LECT. I.]

THE BIGOTRY OF PRELATISTS.

3

by divine right, and not merely by human appointment ;—that they possess prerogatives, by pre-eminence, their own-that they, alone, are empowered to ordain,-that their ordination is essential to the validity of a true gospel ministry-that they possess, and can alone bestow, the gifts of the Holy Spirit-and that, without them, all preaching, and all ordinances, administered by such as were ordained in other denominations, are "vain," and "without the promise of Christ," and of course delusive, not only as it regards us who minister, but those also to whom we minister in holy things.

Presbyterian ministers are therefore branded as "pretended ministers" as guilty of "presumption and daring imposture," as no "ministry," and their churches "no churches" but "withered branches"-as "unauthorized sects."

We are "protestant sectaries"-"sectarions"-"the meetingers"-"schismatics"-"guilty of a most grievous sin" and of "wicked errors"-"self-appointed teachers"-"dissenting mountebanks" and "those beings who pretend to be ministers of the gospel and really are ministers of hell."11

"It is utterly unlawful to attend our ministry," and to hear us "is rebellion against God."12

"Our Baptism is a mockery, which may sprinkle with water on earth, but cannot admit souls to the kingdom of heaven."12 We are declared to be as totally different from the true church and the true ministry, "as a mouse is from a bat,' or as "one kind of flesh is from another," "they are in the church, we are out of it."15

9913

We are therefore (and if all this is true, we are justly) "excommunicated," as being guilty of "a sin against our brethren, against ourselves, against God-a sin which, if not repented of, is eternally destructive to the soul," since "all our acts of separate worship" are to be ranked among the works of dark

ness.17

Our church "sessions are meddling, inquisitorial courts.'

"Our whole system involves errors in fundamental doctrines," while presbytery and episcopacy are declared to be two opposites.2

"Whereas," says Bishop Beveridge, “in the private meetings, where their teachers have no apostolical or episcopal imposition of hands, they have no ground to succeed the apostles, nor by consequence any right to the spirit which our Lord hath; without which, although they preach their hearts out, I do not see what spiritual advantage can accrue to their hearers by it.”3

This is no more than a fractional illustration of that language and sentiment which are now prevalent in reference to Presbyterianism. It may be thought, however, that this is the language of only some few, illiberal, bigoted and extravagant writers. But this is not the case.

This system is not only found in the writings of many old and standard divines of the Church of England, of whom fortythree are quoted in No. 74 of the Oxford Tracts; it is not only receiving extensive currency, by the able and zealous advocacy of certain eminent divines of Oxford; it has not only been avowed by some of the English prelates, and by two thousand of the English clergy; but it is now extending itself widely

1) Oxford Tr., vol. 1, Am. Ed. 2) Dr. Pusey's Letter to the Bishop of Oxford, p. 100. Am. Ed.

3) Sermon on Christ's presence with his ministers; in Works, vol. 2.

4) See the list of them in the Oxford Tracts, vol. 3, Tract 74.

5) Very erroneous conceptions prevail of the extent to which these high-church principles, as developed by their recent advocates, have been diffused.

These doctrines, says an English episcopal press, "are every where creeping into houses and into churches too.' "Puseyism," which is scarcely a modification of popery, is increasing most fearfully; its votaries boast that TwO THOUSAND clergymen of the established church have publicly or privately announced themselves converts to its erroneous doctrines." Plea for Presb. p. 522.

A Roman catholic priest, in Great Britain, in a public meeting recently stated, that out of fifteen thousand clergymen of the Episcopal church, eleven thousand have embraced these sentiments. The proportion is by no means so large in this country, and the statements respecting the church of England may be exaggerated.

As to the extent of the influence of these views, see also Professor Powell, of Oxford, in his recent work, "Tradition Unveiled, or An Exposure of the Pretensions and Tendency of Authoritative Teaching in the Church." Lond. 1839, p. 1, 2. "It is clear," he says (p. 4) of these opinions of church authority, and others dependent on it, that they "have been extensively adopted and are strenuously upheld, and are daily gaining ground among a considerable and influential portion of the members as well as ministers of the established church."

