Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

passed off as Presbyterial. So, too, all Episcopalians, who have been baptized by Deacons, are in " a state of excommunication from Christ"; for Episcopal Deacons, you give us to understand, are impostors. In fact, all Episcopal societies are utterly unchurched by your doctrine, since they discard entirely the system of Presbyterial ordination; regarding the sacerdotal authority as flowing from the Bishop alone. Thus you excommunicate nineteen twentieths of the Christian world; excepting none, from 66 your tremendous" sentence, but a handful of dissenters, who, within the last three centuries, have sprung up in the western church.

When you talk of all societies, possessing certain internal qualifications, as members of the true visible church, you talk like a wild man; and, if there is any vigilance in the ecclesiastical government, to which you are subject, you will be made to answer for thus contradicting its public and solemn declarations. Instead of such fanatical absurdity, your op ponents say, that there can be no visible church without the ministry and ordinances; but they say, at the same time, that all, who unfeignedly desire and endeavor to do the will of God, will be received to his mercy; and that an invalid administration of divine ordinances will not destroy their efficacy on those who labor under involuntary error, provided they posses a sincere and willing heart. It is thus that your opponents express charity; embracing, in the arms of mercy, all who seek God in truth. The spirit of their benevolence extends even to the heathen world. Will you follow them here? Ah no! The terrific genius of Calvanism interposes! "Eternal perdition to all who have not heard the gospel!" "However diligent to frame their lives according to the lights of nature." 'Tis of no consequence. They are not of the elect; and, with reprobate infants, can have no hope; being fashioned as vessels of wrath, under an eternal decree of God, to set forth "his glorious justice." And do you argue against a doctrine on the principle of its uncharitableness? Do you found a presumption, against the system of your opponents, on the "tremendous consequences" which it involves? How of ten are those, who declaim against bigotry, the most bigotted of all mortals! Who could restrain the laugh of derision, were it not for the sacred nature of the subject, in seeing you so violently agitated with a gnat, While you are in the very act of swallowing a camel! To represent a small number of dissenters as having departed from the visible

church, although this is imputed to involuntary error, which God will excuse, making his ordinances, notwithstanding the irregularity of administration, channels of grace and salvation, is terrible. But, to cut off ninety nine hundredths of the human race, from even the possibility of mercy, has nothing, in it, to alarm the most timid mind. Well, indeed, might Dr. Jortin denominate Calvinism a system of "human creatures without liberty, of faith without reason, and a God without mercy."

They

It is with pain that I make these comparisons. are forced upon me by an imperious principle of self defence. And the repetition of observations, made under other heads, I must beg the reader to excuse; it being rendered necessary by the endless shapes in which you present your charges.

LETTER V.

SIR,

IT was my intention, in the present address, to examine

the evidence of the divine institution of Presbytery, which you attempt to derive from the sacred scriptures; but, having already exceeded the limits which I had proposed to myself, I must reserve this part of the subject to a future opportunity.

The address, indeed, has, imperceptibly, grown to a size far beyond what I had calculated on; and, yet, I have only glanced at the subjects of which it treats. You will consider it merely as introductory to an examination of your whole work. It will not be in my power, however, to proceed immediately in the investigation. There are circumstances which must, unavoidably, call my attention to other subjects. Any delay, which may occur, you will, therefore, be pleased to ascribe to what I have just mentioned; not to any want of personal respect, or consideration.

It would give me great pain to be supposed capable of any degree of ill will towards those who differ from me in opinion; or whose doctrines and reasonings I may think it a duty publicly to oppose. I have expressed myself freely in the present address; not more freely, I hope, than the case will justify. If I have, in any instance, gone beyond the proper limits, I must entreat that indulgence towards human frailty, which, I trust, I shall always be disposed to reciprocate. Permit me to say, that any warmth, which may have escaped me, will be to be referred, I humbly hope, not to malignity of temper, but to honest zeal for a church which I love, and which, I sincerely think, has experienced a treatment, from her opponents, not to be justified on any princiciples of charity, or even of common toleration.

