties. And furthermore, that these three grades of Officers in the Church correspond with the same grades of Officers now usually known as Bishops, Presbyters, and Deacons. And, on these points, we now invite the attention of the reader to the Scriptural evidence, which will be briefly pre sented. IV. The Apostles were a distinct Order of the Ministry ; and to them belonged the power, and to them alone, to perform certain ministerial duties, as * Com. on I Tim. iii. f Ep. lir. i Ep. Ixxxr. i 74 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY of Ordination, Confirmation, or the rite of laying on of hands, and general supervision. That they were an Order of raen distinct from Elders or Presbyters, needs little proof, as it is seldom disputed ; it is in respect to the powers and duties vested in them, and which of necessity must belong also to their successors, that the important question arises. The f;tct of their special call and appoint ment as Christ's Apostles (Luke vi. 13,) the special commission which was entrusted to them (Matt. xxviii, 18-20,) and the distinct manner in which they are mentioned in the subsequent history of the Church, and particularly iu the formal decree respect ing Cii"cumcision (Acts xv.,) show that they were an Order of the Ministry, distinct from Presbyters and Deacons. But to the Apostles belonged certain ministerial powers, which were not peculiar to any age of the Church, as Ordination, Confirmation, and authorita tive supervision ; besides those ministerial offices which tliey shared in common with the inferior grades of the Ministry, such as the right to preach and baptize. 1st. The Apostles, and they alone, had power to ordain men to the sacred Ministry. There is not, ia the New Testament, a single instance of Ordination at the hands of either Presbyters or Deacons. Nor, as we raay here observe, was there such an instance ever known or acknowledged in the Church during the first fift^een hundred j^ears of its exist..-nce. Thus the Apostles, and they alone, ordained the seven Deacons. They said to the multitude of the EXISTING IN THREE OEDERS. 75 disciples, Looh ye out (or select from) among you, seven men of honest report, full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom, whom we may appoint over this busi ness. And the saying pleased the whole multitude, and they chose Stephen, &c., whom they set before the Apostles, and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them. Acts vi. 3, 5, 6.* This was an undoubted instance of Ordination by the Apostles. 2d. The next instance of Ordination recorded in the New Testament, was to the Office of Presbyter, and was by the Apostles Barnabas and Paul. That Paul and Barnabas were Apostles, is evident, because they are distinctly mentioned as such. Acts xiv. 4, and 14. In the thirteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, we read of a special journey undertaken by these men, who were there, together with certain prophets and teachers, at Antioch. That and the following chapters give a particular account of their journey, labors, and success. The account reminds us at once of the Missionary tours of our own Mission ary Bishops at the present day. The sacred writer having given a rapid sketch of the principal places which they visited, with their reception, tells us near * It is worthy of note, that during the Usurpation in England when the Bishops were ejected from their places and grievously perse cuted, a singular alteration was made in the Bible, in the account of the appointment of the Deacons. In Field's large folio edition, I6G0, which was found lately in at least some English Churches, instead of the words "whom we ma?/ appoint, " it was altered so as to read " whom -ye may appoint," thus altering the Bible to suit the views of a party. And yet that edition of the Bible was to have been pub lished by authority of the Puritan Parliament, had it not been for the Eestoration. — Jones' Essay, ch. iv. 76 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY the conclusion of the narrative, that, "when thoy bad ordained them Elders (or as in the original. Presbyters,) in every Church, and had prayed, with fasting, they commended them to the Lord, on whom they believed." Acts xiv. 23. This is another undoubted instance of the Ordina tion of Presbyters, not by Presbyters, but by those whom loe know to have been Apostles. 3d. The next Scriptural authority for Ordination by Apostles and their successors, is in St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy. It is not a historical account like those cited above, but is one of those incidental allusions to a practice existing, wdiich affords argu ment of the very strongest kind. Timothy was now stationed permanently over the Church at Ephesus, by St. Paul, who was an Apostle to the Gentiles at large, and who travelled over large portions of the Gentile world. Five years previously, as chronologers tell us, St. Paul had sent from Miletus to Ephesus, and called together, not the Church at large, but the Elders or Presbyters of the Church in Ephesus. He reminds these Presbyters that he himself had spent three years at Ephesus, warning every one night and day, with tears. He reminds them that this is now the last time that they should see his face ; and in taking this his last and most affecting leave of them, he presses upon these Presbyters certain duties to the flock over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers, and warns them against certain dangers. But on one subject, and most important to the Church at Ephesus, he says to them not one word. EXISTING IN THEEE ORDERS. 77 But his Epistle to Timothy breathes an entirely different spirit. He clearly recognizes Timothy, though a young man (1 Tim. iv. 12,) as one having authority over the Presbyters of Ephesus (1 Tim. i. 3 ;) he minutely specifies the different qualifications of those who are to be admitted to the "office" of Presbyters, (then also called Bishops,) and to " the Office of a Deacon " (1 Tim. iii. 10,) and expressly charges him, in respect to the work of Ordination, to " lay hands suddenly on no man." 1 Tim. v. 22. Other peculiar prerogatives belonging only to the highest Order of the Ministiy, are also recognized as belonging to Timothy, which will be specified under their appropriate head. These Epistles to Timothy, indited by the Spirit of God, and binding upon the conscience of every Christian, do most distinctly recognize Timothj' as Bishop of Ephesus, in the modern sense of that word. 4th. The next case where the power of Ordination is distinctlj' recognized, is found in the Epistle of St. Paul to Titus, Bishop of Crete. Crete had been part of the missionary field of St. Paul. The suc cess of the Gospel in that Island, and the importance of the field itself, containing, as is recorded, a hun dred cities, rendered it important that the Church there should be under the immediate and constant supervision of its own Bishop. It was for this pur pose, that St. Paul, an inspired Apostle, placed Titus over this field of labor. And while other preroga tives were vested in him, as will subsequently appear, he, and he alone in Crete, had power of Ordination. " For this cause, says St. Paul, left I thee in Crete, 78 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY that THOU shouldst set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain Elders {or Presbyters) in every city, as I had appointed thee." Titus i. 5. Nor is it out of [)lace here to observe, that all early history of the Church speaks with one voice in naming Titus as the first Bishop of Crete. That he, and he alone, is recognized as having power to Ordain, the Scripture above cited sufficiently attests. Thus far, the chain of Scriptural evidence has heen confined to one single point, that of Ordination ; and it certainly has been shown, that the Scriptures are far from being silent upon this subject. In the first case adduced, we find the candidates for the sacred office of Deacon, selected or chosen indeed by the people, J'et ordained to their Office by the laying on of the Ajjostles' hands. In the next instance, we find two Apostles, Paul and Barnabas, themselves removed one link from those whom Christ first appointed, visiting city after city, ordaining Elders or Presbyters in every Church. In the next instance, we find St. Timothy in E[ihesus, already long since containing its band of Presbyters, yet he alone vested with power to admit men by the laying on of hands, to the different Orders of Presbyter and Deacon. And finally, Titus is brought before us, placed on the populous Island of Crete, with its hundred cities, distinctly and avowedly, that he might ordain Elders or Presbyters in every city. We ask the intelligent, candid reader, if these instances alone are not fatal against the modern theories, both of Lay and Presbyterian Ordination ? Before leaving this, the Scriptural argument, in favor of Ordination by Apostles and their successors, EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 79 and them alone, we will notice the two instances usually cited from the New Testament, as the main pillars in favor of Presbyterian Ordination. And, as this is a branch of the subject of the greatest intrinsic moment, we will give to those two instances a partic ular though brief examination. The first instance, usually urged in proof of Presby terian Ordination, is that recorded in the first verse of the thirteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apos tles, where Paul and Barnabas are sent forth by the Holy Ghost for the performance of a certain work ; and on whom " certain prophets and teachers," three in number, Simeon, Lucius, and Manaen, are said to have laid their hands. This, the reader will remem ber, is one of the two main proofs of Ordination by Presbyters. But with how little reason this verse is urged, is obvious from these considerations : — 1st. -Both Paul and Barnabas in t'nis verse are mentioned with the others as being already " projihets and teachers," and as having " ministered unto the Lord," and, therefore, already shared the same Office with them. 2d. Both Paul and Barnabas had already been in the work of the Ministry long before, as is recorded previously. Acts ix. 20, 22, and xi. 23, 26. So that if this was an Ordination, as some contend, it could only have been such on the supposition that they were admitted to a higher degree of the Ministry thau they had before, (although before preachers of the Gospel,) an admission fatal to the idea of parity, or of Presbyters alone. 3d. St. Paul declares that he did not receive his commission at the hands of men — his language is, so THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY " An Apostle not of men, neither by wcw, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father." Gal i 1. 4th. Granting this to have been an Ordination, 3L does not appear that those three " prophets and teacbftrs" were Presbyters, for such is the usage of Scripture, that it does not hence appear to what Order they did belong. The verse, therefore, is as good proof of Apostolic, as of Presbyterian Ordination. Sth. The real truth re specting this occurrence was, that it was a .'getting apart of Paul and Baj-nabas, both Apostles, as before proved, for a special missionaiy work to the Gentiles, with prayer and the invocation of a blessing by the laying on of hands ; and a careful perusal of the nar rative of their journey to the end, will show that that work they actually " fulfilled," or completed. And yet this is one of the two main proof-texts in favor of Presbyterian Ordination. The other instance cited from the New Testament in favor of Presbyterian Ordination, is that passage in the Epistle of Paul to Titus. " Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery." 1 Tira. iv. 14. It is contended : — 1st. That this was an Or dination ; 2d. That the word translated " Presbj'- tery," means a council of Presbyters in the modern sense of that word ; and 3d. That the Ordination was performed by the laying on of the hands of thess Presbyters, in the modern sense of that word. This, however, is taking three things, three im portant things, for granted, none of which ever has^ been, or ever will be proved. For, 1st, It is not cer tain that this verse alludes to any Ordination at all. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 81 The mere " laying on of hands " does not itself prove an Ordination ; for, as seen already in the case of Barnabas and Paul, it was employed simply to invoke a benediction or blessing upon a particular under taking. 2d. It is far from certain that the word " Presby tery" means an assembly or Council of men of anj^ grade whatever. For Grotius, a learned Presbyterian, speaking of Presbyters laying on their hands near those of a Bishop, says : " I do not dare to bring in confirmation of this, that expression of Paul's, of the imposition of the hands of the Presbytery, because I see that Jerome, Ambrose, and other ancients, and Calvin, cei'tainly chief of, all the moderns, interpret ' presbyterium' in that place, not an assembly, but the ofiice, to which Timothy was promoted. And, indeed, he who is conversant vnth the councils and writings of the Fathers, cannot be ignorant that ' presbyterium,' as ' episcopatus,' and ' diaco'natus,' are the -names of offices."'^ 3d. Evenif "Presbytery" does mean an assembly of men, it does not prove that that assembly consisted of Presbyters. The word " Presbytery," like the word " Deaconship," which is sometimes translated Minis try, may refer to the Ministiy in general, without designating which of the grades of the Ministry is specifically meant. And as St. Peter and St. John, certainly eminent among the Apostles, declare them selves to be Presbyters, 1 Pet. v. i ; 2 John i. ; 3 John i., so, for aught appears, this Council of the Presbytery might have consisted of Apostles alone. * Grotius' Work, "Ch. Gov.," Ch. xi., Seo. 11. 4* 82 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY And this is the construction actually given to this passage, in the Greek Church, both ancient and mod ern, in which the Presbyters do not lay on hands with the Bishop in Ordination. 4th. If, however, we grant all that they claim for this passage — that it refers to a council of men, and that those men were all Presbyters, even then this passage avails them nothing, and this last proof for Presbyterian Ordination is entirely worthless ; for, in comparing this passage "s\'itli another, in which the Ministerial gift is supjiosed to have been conveyed in Ordination, we find a very marked and striking differ ence in the two passages, which gives to this verse an entirely different shade of meaning. That other passage is this : " Stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands." 2 Tim. i. 6. In the other passage already considered, the expres sion is : " With the laying on of the hands of the Presbytery." The Greek words are equally significant. The word dia denotes instrumentality, and points out St. Paul as the person by whom the ministerial gift was conveyed. The other word, meta, simply signi fies concurrence, and intimates that the Presbyters concurred with St. Paul in the appointment of Tim othy ; as is done in Ordination now in the Protestant Episcopal Church ; while, as before, St. Paul remains the person from whom the Ministerial Office pro ceeded. Even then, granting all that is claimed for this passage, yet, closely examined, it is utterly worthless as an argument for Presbyterian Ordination ; and thus, this last prop for that system falls at once to EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 83 the ground. We leave it, therefore, -without the shadow of an argument from the Holy Scriptures. Again, another prerogative which belonged to the Apostolic Office, was that of laying on of hands in Confirmation. We shall not attempt here to give the Scriptural authority ; and hence, the universal obligation of this Apostolic Eite. But, if there is one ordinance which dates back to Apostolic times, and in respect to which the rule of St. Vincent holds good, the " Semper, ubique, et ab omnibus," or, always, everywhere, and by all, it is this rite of Confirmation. For the first fifteen hundred years it was universallj^ practised. It is still observed by the great mass of Christendom, and not only by those who, at the Eeformation, retained Episcopacy, but by that large body of Prot estants, the Lutherans. Its binding authority on all Christians is sufficiently proved by St. Paul, when he declares that the " laying on of hands " is one of the first " principles of the doctrine of Christ." Our present object is to show that the administra tion of this Eite was the duty of the Apostles and their successors in Office, and these alone. At the first preaching of the Gospel, Philip, one of the seven Deacons, had gone down to Samaria, and preached the Word with great success. " With one accord they gave heed unto those things which Philip spake," and " they were baptized, both men and women." Acts viii. 6, 12. And then it is recorded, th;it when the Apostles, which were at Jerusalem, heard that Samaria had received the Word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John, two of the Apostles, who. 84 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY when they had come down to Samaria, having prayed for the disciples, that they might receive the blessing of the Holy Ghost, they then " laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Ghost." Acts viii. 17. This simple narrative develops this important prin ciple, that although others besides the Apostles might preach and baptize, yet that the Apostles alone had power to administer this Eite of "laying on of hands." Still another instance proving that Confirmation was administered only by Apostles, is seen in the practice of St. Paul, one of their number. For it is recorded of him, that in one of his journeys, having come to Ephesus, he tarried there a considerable time, and that after they believed and were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus, that " Paul laid his hands upon them, and the Holy Ghost came upon them." Acts xix. 6.* Hence, on these Scriptural evidences we believe that the Apostles, and they alone, had the power to administer the Eite of laying on of hands. The Apostles and their successors not only had the power of Ordination and Confirmation, but they also exercised supervision over the Churches, and had power and authority of discipline over Presbyters and Deacons ; a measure of authority, however, which Sfc. Paul declared was given, not for destruction, but for the edification of the Church. 2 Cor. x. 8. While * A very ingenious and thorough examination of the practice of the Apostles in respect to Confirmation, may be found iu " Chapin's Prim itive Church," pp. 209, 211. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDERS. 85 individual Presbyters had the care of their own indi vidual flocks, yet St. Paul declared that he had ¦'' the care of all the Churches." 2 Cor. ii. 28. From Miletus, we read that he sent and summoned around him the Presbyters of Ephesus, to whom, when assembled, he delivered his solemn and weighty charge. He bid them " Take heed unto themselves, and to all the flocks, over which the Holy Ghost had made them overseers." Acts xviii. 28. So also, in his Epistles to Timothy and Titus, Bishops over Ephesus and Crete, it is undeniable that he recognizes in them, authority and power over the Presbyters and Deacons of those Churches. It was not because of the advanced age of those Bishops, for Timothy was yet comparativelj' j'oung, 1 Tim. iv. 12, but on account of the stations and Offices which they were called to occupy. Thus to Timothy he says, " Against an Elder (or Presbyter,) receive not an ac cusation (or complaint,) but before two or three wit nesses. Them (Presbyters) that sin, rebuke before all, that others may fear." 1 Tim. v. 19, 20. Here is power and authority recognized in Timothy, as belonging to the Office which he held, official power to receive an accusation or complaint, formally and officially made — complaint which must be sub stantiated by the proper presentation of witnesses, and those of the requisite number. He recognizes in him also, not only power to entertain a complaint against a Presbyter, but also to give sentence against him. " Them that sin rebuke before all, that others may fear." And again he says to him, " Reprove, rebuke, exhort, with all long-suffering and doctrine ;' 86 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTRY 2 Tim. iv. 2, clearly iraplying that power is lodged in the hands of the Bishop, as pertaining to his Office. So also, writing to Titus, Bishop of Crete, he recognizes the same power and authoiity in him also, which he had implied, as reposing in the Bishop of Ephesus. His language is, " Exhort, and rebuke, with all authority. Let no man despise thee." Titus ii. 15. We see, also, clear proofs of the authority of the Apostles and their successors over Presbyters and Deacons, in the address of St. John to the Angels of the Seven Churches, in Asia. This portion of the inspired volume was written at a late period, and after these Churches had had time to assume a flour ishing aspect. Ephesus, as we know, had its Presby ters and its Deacons, more than two scores of years previous to the time of writing this book. These addresses themselves bear internal marks of being designed for Churches of considerable age. The ven erable Apostle and "beloved disciple" does not address the Churches themselves, nor direct his mes sage to the Presbyters placed over them ; but he directs his exhortation to one single person, whom he names, " the Angel," or, as the term signifies, the Messenger, or Apostle, who is addressed, os a person^ (and here is the force of argument,) as one bearing authority over these Presbyters and Churches, as one who is responsible for the condition of those Churches, both in respect to Doctrine and Discipline. Thus, to the Angel of the Church of Ephesus he says : "-Thou hast tried them which say they are Apostles, and are not, and hast found them liars." Eev. ii. 2. To EXISTING IN THEEE OEDERSf. 87 the Angel of the Church in Pergamos, he says : " I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there them that hold the doctrine of Balaam." Eev. ii. 14. To the Angel of the Church in Thyatira, he says : " I have a few things against thee, because thou suf ferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to teach." Eev. ii. 20. Thus these messages of the inspired Apostle ad dressed to the head of each of these Seven Churches, recognize power and authority in the persons address ed, over those Churches, and over those who professed to teach in those Churches ; authority, as the letter of the messages shows, to try them who called themselves Apostles ; authority, to forbid them who taught false doctrines, as that of Balaam ; authority, in the Church to banish from it Jezebel the prophetess, and with her all such unauthorized teachers. In this latest portion of the inspired volume, then, we have proof that there was an Order of men in those Churches of Asia, responsible for the condition of those Churches, and having authority over them in their Ministry, Doctrine and Discipline. Nor need we anticipate another portion of our argument here to say, that all primitive history is decisive in pointing out the Angels of those Churches, as the Bishops of those Churches respectively.