Dr. Pusey boasts of "the almost electric rapidity with which these principles are confessedly passing from one breast to another, from one end of England to another." Letter, page 230, 231, Edn. 2,-and also of "the sympathy which they found in the sister and daughter churches of Scotland and America." The testimony of R. M. Beverly Esq., who was himself educated at one of the universities. is of weight. In his "Heresy of Human Priesthood," he says, "At last, however, the old Laudean fever has revived, and has spread its contagion through all ranks of the clergy; a swarm of

LECT. I.]

THE DEMAND FOR INVESTIGATION.

5

through the protestant episcopal churches in this country; has been avowed by some American prelates; by some leading journals-by some of their periodicals-and by some of their ministers, in this very city.1

Acting on these principles, the episcopal church, by her Canons, prohibits her ministers from allowing a minister of any other denomination to preach in any of her pulpits-while they, who fully adopt these principles of high-churchism, most carefully avoid any possible occasion-as for instance co-operating in the advancement of any work of common charity or benevolence-by which they might "even seem" to acknowledge our claim to the character of christian ministers. The most zealous efforts are also made to put into the widest possible circulation, those works, pamphlets and tracts in which these views are most boldly and pertinaciously advanced. By these, and other means, the minds of many in our communion have been already excited to inquiry on these great questions-while the minds of all must, sooner or later, be turned anxiously to the settlement of the fundamental principles which they involve. From these causes, in different parts of this country, as well as in England and Ireland, ministers of our own, and other protestant denominations, have felt called upon to appear in vindication of their claim to membership in the holy, catholic, and apostolic church of Christ.

Urged by a strong conviction of duty, we have also determined to examine those assumptions, whereby we are to be despoiled of all rigth and title to the character of a church of Christ-the possession of christian ordinances-and a christian ministry. The reasons-or some of them-why this course appears plainly and imperatively demanded of us, we will at this time present.

This open discussion of these high and exclusive claims, we owe to their authors and abettors.

However desirable and proper it is for christians to live in

unknown and inferior priests may now justify the adoption of Puseyistic opinions, by reference to the prelates of Oxford and Lincoln, and it is believed, to the Archbishop of Canterbury also." Ed. 2d. pub. in 1839, pp. xi. 74. See also p. 81. See further the Review of Tracts for the Times, Number Ninety, in Edinb. Rev., April, 1841, p. 146.

The recent restriction put upon the publication of what are termed "The Oxford Tracts," will in no degree retard, but rather advance the

progress of those sentiments to the support of which those tracts were mainly devoted.

1) For proof of this see the Charleston Gospel Messenger for July, 1840, pp. 103, 118, et passim, and also the quotations which shall be subsequently introduced. See also British Critic, Oct. 1837, 343, pp. 285, 305, 308, 309, and 324, 326, 327.

See also Presb. Defd. p. 27, and p. 130.

peace and brotherhood-yet, when that peace is broken by the incessant shouts of war, and this brotherhood is scornfully rejected as "impious opposition to the divine will"-it is time to proclaim-"amicus Socrates, amicus Plato, sed magis amica veritas." And however we might feel justified in bearing patiently personal contumely or wrong-yet, when it is the character and claims of the church that are in question, we are surely required, by an imperious call of duty, "to vindicate the perverted truth and abused ordinances of our blessed Master."

In accepting, therefore, the call to this discussion, we make no assault upon the christian character and standing of those churches denominated episcopal. The question is not, "is episcopacy right, or is it wrong-of scriptural or of human origin?" That episcopacy does not destroy the being of a true church of Christ is cheerfully granted; for we ourselves claim the possession of primitive and apostolical episcopacy. Our ministers are styled episcopoi (Emiσnoжо) or bishops, and our polity is the scriptural episcopacy.

1) Palmer, on the Church, vol. ii., page 323.

2) "Plato is my friend, so is Socrates; but truth is a friend I prize above both."

3) This challenge is given by Mr. Keble, in his work on primitive tradition, in the very fulness of confident victory. He complains bitterly of that "light, extemporal way in which many reject it," and calls upon its rejectors in the language applied of old to an impatient controversialist, "strike, but hear me." "Do your best in argument, if you can any how refute the claim of the succession; but do not dismiss it unexamined, in any kind of hasty feeling. Do not set it aside," &c. Edition, 4th, p. 95, 96.

