HARVARD COLLEGE APR 25 1888 LIBRARY John Harveys Treat. Entered according to Act of Congress, in the year 1866, by SMITH, ENGLISH & CO. In the Clerk's Office of the District Court of the United States for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania. STEREOTYPED BY J. FAGAN & SON. PRINTED BY SHERMAN & CO. PREFACE. THE following work has been written by a clergyman of the Protestant Episcopal Church, for the use of those who belong to that body, and in the hope of settling a controversy that has of late sprung up among them. It is not (as might be supposed from a glance at the title-page) a treatise upon certain doctrines, but the discussion of a simple question of fact. The author has not written for the purpose of proving or apologizing for Apostolical Succession and Episcopacy. With their merits or demerits he has, at present, little or nothing to do. He merely undertakes to prove that those doctrines have always been avowed and acted upon by the Church. Some may wonder that it should appear necessary to prove a matter so notorious; but, in this age of almost universal doubt and denial, nothing can be taken for granted or looked upon as established. The necessity has arisen- -the fact has been denied, and, therefore, the proof is presented. The author will never forget the astonishment with which he heard, for the first time, the denial just referred to. He saw at once that the person who made it was simply repeating the opinions or assertions of some other party; and, on inquiry, he learned that that party was the Rev. William Goode. To the "Essay on Orders," published by that gentleman, his friend referred him, describing it as a convincing and unanswerable production, by which it was proved, beyond all doubt, that the Church of England is not essentially or exclusively Episcopal. Within a few days a copy of the book was sent to him by a zealous layman, who was scattering it broadcast over the country, and he sat down to its perusal with peculiar eagerness. The subject of Church Government was one to which he had given much attention, owing to circumstances which he may be excused for mentioning. Although born, baptized and educated in the Church of England, he had been accustomed, all his life, to associate intimately with ministers and members of other denominations. To many of these he was strongly attached. They were not only among his dearest and kindest friends, but they were also Christians, who, by their daily walk and conversation, adorned the doctrine of God their Saviour. Meeting with them continually in private life, and sharing regularly in their worship, it was but natural that he should imbibe their sentiments. They were, in general, very unfriendly to the Church, and unwilling to acknowledge that it had any genuine zeal for the truth of God or for the salvation of men. Hearing statements to this effect made by persons in whom he had entire confidence, and knowing well that the modes of worship and of thought, which he had come to regard as inseparable from true religion, were neither used in the Church nor favored by it, he was easily led to accept those statements as substantially correct. At first, indeed, and often when harshly put, they seemed to him somewhat uncharitable; but he did not protest, for he had learned to believe that they were not unfounded. This being so, his attachment to the Communion of his fathers became little more than nominal. He could not be a hearty lover and faithful member of a Church that appeared to set greater store upon matters of order than upon vital truth. For various reasons he did not wholly abandon it; but his sympathies were with those who were called by other names, and who worshipped in separate sanctuaries. Continuing thus for years after he had come to man's estate, he was a zealous advocate for what he supposed to be “Evangelical" views. He was willing to look upon Episcopacy as an allowable system-the Bishop being no more than the Moderator of an Assemby, or the President of a Conference; but the Churchman's claim of divine right he regarded as arrogant assumption, savoring too much of Rome, while he looked upon "Apostolical Succession" as a mere figment- the last resort of a declining Church, invented for the purpose of giving it some apparent advantage over other bodies which surpassed it in spiritual life and zeal. Consequently he never hesitated to denounce as poor bigoted creatures all who said a word in behalf of such a doctrine, or who even ventured to name the sin of Schism. When the providence of God led him to become a candidate for Holy Orders, he knew that there were very few, if any, in the Church whose opinions on the subjects above mentioned were similar to his own; but he supposed he might be allowed to conform in silence to Episcopal Government; or if even called upon to justify it, that he might do so on the ground of expediency. But some of his Non-Episcopal friends would not allow this. By one he was told, that no system of Churck Government, which could not show true Scriptural warrant, ought to receive the sanction of a Christian man, and this principle having been laid down, the question followed: "How he could possibly defend the constitution of the Church whose ministry he was about to enter." To this he had almost nothing to reply. He had always been prepared to attack what he considered extreme views or arrogant claims, but never to defend