* * The statement of the non- Episcopal Mosheim, is too valuable iu this connection, to be omitted. He says: "In Che more considerate ones [Churches] at least, if uot in the others, it came even during ihe life-time of the Apostles, and with their approbation, to be the practice for some oue man, moro eminent thau the rest, to be invested with the 88 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY We have now examined three different and inde pendent sources of proof, that the Apostles and their successors in Office were a superior grade in the Christian Ministry ; that they possessed powers, and discharged functions, which they did not share in common with Presbyters and Deacons. We have seen that thej', and they alone, ordained men to the sacred Office of the Christian Ministiy ; that they, and they alone, administered the rite of the laying on of hands in Confirmation ; and that they also had power and authority over Presbyters and Deacons. It will be remembered, also, that our proof, thus far, has been drawn entirely from the sacred oracles of God ; and so far from those writings being silent on this subject, that they abound in testimony bearing directly upon the point, that the Christian Ministry, as established by Christ, through the inspired Apos tles, consisted of three Orders ; and that the evidence upon which we receive this doctrine, is at least equally direct and strong with that upon which we receive the doctrine of the Divine Institution of the Lord's Day, or the doctrine of Infant Baptism. We have dwelt more particularly upon this point — the superiority of the Apostles and their successors in Office — because it is the hinge on which the whole presidency or chief direction. And in support of this opinion, we are supplied with an argument of such strength in those "Angels "to whom St- John addressed the Epistles, which, bij the co-mmand of our Saviour Hiinself, he sent to the Seven Churches of Asia, (Rev. ii. iii.,) as the Presbyterians, as they are termed, let them labor and strive what they may, will never be able to overcome." Murdochs Mosheim's Oonwnerdaries, Vol I., Cejd. I., Sect. 41, p. 170. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS, 89 question turns. If the Apostles and their successors, and they alone, had power to ordain, to confirm, and to exercise authority over the Ministry of the Church, then, of course, the theory of parity in the Ministry, or of Ordination by mere Elders or Presbyters, falls at once to the ground. We have dwelt upon the superiority of the Apostles the longer, because, that point being settled, the whole question is decided, and we shall therefore pass rapidly over the subject of the duties and powers of Presbyters and Deacons, though on this latter point — the ministerial character of the Office of Deacon — as it is matter of dispute, we in vite the closest attention to its consideration. V. The Order of Presbyters was distinct from that of the Apostles. They were an Order of the Ministiy. They performed certain ministerial duties, as preach ing, and supervising their respective congregations. Two remarks are made in this place, introductory to what follows. One is, that the indiscriminate use of names in the New Testament, may partly ariso from the fact, that those who belonged to the firsv Order of the Ministry, had the power also, as a mattei of course, of performing those duties which belonged to the other Orders, inasmuch as the greater must necessarily include the less. Thus, an Apostle might not only Ordain, but also preach and baptize. And so, St. Peter, though an Apostle, is yet named as a Presbyter, 1 Pet. v. 1, and Paul and Apollos, though both of them Apostles, are also named as Deacons. 1 Cor. iii. 6. But the reverse of this is not true ; that is, we do not find Presbyters arrogating to themselves either the name or duties of an Apostle ; 90 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY nor Deacons, claiming the prerogatives of either Apos tles or Presbyters. The other remark is, that the interchangeable use of the terras. Bishop and Presbyter, ceased, as soon as the name of Apostle was dropped, and then the name of Bishop was exclusively applied to the first Order of the Ministry. 1st. The Order of Presbyters "^vas distinct from that of the Apostles. This is evident, from the raarked distinction observed between thera, in that important decision which was pronounced by an early Council at Jerusalem. The question of Circumcision had agitated the Church at Antioch. The J(!wisli Christians clung to this long practised rite. The Gentile Christians, who had received the Gospel from the direct preaching of the Apostles, abjured the no tion that Circumcision was necessaiy to salvation under the Gospel. So sharji was the discussion, that an appeal was finally made to the Apostles, and Elders or Presbyters, at Jerusalera. After the sub ject had been thoroughly discussed, a decision was made, carefully framed and in due form. That deci sion was as follows : " The Apostles and Elders (or Presbyters,) and brethren. Greeting," &c.. Acts XV. 23. The language of that official authoritative document, fraraed by several of the Apostles and Presbyters, to settle an important principle, clearly designates the parties from whom it emanates, as well as tliose to whom it is addressed. And yet, in that document, the Apostles and Elders are named in dis tinction from each other, as they are from the brethren in the Church at l.irgo. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 91 2d. They were not only distinct from the Apostles, but they were also an Order of the Ministry. This is implied in St. Paul's address to the Elders of the Church at Ephesus. " Take heed to yourselves, and to all the flock over which the Holy Ghost hath made you overseers." Acts xx. 28. It is asserted in St. Pani's Eoistle to Timothy, "If any man desire; the Office of a Bishop (or Presbyter,) he desireth a good work." 1 Tim. iii. 1. It is proved from the qualifications required of Presbyters. Thus it is demanded, that he be "apt to teach," 1 Tim. iii. 2, that he be one that " ruleth his own house well." 1 Tim. iii. 5. He is also said to be " the steward of God," Titus i. 7, and one that "may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to con vince the gainsayers." Titus i. 9. It is evident, also, that Elders were Ministers, from the fact that they were admitted to their high and holy calling by the sacred ordinance of Ordination. Paul and Barnabas, the Apostles, in their missionary tour " ordained them Elders or Presbyters in every Church." It was for this reason also that Titus was stationed in Crete, that he might ordain Elders or Presbyters in every city. Brief as our examination has been, enough has been said to show, that the Presbyters were an Order of men distinct from the Apostles, and also, -n'hat is scarcely questioned at the present day, that they also were an Order of the Christian Ministry. VI. We pass now in conclusion to the remaining point — that Deacons are an Order of men distinct from Apostles and Presbyters, and also, that they are an Order of the Ministry. 92 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY That they were a distinct Order of men, needs no proof The circumstances attending their appoint ment, and the distinctness with which they are always named, as separate from the other Orders, sufficiently proves that they are au Order of men distinct from them. Phil. i. 1 ; 1 Tim. iii. 8, 10, 13. The only question deserving consideration is. Were the Scriptural Deacons an Order of the Cliristian Ministry ? An examination of the evidence will show that they were. 1st. The qualifications required of those to be ad mitted to the sacred Office of Deacon, clearly intimate their ministerial character. They were to be " full of the Holy Ghost and of wisdom." Acts vi. 8. They were to be "grave," " holding the mystery of the Faith in a pure conscience," "ruling their children and their owm houses well." 1 Tim. iii. 8, 9, 12. 2d. The manner of admitting them to their Office indicates their ministerial character. They were or dained to that Office by the Apostles. The people might choose them : " Look ye out from among you seven men," &c. ; but the ApostLs must ordain them, "whom we may appoint," &c. ; "and they set them before the Apostles, and when they had prayed they laid their hands on them.." Acts vi. 6. 3d. St. Paul speaks of the Office of Deacon, in a manner to indicate its ministerial character. Thus he says, " They that have used the Office of a Deacon ivell, purchase to themselves a good degree" (1 Tim. iii. 13,) or as the words evidently mean, they who have worthily conducted themselves in this inferior Order or " degree " of Deacon, " purchase to them- EXISTING IN THEEE OEDERS. , 93 selves " or render themselves worthy of advancement to, a higher "degree" or Order in that Ministry, for which, by their past fiiithfulness, they had qualified themselves. 4th. If there be, however, doubt whether Deacons were an Order of the Ministry from the above consid erations, that doubt must vanish as we examine the actual practice of the Deacons themselves. Stephen, one of the Seven Deacons, appears to have been a preacher of the Gospel, for he not only did "great wonders and miracles," but also publicly taught the people ; for his enemies " suborned men to say that they heard him speak blasphemous words against Moses and against God." Acts vi. 11. And that strong current of public prejudice against him, which enlisted the High Priest and chief men among the Jews, and finally gave him the glorious crown of the first martyr in the Christian Church, points him out as a public ambassador of Jesus Christ. Whatever uncertainty the reader may feel respect ing the case of St. Stephen, there can be none in re gard to the ministerial character of another of the Seven Deacons. We read that " Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them." Acts viii. 5. Nor was he ouly a preacher, but he also administered the holy Sacrament of Baptism. For it is said that " when they believed Philip preach ing the things concerning the kingdoni of God, they were baptized, both men and women." Acts viii. 12. A little wdiile after, we find Philip baptizing a very distinguished convert to the Gospel, a man who had charge of all the treasures of the Queen of Ethiopia. 94 the cheisti.\n ministey Acts viii. 38. We read, also, that this same Deacon preached in all the cities till he came to Cesarea. Acts viii. 40. The only possible way, in which to avoid the con clusion which these facts force upon us, is to assume that this Philip, whom we thus find publicly preach ing and baptizing, was not Philip one of the Seven, but another person bearing the same name. But they who resort to this subterfuge, are cut off from this plea, which is at best but a mere assertion, for we are told expresslj^, that Paul, when on his journey to Jerusalem, came unto Cesarea and entered into the house of " Philip, the Evangelist," or preacher of the Gospel, (and then it is incidentallj' added,) "' which was one of the Seven." (Acts xxi. 8.) For these various reasons, we must believe, as a truth of God's Word, that Scriptural Deacons were an Order of the Christian Ministry. VII. We have now finished the argument, to show that the Holy Scriptures clearly recognize the exist ence of three Orders in the Ministiy of Christ's Holy, Gatholic, and Apostolic Church. We have seen, that there was an Order of men, at first called Apostles ; that there was another Order of men, ordinarily call ed Elders or Presbyters ; and that there was another Order of men, also called Deacons — each of these Orders distinct from the others, and yet each of them possessing ministerial character, and each called to perform ministerial duties. And we expect to show, in a subsequent portion of this work, that these same Orders have been handed down in the Church to the present day. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 95 We know that the Scriptural argument for an Episcopacy is often called weak, and that Churchmen are frequently taunted for apiiealing to patristic testi mony. On the contrary, considering the times, in which the different Books of the New Testament were written — the persons, by whom they were writ ten — the objects, for which they were written : con sidering, also, the general manner in which the doc trines of Holy Scripture are taught, not technically but inferentially, we should have expected to find the proof of the organization and Ministiy of the Church in the very form in which it presents it self — proof, sufficient for the humble, docile Christian to guide his conduct, but insufficient to silence the muttering complaints of the caviller, and shut the mouth of self-will. Thankful for what light God has thrown around our i)ath, may we and our readers have grace, meekly and cheerfully to follow, even the gentlest teachings of His Word. Let us, in conclusion, remind the reader, that if the truths now presented have gained the assent of his understanding, they also, of necessitj', appeal to his conscience, and ought to regulate his practice. It is no matter of vain curiosity, or of blind expediency, how Jesus Christ, through His inspired Apostles, organized His Church. May God grant us all such measure of the grace of His Holy Spirit, that we may not only know what things we ought to do, but also fiiithfully perform the same, through Jesus Christ, our Lord. Let early education, prejudice, social influence, earthly friendships, even the bitterness of oppositiou, lie as the small dust of the balance, in comparison 96 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY with what we know to be our duty to the Church which Jesus Cheist purchased with His own precious blood. CHAPTEE VI. THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY EXISTING IN THEEl OEDERS. THE HISTOEICAL AEGUMENT. Having examined the Scriptural argument, prov ing that Jesus Christ, through His inspired Apostles, established the Christian Ministry in three Orders, we come now to another kind of evidence ; we mean the testimony of competent witnesses, who lived in Apos tolic times, or so near that period, that they could not possibly have been mistaken, in respect to the organi zation of the Christian Church. Two or three considerations will show us the value of this class of testimony : 1st. The real amount of history of the Apostohc Church, contained in the writings of the New Testa ment, compared with the wide extent of the field, is extremely limited. The Holy Gospels are almost en tirely occupied with the life, miracles, instructions, sufferings, and death of our blessed Saviour. It was not until after He had become victor over death and EXISTING IN' THREE OEDERS. 97 hell, that He gave full commission to His Apostles whom He had chosen. He did not go forth Himself to plant Churches. He left this in the hands of His Apostles, clothing them with the power of the Holy Ghost, (Acts i. 8,) and promising them His presence, "alway, even unto the end of the word." Mat. xxviii. 20. " Now, the only book which professes to be at all historical in its character, is the ' Acts of the Apos tles ;' and that book, not written by one of the Apos tles, but by St. Luke, an Evangelist, a companion of St. Paul, and, as is supposed, under his immediate in spection."* This book, however, does not profess to give an ac count of the labors of all the Apostles. Of at least nine of the Twelve Apostles, ifc gives us no clue to their history, their labors, trials, sufferings and deaths. The Epistles in the New Testament were not designed as historical sketches ; and the Book of Eevelations is rather prophetic than historic in its character. With this scantiness in the detail of facts in the lives of the Apostles, as furnished by Holy Scripture, we turn to the testimony of competent witnesses, liv ing at that early day, whose writings Providence has handed down along with the Holy Scriptures, for our use. This is a kind of evidence legitimate and deci sive. Secular and civil events often depend for their interpretation on the testimony of cotemporaneous witnesses. For instance, the right construction of our National Constitution, on a disputed point, is de cided hj au appeal to the papers of Washington, and * Burton's Hist. Ch. Church, p. 129. 5 98 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTRY Madison, and Jay, and Hamilton, and Marshall. So with the New Testament. If men differ as to the in terpretation of that volume, in respect to Doctrine, Ministry, Sacrament, or Worship — and they do differ, it is a conclusive method of argument, to refer at once to the writings, or the practice, of the men who wrote the New Testament, and who, of course, must have known how it should be understood. And who will say, that the scantiness of such his tory in the " Sacred Writings," does not find its rea son in the minuteness of detail, which God has given us in His Providence ? God does not interpose by miracle, when the ordinaiy course of His Providence sufficiently attests. We turn then to the testimony of those Apostolic men, as competent witnesses for God's truth ; and, so far from rejecting such testimo ny as unimportant, we are bound to receive it as one of God's richest gifts to the world.* 2nd. This is a method of argument which the ob jectors to Ejascopacj' are forced to use, and do use in cases of necessity, and they cannot maintain them selves against the infidel and blasphemer without it. At the present daj-", the differences of opinion concern ing Christianity do not pertain to Church Order and Government alone. Other subjects, vital in the Chris tian Faith, are matters of disjDute. The doctrine of the Holy Trinity ; the Personality and Divinity of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost ; the divine institution of the Lord's Day, and the Holy Sacrament of Infant * For a clear statement of this argument, see that admirable work, Scoffs Christian Life, Vol, iii. Chap, vii., Sec. 10. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 99 Baptism, are subjects of earnest discussion, and both parties, alike, appeal to the language of the Bible in support of their views. Amidst this diversity of sentiment, how satisfactory it is to appeal at once to the practice of the Church in the very days of the Apostles, to settle the disput ed point ; to show how the Bible was understood by the men who wrote it ! How triumphantly the ap peal is made, in controversy with the Unitarian ! We drive him to the necessity of abandoning his position altogether as untenable, or else of giving up the Holy Scriptures entirely, and going over into the ranks of Deism. And yet, as a matter of fact, they who wield this weapon most dextrously and confidently in their con troversies with the Unitarian and the Baptist, who thus appeal to the "Apostolic Fathers," as to men of authority, who have a right to be heard, yet, when the Order and the Ministry of the Church are in dispute, they suddenly resort to all sorts of subter fuges to avoid the issue. Then it is, we are gravely told, that " These Epistles are not genuine," and " are of no authority with scholars," &c. Thus, for exam ple, a distinguished Presbyterian divine, in 1807, writ ing against the Church, maintains : " That even the Shorter Epistles of Ignatius arc unioortliy of confidence as the genuine works of the Father, whose name they bear, is the opinion of some of the ablest and best judges of the Protestant worid."* ?Letters on the Ministry, by Dr. Milior. 100 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY And jet, in 1821, writing against the Unitarians, fourteen years subsequently, the same author is able to say : " The author is aware that the authenticity of the Epistles of Ignatius Aas been called in question. Ifc is sufficient for his purpose to say, that the great body of learned men consider the Smaller Epistles of Ignatius, as, in the main, the real works of the writer whose name they bear."* In respect to the genuineness of these Epistles of * Letters on Unitarianism. This obvious inconsistency of Dr. Miller was so often alluded to, that ho appeared in self-defence. His defence is the greatest curiosity of which he was the author. He says that his alleged inconsistency with himself is owing to the greater light tlirown upon such studies in modern times. But then, unfortu nately for him, it was in the light of these modern times that he bore testimony ire/aTOr of Ignatius. His Epistles havo now come to be " the real works of the writer whose name theyljear." But the Doctor is still more amusing. In his defence, he claims that even the Shorter Epistles of Ignatius have been " tampered with and interpolated," to prove Episcopacy, "with a disgusting aud even nauseating frequency," and yet it was not a great while before that the Doctor quoted these same Epistles as teaching " genuine Presiyie- rianism." To escape from such a position unscathed, would puzzle most men. But the Doctor, well skilled in " archerj'," dodges hi-msdf here with uncommon dexterity. He gravely asks, "may not any man avail himself of the ' argumentum ad hominem' with perfect fair ness and force?'' That is, according to his logic, the Epistles of Ignatius are " tampered with and interpolated " — " with a disgusting and even nauseating frequency," io prove Episopacy ; and still may be appealed to as teaching "genuine Presbyterianism." And this is tbe Doctor's "argumentum ad hominem!" — K T. Observer, May 25, 1844. To he serious on a serious subject, whoever carefully examines the Doctor's controversial writings agaiust the Church, will see that he made strange use of tho "right of private judgment," in his quota tions from the Fathers. — See Dr. Bowden's Letter to Dr. MiUer, Vol. I. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 101 Ignatius, even Mosheim, the great historitm, acknowl edges that "Perhaps there Avould have been no contention with most persons about the Epistles of Ignatius, if those who contend for the divine origin and antiquity of Episcopal government had not been enabled to support their cause with them."* But even suppose that the " Shorter Epistles of Ignatius" have been interpolated, it is easy to ascer tain wdiich is the genuine text. For by comparing all copies of Ignatius together, by rejecting that in which they differ, and retaining that in which they agree, according to the well-known rule of criticism, we shall be sure of attaining the correct text. Now, lohat deserves to be remembered, the interpolations of Ignatius, if any, do not affect his statements respect ing Episcopacy, for, on this point, all copies agree precisely. 3d. We see the importance of this class of evi dence in settling the question, what constitutes the Sacred Canon of Scripture. The objector, who refuses an appeal to the Apos tolic Fathers and writers of the Primitive Church, bids us settle all these disputed points by referring at once to the Inspired Books of the New Testament. But this is the very question to be decided. How do we know, which are the Inspired Books of the New Testament ? How do we know, that all the writings thus collected together are inspired ? and how do vve know, that other equally important works have not * De rebrn Ghrist. ante Qons., p. 160. 102 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY been rejected ? The mere circumstance that certain books are bound up together in one volume, does not prove the Inspiration of any one of them. Perhaps it is said, that we must rely upon their internal evi dence, to prove their inspiration and genuineness. The argument from " internal evidence " is popular, and, within certain limits, legitimate ; yet who does not know, that reliance upon this alone, would fill all Christendom with confusion ? For what is this, after all, but an appeal to the ignorance, vanity, and self-will of fallen man, to settle the question, what it was, and wdiat it was not, proper for God to reveal. When God has seen fit, in His infinite wisdom, to en lighten the ignorance, rebuke the folly, and condemn the sinfulness of His unworthy creatures, is it so that raan must first sit in judgment upon the propriety of these rebukes and threatenings, before he can decide upon his obligation to receive them ? It was error of this kind, which led Luther to reject the Epistle of St. James from the New Testament, because that Epistle did not agree with his notion of Justification by Faith ; that is, it lacked " internal evidence." It is this same dangerous error, in a more appalling form, which is leading a large class of nominally Christian men to reject considerable portions of the Old and New Testaments, because they lack, what these modern wiseacres call, " internal evidence." As we before said, "internal evidence," under proper restrictions, is one of the strongest arguments for the Holy Scriptures. But yet we receive them ourselves, we teach theni to our children, we carry them to the heathen, on the authority of the early EXISTING IN THEEE OEDERS. 