These doctrines are most fully avowed by the Rev. Mr. Odenheimer, of Philadelphia, in his Origin and Compilation of the Prayer Book. Phil. 1841, see passim. He even ventures so far as to denominate all non-episcopalians as dissenters, (e. g., pp. 33, 46) and the Episcopalian as the only legitimate branch of the church catholic in America. See p. 106, 113.

The notorious sermon of Dr. Hook, "Hear the Church," has been also republished by the Bishop of New Jersey, "whose untiring efforts for the dissemination of Catholic truth and practice, claim the grati

tude and love of American churchmen!" See do. do. p. 53; Note.

So also in the Preface to No. 74, of the Oxford Tracts. "Persons who object to our preaching distinctly and unhesitatingly the doctrine of the apostolic succession, must be asked to explain, why we may not do what our fathers in the church have done before us, or whether they too, as well as we, are mistaken, or injudicious theorists, or papists, in so doing? This question is here plainly put to them; and at the same time the attention of inquirers who have not made up their minds on the subject, is invited to the answer, if any is forthcoming, from the parties addressed." Oxf. Tr. No. 74, vol. 3, p. 129.

This doctrine will be found contained in the most elementary catechisms of our opponents. See, for instance, the catechism prepared by Bishop England (Roman catholic) "for young children, servants, &c.," p. 27, 28, and his larger catechism, p. 23.

See also the church primer of the protestant episcopal church, passim and p. 12-and Hobart's Catechism, (number three) at p. 46, &c., and the short catechism at the end of Bayard's Anniversary Sermon to the Prot. Ep. Sund. Sch. Un., from Cat. No. iii.

LECT. I.] THIS DISCUSSION NOT ABOUT EPISCOPACY.

7

That this discussion does not turn upon the mere question of episcopacy, and that therefore, in pursuing it, we are not to be regarded as either opposing or denouncing episcopacy, as such -this, I say, is granted even by our opponents. "We are," say they, "of THE CHURCH, not of the episcopal church -our bishops are not merely an order in her organization, BUT THE PRINCIPLE OF HER CONTINUANCE; and to call ourselves Episcopalians, is to imply, that we differ from the mass of dissenters mainly in church government and form; whereas the difference is, that we are here, and they are there: WE IN THE CHURCH, AND THEY OUT OF IT." "It may seem harsh," they add, "to speak thus of episcopacy and episcopalian, yet we hope it will not shock any one, if we say, that we wish the words-as denoting an opinion and its maintainers-never had been invented. They have done great mischief to our own cause."2 "Apostolic order," and not "the episcopate, or the liturgy" form the corona, or crown, which adorns their kingly head. "OUR ALL," say they, "as we cannot but know, depends upon that holy succession." The argument, therefore, now entered upon, is not about episcopacy, which is thus repudiated as containing (as indeed it does) nothing peculiar to themselves, nor is it about liturgical services, which do not constitute their distinctive characteristic-but it is about the all-important and essential question-which is, confessedly, fundamental to all well-grounded hopes of eternal life-where is, and where is not, the church of Christ, and the way of salvation?

5

This church, and this way of salvation, are limited by these prelatists, or high-churchmen, to those only, who either are members of, or who fraternize with, the anglican church. All others are guilty, they say, of "renouncing the church of Christ -a renouncing of her ministers, and through them of Christ himself." They "cannot, therefore," it is said, "expect to be considered as christians, but according to the command of Christ, as heathens and publicans."

1) "The American Church." See in British Critic, Oct., 1839, p.

341.

2) See ditto, p. 341. See, also, p. 340, and p. 337, 338.

3) Oxf. Tr. vol. i., p. 376. Am. Edit. and p. 555.

4) But we may give up "gowns, robes, surplices, christmas festivals, and even a liturgy and still be as distinctly as we are now an episcopal church. These are not essentials to an Episcopal organization."

Dr. Clark's Letters on the Ch. Phil. 1839, p. 29.

5) "He," Archbishop Usher, as is declared by Dr. Bernard, "was for the minister's improving of their gifts and abilities in prayer before sermon and after, according to his own practice,' The Judgment of the late Archbishop of Armagh, &c. Lond. 1657, p. 149, 150.

6) See Letters to a Dissenting Minister, by L. S. E. recommended by the Bishop of London "Schism," p. 351.

in