Episcopacy. And yet he was about to become an Episcopal Minister! He could be no longer blind to the awkwardness and inconsistency of such a position. He had wholly confined his reading to one side of the question, forgetting that common fairness required the other to be examined also. It was evident then that he must either make that examination, or unite himself with some other body. The latter alternative he was not prepared to accept, owing to the new aspect of the case; so he entered forthwith upon an honest study of ecclesiastical polity, and read with patience everything he could procure upon the subject; and the more he read, the more he became convinced that his long-cherished views were untenable. This was a bitter experience. Yet, still he persevered, in the hope that some one would incline the balance to the other side, or at least furnish sufficient reasons for stopping short of that conclusion, to which he felt that his investigation was leading him. He still clung to the spirit of his former belief, and hoped that he might be able to retain it with a satisfied mind and a clear conscience. But the better he became acquainted with the subject, the more readily he detected the unworthy arts resorted to by some who had treated of it. These were not always on one side; but it was painful to find that such offences were most frequent and gross on that to which he had been so strongly attached. This made him more suspicious of it, and even created a sort of prejudice against it. Could that be a just cause that needed such support? Non tali auxilio nec defensoribus istis VERITAS eget!" Still being unwilling to judge the cause wholly by the conduct of its advocates, he prosecuted his search, turning away from unsupported assertions, looking for facts and honest arguments, and having no other desire or purpose than to ascertain the truth. The result was this after a few years he found himself holding those very doctrines that he had formerly regarded with abhorrence. 66 Such was his position when Mr. Goode's book came into his hands, and so he entered upon its perusal with peculiar anxiety. What if it should present evidence that he had never seen, or arguments more powerful than he had already weighed! What if it should prove to be all that its enthusiastic eulogists represented! Should he yield to it and return to the opinions of his youth? To this there could be but one reply-"Let the TRUTH appear! If Mr. Goode, or any other, can present sufficient reason for it, I shall (like Chillingworth) 'despise the shame of one more alteration, and, with both my arms and all my heart, most readily embrace it!" But the reason was not presented-the change was not rendered necessary. In Mr. Goode he discovered not at all what he expected, but a skilled and subtle advocate, laboring in a cause "too weak to carry him, and too heavy to be carried by him." The "Essay," so far from convincing him that our Church had ever sanctioned Non-Episcopal Orders, served only to confirm him in the contrary belief. And when he saw clergymen who ought to have been able to form a more correct judgment, lauding that production as masterly and unanswerable, and other credulous persons accepting it on their recommendation, he considered it his duty to review the work and let the public see its real character. He had nearly completed an answer to it, when ill health and the pressure of other engagements obliged him to put it aside. It lay thus, unfinished, in his desk for years, and would, probably, never have seen the light, but for events that are still fresh in the memory of the public. Certain clergymen of the Diocese of New York, adopted a course designed to change the settled practice of the Church, if not to change its whole character. They turned their backs upon all existing laws and all previous usage in connection with such matters, and openly admitted to their pulpits ministers who had not had Episcopal Ordination. Whether in the abstract this were right or wrong, is a question that does not concern us. That it was a violation of the laws, or at least of the customs of the Church, was clear to all men. Of course, an innovation so startling and so daring occasioned much excitement. The Bishop of the Diocese issued a Pastoral Letter, in which, in the kindest language and most reasonable spirit, he pointed out to those gentlemen the unlawfulness of their course. And there, if they had been lovers of Order and of peace, the whole matter might have rested. But however gentle the reproof or remonstrance, it was still an exercise of authority, and that was hard to bear. Therefore, the Reverend gentlemen rushed into print at once, and strove to give to the whole matter the air of simple controversy, on equal terms, between the Bishop and themselves. They represented him as the advocate of a narrow partisan policy, and not as their ecclesiastical superior to whom they had solemnly promised obedience, and whose duty compelled him to give them a reproof. Letters," Reviews" and "Replies to the Pastoral" have been sent everywhere throughout the country, and have served to show that some Episcopalians pay but little respect to those who are over them in the Lord; that they are not much disposed to "submit to their judgment" or to follow with a glad mind and will their godly admonitions." Of those productions this is not the place to treat. As to their general merit, the author 66 Their |