103 Church ; because those ancient men were competent to decide, and did actually decide, what Books did, and what Books did not, belong to the Sacred Canon. Vast numbers of spurious writings were in circula tion as early as the second centuiy ; and to the Church in those primitive times it belonged to decide that delicate and important question, not for them selves only, but for the Church in all coming time. But then, be it ever remembered, on that same class of testimony, on which we receive the Canonical Books of the New Testament, we also rest the fact, of the organization of the Apostolic Church in three Orders of the Ministry. And we affirm the manifest and gross inconsistency of those, "who receive that tes timony in one case, and reject it in the other. Those Apostolic Fathers and Ancient Christians were wit nesses of certain facts. We believe them to be credi ble witnesses. We affirm, however, that that cred ibility affects their whole testimony. And they who deny that credibility in one case, as in respect to the organization of the Church, have no reason why they should not deny it in every other case. These con siderations are sufficient to show why it is we have a right to place such reliance upon the testimony of the primitive witnesses of Christ's Apostolic and Ancient Church. To that testimony we now ask attention. I. The first writer, whose language we will quote, is Clement, the third Bishop of the Church in Eome. According to Eusebius, the historian of the early Church, and who preserved the list of the Succession in the four Patriarchal Sees,* from the beginning * Many of the records of the Successions were preserved in the 104 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTRY down to the year 305, or to within twenty years of the Council of Nice, the testimony of St. Clement is more valuable, inasmuch as he lived in the first century, was contemporaiy with St. Paul, by whom he is mentioned (Phil. iv. 3,) and the fragment of his writing which has come down to us, is at least of equal age with the Eevelation of St. John. It was addressed to the Church at Corinth, by whom it was received with the greatest respect, and was not only by them, but by other Churches, also customarily read in public. It holds, therefore, a place in the very next rank to the Inspired writings : and, what adds to its reputation, its genuineness has never been questioned. He says : " We ought to take heed that, looking into the depths of the Divine knowledge, we do all things in order, whatsoever our Lord hath command ed us to do ; that we perform our offerings and service to God at their appointed seasons. He hath himself ordained by his supreme will, both where and hy what persons they are to be performed. For to the Chief Priest his peculiar offices are given, and to the Piiests their office is appointed, and to the Levites appertain their proper ministries. And the layman is confined within the bounds of what is commanded to laymen."* This extract needs no comment. It is full, and to the point, in proving that God ordained both where, and by whom, offerings in the Christian Church are to be performed ; and it teaches, that as there were Library at Jeruaalem, to which Eusebius had access, and from which he gathered many of his materials. * E-p.ad Cor., Sec. 40. EXISTING IN THEEE ORDERS. 105 the High Priest, Priest, and Levite, in the Jewish Church, so there were also in his day corresponding Orders of the Ministry in the Church of Christ. Neither was this arrangement of the Christian Ministry the result of general agreement, or of con venience, or to meet the growing wants of the Church, for he says : " Christ, therefore, was sent by God, and the Apostles by Christ. Thus both were orderly sent according to the will of God."* And more partic ularly — " Our Apostles kneio by our Lord Jesus Christ, that contentions should arise on account of the Min istry, and therefore, having a perfect fore-knowledge of this, they appointed persons, as we have before said, and then gave a direction in what manner, when tliey should die, other chosen and appointed men should succeed in iheir Ministry."-^ These quotations from Clement leave us in no doubt in respect to the origin of the Ministry in the Church of Christ. They teach, that the Apostles, by the direction of Jesus Christ, appointed certain per sons to that Ministry, and then gave directions for the Apostolic Succession after their death. Did these passages stand alone, they would be enough to satisfy every reasonable doubt, as to the question how the Ministry of the Church of Christ was constituted and appointed. II. Wc turn, now, to the testimony of another of the Apostolic Fathers, St. Ignatius, whose writings we have already above briefly noticed. His Epistles are seven in number. A larger number were ascribed * l}p. ad Cor., Seo. 42. f Ep. ad Cor., Seo. 44. 5* 106 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY to him, which were the production of a somewhat later age, probably of the sixth centuiy. But these Seven Shorter Epistles are generally acknowledged hy all thorough scholars to be his.* Of Ignatius himself it may be observed, that he had conversed with, and been instructed by, at least, three of the Apostles, Peter, Paul, and John, the death of which last named Apostle, he survived only about four years. He was made second Bishop of Antioch, by the laying on of the hands of St. Peter, about the year A. D. 70, -ndiich station he occupied about forty years.f It was about the year A. D. 107, that the Eoman Emperor Trajan passed through Antioch, on his way to wage war against Parthia. It was here, where tho disciples were first called Christians, that Trajan listened to the enemies of the Church of God, and sent their venerable Bishop a prisoner to Eome, to be devoured by the wild beasts of the amphitheatre, for the sport of bloodthirsty men. On his way to this cruel martyrdom, as he touched at different places on the coasts of Africa and of Greece, he found time to write these seven Epis- * Usher, Vossius, Grotius, Petavius, Bull, "Wake, Cave, Cotelerius, Gi-abe, Dupin, TiUemont, Le Clero, Bochart, Fabricius, and many others, have borne testimony to the genuineness and authenticity of the Epistles of Ignatius. See Dr. Horsely's Letters to Priestly, p. 34. Even Dr. Lardner, a dissenter of great learning, and a very able critic, says: "I do not affirm tliat there are in them any considerable oor- ruptidna or alterations?," and adds ; " as they are allowed to be gen uine by a 'great number of leamed men, whose opinions I thint to be founded upon probable arguments, I now proceed to quote them as his." — Lardner's Works, Vol. ii. p. 78. \ See Chrysostom as quoted by Eusebius, Vol. i., lib. iii., cap. xvii. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDERS. 107 ties, as his last legacy to Christ's Holy Church, to which he was so soon to join the testimony of his blood. See the holy boldness of this aged Saint, as he thus addressed the Church at Eome : " Now I begin to be a Disciple. Nor shall any thing move me, whether visible or invisible, that I may attain to Jesus Christ. Let fire and the cross ; let the companies of wild beasts ; let breaking of bones and tearing of members ; let the shattering in pieces of the whole body, and all the wicked torments of the Devil come upon me, only let me enjoy Jesus Christ — all the ends of the world, and the kingdoms of it, will profit me nothing. I would rather die for Jesus Christ than rule to the utmost ends of the earth."* Such was the spirit of the man, who, on his journey to Eome, addressed Epistles to the Ephesians, the Magnesians, the Trallians, the Eomans, the Phil- adelphians, the Smyrneans, and to Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, who, also, with Ignatius, was companion of St. John. Did our limits permit, we would give copious ex tracts from these Epistles, showing the strong faith, the burning love, the heavenly meekness of this aged man of God, this primitive Bishop. It was no part of his object, in writing, to prove the fact of the Three Orders of the Ministry. There was no occasion for such an object -then. And yet he incidentally alludes to the Ministers of the Church, here and there, throughout his Epistle, to which vve will refer.f * Ep. ad Earn., See. 5, 6. \ In our quotations from Ignatius and the other Fathers, we have used the faithful and well credited translation of Chevallier in Bishop Whittingham 's edition. 108 THE "CHEISTIAN MINISTEY Thus, in his Epistle to the Ephesians : " Wherefore it becomes you to run together, ac cording to the will of your Bishop, as also j^ou do. For your renowned Presbytery worthy of God, is fitted as exactly to the Bishop as the strings are to an harp. Wherefore in your concord and harmonious love, Jesus Christ is sung. And every single person araong you makes up the chorus."* Again : " Since ye all, individually, come together in common, in one Faith, and in one Jesus Christ, who was of the race of David, according to the flesh, the Son of Man aad the Sou of God, obeying your Bishop and the Presbytery with an entire affection."f In his Epistle to the Magnesians, we find the fol lowing : " Seeing, then, that I have been thought worthy to see you by Damas, your godly and excellent Bishop, and by j'our worthy Presbyters, Bassus and Apollonius ; and by my fellow servant, Sotio, the Deacon, in whom I rejoice, for as much as he is subject unto his Bishop, as unto the grace of God, and to the Presbytery, as unto the law of Jesus Christ."J Again : " I exhort you, that ye study to do all things, in- a divine concord ; your Bishop presiding in the place of God, and your Presbyters, in the place of the Council of the Apostles, and your Deacons, most dear to me. being instructed with the Ministry of Je sus Christ, who was with the Father before all ages, and in the end hath appeared. Do ye all, therefore, be in subjection, one to another, following the same holy course."§ Again ; " As, therefore, the Lord did nothing with- * Ep. ad Eph., Seo. 4. f Ibid., Sec. 20. X Ep. ad Mag., Seo. 2. § Ibid., Seo. 6. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 109 out the Father being united to Him, neither by Him self, nor yet by His Apostles, in like manner do ye nothing without the Bishops and the Presbyters."* Again : " Give diligence, therefore, to be establish ed in the doctrine of our Lord, and of His Apostles, that so, whatsoever ye do, ye may prosper, both in body and in spirit ; in Faith and Charity, in the Son, and in the Father, and in the Spirit, in the beginning and in the end ; together with your most worthy Bishop, and the well- woven spiritual crown of your Presbytery, and your godly Deacons."f In his Epistle to the Trallians, he thus writes : " It is, therefore, necessary that ye do nothing with out your Bishop, even as ye are wont, and that ye be also subject unto the Presbyters, as to the Apostles of Jesus Christ our hope, in whom if ye walk, ye shall be found in him. The Deacons, also, as being the Ministers of the mysteries of Jesus Christ, must by all means please all. For they are not the ministers of meat and drink, but of the Church of God."'| "In like manner, let all reverence the Deacons as Jesus Christ, and the Bishop as the Father, and the Presbyters as the Council of God, and the Assem bly of the Apostles. Without these, there is no Church."§ "I exhort you, therefore, or rather not I, but the love of Jesus Christ, that ye use none but Christian nourishment, abstaining from all strange pasture, which is heresy. Wherefore, guard yourselves against such persons. And that ye will do, if ye are not puffed up, but continue inseparable from Jesus Christ our God, and from your Bishop, and from the commands of the Apostles. He that is within the Altar is pure : but he that is without is not pure. That is, he that doeth * Ep. ad Mag., Sec. 1. \ Ibid., Sec. 13. X Ep. ad Tral, Seo. 2. § Ibid., Sec. 3. 110 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY anything without the Bishop, and the Presbyters, and the Deacons, is not pure in his conscience."* In his Epistle to the Philadelphians, he says : " Which (Church,) also, I salute, in the blood of Jesus Clirist, which is our eternal and everlasting joy ; especially if they be at unity with the Bishop, and the Presbyters, and Deacons, vvith him appointed ac cording to the will of Jesus Christ, whom He hath settled, according to His own will in all firmness, by the Holy Spu-it."t " For there is one flesh of our Lord Jesus Christ ; and one cup in the unity of His blood ; one Altar, as there is also one Bishop, together with the Pres bytery, and the Deacons, my fellow servants."| Again : " I cried whilst I was among you ; I spake with a loud voice, give ear to the Bishops, and to the Presbytery, and to the Deacons. And some suppose that I spake this as knowing before the separation of some. But He is my witness, for whose sake I am in bonds, that I know nothing from any man. But the Spirit spake, saying in this wise : Do nothing without the Bisliop ; keep your bodies as temples of God; love unity ; flee divisions ; be the followers of Clirist, as He was of the Father."§ In the Epistle to the Smyrneans : " See that ye all fidlow your Bishop, as Jesus Christ the Father : and the Presbytery as the Apos tles : and reverence the Deacons as the command of God. Let no one do anything which belongs to the Church, separately from the Bishop Whereso ever the Bishop shall appear, there let the people also be ; as, where Jesus Christ is, there is the Catholic Church."|| Again : " I salute your very worthy Bishop, and * Ep. ad Tral, Sec. 1. f Ep. ad Phil X -''6'*. Sec. 4. § Ibid., Sec. 7. \ Ep. ad Sm-yr., See. 8. EXISTING IN THREE OEDERS. Ill your venerable Presbytery, and your Deacons, my fellow servants ; and all of you in general, and every one in particular, in the name of Jesus Christ, and in his flesh and blood, in his passion and resurrection, both fleshly and spiritually, in the unity of God with you."* And flnally, in his Epistle to Polycarp, he says : " Hearken ye all unto the Bishop, that God also may hearken to you. My soul be security for those who submit to their Bisho]), Presbyters, and Deacons. And may my portion be together with theirs in God."-j- We have quoted more particularly from this Apos tolic Father, because he is one whose writings have come down to us with great completeness, and because he is a witness who has a right to be heard ; and we do say, that, as a witness of facts, existing in the Church, in the days of the Apostles, his testimony not only may, but absolutely ought to be received by us. We have quoted briefly, but the following posi tions are clearly proved : 1. That the same organization is recognized as ex isting in all those Churches, though vvidely Scattered in Asia and Europe. 2. That in all these Churches, the Three Orders of Bishops, Presbyters, and DeaCons, are spoken of as constituting the Christian Ministry. 3. That in each Church, there was only one Bishop, but J'et a plurality of Presbytere and Deacons. 4. That Presbyters and Deacons tvere spoken of as subject to the authoi-ity of the Bishop, who was re garded as the visible head of said Church. *^ad Smyr., Sea 13. } 1^. -ad ,Pol^,, See. 6 112 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY 5. That union with the Church, thus constituted, is spoken of as a high privilege and solemn duty, and separation from said Church was regarded as danger ous and sinful. Now, we say, that considering the time when Igna tius lived, that he was personally conversant with the inspired Apostles, and vvith their practice, and that he could not possibly have been mistaken in the facts which he asserts ; and when we remember, that he sealed the truth of his testimony with his own heart's blood, for he had a certain and most tragical deatli staring him in the face, and but just before him, that there is no possible room to doubt in what manner Jesus Christ constituted His Church, through His inspired Apostles. III. The next witness who properly appears before us, in order of time, upon this question, is St. Polycarp. He was ordained Bishop of Smyrna, by the Apostle St. John, in the first centuiy, and suffered a cruel death by martyrdom, at the good old age of eighty- six years, being burnt to death in the amphitheatre of Smyrna. His boldness in the Faith, may be seen in his reply to the Gnostic heretic, Marcion. " Dost thou," said Marcion, " acknowledge me T' " I do, I acknowledge thee for the first-born of Satan," was Polycarp's prompt reply. His steadfastness was prov ed, when the Pro-Consul held out hopes of pardon if he would but utter imprecations against Jesus Christ. He replied, "Eighty and six years have I served Him, and He has done me no injury ; how, then, can I blaspheme my King and my Saviour .?" How well qualified Polycarp was to bear witness to EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 113 the Church in the Apostles' days, may be seen from the testimony of Irenasus, a disciple of Polycarp. He says : " Well, therefore, could I describe the very place in which the blessed Polycarp sat and tauo;ht ; his going out and coming in ; the whole tenor of his life ; his ]iersonal appearance ; the discourses which he made to the people. How would he speak of the conversa tions wliich lie held with John, and with others who had seen the Lord. How did he make mention of their words, and of whatsoever he had heard from them respecting the Lord."* Of the writings of Polycarp, only one Epistle has come down to us, his Epistle to the Philippians, who had sent to him for the Epistles of Ignatius, which were in his possession. He accompanies these Epistles of Ignatius with one from himself, from which we shall briefly quote. It is no small part of its value, that it contains a full endorsement of the Epistles of Ignatius, so that we may also consider St. Polycarp as adding his name as a witness to the facts which have already been stated. Thus Polycarp says : " The Epistles of Ignatius which he wrote unto us and others, as many as we have with us, we have sent to you according to your order, which are subjoined to this Epistle ; from which ye may be greatly profited. For they treat of faith and patience, and of all things which pertain to edification in our Lord."t But his Epistle itself contains, also, distinct recogni- *I^. ad Florinwn; Euse. Ecc'. Sis., v. 20. ^ ^.ad Phil, Seo. 13. 114 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY tion of the Three Orders of the Ministry. It com mences thus : " Polycarp (Bishop of SmjTna) and the Presbyters, that are with him, to the Church of God which is at PhiUppi."* Here is no mention made of Deacons. But in the Epistle, while enumerating the duties of various classes of men, he says : " In like manner, the Deacons must be blameless in the light of His righteousness, as the ministers of God in Christ, and not of men."f And again, he says : " Being subject to the Presbyters and Deacons, as unto God and Clirist."J Here, then, we have the language of another of those Apostolic men, who, with Clement and Ignatius, exercised their Ministry in the very first century, in the days of the inspired Apostles, who could not have been mistaken as to the facts which they witness, and whose veracity is sufficiently attested by their holy lives and cruel deaths. To say that those men, who laid down their lives for Christ's sake, merely acted a part for the purpose of deceiving men in all ages, is a libel upon their character, as it is an insult upon the Faith of the Church in all ages ; and with them agrees the whole armj' of martyrs and confessors in the subsequent and all following ages, for more than a thousand years. And yet, their testimony is clear in proving, that the same Three-fold Ministry of Christ prevailed at Philippi, at Smyrna, at Phila- * Ep. ad Phil, Sec. I. f E'p ad Phil, Sec. 5. % Ibid , Seo, 5. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 115 delphia, at Magnesia, and at Eome, which we have before seen to have been planted by St. Paul at Ephesus and Crete, under the Bishoprics of Timothy and Titus. IV. We have now reached a very important era in the history of th3 Church. We have come down to the close of the First Century, and the commence ment of the Second. The Inspired Apostles had finished their work, and left the Church under the organization which Christ had commanded, and to which they had been guided by the unerring direction of the Holy Ghost. Nor are we in doubt as to what that organization was, at the period which we have now reached. Bishops, Priests and Deacons, every where existed as the Ministry of the Church of Christ. From this period onward, the evidence is so clear, copious, and indisputable, in respect to the Episco pacy, that the most learned non-Episcopalians are compelled to yield to the evidence. It is only (we think we are not uncharitable in saying it,) from those, to whom the Apostolic Fathers are strangers, and Primitive Order an untrodden field, that we hear the assertion sometimes pertly and boldly made, that Episcopacy was the growth of a corrupt age of the Church ; at least, that it cannot date back earlier than the third or fourth Century. Even Dr. Mosheim, by no means an Episcopalian, acknowledges that a Three-fold Ministry dates back into the first century. In his history of that century he says : " When the Churches became larger, and tbe num ber of Presbyters and Deacons, as well as the amount of duties to be performed, was increased, it became 116 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY necessary that the Council of Presbyters should have a President, a man of distinguished gravity and prudence, who should distribute among his colleagues their several tasks, and be as it loere the central point of the whole society. He was at first denominated the angel, Apoc. ii. and iii., but aftenvards the Bishop, a title of Grecian derivation, and indicative of his principal business. It would seem that the Church of Jerusalem, when grown very numerous, after the dispersion of the Apostles among foreign nations, vvas the first to elect such a President ; and that other Churches, in process of time, followed the example."* This, it will be remembered, is in his history of the First century, and as he calls it, " the golden age of the Church." In his history of the Second century, he says : " The form of Church government which began to exist in the preceding century, was in this centuiy more industriously established and confirmed in all its parts. One President or Bishop presided over each Church. .. .with the Presbyters for his Council subject to the Bishop, and also to the Presbyters, were the servants, or Deacons."f These statements of the learned Mosheim, respect ing the Ministiy and organization of the early Church, cover all that the most strenuous Churchmen need to claim. For they admit, that even in the very First Centurj', during the very life-time of some of the inspired Apostles, the three Orders in the Ministry were established iu the Church. They admit that this had already taken place in those Seven Churches of Asia, addressed by St. John, in the second and * MurdocTi's Mosheim, Cent. I., Part II., ch. iL t Ibid,, Cent. IL, P. II., oh. i'". Sea I.. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 117 third chapters of Eevelations ; and that this estab lishment was first instituted in the Church at Jerusa lem. Novv since the Inspired Apostles weut forth under the spfecial guidance of the Holy Ghost to obey the commands of Jesus Christ, we might well rest the argument on the admissions of this leanied historian. But the inquisitive reader will ask, how does Mosheim himself explain the facts which he thus frankly admits ? It is as follows : " If, however, what no Christian can doubt, the Apostles of Jesus Christ acted by a divine command and guidance, then that form of the Primitive Church es which they derived from the Church of Jerusalem, erected -and organized by the Apostles themselves, must be accounted divine. But still it will not follow that this form of the Church luas to be perpetual and una.lterable."'-' The Churcl)raan will answer, it does follow, that that divine form of the Ministiy was to be "per petual and unalterable ;" and, as we have before said, that any other method of reasoning would sap the very foundations of Christianity itself. This is the whole question in a nutshell. V. Having brought down the account of the organ ization of the Church to the beginning of the second century, we quote briefly from two or three writers of that period, to show that the same organization of the Church was still preserved, and that the Succession derived from the Apostles was handed down to subse quent times. Among the most learned writers of * Murdoch's Mosheim, Cent. I., Part II., ch. iL, Soc. 5. 