The Episcopal church asks only to be indulged in thinking for herself, and in decently maintaining her peculiar principles. Is this an unreasonable claim? Indeed, it seems to be absolutely a crime, in the eyes of certain persons, to say that the Episcopal degree of the ministry is of divine institution. If a church is not to be permitted to think for herself, and to say what she thinks, relative to the constitution of the Priesthood, without being stigmatized as invading the rights of others, and held up to public scorn, she may very justly complain that the ordinary privileges of toleration are denied her.

The Companion for the Altar, and the Companion for the Festivals and Fasts, published in 1804, by the Reverend Doctor Hobart, have kindled a resentment which nothing can appease. And yet these productions are addressed, exclusively, to Episcopalians; containing nothing more than a perfectly decent and temperate exposition of the acknowledged principles of their church. It was the duty of Doctor Hobart to bring the subject of the ministry before his people; for it is very emphatically insisted upon in the standards of his church, and, as a faithful steward, he was bound to deliver the whole counsel of God. Has it ever been pretended that the style of the works, in question, is either disrespectful, or intemperate? No-It is then the principle contended for, not the manner of the writer, that has called forth so loud a spirit of complaint. And this principle you brand as of a nature nearly allied to the claim of Papal infallibility ;* declaring that its advocates are to be viewed in the same light with those who use images in devotion, who believe in transubstantiation, and deny the possibility of salvation out of the church of Rome.f- Well!

You lay as much stress upon outward ordination as your opponents. You carry Presbytery as far as they carry Episcopacy. See, then, what a picture you draw of yourself, and your society! To maintain, that Episcopal ordination alone is valid, is almost the same thing with setting up for infal libility. But to say as much of Presbyterial ordination has nothing arrogant about it. Oh no! It is even a specimen of humility. And then there is so much charity in admitting that Episcopal ordination is, in reality, Presbyterial;§ and therefore, not an act of rebellion against God. For con

* Letters, p. 19. + Ibid. p. 20, 21. + Ibid. p. 347.

§ Ibid. p. 347.

descension like this we ought certainly to be grateful. But is Episcopal ordination, as 'contradistinguished from Presbyterial, good for any thing? Good for any thing? The men who attempt to exercise the sacerdotal office, under such a commission, are rebels and impostors. And so are all who receive the ordinances of the gospel at their hands. Very well-If you will make it out that Presbyterial ordination is, in reality, Episcopal, we will, at once, admit its validity; especially if you should hint to us, at the same time, that we derive the sacerdotal authority through you, and that, in unchurching you, we must also unchurch ourselves. This, I think, as to liberality, will be pretty fairly ballancing the account.

Suppose a Quaker should address you, on the subject of the ministry, in a strain like the following. You inveigh bitterly against your Episcopal neighbors for asserting the exclusive validity of Episcopal ordination. But you equally assert the exclusive validity of Presbyterial ordination; telling us, that, without such ordination, there can be no ministry; without a ministry, no church; and without a church, no covenanted title to salvation. In addition to all this, you assert the divine institution of Presbyterial government, in all its parts, excluding its habitual violators, cases of unavoidable ignorance, or involuntary error, excepted, from the kingdom of heaven. If the Episcopal doctrine is of a nature nearly allied to the claim of Papal infallibility, your doctrine must be the claim of Papal infallibility itself.* I cannot

* Indeed, continues the Quaker, some of you even go so far as to make Presbyterianism essential to lawful society, civil, as well aś ecclesiastic.t

All of you declare baptism and the supper to be general conditions of salvation; representing them as seals of the covenant of grace, without which, it is impossible to have any ordinary, or regular, claim to the blessings of that covenant. Such as habitually neglect these ordinances, saving a little allowance for error, you exclude from the kingdom of heaven.-Intolerant and wretched bigots! To give so much importance to the ceremony of sprinkling water, or of receiving bread and wine! And to tell us, too, that it is impossible to have these ordinances except at the hands of ministers Presbyte rially ordained. How much better is all this than the tale of Papal infallibility! How far are you removed from catholic absurdity and arrogance!

See, sir, what an example you have set! There is not an ordinance

« AnteriorContinuar »