118 ^THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY that century was Hegesippus, a converted Jew. Eu sebius gives an account of his travels and writings, and has preserved a few fragments of his works, which have come down to us. He declared, " Tbat travelling as far as Eome he discoursed with many Bishops, and from them all he heard one and the same doctrine." His language is : " After James the Just had suffered martyrdom (as the Lord had also,) for the preaching of his doctrine, Simeon, the son of Cleophas (which Cleophas was uncle, by the mother's side, to our Saviour,) was constituted Bishop in his room ; whom all preferred to be second Bishop there, because he was the Lord's cousin-german by the mother's side," &c."* In the same centuiy lived Irenseus, a disciple of Polycarp, and Bishop of Lyons in Gaul. In the year A. D. 185, he writes thus : " The blessed Apostle, therefore, having founded and built the Church, delivered the Episcopal office to Linus, of whom Paul made mention in his Epis tles to Timotheus. 2 Tim. iv. 21. Anacletus suc ceeded him ; after whom, in the third place from the Apostles, Clemens had the Bishopric allotted to him ; who had seen the blessed Apostles, and was conver sant with them.. . .Evaristus succeeded this Clemens; and Alexander, Evaristus ; then Xystus was consti tuted the sixth from the Apostles ; after him Teles phorus, who suffered a glorious martyrdom ; after him Hyginus ; then Pius ; after Pius, Anicetus ; Soter having succeeded Anicetus, Eleutherus is now in possession of the Episcopal office, in the twelfth jilacc from the Apostles."f He also speaks particularly of the " Divine Scrip- * Eus. Hist. Ecc, Lib. iv., ch. xxii.. Com. 1683. Folio, p. 63. f Ibid., Lib. v., ch. vi., p. 76. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 119 tures," in a manner of the greatest interest to us, but %ve forbear to quote upon that subject. In that same century also flourished Clement of Alexandria, a very learned man, who bears testimony to the Church in his daj'. He says : " There are other precepts in the Holy Scriptures, without number, which concern men in particular capacities. Some which relate to Presbyters ; oth ers which belong to Bishops ; others respecting Deacons."* And again this learned writer says in that well- known passage : " I imagine that the Ecclesiastical gradations of Bishops, Priests and Deacons, are imitations of the angelic glory."-j' VI. A few quotations from writers of the third century, will finish our appeal to the writings of the Fathers. Tertullian, by birth a Carthaginian, bears the fol lowing testimony : " The Chief, or highest Priest, who is the Bishop, has the right of giving Baptism ; and, after him, the Presbyters and Deacons ; but not without the Bish op's authority.''^ Origen, of the same century, speaking of debts in the Lord's Prayer, says : " Besides these general debts, there is a debt pecu liar to widows who are maintained by the Church ; another to Deacons ; another to Presbyters ; and another to Bishops, which is the greatest of all." * Pcedag., Lib. iii., cap. xii., p. 264. Paris Edition. f Strom., Lib. vi., p. 667. X ^^- * ^"Pi t^^P- ^vii. 120 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY Cyprian, a voluminous writer of that age, says : " There being only one Church, and one Episco pacy, all the world over he must needs be a schismatic, who labors to set up false Bishops in op position to them .... Since after the first Bishop, there can be no second (at the same time ;) whoever is made Bishop after the first, is not a Bishop, but no Bishop." But yet, although there could be, in the same diocesan Church, but one Bishop, there were many Presbyters and Deacons. For Cornelius, Bishop of Eome, of the same age, in an Epistle, a part of which Eusebius has preserved, acknowledged that there was in his Church at that time, " forty-six Presbyters and seven Deacons."'-' We shall not make quotations from writers living a little more remote from Apostolic times ; for this stream of testimony widens and deepens, of course, in its progress. Eusebius, the great historian of the early Church, has left us exact lists of the Succes sion in the principal Churches, down to his own time, A. D. 305, vvhich was within twenty years of the Council of Nice ; while Athanasius and Epiphanius, St. Ambrose and Chrysostom, and Theodoret leave us no room to doubt as to the organization and Ministry of the Church in their day. This, too, be it remem bered, was the condition of the Church in its days of fiery trial, when martyrdom purified the Church, when the steadfastness of the faith of the witnesses, even unto deatb, forbids us to impeach the veracity of their words. * Eusebiiis' Ecc. His., Lib. vL, ch. xliiL EXISTING IN THREE OEDEES. 121 YII. Before closing this chapter on the historical evidence of the Divine institution of Episcopacy, we propose to present two facts, brought to light by the discoveries of modern times, so pertinent and striking as to be worth preservation. The first is given on the authority of that noted traveller and indefatigable Missionary, Eev. Joseph Wolff, D. D. It was stated by him in a letter to Eev. Dr. Hookwell, author of a work on " Primitive Episcopacy." Says Dr. Wolff: " This question, ' What Bishop sent you out ?' was addressed to me by the great Bogas, late Patriarch of the Armenian nation at Constantinople ; the great Hemes, Archbishop of the Armenian nation at Tiflis ; and by the whole body of Bishops at Ptsh Miazin, the celebrated convent at the foot of Mount Ararat ; by the Syrian Patriarch in Mesopotamia ; by the Coptic Bishops ; by the Greek Patriarch of Constan tinople ; and by the Eoman Catholic Bishops of Bagdad. When I replied to them, 'My internal voice sent me forth,' the answer I received was, ' Moses heard the voice of God upon Horeb, but God himself deemed it to be necessary to endow him with the gift of miracles, (Ex. viii.) in order that Pharaoh may be forced to acknowledge him as the extraordinary Am bassador. And the ordinary ministers of God, the Levites, had to receive their commission from Moses, and Christ made the same provision in His Church. He imparted the gift of mirac'es to th^i Apostles iu sending them forth, but they instituted Bishops, by the imposition of hands, and charged them to follow up that manner of constituting ministers. Titus i. 5. Jf you, Joseph Wolff, are an extraordinary minister, prove -it by miracles; if an ordinary one, who laid hands on you ? Your internal voice is evidence to you, not to us.' " 122 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY Dr. Wolff, after stating that he once held wild and irregular notions on Church matters, adds : " The very fact that all the Eastern Churches, without one single exception, have Bishops, Priests, and Deacons, and the very fact that a Presbyteriaii Church is not knovvn, is to me a sufficient proof that Episcopacy is of Divine origin, and that the doctrine of Apostolic Succession is a Scriptural doctrine." The reader will perceive, that this letter of Dr, Wolff contains the gist of the whole argument. Its facts are indisputable, its reasoning unanswerable, and yet so simple, that a child can understand it. It is this simple question : " If the professed Ambassa dors of Jesus Christ are Christ's extraordinary Min isters, where are their miracles ? If they are Hia ordinary Ministers, who laid hands on them 1 Their internal voice may be evidence to tliem, but not to us." Another fact has been brought to light by a modern traveller, which, though quoted by other writers, is so convincing, and bears so directly upon the point before us, we will allude to it. We refer to the " Church in the Wilderness," "which has been dis covered in modern times, amid the mountains of Asia. The Providence of God has preserved it separate from, and unknown to, all other Churches in the world, as it would seem to be a witness to modern times, of the Institutions of Apostolic days. A Bishop of that Church thus addressed the traveller, who, in the seventeenth centurj', discovered them. He says : "The Bishop was desirous to know something of the other Churches, which had separated from Eome, EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 123 I was ashamed to tell him how many there were. I mentioned that there was a Kasheeslia, or Presbyter Church, in our own kingdom, in which every Kashee- sha was equal to another. . Are there no Shum Slianas (Deacons in Holy Orders ?) None. And what, is there nobody to overlook the Kasheeslias (or Presbyters ?) Not one. There must be some thing imperfect then, said he."* The reader will draw his own conclusions from these facts in the history of this ancient Apostolic Church VIII. We have novv presented briefly, yet we hope satisfactorilj', the historical argument in proof of the Three Orders in the Christian Ministry. Convincing as is the argument from Holy Scripture, it yet be comes truly unanswerable when corroborated by early history. During the first, second, and third centu- * Buchanan's Researches, pp. 67-71. Ed. 1812. Itisproperto inform the reader that in some American editions of this work, this account of the Episcopal character of that lost Church has been omitted. It may not be known to all our readers, that Leslie's " Short and Easy Method with Deists," now hawked about the country, as con taining an unanswerable argument for Christianity, was written by Leslie in Defence of Episcopacy ; and all those marks now applied as tests of Christianity, were applied by him to the "Three-fold Ministry." The following is a portion of the languago of Leshe, but whieh some American publishers are very careful to suppress : "The Apostles- were instituted by Christ the first governors of His Church ;. and with them and their successors He has promi.sed to be to the end of the world. The Apostles did ordain Bishops, as governors in all the Churches which they planted throughout the whole world ; and these Bishops were esteemed the successors of the Apostles, each in his own Church, from the beginning, io this day. Tlus was the cur rent notion and languago of all antiquity. Omnes Apostolorv/m Suc cessores sunt. That all Bishops were tho successors of tho Apostles. Thus it continued from the days of tho Apostles to those of John Calvin, in all which time, there ¦was not any one Church in the whole Christian world ihat ¦was -not EpUcopal." — Leslie's Supplementary Letter to Short and Easy Method, Sec. 13 124 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY ries, the testimony is clear and explicit. Tbe field which this testimony covers, embraces Europe, Asia, and Africa. It embraces Churches under every variety of civil government ; monarchy, aristocracy, and democracj'. It embraces every possible hue and shade of civilization and refinement, the philosophical Greek, the rude Gaul, the sophistical Asiatic, and the impetuous Carthaginian. It embraces portions of the world, distant thousands of miles from each other, and having little or no communication with each other. And yet, throughout this whole field, we find the Church of Christ planted everywhere, and existing only with a Ministry of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons. During the first fifteen hundred years of the Christian era, such a thing as a Presbyterian, or Congregational Church, was unheard of. And even at this day, more than nine-tenths of nominal Chris tendom retain the Eiiiscopacy.* Let us, in conclusion, look fairly at the difficulties which necessarily meet us under the supposition, that Christ, through His Apostles, established Presbyte rianism, or Congregationalism, or left this question of the Ministry as a mere matter of expediency. Where * A modern writer truly says, " They that are concerned to estab lish a looser theory than that of the Catholic Church, how numerous soever, when taken by themselves, are a small fi-action of the Chris tendom of the d.iy, .and as a handful, compared with the multitudes of Christians, who from the beginning have lived, hoped, suffered, and died, in another trust." It is generally conceded, that there are not to exceed twenty-one millions, out of the two hundred and twenty- oiglit milUons whioh constitute nominal Christendom, who have re- iected the Episcopacy, which, as the reader will perceive, is less than ono-tonth of the whole. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 125 is there evidence of such an establishment in the Holy Scriptures, or in the early historians ? If Christ through His Apostles, planted a Presbyterian, or Congregational Ministry, why has there never been discovered any trace of it in the early Church ? How has it happened that the first light which dawns upon us, from that early Church, discloses it to us, with a Three-fold Ministry, dating back to, and claiming power from, the Inspired Apostles "^ It could not have been from the influence of any one form of civil government ; for the Church was planted, uniformly, under every form of said government. It could not have been from any one particular state of civilization ; for the Church was established among nations, and tribes, differing endlessly in this respect. It could not have been, that such a change was made from motives of ambition ; for the highest reward of the Ministry was then a martyr's crown ; and no note of remonstrance was ever heard from any one of the thousands of Presbyters. Neither may we believe that Christ would have established a System so weak, so short-lived as Presbyterianism, or Congregational ism must have been, to have so entirely faded awaj' from the memory of man, within a centurj' or two from its first existence, and that in the purest days of the Christian Church. Such was not the truth or efficacy of Christ's promise, "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world." No, on the ground that Jesus Christ, the great Head of the Church, established a Ministiy in Three Orders in the Christian, as he had done before in the Jewish Church, all is plain, simple, natural. Scripture and 126 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY undoubted history blend in harmony together. But, on the supposition that Jesus Christ established a Presbyterian or Congregational Ministry, or, what is equally improbable, no Ministiy at all, or what might be either Presbyterian, or Congregational, or Episco" pal, or all, or neither, with such a theory before us, all testimony of Scri[iture and history is inexplicable and mysterious. We close our own convictions on this point, in the language of one of the most power ful defenders of the Church of England, against Eome on the one hand, and Dissent on the other. " When I shall see, therefore, all the fables in the Metamorphoses acted, and prove true stories ; when I shall see all the democracies and aristocracies in the world lie down to sleep, and awake into monarchies ; then will I begin to believe that Presbyterial govern ment, having continued in the Church during the Apostles' tinies, should presently after (against_ the Apostles' doctrine and the will of Christ) be wheeled abont, like a scene in a mask, and transformed into Episcoiiacy. In the mean time, while these things are thus incredible, and in human reason impossible, I hope I shall have learnt to conclude thus : Episco pal government was universally received in the Church, presently after the Apostles' times. Between the Apostles, and this presently after, there was not time enough for, nor possibility of, so great an alter ation. And, therefoie, there was not such alteration as is pretended. And, therefoie. Episcopacy being so ancient and Catholic, must be granted also to be Af (Stolic."* * ChiUingworth's Apos. Ins. of Epis. Dem., Sec. 11. CHAPTEE VII. THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES ADMISSIONS OF OPPONENTS. Befoee entering upon the subject of the present chapter, we wish to state precisely the nature and value of the argument now to be presented. It is not an argument, on which, so far as we ourselves are con cerned, we lay the smallest stress. We do not defend a sj'stem of Eeligious Faith and Worship for the sal vation of our souls, on the reluctant admission of op ponents, wrung from them as an unwilling tribute to the truth of God. We stand on higher, holier, and stronger ground. On the contrary, even against the unbroken testimony, and the strongest remonstrances of our opponents, though borne for a thousand years, still our duty would remain the very same that it is now. Still we would rely upon the authority of God's Holy Word, commended to us by the testimony of the early Catholic Church, " The pillar and ground of the Tmth." It is not for ourselves, then, that we enter upon the subject of the present chapter. We have a different object in view. 128 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY It seems to be supposed at the present day, by a large class of persons, that at the Eeformation, a con siderable portion of the Eeformers, and especially those upon the continent of Europe, being free from entanglements with civil government, and more than all, having imbibed clearer views of God's truth, re jected the Episcopacy, and embraced the Presbyterian system, as a matter of duty and conscience. In the same strain, it is common to hear men speak of the English Eeformers, as having left the work of reform half done, and as having retained the Episcopacy and Liturgical Worship only to render the pure truths of the Gospel less offensive to a proud and haughty Court. And so the haughty pretensions of royalty, and of an aristocracy, on the one hand, and the Litargy and the Episcopacy on the other, are both mentioned at one breath, as if there was some necessary connectiou between them. "A Church without a Bishop, and a State without a King," has been the popular cry. Now we have no wish simply to spoil so much empty declamation ; but yet, as a searcher after truth, we do propose to show, what really were the senti ments of the Continental Eeformers, on the subject of the Christian Ministry, and why, as a matter of simple fact, they did not organize their societies under an Epis copal Ministry. It is susceptible of proof, that those men, so far from regarding Episcopacy as a corruption of Christianity, or an innovation upon Apostolic In stitutions, actually acknowledged its Apostolic charac ter, and that they lost it, only on what they believed to be the ground of absolute necessity. Again : another introductory remark we desire to EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 129 make. The men df whom we shall speak, and who were prominent actors in the scenes to be brought be fore us, were not ignorant men. " There were giants in the earth in those days." They possessed every im portant facility for the study of Ecclesiastical Order and Government ; and, what is more, they brought to the work of investigation, minds imbued with a sense of the importance of the subject. They went back to the fountain of ancient learning, with an ar dor, reverence, and perseverance, which ought to put to blush the ignorant self-conceit of the present age. Modern times are distinguished, (justly so,) for dis coveries in a few branches of Physical Science ; but they are behind past ages in some of the Noblest Arts, and especially are they deficient in that reverence for antiquity, which is justly due. And so, in this reck less, stupid presumption, the inspired Apostles have come to be regarded as "poor, misguided fishermen ;" and even Jesus Christ, it is said, may come to be eclipsed by some of His own followers, as the human mind shall advance with the spirit of the age. With this mad spirit of infidelity we have nothing to do, otherwise than to wash our hands of its guilt, and bear our earnest testimony against it. I. To show, in what light those men regarded Epis copacy, who are now looked back upon as the founders of the non-Episcopal system, we appeal first to the testimony of John Calvin. He was replying to the re proaches of the Eomish Cardinal, Sadolet, and says : " That the discipline which the ancient Church used, is wanting in us, we ourselves do not deny."* * vi^ Card. Sad. -Sesp. 6* 130 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY Again, he says : " I know how many things might be required, as lacking in us. And truly, if God should presently summon us to a reckoning, our de fence would be a difficult one."* And again, in a work m wdiich he was treating par ticularly of Church Politj', he says : " It will be profitable, in these questions, to review the form of the ancient Church, which will exhibit to our glance a kind of representation of the Divine In- stitutron. For, although the Bishops of that time promulgated divers Canons, in which they may appear to set forth more than is expressed in the Sacred Scrip tures, yet, with such heedfulness did they arrange their whole system, according to that one prescript form contained in the Word of God, that you may easily perceive that they held, in this particular, almost nothing, which varies from that word.""]" Again, he says : " This order of Government sorae have termed hierarchy ; an improper name, in my judgment, and certainly not to be found in the Scrip tures But if, omitting the phrase, we shall consider this thing itself, we shall find that those an cient Bishops sought to frame no other mode of Church Government, than that which God hath pre scribed in His Word."J So, also, in writing to a former friend, but recently consecrated Bishop in the Eomish Church, he says ; " The Episcopate itself had its appointment from God. The office of a Bishop was instituted by the authority, and defined by the ordinance of God."§ And again, and strongest of all, in that remarkabla passage : " Let them give us such an hierarchy, in which the « De Ecf Eccl •)¦ Cital ap. Hadrian, ko. p. 87. X Cxlv. Inst. Lib. iv. Cap. iv. Sea 4. § Vet. Am. Numc Prael Ep. EXISTING IN THREE ORDERS. 131 'h Bishops may so bear rule, that they refuse not to sub mit to Christ, and to depend upon Him as their only Head : let them be so united together, in a brotherly concord, as that His truth shall be their only bond of union ; then, indeed, if there shall be any who will not reverence them, and jiay them the most exact obe dience, there is no anathema but I confess them wor thy of it."* Such were the sentiments of John Calvin on this important subject of Church polity. Perbaps it will be said, that his conduct bore testimony contradicto ry to these statements. But here, also, history has left an important fact on record. Nor was this in the earliest portion of his career. It vvas when the great work of his life was accomplished, that he sought to give direction to the stream, of vvhich his own life had been the fountain. Against the corruptions of Eome, he had levelled the thunders of his artillery, and not in vain ; and he knew it was in vain, from that source, to seek an Apostolic Ministry. He did not, however, leave the world without making a decided effort to ob tain such a Ministry, as, in his judgment, he ap proved. The account of that effort deserves careful atten tion. It is given in the language of Archbishop Ab bot, himself a believer in Calvin's peculiar doctrinal views. He says : "Perusing some papers of our predecessor, Mat thew Parker (Archbishop,) we find that John Galvin, and others, of the Protestant Churches of Germany, and elsewhere, would have had Episcopacy, if per- *Dt Ref Eccl 132 THE CHRISTIAN MINISTEY mitted ; but could not upon several accounts Another and main cause vvas, they would not have any Popish hands laid over their clergj'. And, "whereas, John Calvin had sent a letter in king Ed ward Vl.'s reign, to have conferred with the clergy of England, about some things to this effect — two Bish ops, viz. Gardiner and Bonner (Eomish,) intercepted the same, whereby Mr. Calvin's overture perished ; and he received an answer, as if it had been from the reformed Divines of those times, wherein they check ed him, and slighted his proposals. From which time, John Calvin and the Church of England were at variance on several points, which otherways, through God's mercy, had been qualified, if those papers of his proposals had been discovered unto the Queen's Majesty, during John Calvin's life. But, being not discovered until or about the sixth year of her Majesty's reign, her Majesty much lamented they were not found sooner, vvhich she expressed before her Council, at the same time, in the presence of her great friends, Sir Henry Sidney, and Sir William Cecil."* The same industrious author (Strype) records how the Foreign Protestants " took such great joy and satisfaction in this good King Edward VI. and his establishment of religion, that the heads of them, Bullinger, Calvin, and others, in a letter to him, offered to make him their defender, and to have Bishops in their Churches, as there were in England, with the tender of their advice to unite and assist together."t And he then narrates with what arts and cunning certain Papists defeated the object. We quote no more from the writings of this cele- * Strype's Life of Parker, vol. L, p. 140 ¦)¦ Strype's Lfe of Cranmer, vol. i., pp. 29, 6, 7. EXISTING IN THEEE OEDEES. 133 brated man. He inveighed against the doctrinal errors of the Church of Eome, and he opposed the usurpations of its Ministry, but we have proof enough that he would most gladly have retained the Apostolic Order of Bishops, had it lain within his power. II. The next one of the Eeformers on the Con tinent, whose testimony we will adduce, is the im mediate successor of Calvin in Geneva — Theodore Beza. In the writings of Beza, and others of this same class, the strongest language of opposition can be found against men clothed with the Episcopal office. But yet it will be easy to prove, that their opposition was made, not against Episcopacy as such, but against the tyranny of the Church of Eome. As Du Moulin says : " If we sometimes speak against the authority of Bishops, we condemn not Episcopal order in itself, but speak only of the corruption which the Churcli of Eome has introduced into it."* And so Beza — " In all which I have written against the Eomish Hierarchy, I have not even alluded to the Polity of the Anglican Church, which to impugn, or even to notice, was at no time in my thoughts."f Again he says : " If your English Church be supported by the authority of Bishops and Archbishops, and it has possessed many of that order, who were not only illustrious martyrs of God, but also most eminent pastors and doctors, let it enjoy that singular benefit * Buckler of Faith, p. 345, in Bingham, vol. viii., p. 204. ' Tind. Heel. Ang., Cap. zxsiv., p. 529. 134 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTRY of God, wluph I trust He may preserve to it for ever."* And again : ". Consecrated, A. D. ILWUS, 67 47 Simplicius, 4G8 2 Anacletus, 79 48 Felix III., 483 3 Clemeut, 91 49 Gelasius I., 492 4 Evaristus, 100 50 Anastatius IL, 496 5 Alexander, 108 51 Symmachus, 498 6 Xystus, 118 52 Hormisdas, 514 7 Telesphorus, 128 53 John I., 523 8 Hyginus, 138 54 Felix IT., 526 9 Pius, 141 55 Bouiface II., 530 10 Anicetus, 155 56 John IL, 532 11 Soter, 166 57 Agapetus L, 535 12 Eleutherus, 174 58 Silverius, 536 13 Victor, 187 59 Vigihus, 540 14 Zephyrinus, 198 60 Pelagius L, 555 15 Calixtus, 216 61 John IIL, 560 16 Urban, 221 62 Benedict L, 574 17 Pontiauus, 229 63 Pelagius II., 578 18 An teres, 235 64 Gregory L, 590 19 Fabian, 236 20 Cornelius, 251 I AUGUSTINE, 596 21 Lucius I., 253 2 Laurence, 605 22 Steplien I., 255 3 Mellitus, 604 23 Sixtus II., 257 4 Justus, 604 24 Dionysius, 259 5 Honorius, 634 25 Felix L, 269 6 Adeodatus, 654 26 Eatychianus, 275 7 Tlieodore, 668 27 Caius, 283 8 Birth wald. 693 28 Marcellinus, 29G 9 Tatwine, 731 29 Marcellus I., 308 10 Nothelm, 735 30 Eusebius, 310 11 Cuthbert, 736 31 Miltiades, 310 12 Bregwin, 759 32 Sylvester L, 314 13 Lam)5ert, 763 33 Mark, 336 14 Ethelred L, 780 34 .lulius L, 337 15 Wulfred, 803 35 Liberus, 352 16 Theogild, 830 36 Felix II., 355 17 Ceolnoth, 830 37 Damassus I., 366 18 Ethelred IL, 862 38 Siricus, 385 19 Phlegmund, 891 39 Anastatius I., 398 20 Athelm, 905 40 Innocent I., 402 21 Wuirclm, 923 41 Zosinms, 417 22 Odo Severus, 920 42 Boniface L, 418 23 Dun.stan, 957 43 Celestine L, 422 24 Acthalgar, 980 41 Sixtus IIL, 432 25 Siricus, 986 45 Leo L, 440 26 Alurioius, 990 46 Hilary, 461 27 Elphege, 983 EXISTING IN T]j[EEE ORDEES. 14? Consecrated A.D. Consecvatec ,A. D. 28 Living, 1001 60 Henry Chichely, 1409 29 Agelnoth, 1020 61 John Stafford, 1425 30 Edsin, 1015 62 Jos. Kemp, 1419 31 Robert Gemeticensis, 1044 63 Tliomas Boucher, 1435 32 Stigand, 1040 64 John Morton, 1478 33 Lanfranc, 1070 65 Henry Dean, 1496 34 .\nRelm, 1093 66 William "Warham, 1502 35 Rodulph, 1108 67 Thomas Cranmer 1533 36 -William Corboyll, II22 68 Reginald Poie, 1555 37 Theobald, 1138 69 Matthew Parker, 1559 33 Thomas d Becket, 1162 70 Edmund Grindall, 1559 39 Richard, II74 71 John Whitgift, 1577 40 Baldwin Fordensis, 1180 72 Richard Bancroft, 1597 41 Reg'd Fitsi JoceUne, 1174 73 George Abbot, 1609 42 Hubert "Walter, 1189 74 William Laud, 1621 43 Stephen Langton, 1207 75 "William Juxon, 1633 44 Richard "Wethersfleld, 1229 76 Gilbert Sheldon, 1660 45 Edraund, 1234 77 "Wilham Sanoroft, 1677 46 Boniface, 1245 78 John Tillotson, 1691 47 Robert Kilwarby, 1272 79 Thomas Tenison, 1691 48 John Peckham, 1278 80 "William Wake, 1705 49 Robert "Winchelsey 1294 81 .Tohn Potter, 1715 50 "W"altcr Reynold, 1308 82 Thomas Herring, 1737 5 1 Simon Mepham, 1328 83 Thom.as Seeker, 1734 52 Jos. Stratford, 1323 84 Fred. CornwaUis, 1749 53 Thos. Bradwardme, 1348 85 John Moore, 1775 54 Simon Islip, 1349 55 Simon Langhara, 1362 1 SAMUEL SEABURY, 1784 66 "William "Wittlesey, 1361 2 "William "White, 1787 57 Simon Sudbury, 1362 3 A. T. Griswold, 1811 58 William Courtney, 1369 4 Philander Chase, I8I9 59 Thomas Arundel, 1375 5 T. C. Brownell, 1819 The reader will perceive that, in this catalogue, we have given a list of the Bishops of Rome until the time of Augustine, Archbishop of Canterbury, A. D. 596 ; and then, the list of those Archbishops until the Consecration of Bishop Seabury, the first Bishop of the American Church, 'A. D. 1784 ; and then, a list of the Presiding Bishops of that Church to the present day, A. D. 1863. It will be borne in mind, that these Lists of Bishops and Archbishops are a different thing from the actual line of Succession. 148 THE CHEISTIAN MINISTEY We have traced back the list, beyond Augustine, through the Bishops of Eome, as is more usually done. Our Succession, however, is not derived from the Bishops of Eome. It is susceptible of proof, tbat tbe Ancient British Bishops never lost Successors in the English Church ; and Augustine, Archbishop of Canterbury, was consecrated by the Archbishop of Aries, in Gaul, whose Orders were derived tbrough Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, the disciple of St. John ; so that neither the British nor the English Succession came from Eome.* In conclusion, we observe, that the fact that such Lists of the Successions have been preserved ; that, in great numbers of instances we can show, not only the names of the Consecrators, but the names of the Consecrators of the Consecrators ; the fact, that the Canon Law, the common Law and common sentiment of the Church required that Consecrations should be at the hands of three Bishops, from either one of whom a valid Consecration would be received ; and finally, the fact, that we have before us an Episcopacy claiming such a descent and such an authority — all this gives to the argument for the Succession the highest degree of moral evidence. It surely throws upon the objector the burden of showing where a single link in that chain has been broken ; a thing that never has been, and never can be done. On a * For lists of the Successions in the Four Patriarchal Sees, Rome, Alexandria, Jerusalem, and Antioch, see Chapin's Primitive Church, chapters xxiii. to xxvii. For the Successions in the English and Scottish Ct urehes, see Perceval on Apostolical Succession, N. T. P. E. T. Society. EXISTING IN THREE OEDEES. 149 different method of reasoning. Archbishop Whately was able to prove that such a man as Napoleon Bonaparte never lived ;* and, in the same way, an American writer has lately shown that Shakspeare was a myth. The truth is, men are not to be rea soned vvith on matters of History, Murals, or Eelig ion, who demand mathematical certainty, or the evi dence of their own senses ; a kind of evidence which the nature of the case does not admit. It may be added concerning the Succession of the English Church, a point which will be more fully ex amined hereafter, that the Church of Eome has ever kept an eagle eye on the English line of descent, and that even she, in the language of many of her most learned wiiters, has been obliged to admit the validity of the Orders of that Church.f * Historic Doubts relative io Napoleon Bonaparte. ¦f See Lingard's His. of Eng., Vol. vii., Ch. iv.. Note I, For testi mony of Romish writers; see also Palmer on the Chur-:h, Vol. ii.. Part vL, Ch. X. CHAPTEE VIII. AMERICAN METHODISM. We propose to devote the present chapter to the consideration of a Sect, which, dating back only about a century, has e.xerted a raarked influence in the reli gious history of our country ; but which is already undergoing radical changes in temper, doctrine, and ecclesiastical position. Among many of the followers of tbis system, there is a deep feeling of uneasiness ; a conviction that there is something wrong in the Sys tem : and yet there is a prevailing ignorance of the real views and intentions of the man to whom they look back, as the founder of the System. We mean the disciples of John Wesley. The prevailing religious apathy of the age in which Wesley lived, his own deep convictions as to the reality and power of the Life of God in the soul of man, and some peculiar views vvhich he held as to the nature of that Life, led him, though, as he says, regarded as a "High Churchman," to institute a system of certain ex traordinary and temporary means to accomplish cer tain extraordinary ends. But John Wesley had no idea of establishing a "New Church," or of being the founder of a religious body which would separate from AMERICAN METHODISM. 151 the Church of England, of which he was a Minister. To this he vvas opposed, not on grounds of prudence or expediencj', but, as he said again and again, " as a point of conscience." All the reasons, which weighed. with him then, should have ten-fold greater weight now, with those who call themselves his_ disciples, and profrss to be his followers. We have gathered out of the Works of Mr. Wesley a few extracts from his writings, which, though com paratively brief, are enough to show how radicallj' different the opinions of John Wesley were from the popular notions of mulitudes of those who now bear his name. The increasing number of those who are leaving that sect and returning to the Church of which John Weslej' was a Minister, and to which, even to the last, he never ceased declaring his love and allegiance, will, we doubt not, at no distant day be increased . many fold. Important movements of this sort are even now said to be in contemplation. That these men may live and labor happily and successfully, with us, they will need to understand precisely the point where Modern Methodism began to diverge frora the ideal of its founder. Religion, in all its essential fea tures, must be unchangeable by man. A Eeligion which reaches the heart, which commands the faith, and regulates the life ; a Eeligion which meets all the wants of man's spiritual nature, must be that very Eeligion vvhich Christ Himself established, and which He commissioned His Apostles to preach in all the world, and with whom, in the persons of their Suc cessors, He promised to be present to the end of time. Upon two or three points in tho personal belief of 152 AMERICAN METHODISM. John Wesley, we shall now make extracts from his writings. In respect to the Ministry, Mr. Wesley says in his Journal : " We believe there is and always was, in every Christian Church, an outward priesthood ordained by Jesus Christ, an outward sacrifice offered therein by men authorised to act as ambassadors for Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God." "We believe that the three-fold order of ministers is not only anlhorised by the Apostolic Institutioa, but also by the Written Word." And of the Wesleyan Preachers, he says : " They no more take upon themselves to be priests than to be kings. They take not upon them to ad minister the Sacraments, an honor peculiar to the priests of God."* In his Letter to Mr. H., in 1756, he says : " I do tolerate unordained persons in preaching the Gospel ; whereas I do not tolerate them in adminis tering the Sacraments."f "As to ray own judgment, I still believe the Epis copal form of Church Government to be Scriptural and Apostolical. I mean, well agreeing with the practice and writings of the Apostles."J In John Wesley's Letter to Eev. Francis Asbury, who, vvith Dr. Coke, then pretended to be a Bishop, dated London, Sept. 20th, 1788, only a little over two years before Wesley's death, he thus writes : " But, in one point, my dear brother, I am a little * Appeal to Men of Reason, Part III. "Works, VoL v., p. 159. f Works, ToL VIL, p.-289. X fVorks, VoL VIL, p. 284. AMERICAN METHODISM. 153 afraid, botn the Doctor (Coke) and j'ou differ from me. I study to be little ; you study to be great. I creep ; you strut along. I found a school ; you a College ! naj', and call it after your own names. Oh, bewnre ! Do not seek to be something ! Let me be nothing, and ' Christ be all in all' " " One instance of this your greatness has given me great concern. How can you, how dare you suffer yourself to be called Bishop ? I shudder, I start at the very thought ! Men may call me a knave, or a fool, a rascal, a scoundrel, and I am content ; but they shall never, by my consent, call me Bishop I For my sake, for God's sake, for Christ's sake, put a full end to this ! Let the Presbyterians do what they please, but let the Methodists know their calling better."* To show that Wesley, even to the day of his death, had no intention to ordain a Ministry, we quote from a Sermon published by Mr. Wesley himself, five years after his appointment of preachers for America. (Sermon 39.) He says : " I wish all of J'OU, who are vulgarly termed Meth odists, would seriously consider what has been said. And particularlj', you whom God hath commissioned to call sinners to repentance. It does by no means follow from hence, that ye are commissioned to bap tize, or to administer the Lord's Supper. Te never dreamed of this for ten or twenty years after ye began to preach. Ye did not then, like Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, ' seek the priesthood also.' Ye know, ' no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.' 0, contain yourselves within your own bounds !" And, in giving his final revision to the rules of the * 'Wesley's 'Works, VoL vii., p. 188. 154 AMERICAN METHODISM. Society, in his last year, the last year of his life, he sends forth the following emphatic language, viz.: " Let all our preachers go to Church ; let all the people go constantly ; let them receive the Sacrament, at every opportunity. Warn all against despising the prayers of the Church ; against calling our s ciety a Church ; against calling our preachers Ministers." The Correspondence of Dr. Coke with Bishop White, in 1791, the former projiosing to Bishop White, that the Methodist preachers should be re-or dained by our Bishop ; and the Correspondence of Dr. Coke with Mr. Wilberforce in 1813, proposing that himself be made Bishop in India, prove conclusively that neither did Dr. Coke, nnr the Methodists preach ers in America, then pretend to have really any gift of Orders from Mr. Weslej', either in fact, or in the intention of Mr. Wesley himself The " appointment" of Dr. Coke as Superintendent, in Mr. Wesley's pri vate chamber, in 1784, was done, not as an Ordination, or Consecration, but to accomplish a private object of Dr. Coke himself. It cannot be pretended that it made Dr. Coke a Bishop ; first, because Mr. Wesley himself was only a Presbyter ; and secondly, even if Lord King's theoiy, on which Mr. Wesley is claimed to have acted, is taken for granted, to wit, that Bish ops and Presbyters are one Order, ifc could not have made Dr. Coke a Bishop, for he was already an ordain ed Presbyter of the Church of England. Charles Wesley's explanation, taken in connection with the history of the transaction itself, is the best that can be given. Said he, " but John, as you see, is now a very old man." He was now in his eighty-second year ; AMERICAN METHODISM. 155 and Charles Weslej' saw at a glance the purposes to which that appointment would be used, and at length perverted. In the Correspondence between John and Charles Wesley relative to that appointment, John Wesley said, "I no more separate from it (the Church of Enghmd) now, than I did in the j'ear 1758." We shall examine that pretended "Ordination" presently, with more care. On " Separation from the Church ;" in his Letter to the Eeverend Mr. Walker, in 1755, Mr. Wesley says : "You Jidvise, secondly, 'to keep in view also the unlawfidness of a separation from the Church of Eng land.' To this likewise I agree. It cannot be lawful to separate from it, unless it be unlawfnl to continue in it. You advise me, thirdly, 'Fully to declare myself on this head, and to suffer no dispute con cerning it.' The very same thing I wrote to my brother from Ireland ; and we have declared ourselves, without reserve. Fourthly, all our preachers, as well as ourselves, purpose to continue in the Church of England."* In the Minutes ' of Conference for 1770, we find John Wesley saying : " Carefully avoid whatever has tendency to separate men from the Church. 0 ! use every means to pre vent this. 1. Exhort all our people to keep close to the Church and the Sacrament. 2. Warn them all against nicety in hearing — a prevailing evil. 3. Warn them also against despising the prayers of the Church. 4. Against calling our Society ' the Church.' 5. Against calling our preachers ' ministers,' our houses, ' meeting houses ;' call them {dain preaching-hous.-^s, or chapels. But some may say, ' our own service is public worship.' - Works, ToL vii., p. 276. 156 AMEEICAN METHODISM. Yes, but not such as supersedes the Church Service. If it were designed to be instead of the Church Ser vice, it would be essentially defective, for it seldom has the four grand parts of Public Prayer, Depreca tion, Petition, Intercession, and Thanksgiving. If the people put ours in the room of the Church Service, vve hurt them that stay with us, and ruin them that leave us. Let this be well observed : I fear, when the Methodists leave the Church, God will leave them." In 1787, only four years before his death, and in the 84th year of his age, we find the following entry in his Journal : "I went over to Deptford ; but it seemed I was got into a den of lions. Most of the leading men of the Society were mad for separating from the Church. I endeavored to reason with them, but in vain ; theyhad neither sense nor even good manners left. At length, after meeting the whole Society, I told them, ' if you are resolved, you may have your Service in Church hours ; but, remember, from that time you will see my face no more.' This struck deep ; and from that hour I have heard no more of separation from tho Church."* In 1789, about two years only before his death, his language is, in " Thoughts on Separation," "'I never had any design of separating from the Church. I have no such desigo now. I do not believe the Methodists in general design it, when I am no more seen. I do, and will do all that is in my power to prevent such an event. Nevertheless, in spite of all I can do, many of them will separate from it : al though I am apt to think not one half, perhaps not a third of them. These will be so bold and injudicious * Works, ToL iv., p. 050. AMEEICAN METHODISM. 157 as to fonn a separate party, which consequently will dwindle away into a dry, dull, separate party. In flat opposition to these, I declare once more, that I live and die a member of the Church oi England : and THAT NONE WHO EEGAED MY JUDGMENT OE ADVICE WILL EVEE SEPARATE FROM IT."* At the Conference of that year, 1789, about a hundred preachers were present ; he says : "The case of separation from the Church was largely considered, and we were all unanimous against it."t In 1758, Mr. Wesley prepared and published Twelve Eeasons against Separation from the Church of Eng land, wbich we give almost entire. He elsewhere de clared, that those of his disciples who left the Church of England, left Methodism also, and were drawn off into the Anabaptist and other heresies ; nor can it be doubted, that the modelling of Methodism after the English Church has been a great secret of its vitality and success. He says : "' Whether it be lawful or no (which itself may be disputed, being not so clear a point as some may im agine,) it is by no means expedient for us to separate from the Established Church : " 1. Because it would be a contradiction to the sol emn aad repeated declaratioas which we have made in all manner of ways, in preaching, in print, and in private conversation. " 2. Because (on this as well as on many other ac counts) it would give huge occasion of offence to those who seek and desire occasion — to all the enemies of God and His truth. * Works, ToL, viL p.. 326. f ¦'*«'• '^°^ i^-i P- '2?. 158 AMEEICAN METHODISM. "3. Because it would exceedingly prejudice against us raany who fear, yea, who love God, and thereby hin der their receiving so much, perhaps any farther benefit from our preaching. "4. Because it would hinder multitudes of those, who neither love nor fear God, from hearing us at all. "5. Because it would occasion many hundreds, if not some thousands of those who are now united vv-ith us, to separate from us : yea, and some of those who have a deep work of grace in their souls. " 6. Because it would be throwing balls of wild fire among them that are now quiet in the land. We are novv sweetly united together in love. We mostly think and speak the sarae thing. But this would occasion inconceivable strife and contention, between those who left, and those who remained in the Church, as well as between those vvhn left us, and those who remained with us ; nay, and between those very per sons who remained, as they were variously inclined, one way or other. " 7. Because, whereas, controversj' is now asleep, and we in great measure, live peaceably with all men, so that vve are strangely at leisure to spend our whole time and strength iu enforcing plain, practical, vital religion. (0 what would many of our forefathers have given to have enjoyed so blessed a calm !) This would utterly banish peace from among us, aud that without hope of its returu. It would engage aie for one, in a thousand controversies, both in public and private ; (for I should be in conscience obliged to give the reasons of ray conduct, and to defend those rea sons against all opposers,) and so take me off from those more useful labors, which might otherwise cm- ploy the short remainder of my life. "8. Because to form the plan of a new Church would require iaflaite time and care, (which might be AMERICAN METHODISM. 159 far more profitably bestowed,) with much more wis dom and greater depth and extensiveness of thought, than any ot us are masters of. "9. Because, from some having barely entertained a distant thought of this, evil fruits have already fol lowed, such as prejudice against the Clergy in general ; aptness to believe ill of them ; contempt, not without a degree of bitterness, of Clergymen, as such, and a sharpness of language toward the whole order, utter ly unbecoming either gentlemen or Christians. 10. Because the experiment has been so frequently tried already, and the success never answered the ex pectation. God has, since the Eeformation, raised up, from time to time, many witnesses of pure religion. If these lived and died (like John Amdt, Robert Bo'.- ton, and many others) in the Churches to which they belonged, notwithstanding the wickedness which over flowed both the teachers and the people therein, they spread the leaven of true religion far and wide, and were more and more. useful, till they went to Para dise. But if, upon any provocation or consideration whatever, they separatetl, and founded distant parties, their influence was more and more confined ; they grew less and less useful to others, and generally lost tho spiiit of religion themselves in the spirit of con troversy. "'11. Because we have melancholy instances of tbis even now before our eyes. Many have, in our memo ry, left the Church, and formed themselves iuto dis tinct bodies. And certainly, some of them, from re al persuasion, that they should do God more service. But have any separated themselves and prospered ? Have they been either more holy, or more useful than thej' were before ? " 12. Because, by such a separation, we should not only throw away the peculiar glorying which God has 160 AMERICAN METHODISM. given us, that we do and will suffer all tbings for our brethren's sake, though the more we love them, the less we be loved ; but should act in direct contradiction to that very end, for which we believe God hath raised us up. The chief design of His providence in sending us out, is undoubtedly to quicken our brethren. And the first raessage of all our preachers is to the lost sheep of the Church of England. Now would it not be a flat contradiction to this design, to separate from the Church ? These things being considered, we can not apprehend (whether it be lawful in itself or no) tbat it is lawful for us : were it only on this ground, that it is by no means expedient. « » «f » " If it be said, ' But at the Church we are fed with chaff, whereas at the Meeting we have wholesome food ;' we answer, (i.) The prayers of the Church are not chaff; they are substantial food for any who are alive to God. (ii) The Lord's Supper is not chaff; but pure aad wholesome for all who receive it with upright hearts. Yea, (iii.) In almost all the sermons vve hear there, we hear many great and iaiportaat truths ; and whoever has a spiritual dis cernment, may easilj' separate the chaff from the wheat therein, (iv.) How little is the case mended at the Meeting.? Either the teachers are " new light " men, or they are predestinarians. Now, whatever this maj' be to them who were educated therein, yet to those of our brethren who have lately embraced it, repeated experience shews it is not wholesome food ; rather, to them it has the effect of deadly poison. In a short time it destroys all their zeal for God. * * * * Lastly, whereas we are surrounded on every side by those who are equally enemies to us and to the Church of England ; and whereas these are long practised in this war, and skilled in all the objections against ifc ; while our brethren, on the other hand, are quite strangers to them all, and so, on a sudden, know not how to answer them ; it is highly expedient for every AMEEICAN METHODISM. 161 preacher to be provided with souud answers to those objections, aad theu to iustruct the societies where he labors, how to defend themselves against those as saults; * * * that they vaiiy no more be tost to and fro by every luind of doctrine ; but, being settled in one mind and one judgment, by solid Scriptural and rational arguments, may groio up in all things into Him who is our Head, even Jesus Christ. JOHN WESLEY. Mr. Charles Wesley says : "I think myself bound in duty, to add my testi mony to my Brother's. His twelve reasons against our ever separating from the Church of England, are mine also. I subscribe to them with all my heart. Only with regard to the first, I am quite clear, that it is neither expedient nor lawful for me to separate. And I hever had the least inclination or temptation so to do. My affection for the Church is as strong as ever ; and I clearly see my calling, which is to live and die in her Communion. This, therefore, I am determined to do, the Lord being mv helper."* CHAELES WESLEY. Twentj' years after, in 1778, he says, iu a letter : " The origiual Methodists were all of the Church of England ; and the more awakened they were, the more zealously they adhered to it in every point, both of doctriae aud discipline. Hence we inserted in the very first Eules of our Society, " They that leave tbe Church, leave us." And this we did, not as a point of prudence, but a point of conscience. * * * I myself find more life in the Church Prayers, than in any formal extemporary prayers of Dissenters. Nay, I find more profit in Sermons on either good tempers, or good vvorks, than ia what are vulgarly called Gos- * Wesley's Works, New Tork : "Waugh & Mason, 1832. VoL vii., pp. 293-8. 162 AMEEICAN METHODISM, pel Sermons. That term has now become a mere cant word. I wish none of our Society would use it. It has no determinate meaning. Let but a pert, self- sufficient animal, that has neither sense nor grace, bawl out something about Christ, or His blood, or justification by faith, and his hearers cry out, " What a fine Gospel Sermon 1" Surely, the Methodists have not so learned Christ."* But it will be said, that, at the time of the ap pointment of Dr. Coke as Superintendent of the Methodists in America, in 1784, Mr. Wesley also " ordained" Richard Whatcoat, and Thomas Vesey, as Elders and Presbyters for the Araerican Methodists, for the purpose of baptizing and administering the Lord's Supper ; and, that in that act, he did pretend to ordain. John Wesley's own account of the matter is contained in a paper " On Separation from the Church," dated August 30, 1785, one year after the appointment of those men. He says : " Judging this to be a case of real necessity, I took a step which, for peace and quietness, I had refrained from taking for many years ; I exercised that ])ovver which I am fully persuaded the Great Shepherd and Bishop of the Church has given me. I appointed three of our laborers to go and help them, by not only preaching the Word of God, but likewise by administering the Lord's Supper, and baptizing their children, throughout that vast tract of land, a thou sand miles long, and some hundreds broad. " These are the steps which, not of choice, but of necessity, I have slowly and deliberately taken. If any one is pleased to call this separation from the Church, he may. But the Lavv of England does not * Wesley's Works, Toi. vii., p. 242. AMEEICAN METHODISM. 163 call it so ; nor can any one be properly said to do so, uuless, out of conscience, he refuses to join in the Service, and to partake of the Sacraments administered therein." To this there are several things to be said. 1. The act of appointing those men was put distinctly by Mr. Wesley on the ground of " real necessity." He had travelled in America, had seen the spiritual desti tution, and the unworthy character of many of the Church of England Clergymen there. In 1780, he had earnestly appealed to the Bishop of London to ordain men for America ; but in vain. It will be remembered that our own Bishop White, under the same plea, once suggested a similar temporary ex pedient. 2. John Wesley was then eighty-one years of age, and he was overpersuaded to the act by the importunate solicitations, and the very remarkable Letter (we may say management) of Dr. Coke, (which Letter is still preserved.) 3. The act was done privately, and without the request of the Amer ican Methodists. 4. Lord King's sophistical argu ment to prove that Bishops and Presbyters are the same Order, doubtless influenced Wesley's opinion and conduct ; but what "that argument has to do in sus taining the modern Methodist theory of Episcopal power, is another question well worth asking. 5. Mr. Weslej', in his Letter to the " brethren in North America," Sept. 10th, 1784, is careful to say that he "appointed" (not ordained) certain men " to act as Elders." 6. In his Sermon, published by Mr. Wesley himself, in 1788 or 1789, four or five years after these " appointments," and so, decisive upon the point before us, Mr. Wesley says : 164 AMERICAN METHODISM. " I wish all of you, who are vulgarly termed Meth odists, would seri(msly consider what has been said. And, particularlj', you whom God hath commissioned to call sinners to repentance. It does by no means follow from hence, that ye are commissioned to bap tize, or to adrainister the Lord's Supper. Ye never dreamed of this for ten or tweniy years after ye began to preach. Ye did not then, like Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, ' seek the Priesthood also.' Ye know, ' no man taketh this honor unto himself, but he that is called of God, as was Aaron.' 0, contain j'ourselves within your own bounds !"* The application to Bishop White on the part of Dr. Coke, for the " re-ordination " of these Meth odist preachers, shows conclusively that neither Mr. Wesley nor Mr. Asbury regarded them as having already received a valid ordination. 7. In respect to the Methodists in America, he says : "Whatever there is done, either in America or Scotland, is no separation from the Church of Eng land. I have no thought of this ; I have mauy objec tions against it.""j- 8. Two years after the appointment, he writes to Eev. F. Garretson, a Methodist preacher in America : " Wherever there is any Church Service, I do not approve of any appointment the same hour, because I love the Church of England, and would assist, not oppose it, all I can."'| 9. The formal act of separation by the Methodists was not done in England, it was done in Amenca, Dec. 25, 1784. Mr. Wesley's views as to tha/ as- * Sern-ion, 39. f Works, Toi, viL, p. 315. X Worlcs, ToL vii., p. 185. AMERICAN METHODISM. 1G5 sumption of power on the part of the Methodists in America, may be seen in his Letter four years after, Sept. 20, 1788, to Mr. Asbury, above quoted, and to which we again ask the reader's attention. If, in this whole matter, Mr. Wesley is inconsistent vvith himself, we shall not attempt to explain that incon sistency ; but we do put the question, whether Meth odism, as an Institution, or a Sect, can afford to stand on such a foundation ? On these important facts, in tbe history of John Wesley and Thomas Coke, we draw the following conclusions : 1. John Wesley never regarded himself as having consecrated, or attempted to consecrate, Thomas Coke a Bishop.2. That Coke, in his subsequent history, indicated great dissatisfaction with his claim to the title of a Bishop. 3. That Coke, in consenting to the re-ordination of his Methodist preachers, showed how lightly he thought of the validity of the Orders received at his hands. 4. Thomas Coke, as charged upon bim by John Wesley, aud, as his whole history shows, was ambi tious to be consecrated a Bishop of the English or American Church. 5. As neither Wesley nor Coke was anything more than a Presbyter, so, Ordination at their hands, was anJ is devoid of validity. 6. John Wesley supposed that he was only estab lishing societies for a temporary purpose, and had no thought or intention of separating from, or causing schism in the English Church. 166 AMERICAN METHODISM. The fiicts which we have given above in the life of Jolm Wesley, we trust will come before uot a few of our Methodist brethren. His views upon other points, especially the Sacraments, we should like to present. We believe there are large numbers of their Preach ers, who, to-day, have far more real sympathy with the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States, than with Methodism, in the present stage of its de velopment. Methodism, in a great degree, has finish ed its work. Ifc is not what it was. Its organic unity and efficiency are lost, and lost forever. _ Its old badges of distinctive un worldliness, its old tone and spirit, wbich made Methodism what it was, are gone Its strongly marked teachings, both as to the Institu tions and Doctrines of Grace, have given place largely to a modified German Eationalism. The influences, under which this change has been silently going on, we are not now seeking ; the fact itself is indisputable, and many of the Methodists, of the old school, freely confess it. The Church from wbich it went out, on the contrary, is growing in life and efficiency ; and in its late " Memorial Moveuieut," it has proffered the fraternal band to all who are yearning for Unity in the One Body of Christ, that we may labor for one great end, the salvation of the souls for whom Christ died, and the glory of God. The Protestant Episco pal Church will meet this great question fairly. Cer tain great priuciples she caa never abandou ; for they rest, not upon mere opinion, but upon undoubted Facts, and are cherished by her in the deepest convic- tious of her couscieuce. But there is ao good reasoa why multitudes of the Methodists, whose best life FRUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 167 came from the Church of Eaglaud, who are one with us in Doctrine, and are so like us in Organization aud Ritual, and who will find our Government more representative as well as Scriptural than theirs — we say there is, we believe, no sufficient reason why Methodists and Churchmen should not link their hearts and hands together, in one and the same blessed work. CHAPTEE IX, FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. The subject announced at the head of this chapter is one which we feel reluctant to pursue. It is a mode of argument in respect to the Church and Faith of Christ, which, as a general rule, it is neither wise nor safe to adopt. It is simply the argument of expedi ency. There are two objections to this method of ar gument. The first is, that this method of receiving the In stitutions of God is presumptuous and irreverent. While vve do not doubt that whatever is right, is also best, at the same time, it better becomes the child of God to obey the commands of bis Heavenly Father, not as a matter of expediencj', but of duty. That 168 FEUIT? OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. is a base and sordid love of God, which springs from personal considerations. " Sinners love those that love them." Luke vi., 32. The true Christian's lan guage is, " Even so, Father — for so it seemed good in thy sight." Mat. ii., 26. Nor does he stop to cavil at the comuiands of God, or estimate the expediency or inexpediency, the profit or loss, of doing what God expressly enjoins. And yet this is a popular mode of argument at the present day. With multitudes, the duties. Ordinan ces, and Sacraments of religion, are subjected to this sordid test. The question is now asked, " What good does it do," to observe this or that Ordinance of Al mighty God ? Men in modern, as in ancient times, are heard to say : " It is vain to serve God, and what profit is it, that we have kept His ordinance ?" Mat. iii., 14. This, then, is our first objection to this mode of argument, that it is irreverent toward God to talk about the expediency, or the inexpediency, of obeying Divine commands. Our second objection is founded on man's ignorance. The expediency of changing God's Ordinances, man is wholly incompetent to decide. The real tendency of such innovations may not be developed in a long course of years, not until centuries have elapsed, un til evils, radical and deadly, have penetrated the whole mass of Society. These fancied improvements upon the Institutions of Heaven, may not be attended, at first, with obvious evil ; naj', they may seem to" prom ise the most manifest advantage. And yet, it is loos ening the key-stone of a vast arch, on which king doms repose for safety, to be followed with slow, but FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 169 certain overthrow ; it is removing the topmost stone of a mound, which heads back a sea of waters, to be followed with ultimate overwhelming ruin. Here, doubtless, is one end to be answered, in the wisdom of God, in the present sfcrange, mysterious condition of nominal Christendom. That field has been for centuries, and still is a great moral labo ratory, where fearful and eventful experiments are making. The ultimate result will be, to humble man, and exalt God ; to teach all intelligent creatures, in Heaven and earth, that " The fear of God is the be ginning of wisdom." The great evils which now pervade the two wide extremes of nominal Christendom, in this westera world, the Romish Church, oa the oue baud, and the numerous Sects, on the other, have their origin in one and the same cause — a departure from the Apostolic Church ; the one having erred by adding fo, and the other by taking from, the primitive Faith and Order. And yefc, if we trace those departures back to their origin, we shall see, that in almost every case the in novations sprang from a supposed necessity, or fancied expediency. Still, as this method of argument is popular at the present day, we shall adopt ifc. We sliall examine these Modern Systems in the light of their actual tendencies : in other words, we will "judge of the tree by its fruits." Passing by the system of Romanism,* we are to apply this method of reasoning to those who have * "We wish, in this place, to protest against the use of the term Catholic, as applied to the Papists. They are careful to claim this title to themselves, and oven their most ignorant members have 170 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. rejected Apostolic Institutions and Ordinances ; and we jiropose to try these Modern Systems by their own favorite test, expediencj'. And we think we shall make apparent, to the satisfaction of our readers, perhaps to the surprise and amazement of sorae, that even within the comparatively short period of their existence, these Systems will not bear such au exam- iuatiou. We shall aot give a historical sketch of the origin and progress of these Systems, or a minute account of their present condition ; but shall endeavor to show, that those religious Systems which have re jected the Apostolic Order, Discipline, Ministiy, and Worship, have, in a greater or less degree, lost tho spiiit and power of the Gospel, fallen into dangerous and deadly errors, and are exhibiting, to a greater or less degree, a godlessness of life and conversation. It would be a far more grateful task to take another view ; to note the provocations under which the founders of these Systems originally acted in reject ing Primitive Order ; and to bear witness to the Christiaa pietj', the moral heroism, the iutegrity of life, whicb have, es[)ecially in certain portions of this field, been exhibited. But this is uot the work to sagacity to feel the force of the argument which the term gives them. " What, say ihey, are we not the Catholics'? and doe^ not Catholic mean universal ?" The political press, witli perhaps not an exception, and most of the books we use in our school^ psrsis'", in this most improper use of an iraportant term. Call tliem " Rnmaiists," or better still, call them "Papists," which is their appropriate aud specific title; but, as for allowing tliem to be " Catholics," we cannot without moral treachery. FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 171 which the truth novv summons us. We shall show that the general tendency of those Systems, as such, which have rejected the Apostolic Order, Ministry, and Worship, has been to degenerate into doctrinal and practical irreligion. We shall draw our illustra tions from Germany, England, and the United States. I. We ask attention, first, to the state of Religion at the present day in Germany, where tbe System has been a long time in existence, and where every oppor tunity has been given to tiy the System by its own legitimate results.* Germany has been called " the cradle of the Reformation," the home of early Prot estantism. An English author, of modern date, gives us the following statement of Religion, doctrinal and practi cal, in Germany. He says : " The theology of the Protestant Churches of Germany presented a very singular spectacle, during tbe last half of the preceding century, and the com mencement of the present. A very large majority of the divines of these Churches rejected, in a word, all belief in the Divine origia of Christiauitv, aud aax- iously eudeavored to instil into others the opinions which they had embraced themselves. Tbey bad possession of by far the greater number of divinity professorships in the many Universities of Germany, and they had, almost exclusively, the direction of the literaiy and religious journals ; a class of publications of more influence and importance in Germany than among ourselves. By the unsparing use of the means thus afforded them, and by an infinite number of * For an aocount of the swarm of Sects that sprang up in Germany at the timo of the Reformation, see Hardwick's History of the Refor mation, pp. 271-296. 172 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. writiugs, addressed to meu of all classes and of all ages, they succeeded iu spreading their views over tbe surface of society. How deep the disease went among the lower orders it is not easy to ascertain, but it appears that, after a time, a spirit of almost entire indifference to religion manifested itself among all classes. The Churches were thinly attended, the Sabbath little honored, the Bible much neglected."* The same author says : " My allegation against the German Protestant Divines is, that the peculiar and positive doctrines of Christianity had lost all value in their eyes, and that they sought to depress Christianity itself to the level of a human invention, and its doctrine, at least, to a repetition of the doctrines of natural re- ]igion."f To show what German Eationalism is, we quote from one of the ablest of their writers, LudwiG Feuebach, whose work on " The Essence of Chris tianity" bas passed through several editions, and has been re-published in the United States. Of Miracles, he says : " Miracle is only a product and object of the im agination, and hence Creation out of nothing as the jirimitive miracle, is of the .same character." p. 140. " When thou sayest the world was raade out of noth ing, * * * thou thinkest God by Himself, i. e., abso lutely unlimited subjectivity, tbe subjectivity or soul which enjoys itself alone, which needs not the World, which knows nothing of the ])ainful bonds of matter." p. 149 And yet again be says, " The Creation out of nothing, i. e., the Creation as a purely iini)erious act, had its origin only in the uiifatbomahle depths of Htbrew egoism. * * * Theoretically considered, it is a * Rose's State of Protestantism i-n Germany, 2d ed. f Ibid., p 93. FEUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. 173 baseless air-built doctrine, which originated solely in the need to give a warrant to utilism, to egoism." p. 158. Of the Trinity, he says : " Man's consciousness of himself in bis totality, is the consciousness of tbe Trinity." ]>. 95. " The Trinity is, therefore, originally, nothing else than the sum of the essential fundamental distinctions wliiclf man perceives in the human nature." p. 295. And yet this same doctrine of the Trinity he subsequently maligns by saying, " Thus, in the holy mystery of the Trinity, that is to say, so far as it is supposed to rep resent a truth distinct from huinau uature — all re solves itself iuto delusions, phantasms, contradictions, and sophisms." p. 299. Prayer, he describes as " The self-division of man into two being.s — a dialogue of mau with himself, with his heart. "'^ * * Iu praj'er, mau turns to the omnipotence of Good ness ; — which simply means, that in prayer mau adores his owa heart, regards his own feelings as ahsolute." pp. 166, 16.9. " God is the affirmation of human feeling ; prayer is the unconditional C(mfidence of human feeling ia the absolute. identity of the sub jective and objective, the certainty that the power of the heart is greater than the power of nature, that the heart's need is absolute necessity, the Fate of the world." p. 166. " It is an extremely superficial view of prayer, to regard it as an expression of the sense of dependence. It certainly expresses such a sense, but the dependence is that of mau on his own heart, on his own feeling." p. 167. His theory of the Sacraments is, that the whole virtue of the Sacraments consists in the natural properties and uses of the elements themselves ; that is, iu washing, and in eating and drinking. Any such 174 FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. thing as supernatural Grace accorapanying the recep tion of Baptism, or the Lord's Supper, is of course not to be thought of. He saj's : " The water of Baptism, the wine and bread ofthe Lord's Supper, taken in their natural power and sig- nifioence, are and effect infinitelj' more than in a supernaturalistic illusory significance." "That vvhich is, or is supposed to be iniparteil in the water, bread, and wine, over above the.se natural substances them selves, is something in the imagination only, but in truth, in reality, nothing." ]>. 11. " The necessary iiiimiiieiit consequences and effects of this religious materialism, of this subordination of the human to the supposed divine, of the subjective to the supposed objective, of truth to the imagination, of morality to religion — the necessaiy consequences are superstition and immi)raliry : su[ieistition, because a thing has attrihuted to it an eflect which does not lie iu its nature, because a thing is held up as not being what it ill truth is, becau.se a mere conception passes for objective reality ; immorality, because necessarily, in feeling, the huliuess of the action as such is separated from morality, the partaking of the Sacrament, even apart from the state of mind, becomes a holy and saving act." j). 312, 13. Concerning Inspiration, he teaches, that " The belief in Revelation exhibits in the clearest manner the characteristic illusion of the religious con sciousness." p. 266. " In Revelation man goes out of himself, iu order, by a circuitous path, to return to himself ! Here we have a striking confirmation of the position, that the secret of theology is nothing else than ruithropology — the knowledge of God nothing else than a knowledge of man !" p. 267. " The belief in Revelation not only injures the moral sense aud taste — the esthetics of virtue ; ifc poisons, nay, it FRUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 175 destroys, the divinest feeling in raan — the sense of truth, the perception and sentiment of truth." p. 269. " Tbe Bible contradicts morality, contradicts reason, contradicts itself, innumerable times ; and yet it is tho word of God, eternal truth, and ' truth cannot contradict itself.'" "How does the believer in Rev elation elude this contradiction between the idea in his own mind, of Revelation as divine, harmonious truth, iind his supposed actual Eevelation ? Only by self-deception, only bj' the silliest subterfuges, only by the most miserable transparent sophisms. Christian sophistry is t!ie necessary product of Christian faitb, esjiecially of faith in the Bible as a divine Revelation." p. 271. A correct idea of some of the various forms of Infidelity constantly springing up in Germanj', maj' be gathered from the following descri[)tion of the " Friends of Light " {Lichtfreunde,) who first made their appearance in 1840. We take our account from the American Correspondent of a religious Journal, in 1863. "These 'Friends of Light' had for leaders Dr. Ulilich, and other celehrated Professors. These gen tlemen pompously announced that their new Chris tianity fully met the ideas and wants ofthe nineteenth centuiy. M. Uhlich boasted of counting eight thou sand members in the communion vvhich he had estab lished at Magdebourg. The city of Berlia contained also a large congregation belonging to the same sect. Preachers abounded. Instead of selecting texts out of the Holy Scriptures, they took for the subject of their discourses, maxims of Schiller, Goethe, Kant, Thoinas Paine, etc. " After rejecting the inspiration of the Bible, and the historical truth of the Gospels, they retrenched successively all that distinguishes Christianity from 176 FRUITS OP MODERN SYSTEMS. philosophy ; they abolished all the forms and ceremo nies of the Church, and tbeir worship was nothing more than an academical lecture upou political or moral subjects. The Lord's Supper is aluiost eutirely suppressed in the raeetings of the Lichtfreunde. The following are eorae of their views upon this subject ; we borrow them from a recent number of the Sonntagsblatt (Sunday paper,) published by M. Uhlich : ' The Lord's Supper has been supjiressed in the congrega tion at Manheim. and I will tell you how it is, in this respect, at Magdebourg. The Supjier was afc first celebrated once a month, but the number of commu nicants becoming fewer and fewer, vve celebrated it three times a year. Finding this, also, too often, we combined the Lord's Supper with the confirmation of the young people. At last, tbe Liberal princijile gaining ground in tbe community, we told the young people that they were free to attend the Lord's Sup per, or not I, who know tbe congregation, believe that, in a short time, the Holy Supiier will disappeai from our worship : for we no longer feel the need of it It seems to me more suitable that the cougre- gatioa should be divided iato small groups, who shall meet sometimes at one house, and sometimes at another, aud each oue bring his own food with hira. We would thus pass the time together ])leasantiy. In suaimer, we could meet for this object in some public garden. When the Holy Supper is suppressed, coufirmatiou will becorae very solemn. Nothing is more beautiful to a community of the Liberal Union, than to see her sons and her daughters raising tf.eir hands, and declaring that they wish to become hocest men !' " As to the state of practical religion in Germany, the view is equally appalling. A learned Professor froui the United States, travelling through that country, i..ays ; FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 177 "All the vices for which German students liave been fiimous, are no less common among theologians than among others : and tbey are as likely as anyto be found engaged in gauibliug, druukeuness, broils, duels, and every species of renowning Among the nine hundred students of theology at Halle, not more than from one hundred to one hundred and fifty can be reckoned as possessing seriousness of character in any degree. " To an American, it is a striking and painful sight, to enter the house of God, and find it almost entirely destitute of worshippers. The preacher is there, the services are there, the voice of song arises from the choir and organ, but a woishipping assembly can hardly be said to be tbere. Go where you will in every part of the country, and you find the same neglect of religious worship."* A correspondent of the N. Y. Christian Advocate and Journal, writes from Berlin, under date of Julj', 1854, as follovvs. He is evidently an intelligent man, and in familiar intercourse with the best minds ia Germany. Here is the result of those contineatal theories, which, since the Reformatioa, have beeu try ing to graft themselves on the English Church, and our own, and to resist which is " Puseyism," and " High Churchism," and what not : "A residence of nearly a year, as a German among Germans has corrected, to a great extent, the first im pressions, ever more or less incorrecfc, that are made upon the mind of a stranger in a strange land. In Berlin, the refiaed taste that is displayed throughout the city, aud iu individuals, the universal order and quietness that prevails, the abseace of all those scenes of public immorality, riotousuess, aud fashionable Scibinsm't Sib. Sspo*, Toi. u, pp. 425, 442 178 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. rowdyism, that characterize New York, might lead the new comer, or the superficial observer, to imagine that morality and religion constituted the foundation of society, instead of armed soldiers, and a most rigid system qf police. " Religion iiere is made a mere form, to all intents and jiurposes ; and, witb the exce])tion of the very few really pious ministers, true Chiistianity, ' in this very Christian State,' is seldom jireached or lived. I arrive at this conclusion, not only from my own ob servation and ex|)erience, but from the statements of the most devoted ministers themselves. They lament that the standard of Christianity is so low among them. If 1 were to seek to be u.sefnl in the c.iuse of Christianity, as I trust I may be, I would sooner select, as a promising field of labor, a laud of eatire heatheiiisra, than learned and Christian Germany. To a person even in the midst, it is almost inconceivable to what an extent, not only rationalism, but panthe ism, in its most cultivated and most degraded forms, jiervades Gennan society. In the higher classes, it takes on the garb of philosojihy and enlightened skep ticism, and as it descends in the scale of being, and vulgarizes, it makes the lives of tbe bnvest classes the lives of brutish beasts ; not only 'without God in the world,' but without a belief iu God, or iu an exist ence after death. " I am aware that many persons have thought and writteu, that the most fearful days of unbelief in Ger many were past; but as far as pertains to the present grow'n-iip generation, and at least to the city of Berhn, althougb its external character has been varnished, its power aud accursed effects still remain. I have been told by a very good and useful clergymau, that he felt aluiost discouraged, and that his only hope vvas now ia the childreu. " I will go somewhat into details on this subject. Berlin has a population of about four . hundred aud FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 179 forty thousand. In the entire city, including chapels and all places of worship, there are but a little more than thirty churches. These can contain only about forty thou'siuul jieople, and are never full except upon some fast-day. I inquired of the clergyman to whom I have just referred, what proportion of these four hundred' thousand people, who never enter the church es, was estimated to be unbelievers ? and he answered, ' About all: They have many proofs on this subject. Colporteurs, who bave been attempting to do some good ia Berlin, everywhere meet vvith the same story among the laboring classes : ' We have no time to read ; we must work oa Sundays until noon, and then enjoy ourselves ; we believe not in your Goii.' In regard to the numerous places of amusement on the Sabbath, there are not only the opera, theatres, circuses, and fashionable resorts for the elite, but con certs, balls, fireworks, and the like, for tlie poorer classes, vvhere the admittance fee ranges from nothing up to a si.xpence ; thus accommodating all circuni- stauces in matter of jirice. I will returu to these sub jects at some future time. " This circumstance led to a very interesting con versation on a subject vvhich is now agitating the Cliurch in Germany ; namely, divorces. As you are probably aware, a divorce may be obtained in Ger many for tbe most trifling cause ; as, for instance, a mere disagreement. It is, in fact, a matter of pleas ure, aud is of every-day occurrence. In Pastor Kurtz's congregation alone, there were, during the last year, ninety applications for divorce. "It has been often theoretically AqcVayq^ in England and America, what would be the results of a lax law on the subject of divorce, and you will recollect that there vvas a discussion on this subject in the Biitish Parliament last winter. 1 can state what are the practical results of such a law in Germany, as this is acknowledged to be the great cause of the preseut 180 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. immorality. In the city of Berlin, one-eighth of the children born yearly are illegitimate. In Hamburg, and other cities, the proportion is still larger ; while Munich has the enviable superiority of swelling the proportion to one-half. This is a sufficient com mentary on the practical workings of the sj'stem." An American gentleman, every way qualified to form au opinion, lately in Germany, thus writes to an American religious paper, from Nuremberg : " I learned from my ministerial friend, that his flock consisted of twenty hundred souls, of whom fifty or a hundred attended Church. He remarked that it was difficult to do anything, and was much discouraged. Immorality, exceedingly gross, one- third of the new ])opulation bdng illegitimate; no regard paid to the Sabbath, or sacred things ; {loverty and suffering abounding everywhere — one would think he had cause of soitow. And yet it is onlj' the same story that I hear everywhere in Germany. * * * * This, to one who feels a universal brotherhood in men, dispels the romance associated with the name of Ger many in the new world. Sad, indeed, is the fate of the Germau people, and darker, still darker grows the future. God ouly knows what the end shall be." We know it is often said, that a brighter day is dawning on Germany. But has the method of thinking and reasoning, which is the real source ofall this Infidelity, been changed ? Besides, who are the men to act as reformers of such a system ? Are they such men as Tholuck and Neander ? — the former of whom is said to be, in doctrine, a Restorationist ; and the latter is declared " to set aside the Nicene and Athanasiau Creeds," aud to teach that the pool at Bethesda was a " reaervoir" of minei:al water, and the FEUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. 181 transfiguration of our Saviour, a "dream." Con cerning Neander, (who died in 1850) Kurtz, in his late Church Histoiy, says : " He was so entirely a Pectoralist, that even his criticism was only a criticism of feeling ; and this was mauifested uowliere more arbitrarily than with regaid to the historical books of the New Testament, where he wavers continually between authenticity and non-authenticity, between histoiy and myth."* We have dwelt the longer upon the fruits of this Modern System in Germany, because here it is, we are told, the Reformation was conducted on a true basis ; and here it is tbat so many of our young men go to learn their Philosophy and their Theology ! Gemian text-books are used in some of the " Orthodo.x" The ological Seminaries of this country ; and because, moreover, German habits of thinking are just now exerting a most powerful influence in England, and upon the religious character of the American people. IL Leaving Germany, let us now turn our atten tion to the fruits of Modern Systems in England. Has there, or has there not, been here a wide de parture from the Doctrines once held by the Dis senters ? We learn, on the authority of those having every means of ascertaining facts, and who have published these facts to the world, that, " Out of 258 Presbyterian chapels in England, * Kurtz's Church History, Vol. ii., p. 355. Phila., Smith, English & Co., 1862. This same Neander is the man who wrote the Introduc tion to a book whioh is novv cirouliiting over tive country, "A. Church without a Bishop, or Coleman's Christian Antiquities." 182 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. which is the whole number, it is asserted, on the au thority of the dissenters themselves, that 235 of these are actually Unitarian in sentiment."* Two Dissenting authors, describing the decline and present condition of the English Presbyterians, make the following statements : " By the operation of these two causes, (Arianism and Socinianism,) many a Presbyterian congregation dwindled from a giant to a dwarf ... .They are in general now but the shadow of what they fiirmerly were, and many of them have ceased to exist. Dev onshire, the cradle of Arianism, has been the grave of the Arian dissenters, and there is not left in that pop ulous county, a twentieth part of the Presbyterians, which were to be found at the time of her birth So great is the change vvhich these sentiments have produced, that perhaps there are not now in England twelve of their congregations, which can boast an attendance of flve hundred people ; whereas, before the introduction of Arianism, tliey could, in more than two hundred places, count five hundred hearers, and in several, more than dimble that number. To account for the decrease, let it be remembered, that shoals of converts, if they deserve the imme, or cf people weary of dissent, passed over from the Presby terians into the bosom of the established Church. ""j" Another authority, regarded as a standard work, says: "The English body of the 'three denominations' as it is called, is composed of Presbyterians, Inde pendents, and Baptists. Of that portion of the lat ter class called General Baptists, a majority are ac knowledged Uuitariaus, and the Presbyterian Churches * Tracts for the Times, Vol, i., p. 403. f Bogue and Bennel's Hiskiry of Dissenters, Vol. iv., pp. 319, 320. London Ed., 1812. FEUITS OF MODEEN S^TSTEMS. 183 throughout Emjland are understood to be occupied by congregations of this sort."* The Morning Advertiser, (London,) edited by a Dissenter, lately said : " The distinctive doctrines of the Gospel — those which constitute the glory of the Christian system, are ignored among both the Noncomforuiist bodies, to an extent vvhich it is awful to contemplate. The Cross has become an offense, even with tbose whose avowed mission it is to preach Christ and Him crucified A ban is put upon all that is vital in the Gosjiel All is cold, heartless, cheerless, in their places of worship. Never vvas Evano-elical religion in so low a state as itis at the present time, in the Nonconformist bodies A large nmnlier of the youn>; men wbo are studying in Independent and Baptist Colleges, are more or less tinctured witb neological heresy. They have jiartaken more or less deeply of German Ration alism." In an English publication, a writer makes the following statement respecting the meeting-house of the distinguished commentator, Matthew Heniy. He says : "It was built for the celebrated Mr. Matthew Henry, and his congregation, alxmt the year 1700. In this chapel, a copy of Mr. Henry's exposition was placed on desks for general perusal, probably ever since its first publication. A gentleman who visited the chapel some years ago, observed tluit one of the volumes of the New Testament vvas missinir, and that several leaves were torn out of another, while the neio Unitarian version was in the pulpit, and in several of the pews:'\ * Am. Enc,, Voh xii., p. 599. f Matidhesler Soc. Cont, p. 122. Iioudon, 1.825. . 184 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. On the same authoritj', it is stated that several meetiug-houses, built by, and for, the cotemporaries of Matthew Henry, have become decidedly Socinian. The same change of doctrine has taken place in the house built by and for the celebrated Dr. Doddridge. During the late attempt to get up a Bi-centennaiy Celebration of the ejectment of 2000 Nonconformists by tbe Act of Uniformity, of 1662, it has been ascer tained that, of the three hundred Chapels built ex pressly for those men, there are not novv twenty, in wliich the Divinity of Jesus Christ is not denied. To what extent this defection from the true Faith has reached, may be seen from a few extracts from a late work reprinted in this countiy, by an English Dissenter, W. E. Geeg.* The sum of his teaching is thus stated in his own words : " The tenet of the Inspiration of the Scriptures is baseless and untenable, under any form or modifica tion which leaves to it a dogmatic value ; that the Gospels are not textual and faithful records of the sayings and actions of Jesus, but ascribe to hira words which he never uttered, aud deeds which he never did ; and that the Apostles only partially compre hended, and imperfectly transmitted, tbe teacbing of their Great Master." p. 7. While he maintains that " Every doctrine, and every proposition, which the Scri[)tures contsiin, whether or not we believe it to have come to us unmutilated and unmarred from the mouth of Christ, is open, and must be subjected to the scrutiny of Eeason." p. 287. As to the authority of Christ, he says that, " The * The Creed of CSveisUndom, its Fomdaiim md Supernimcture. FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 185 fact that he held a convict-inn which he shared with the great and good of other times, can be no argument for ascribing to him divine communications distinct from those granted to the great and good of other times." ]). 268. And he says that, '• The general concurrence of the evangelical histories, and their un designed and incidental intimations, lead us to con clude tbat Jesus did share tbe mist.ikes which prevailed among His disciples." p. 271. And he comes to the conclusion, that when it is God's " will that Mankind should make some great sten forward, should achieve some pregnant discovery. He calls into being some cerebral organization, of more than ordinary magni tude and power, as that of David, Isiiah, Plato, Shakspeare, Bacon, Newton, Luther, Pascal, vvhich gives birth to new ideas and grander conceptions of the truths vital to humanity." p. 268. These facts, already quoted, are sufficient to show that in England, as well as in Germany, those systems which rejected the Apostolic Order, Ministry, and wofthip, have degenerated into the most gross and dangerous hereries. Again, we ask the reader to judge the tree by its fruits. There is still another field, which its own impor tance, and a regard for truth, will not allow us to puss by in silence. As Americans, and especially as American Churchmen, it is an import.anfc inquiiy, what has been the progress, and what is the present condition of Doctrinal Eeligion, among those pro fessed Christian societies, in the United Sfcates, which have rejected the Apostolical Order, Ministry, and Worship ? Ifc is more difficult to give specific an swers to this question, as yet, than in respect to those fields which we have just left. The development of such Systems may be more or less gradual, according 186 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. to the internal and external bonds which may hold ifc in check. And then, under the most unrestrained tendency to development, a long course of years may be accessary to bring forth, iu maturity, the fruits of this tree. Each of these causes coaspires to throw difficulty around the question novv before us. The leading religious Sects in this countiy are, as yet, in a forming state. Their history cannot yet be written. In large portions of the countiy, the work even of gathering congregations, and planting parishes, and adopting creeds, is at this moment going on. Besides, anotber cause contributes to keep development in check. That sharp-sighted watchfulness, with which each Sect eyes its neighbor, and the power of exposure which the press affords, help to make each deuomination maintain, vvith great pertinacity, its own peculiar priuciples. Still, uotwithstanding all these causes, the work of developmeat has advanced sufficiently to throw a strong light upon the question under exam ination, and to lead us to anticipate with some confi dence the ultimate results. To some facts in connec tion with different religious Sects, we novv ask atten tion. III. We will examine first, the Presbyterian Sys tem. This denomination is one of the oldest in existence among us. It commenced its operations with far more powerful elements of moral strength than any of the otber Sects. Its principles were more conserv ative, better defined ; more thoroughly understood, and more intelligently approved. It bas been forti- FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 187 fied, also, with more efficacious extraneous helps of literaiy and theological Institutions, based upon, and having existence upon, the maintenance of certain .peculiar principles. It has also been infused, less than any of its anti-Episcopal neighbors, with a love of change, partly from the fact, that it professed to derive its authority directly from the Holy Scriptures. It has taken the consistent stand, that, as a Church of Christ, it must derive its ministiy, sacraments, and doctrines, froui Christ Himself, and not spring up as a voluntary dssociation, like a temperance society, directly from the people. For all these reasons, the Presbyterian System has preserved, and still possesses, more of the elements of stability and strength ; and hence the tendency to change has manifested itself less visibly. And yet the recollection of the recent couvulsious is fresh iu the recollection of the country. A con vulsion vvhich divided that body, nofc as the Meth odists were divided, by one geographical line, but which shook that whole System to its very centre, and vvas felt to the remotest corners of its existence ; which distracted almost every Synod, and Presbytery, and Parish, iu the Uuited States — a couvulsiot* which separated these bodies from each other, rend ing them ia twain, like sundering the joints of the human body, and then left the question of the ortho doxy of these conflicting bodies to be settled by a worldly Court. Without going into the minute history of the schism whioh rent that bodj' in twain, it is sufficient to state, that the question which divided the Presby- 188 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. terians was strictly one of Christian Doctrine, and that it was in consequence of alleged radical defection in such Doctrine, of gross heresy in matters of Faith, tbat, in the year 1837, the spectacle vvas first pre-, sented, of two General Assemblies of tbe Presbyteri ans, in the United States, each claiming to be the true General Assembly, each from that time independ ent of the other, and not until recentlj-, if even now, recognized by one another as Christian bodies. What those doctrines were, on whicb it was alleged such dangerous Errors were held, will be specified more particularlj', when we come to speak of the Congregationalists ; the New School Presbyterians, so called, sympathizing with certain uovel aotions, which have arisen among the Congregationalists of New England. Indeed, it is alleged, ans a Church ; of which all the members are equal, and equally entitled to govern, instruct, and nunister. They deny that the Miuisters of the Church are a dis tinct Order from the people. It was this Sect who were mostly the early settlers in the New England Col onies, and they brought with them to this countrj', their radical theories, respectmg the Church, and their bitter hatred of the raother Church, her Ministry, Sa craments, Liturgy, and Ceremonies. Many of the Ministers of the Independents, or Congregationalists, both in Massachusetts and Connecticut, received no other ordination, than the laying on of tbe hands of the "brethren ;" and no other Ordination was then, or is now, regarded as necessary. 190 FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. In the " CoNGREG.\TiONAL Catechism," published at New Haven, in 1844, by leading men of tbat Sect, as an authoritative Manual, we find the following, which we have in part quoted befoie : "Quest. 54. Did ordination, [in the primitive Church,] convey to tbe person official powers vvhich he could not otherwise possess .^" Ans. " No." " Quest. 57. Did the officers of the primitive Church, by virtue of their c>rdiiiatioii, become a distinct Order of men from the jieople, such as the Jewish Priests, and such as the Clergy of the Christian Church, iu subsequent ages ?" Ans. " No." Ag.iin : " Quest. 31. In what relation did these primitive Churches [in each town or cityj stand to each other ?" Ans. " They were completely independ ent bodies : that is, they had power to ajipoint and to depose their own officers, to ailniinister discipline, and to regulate and determine all tlieir other ecclesiastical concerns, subject to no court of appeal, or higher pow er, having authority to reverse their decisions." This Sect, through its Colleges, which were early established at Cambridge and New Haven, and the spirit of propagandism which has always character ized the Sect, has continued to exert great influence iu all the Northern and Northwestern portions of our country. Men educated in the radicalism of this sys tem, and knowing no other, are found occupying the most important positious iu our Educational and other Institutions. To what extent, however, Con gregationalism bas spread, or what has been its influ ence on the various forms of social Life, as tbe Fam ily and the State, is not now the questiou ; though this is oneof the "fruits" of the System, deserving FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. 191 consideration. We are examining the power of the System, as a conservative body ; and esiiecially to preserve and hand dowu its own standards of the Faith of Christ. With such utter lack of cohesive strength, and of ability to defend the Faith, with the entire absence of bulwarks, in the form of authorita tive Creeds and Councils, we might have anticipated a speedy and terrible defection. It is no breach of char ity to say, the worst anticipation has been more than realized. The System has proved, and is proving, such a sad fiiilure, as must startle every reader who has any true conception of the " Faith once delivered to the Saints." In our former edition of this work, in 1845, vve drew our illustrations from the exhibitions then made of the " New Haven Theology," and from the type of Unitarianism, of vvhich Dr. Channing was so distin guished an exponent. Since then the fruits of this System have ripened so rapidly, that vve are obliged to give new examples. To show the depth which this Infidelity has reached, we quote, as a single example, from a Discourse, by the Eev. Mr. Wheelock, of Do ver, New Hampshire :* " Iiis|>iration, then, vve understand to be simply the breathing in of higher influences. Of course there are many degrees. There is the natural inspiration, vvhich flows from a lively appreciatum of the beautiful and sublime in nature. The degree of its enjoyment de pends upou fitness of organization." * * * " Abuve * Inspiration : A Discourse, by Edwin M. "Wuehlook, at Dover, New H.ampshire. "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God." Boston; Crosby, Nichols, & Oo. 1857. 12mo. pp. 16. 192 FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. this is found fhe spiritual, or poetic, or human inspi ration. Where the promjiter is the spirit of man, in spiring us as an orator, by his burning words, aa a musician, by bis sweet sounds, as an artist, by the contrasts and harmonies of color ; or when, in the stillness of meditation, thought bursts into flame, and soul-visions project themselves in exalted winged words ; or, the many-sided poet shapes into perfect utterance all the truths of human nature, and the long ings of the human soul ; or, when pondering the ideas of the Infinite and Eternal, the mind detects the im mensity of the relations it bears to heaven and immor tality, the frosts of indifference melt away, the old for mularies of religious instruction break their husk, and give forth the seeds of wonder and of love. " When the French, at Sebastopol, recoiling twice before the grim face of the Malakoff, at last swarmed over ramparts, ditches, batteries, and men, chanting the forbidden Marseillaise, it vvas the inspiration of that grand war-song that bore them on to victory. * " In the Psalms and prophesies, in Job, and in Eev elations, we have the higher, or spiritual, or poetic inspiration. " While only in the gospel of the Crucified One, only in the words and life of the Son of God, our Master and Lord, do we find tbe inspiration that is divine, unilimmed by the touch of error." * * * * ''This darkened, Jewish fire of insfiiration, which Calvin and his spiritual progeny absorbed, in prefer ence to the undimmed light of the embodied ' Word,' has generated, as a natural result, the smoke of falsi ties and multiform heresies of dogma ; engendering bigotry and ' evangelical' conceit, and enwrapping every saving truth of Christ in moral midnight." * * "See what a monstrous chain of doctrinal errors corae trooping in. A Trinity of gods, made up of a Father, a Son and a bird. A vicarious atonement. FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 193 of which the essential virtue lies in the literal blood, of Christ. An instantaneous regeneration, the fruit of an eternal sovereign election. A justification grounded upon faitb alone, to the exclusion of love. An imputed, not an imparted righteousness. The resurrection of tlie body. A last judgment at the end of the loorld. A personal second coming of the Lord iu the chmds of heavea. Aud au actual couflagratiou of the globe by fire. All these are the outbirth of the dead, literal, sacrificial inspiration, of Jewish fallible men." (The italics are ours.) " Only through belief in the American prophet. Garrison, can come the true belief in the Hebrew prophet Moses. Such is the position of the popular religion in America to-day." To show the spirit of this class of men, aud the character of their teaching, we quote from one of tbe most honest, outspoken of them, Theodore Parker.* " Ifc is a notorious fact, that ifc has not been, aud cannot be jiroved, . . . .that any one book or word of the Bible was miraculously revealed to man." "Lay mg aside all prejudices, if we look into the Bible in a general way, as into other books, we find facts which force the conclusion upon us, that the Bible is a Iiuman work, as much as the Principia of Newton, or Descartes, or the Vedas and Koran. Some things are beautiful and true ; but others, no mau in his rea son caa accept. Here are works of various writers from the eleveuth century before, to the second cen tury after Chri.st, thrown capriciously together, aud united by no coinmon tie but the lids of the book binder. Here are two forms of religion which differ widely, set forth and enforced by miracles ; the one, ritual and formal ; the other, actual aud spiritual ; the one the religion of Fear, the otber of Love ; one final, and restiag entirely on the special revelation * Discourse on Religion. Boston, 1856. 9 194 FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. made by Moses ; tbe other progressive, based on tlio universal revelation of God, who enlightens all that como into the world : one offers only earthly recom pense, the other makes immortality a motive to a divine life ; one compels raen, the other invites them, One-half the Bible repeals the other half; the Gos pel annihilates the two ; the Apostles take the place of the Prophets, and go higher up. If Christianity and Judaism be not the same thing, there must be hostility between the Old and tbe New Testament, for the; Jewish form claims to be eternal. To un prejudiced raen this hostility is very obvious If we look at the Bible as a whole, vve find numerous contradictions, conflicting histories, which no skill can reconcile vvith theniseK-es or vvith facts ; poems Avhicli the Christians have agreed to take as histories, but which lead only to confusion on that hypothesis ; Prophecies tbat have never been fulfilled, and from the nature of things, never can be. We find stories of miracles which could not have bap[)ened ; accounts which represent the laws of nature completely trans formed, as ill fairy-land — to trust tbe tales of the old roniaucers ; stories that make God a man of war, cruel, caprici(nis, revengeful, hateful, and not to be trusted. We find amatory songs, selfish proverbs, skeptical discourses, and the most awfVd imprecations human fancy ever clothed in speech Here are works whose authors are known ; others of which the author, age, and countiy, are alike forgotten. Genuine and spurious works, religious and not religious, are strangely mixed, (p. 309.) Every book of the Old Testament bears distiuct marks of its human origin ; some of human folly and sin ; all of human weak ness and imperfection, (p. 311.) This general thesis may be affirmed. All the writings in the New Testa ment, as well as the Old, contain marks of human origin, of human weakness and imperfection." (p. 333.) FEUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. 195 Speaking of Jesus Christ, he says : " But even if he were what the churches pretenliical truths, under tbe form of symbol. The miracles are symbolical ; the life, in which the miracles are set, is syinb(dical ; the main figure, by whom tbe miracles are said to have been wrought, is symbolical. The writer is ready to grant that such a person as Jesus mny have existed ; on the whole, be is inclined to believe that snch a person did exist, and did lay down his life as a martyr to a Iiigher truth than his age Could understand ; but the historical existence of Jesus is of no importance to his argument." To what extent open and avowed Unitarianism has infected Congregationalism in Massachusetts, it is difficult to decide. Being, in modern times, a System of Negations, a disbelief in all Creeds, it is impossi ble to draw the boundary line.* A significant story was told at a late Unitarian Festival at Faneuil Hall, Boston. A gentleman, in responding to a toast, said, that " Religion had be come so confused iu Boston, that it had become difficult to ascertain whether a mim believed in aoj'- thing firmly euough to eutitle hiai to swear iu a C(mrt of Justice." He said, "A witaess iu Court, being asked as to his belief, replied : ' Your Honor, I * A toast drank at a literary festival at Harvard College a few years since, was a very correct description of Unitarianism. It waa said to have beeu too faithful to be well received. It was as follows : " The Zfnitarians: The Anti- Sectarian Sect: whose Faith consists in not believing." — In vino Veritas I FRUITS OF MODERN SYSTEMS. 197 am a free-thinking Roman Catholic' And anotber witness made answer, ' How shall I swear ? I am an American citizen ; born of Hebrew parents ; ;md I go to Theod(n-e Parker's Meeting.' " What a theme for post-prandial mirth ! It is certain that Unitarianism has coraplete con trol over the richest, iu many respects, noblest literary institution on the coutineut ; and that every year a band of accomplished young raen go forth from tbat distinguished fountain of Science, to teach the religion which prevails in their theological halls — or imbued more or less with its spirit. These are the men who mingle iu the higher walks of life, and give tone to society. This system also has possession of a very large number of those religious temples in that sec tion of the State once dedicated to the worship of the Triune God. Thus, in respect to the meti-op(dis of New England, we have it from the best authoritj-, that every Congregational religious Society founded in that city previous to the year 1800, with one sol itary exception, had fallen into the Socinian heresy. Ill the very jilaces vvhere John Cotton preached in 1633, and Cotton Mather iu 1685, doctrines are now proclaimed, Vv-liicb, if it were possible, would summon those men from their graves. In the old counties of Norfolk, Middlesex, Essex, and Plymouth, so general has been the departure from their eariy standards, it is believed a large majority of their Societies, founded ]irevious to the present century, are now decidedly Unitarian. In Plymouth County, thirteen out of seventeen Societies are known to be sucb. As will be seen, we have presented the most ex- 198 FRUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. treme views to which this system of Congregational ism, in its use of " private judgment," so called, unfettered by Church authority, has given birth. To counteract tbis Rationalistic tendencj', the Andover Theological Seminary was established, several years ago, and in Connecticut, the School at East Windsor. How successful these Schools have been, may be seen from the following : In 1853, the Rev. Dr. Dana, Congregational Minis ter at Newburyport, Mass., a Trustee of the Andover Seminary, published his " Remonstrance" against the Theology taught at the Andover Semiuary. He says : " The distiuguishing Doctrines, and the very Inspi ration of the Bible, are vanishing from the minds of men ; and a real, though disguised Infidelity, is occu pying Iheir places." p. 12. "He, (Professijr Park,) has directly attacked the most important articles of that Catechism, (Assembly's,) of which he has repeat edly declared his belief, with his solemn engagement to teach its doctrines. And, more still, he has re- jie.itedly stamped these articles with ridicule, aud exposed them to public scorn." p. 19. So notorious and radical were and are these innova tions in the teaching at Andover, that the heirs at law of the founders of the Seminaiy, have, as we are told, held Meetings and consultations, with a view to testing the question, whether the large funds, given as endowment, have not been utterly forfeited.* A gentleman, evidently well informed, writes to tho (Philadelphia) Presbyterian, of Feb. 11, 1860, and reports instances of gross doctrinal defection among the New England Puritan ministers. He says : * Philadelphia Presbyterian. FRUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 199 " These are not isolated cases. In one form or another they are constantly occurring around us. No body reports them. Few care f>r them. The process is going on silently, but effectuallj'. Let the ]n-esent generation of true Christians pass away, and, unless there be a raighty interference of Divine grace in the existing churches, or the introduction of another and purer form, the prospect for New England is dark and dreaiy. It is notorious, that five of the students of Andover, last year, rejected tbe doctrine of future punishnient. Ifc is equally well known, that tbe faith of many is unsettled upon this great doctrine. The awful thunder of Revelation is whispered down to this, "Excuse rae for saying you are all sinners." The m ist popular preacher in the Congregational body said to a friend of mine, " If Christ were ou the earth now. He would not preach to sinners as be did — he preached to his times," &3. The bearing of all this is plain enough and sidenin enough. There is a wide departure from the old tiiith of New England, and of the Scriptures, and if that faith was true, this is false." The New York Observer, of Feb. 23, 1860, has au account of a late Congregational Ordination at Hart ford, Conn., conducted iu part bj' one of tbe raost distinguished of the friends of the East Windsor Institution. We quote as follows : " Not a week passes without our receiving fresh evidence of a lamentable defection from the truth, on the part of some of the Ministers and Churches in New England. Recently, we were told of a pastor, in good standing among tbe orthodox, who preached a seiies of Sermons on the " Faults of Jesus Christ." " A clergyman in Connecticut recently attended an ordination in a verj- promineut churcli, wbere the candidate vvas publicly examined as to his theological sentiments. He had no temptation or disposition to 200 FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. conceal tbem, as the clergymen, wbo composed the examining body, though profe.ssedly on the same platform With the orthodox churches of New Eng land, are not disposed to resist the defection whicb now threatens such serious results. The intelligent correspimdent who was present, states that the candi date rejected emphatically the verbal inspiratiou of the Scriptures ; was not clear on the Trinity ; doubt ed as to the use of the word jjerson; denied that God has a holy uature, or aiaii a sinful uature ; be held that the Gospel is uot absolutely necessary to the salvati(m of adult heathens, some of them being un doubtedly saved without it ; be held that after death and before the final judgment, there is a state for all souls, where some who had died impenitent, some who had rejected Christ in this life, would have a new offer of Christ and salvation, and the gift of the Holy Ghost, and be saved : so that, if called to the death-bed of an im]ienitent sinner, and knovving that he haj but a short definite time to live, he would not shut him up to faith in Christ within that time, or final ruin. These views were in direct conflict with the articles of the church, to which everv private raember is required to give his assent. Yet they were not regarded by the Council as a disqualification for preaching in au orthodox Congregational church in Connecticut." The Clergyman, who communicates these facts, remarks with great force and propriety : " I hope that I am not a vain alarmist. Far be it from me to utter a word which should needlessly dis turb the peace of our churches. But can any candid mind look at the events so otten now occurring, and not feel that there is a process going on silently, but surely, which, by another generation, must entirely change the character of our churches .'' " And one of the saddest things about it all is. FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 201 that if any man is found to express anxiety about these things — if any man arises who feels it to be a solemn duty to God to protest against the incoming errors, his reward is overwhelming ridicule as a mau behind the age, or violeut denunciation as a trouhler of Israel." But this is not all. Recently, four young men, studeuts in the Theological Seminary of Yale College, were licensed as preachers by the "New Haven, Con necticut, West Association of Congregational Minis ters." Against their being licensed, two of the Examiners openly protested ; and as their published Protest reveals the doctrines thus not ouly taught, but eadorsed, aud publicly commeoded to the Congre gational community and the public at large, we give the Protest in full. " PEOTEST. " " We, the undersigned, members of the New Haven West Association, do hereby respectfully protest agiiinsfc the action of said Association, at their meeting, held Nov, 29th, 1859, in voting to grant a license to preach and to teach in the churches, to Messrs. Fisk P. Brewer, James M. Whiton, Wilder Smith, and Sol omon J, Douglass ; aud vve thus protest : " 1st. In the case of Mr. Brewer ; because he ex pressed the following as his belief on theological and religious subjects ; to. wit — that the Bible contains a. revelation from God to man, but that he is uot cer tain that all the books of the Bible are divinely in spired ; that the genuine saving conversion of adults may be produced bj' the Holy Spirit, without faith in Christ ; that raan is active in bis own regeneraticm ; that Christ died only to raake sa'vation possible for all mea without exception ; that infants are on the 9* 202 FEUITS OF LIODEEN SYSTEMS. same level with animals as respects tbe reason for wliich thev suffer: that lu? does not understand the use or the theological raeaninj; of the term hnputa- tion; that the unrenewed sinner has ability to do all that God requires of bim ; and that iiiaii is not a sin ner until moral agency commences, and until he per sonally commits sin ; liy which we understan I him. to mean, tbat all sin consists in voluntary transgressions of known law ; and because, also, in giving an accouut of his religious experience, be said n )t a word in re gard to sin, or redemption by the blood of the Lamb ; but only that be purposed to serve God, and consecrate himself to Christ ; and said he would direct a sinner, asking what he should do to be saved, to b.^gin to serve God, and consecrate himself to Christ ; thus pointing the sinner rather to the laiu than to the Gos pel, to doing than to believing. "2d. In the case of Mr. Douglass — because, in addi tion to bis iraplied assent, giveii in silenoe, to the above mentioned views exiireased ly Mr. Brewer, he also said, that the Atonement, or redemptive work of Christ, does not secure the salvation of any raan, and implied his belief iu a gracious abilitj', given alike to all under the sound of the Gospel. " 3d. In the case of all tbe above mentioned candi dates for licensure, they gave a tacit assent to all the above mentioned views, as tenets of tbeir faith, and all explicitly denied a belief in the imputation of Adam's sin to the race, and the imputation of Christ's righteousness to believers as the only ground of justi fication, or in any sense whatever ; said that faith comes in the place [has the nature] of works, and that believers in Christ will finally be judged accord ing to Xhnir loorks ; and because, also, they said, that if they imderstood theWestminster Assembly's Shorter Catechism, they did not believe it. "4th. Because all the candidates evinced only a superficial knowledge of the Sacred Scriptures, and of FEUITS OF MODEEN SYSTEMS. 203 Systematic Theology ; showing that, insteail of being teachers, tbey bave need that one te.ach tlicai which be the first priiici files of the or.icdes of God. "All which is resjiectfully submitted to this Associa tion of Ministers of the Gospel, by " Their brethren in Christ, (signed) '-wm. B.LEE, ''•New Haven, Nov. 29th, 1859. J. S. J UDD." We come now to another imjiortant fact. With this decline in Doctrine, the System has lost its hold on the people. The General Convention of Congre gational Ministers and Churches of Vermont, in June, 1856, appointed a Committee to ascertain and report the facts respecting attendance on Public Wor.shii) in the State, and the " means of reaching more effectu- ally the mass of the people with tbe preached word." Iu June, 18.57, tbis Ciunmittee made a report, from which we extract as follows : " From the above statement, it appears there are in Vermont at least 22,064 families, of whicb there is no habitual attendant on Evangelical worship ; which would, allowing five persons to each, embrace 110,220 souls, a fraction more than one-third of the whole population. The average attendance on Evangelical worship is 55,410, less than one-fifth of the jiopula- tion. In some localities there is a deficiency of seats, but, as a whole, 'there is yet room' in our Evangelical Churches for all the ])eople. Nor does it appear from the reports that